For Lohrno the retard

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » April 22, 2005, 8:34 pm

Since you are incapable of staying on topic lets start a new thread for each and everyone of your idiotic and brain cell killings questions and fucked up non-sensical counterpoints.

Lohrno wrote:He also avoids the protesters question.

Because he knows by his definition they would be conisdered treasonus, and that would be also unconstitutional, and that would make his definition flawed. Unless I've missed something?

I asked you to PM me so as not to detract from the topic at hand. You did not, but I expected nothign less. Detracting from the topic at hand is what you and so many others here do best.

While I find most protesters assholes, morons, jobless fuckholes, and many more vulgar things......I do not believe they should be charged with any crime as long as they protest in a peaceful, non intrusive manner.

You were so fucking eager to here my opinion on protesters. I hope this satisfies question number 546,879,555,435,234 of today.

Do us all a fucking favor. Go online and order a complete set of encyclopedias, then remove the battery from your motherboard, throw it in the nearest lake, river, or stream and answer your own painfully dumb ass fucking questions.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » April 22, 2005, 8:35 pm

FUK U HITLER!

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » April 22, 2005, 8:38 pm

I don't think this should be another thread. We were discussing treason, but you have finally managed to answer the question. As to my being retarded, I think I at least am 3 steps higher than you in the food chain. This post demonstrates that.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » April 22, 2005, 8:43 pm

Now would you care to go back to the other thread and explain why protesters are not dterimental to the cause of war, and why Jane Fonda was? It would seem the protesters did a lot more to stop the war than she did...

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » April 22, 2005, 8:47 pm

Lohrno wrote:Now would you care to go back to the other thread and explain why protesters are not dterimental to the cause of war, and why Jane Fonda was? It would seem the protesters did a lot more to stop the war than she did...

Do we not have freedom of speech here IN AMERICA?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!

Was what Jane Fonda did in America or on enemy soil?

YOU STUPID FUCK!

Someone else can answer this assholes questions from now on. I can't do it. I won't add you to ignore, but lets consider it the same thing. To me you are dead. On that note, I'm going to go buy a bottle of champagne and celebrate.

More definitions of treason. Take your time and sound out the words. You can do it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=treason

Nick · Post by **Nick** » April 22, 2005, 8:53 pm

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=intelligence

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » April 22, 2005, 8:55 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote: Do we not have freedom of speech here IN AMERICA?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!

Oh okay I see now. Freedom of Speech only aplies to our citizens when they are on our soil...

If I go to Iraq, and I say Bush sucks, I can be put in jail when I come back...Makes sense to me..

You see if you'd said that you thought she betrayed her country, that would be a more acceptable answer. It would be an opinion. But you have given a dictionary definition for Treason in which she is no more or less guilty than the protesters.

From dictionary.com : A betrayal of trust or confidence.

This would have been more acceptable. Still I would argue that she did it out of love for her people and the desire to not see us commit atrocities on others. But that would be a difference of opinion, not a logical argument.

Ann Coulter thinks liberals are all traitors...

Sylvos · Post by **Sylvos** » April 22, 2005, 9:37 pm

Teenybloke wrote:FUK U HITLER!

Teeny wins.
You lose.
Game over.
thx

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » April 22, 2005, 9:49 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote: Do we not have freedom of speech here IN AMERICA?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!

actually, constitutional law on this matter is pretty cut and dried, that american citizens have the same rights and freedoms as american citizens, and are also bound by united states law while they are travelling abroad.

I shouldn't even have to warn you about being careful about who you call stupid. you're pretty fucking low on the list.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 22, 2005, 10:48 pm

kyoukan wrote:actually, constitutional law on this matter is pretty cut and dried, that american citizens have the same rights and freedoms as american citizens, and are also bound by united states law while they are travelling abroad.

erm, did some wording get mixed up there? I would hope that American citizens got the same rights as American citizens.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » April 23, 2005, 1:34 am

it was a clumsy sentence.

american citizens don't lose their inherent rights and freedoms granted by the constitution just because they leave US soil (unless you are a visibile minority any time during the bush administration post 9/11).

this means if you go to a foreign country and open your mouth too many times and get arrested for it, then your government won't tell you tough shit, you should have followed their laws.

this also means if you go to thailand and bang a bunch of 12 year old prostitutes they will arrest your ass when you come home.

a lot of countries don't have this kind of thing.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » April 23, 2005, 2:39 am

kyoukan wrote: this also means if you go to thailand and bang a bunch of 12 year old prostitutes they will arrest your ass when you come home.

Note to self: Cancel trip to Thailand...

Exactly...Our laws apply to us when we're overseas, and we have the same rights here overseas. This doesn't mean that in other governments' eyes we have the same rights, but America enforces it's own rights and laws no matter where you are...Last I heard there was no selective enforcement...

Wonko Wenusberg · Post by **Wonko Wenusberg** » April 23, 2005, 3:09 pm

bacon