Slashdot Mirror
Clinton Prosecutor Now Targeting Free Speech
Virchull tells us about a case the Supreme Court has agreed to hear, in which former special prosecutor Kenneth Starr will take the side of an Alaska school board against a student who displayed a rude banner off school property. The banner read "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" and it got the student suspended. He and his parents sued the school board for violating his First Amendment rights. The case is nuanced: while the student did not display the banner on school property, he did do so during a school function. Starr is said to be arguing the case for free.
So who was your fine motor control, walking, and speaking teacher? Maybe we were in the same class.
You kool-aid heads are all the same, you have brought "Bush lied" to cliche status. You just keep repeating it and it has stuck. Clinton lied, there is proof, he lacks integrity, there is proof. You say Bush lied, where's the proof? Saddam had for years rebelled against the wusses at the Un and their worthless sanctions, he acted like he had them and he had used them in the past. I have seen documentation of the fact that he had them, the links to al-qaeda, etc. etc. This war is a very important thing if we are going to stop extremist Islam in the world, to have a country that is on our side other than Israel in the middle east is a good thing. I know there are a bunch of you on here that disagree, but you can't bring Bush down to Clinton's status on this one. (P.S. He's not my favorite Pres. I would prob vote libertarian if I thought they could win and it wouldn't be a vote for the losers the democrats have to offer.) Anyway, just try to think, I know this may be hard for some libs, for yourself. What if he didn't lie, what if Islamists can be evil, what if they're not joking when they say they want to kill us. Take it or leave it, just think for yourself, and don't believe everything she says.
King of kings and Lord of lords
Key words here are "wherever such a thing mattered." Pretty loaded classist speech there, especially considetring that in your own quote, only one in 579 people could read!
That's a literacy rate of... damn, what's the Linux equivalent of calc.exe? This damned computer is making me both illiterate and innumerate! I'm "loosing" it!
But the point is, 1 in 579 is hardly "97 to 100%". Without public schools you would have the same illiteracy rate. Of course, to the eyes of some (Ken Starr? You?), the poor DON'T matter.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
$40 million to investigate somebody lying under oath in a sexual harassment case??
Gee. I always thought pursuing sexual harassers was a progressive cause.
But many schools do ban the practice or dissemination of religion on school grounds, during school hours... my wife (when in high school) was suspended for 2 days when she was in high school for having a silent prayer before lunch (S. California)... I personally lean towards spiritual agnostic, but really feel like there is some growing level of persecution towards Christianity specifically and religion as a whole in this country.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Ahh, the moral corruption of the Republican party. When faced with the reality that you are wrong, you fall back to excuses.
You've OD's on kool-aid and this is a waste of time, but what the hell.
We invaded Iraq because:
(1) We had one human intel Iraqi defector telling us about WMDs;
(2) Saddam was trying to buy Yellowcake uranium from South Africa;
(3) The aluminum tubes were for uranium enrichment.
Well (1) that single person Iraqi defector was actually held and interviewed by German intelligence agencies, and when those German intelligence agencies passed that intel along to us they explcitly told us that this source was a drunk and a PROVEN LIAR, that protions of his stories had been proven fabrications. And Bush went ahead and knowingly used this as "proof" anyway. We used this "evidence" to convince congress and to convince the US public and to attempt to convince the UN. He knew it was worthless intell, but he used it anyway and he did not tell congress or the American people or the UN that this source was proven to have fabricated at least some of his reports. Perhaps the codename Curveball (later referred to as Screwball) rings a bell? He KNEW.
And (2) the fradulent Yellowcake documents? Well US intelligence agencies explcictly told Buch NOT NOT NOT to use them as evidence as they were doubious, and Bush did refrain from citing them as evidence in the next speech he gave after being told not to use them.... but congress and the public and the US were still demanding evidence before going to war... and Bush went right ahead and dumped the Yellowcake uranium story into his speech anyway, after being explcitly told by US intelligence NOT to use it. He KNEW.
As for (3) the aluminum tubes, Bush either knew *OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN* that the US intelligence experts who actually had expertise in uranium enrighment (in particular the Department Of Energy and State Department, the agencies that actually DEAL with enrichment) concluded that the tubes were absolutely the wrong specification for enriching uranium and Iraq did not have the capability to modify them for uranium enrichment, and that the tubes were in fact identical to tubes Iraq was already using for conventional small rockets. I will freely admit that the intelligence committee reporting on these tubes was divided on the issue and gave a majority vote towards concluding they were for uranuim enrichment... but as I said the ones with actual expertise in the subject were ignored/outvoted by other agencies with no expertise in nuclear enrichment. The reason the other agencies voted for it, even though that had zero expertise in enrichment, was that it sounded plausible to them and the administration had been HOUNDING for evidence to confim Iqari WMDs. This was not an effort to manufacture evidence, but the pressure placed to deliver predetermined intel was wontonly irresponsible. You surely can't dispute Bush's intense demand for loyalty and and his lack of tolerance for anyone who doesn't tell him what he wants to hear. There were numerous leaks reports form CIA and other intelligence insiders, all about how we could have gotten the intel so wrong... to quote one National Security Council expert "dismantle the existing filtering process that for fifty years had been preventing the policymakers from getting bad information. They created stovepipes to get the information they wanted directly to the top leadership. Their position is that the professional bureaucracy is deliberately and maliciously keeping information from them." and to to quote one CIA official "The analysts at the C.I.A. were beaten down".
ALL THREE points of evidence were worthless. Screwball, yellocake, aluminum tubes. BUSH KNEW that the first two were worthless, and he either knew or should have known that the actual enrichment experts had concluded the third as impossible. And even if he didn't know about the tubes, the international enrichment experts pretty well unanimously shot it down within a day or two after it was made public.
he had used them in the past. I have seen documentation of the fact that he had th
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I can also cite several lawsuits banning any religious reference by a local government, even on a holiday that is based in said religion... I can cite an instance where a piece of art that scribed the ten commandments, even though it is a historical reference, was forced away. Our declaration of independence, and the articles of confederation mention the G-O-D word, maybe we should have them stricken from the text books as well. I mean, we've already warped the pilgrimage of many groups to this country, away from one with a state sanctioned religion, replacing religion, with politics.... though religion is politics.
When I said that I am a spiritual agnostic, I mean to say that I don't believe in a single omnipotent, omnipresent "creator/god" that Christians do... I feel strongly that there is more of a symbiosis with nature and one's environment that isn't confined to a single location, I also feel that there are scientific principles in some of my own theories that would be nice to see tested, lest I become considered a fringe, crackpot, I haven't really gone so far as to explore this line of thought.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info