Ends doesn't justify the means
 

Bush is so full of crap. He is breaking the f-kin law with his spy tactics and is acting like it's no big deal.

This just in neocons: Your 911 juice has run out. We no longer give you a blank check to do whatever you want just because you keep repeating 911.

Rotflmao!

Don't make fun Mrs M, that's his Xmas present to us all ! http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif

Nothing would thrill the neocons more than another 9-11 to juice up their Big Brother war machine... which might help explain why they really haven't done anything to reduce the odds.

If you want to challenge an assertion, do it directly and specifically. Other wise, ad hominem offerings do nothing to substantiate your position. If you can illustrate why an assertion is not legit, do it. If not, you've done nothing of substance

Reduce the odds? They won't rely on chance odds of something happening. There is no way they leave their agenda to chance. The attack plans and the Patriot act were both completed far before 911 even occured.

I just think it's hilarious!!!http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif People like you have been screaming for so long now that no one takes you seriously.

What is the point exactly? Big government neocons don't mind giving up personal liberty, and you're not going to convince them otherwise. I agree with you that the SS tactics are disturbing and unconstitutional, but you don't really seem to be constructing a debatable point. http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...s/confused.gif

With all due respect to a thread that isn't worthy to reply to...

I respectfully submit that every US President has broken the law with some action or another and always acted like it was no big deal. Nixon still thinks that the Watergate breakin was 'no big deal'... and a large number of us consider Clinton's blowjob as 'no big deal'.

The laughs on you if you were the one who gave them the blank cheque. http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...s/rolleyes.gif

My apologies for posting in such a rabidly partisan thread. The thread title misled me to believe that a philosophic argument might be encountered here.

Uh MM I don't mean to rain on your parade, and frankly do not really disagree with you here, but I do have two points to make. First Nixon assumed room tempurature a while back. I don't think he is thinking anything anymore. Second do you expect that the OP will know what a "cheque" is?

Okay, Nixon believed it up until he expired and his supporters still push it.

As for a "cheque", I refuse to translate my prose into Americanese. Given the spellings I see used by people like sglaine here (amongst others), I'm sure some proper English won't upset too many people. http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif

Indeed, given the OP, what difference would it make if I posted poor English or not?

While we're discussing various forms of english butchery, I'd just like to point out that the title should say either "End doesn't justify the means" or "Ends don't justify the means". http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...ies/tongue.gif

Without a doubt, poor grammar and bad spelling seems to corelate well with idiot politics... go figure. This forum supplies many examples, of which, this is only one.

ANother two points http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif

Given the spellings I see used by people like sglaine here (amongst others), I'm sure some proper English won't upset too many people. http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif I resemble/resent that remark. In my defense however I would say that this is not a work document. Oh sure I could type this in word, do a spell check then copy and paste it here (hmm would that violate the rules against copy and paste jobs I wonder), but really what is the point. If this were a work document I would be a little more concerned about spelling. As long as the point is made does it really matter if I misspell a word here or there, or there, or there, well you get my point.

As for the Nixon item. I don't even know of any Nixon supporters, although I am sure they are lurking about somewhere.

Actually, you don't resemble that remark at all. And the spelling found in my posts is not perfect either.

But the general sentence structure, complexity of language and frequency and type of spelling errors is always indicative of education levels - not intelligence mind you, only education. http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

As for Nixon-philes, I've run across a few conservative 'fans' of Nixon on other forums - some of them were otherwise quite rational too! http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

And just to keep on topic, does the 'end' of quality communication justify the 'means' of thread-jacking? http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif

Dam cant do just the smiley face emoticon. Now that I have added the requisite number of words http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif http://www.uspoliticsonline.net/imag...es/biggrin.gif