Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?  (Read 4090 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline noseyneighbor2

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 114
  • Karma: +11714/-7
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« on: December 13, 2011, 10:30:07 AM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

Action Alert: The U.S. Constitution hangs by its Final Thread - Must ReadSubmitted by visible51 on Sun, 12/11/2011 - 22:07in 16    votes  URGENT: SB 1867 is now HR 1540 - Vote expected on Tuesday.
Lets Melt the Congressional Switchboard with Phone Calls on Monday & Tuesday - We can win this !
SB 1867 did pass with language in Section 1031: that America Citizens be subjected to the rules of war;  That anyone could be detained indefinitely without trial for committing an act of belligerence Sec 1032 prevents military custody of Citizens, but does not exclude American Citizens from being rounded up, and held in private custody under the rules of war.
Don't waste time emailing Representatives or signing petitions. This is Urgent, Your Rep need to hear directly from YOU NOW!
This Bill is also known as the "National Defense Authorization Act" - NDAA
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi...
Find your representative:
http://www.house.gov/htbi...
Contact Your Representative - Switchboard operator:
1-(202)-224-3121
    Be Polite to Staffers who take your call.
    remember SB 1867 is now HR 1540
Urge Your Representative to please:
"remove Sections 1031 & 1032  from bill HR 1540 & any similar language, or reject the entire thing. This bill can be construed to be a Nazi Roundup. The DEVIL is in the DETAILS of the bill.".
    Tell your representative they could be charged with WAR CRIMES if they vote for this bill the way it is worded..
If staffer says "Obama has promised to Veto this bill", don't buy it, it is just another Obama lie..
Proof Obama will not veto S1867http://youtu.be/PLiKvSz_wX8
"They are using sophisticated disinformation tactics". Republican Congressman Justin Amash's told The Grand Rapids Press that the S. 1867 National Defense Authorization Act's military detention provisions are “carefully crafted to mislead the public.”
An Open Message to Police & Militaryhttp://youtu.be/zV0pl9yiURY
------------------------------------------------------
TEXT OF HR  1540  PP (Public Print - PP)(current as of 12/9/2011)
Subtitle D—Detainee Matters
SEC.  1031.  AFFIRMATION  OF  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  ARMED
FORCES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  TO  DETAIN COVERED
PERSONS  PURSUANT  TO  THE  AUTHORIZATION  FOR
USE  OF  MILITARY  FORCE.

        (a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority
    of  the  President  to  use  all  necessary  and  appropriate  force
    pursuant  to  the  Authorization  for  Use  of  Military  Force
    (Public  Law  107–40)  includes  the  authority  for  the  Armed
    Forces  of  the  United  States  to  detain  covered  persons  (as
    defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law
    of war.
    (b)  COVERED  PERSONS.—A  covered  person  under  this
    section is any person as follows:
        (1)   A   person   who   planned,   authorized,   com-
mitted,  or  aided  the  terrorist  attacks  that  occurred  on
    September  11,  2001,  or  harbored  those  responsible  for
    those attacks.
        (2)  A  person  who  was  a  part  of  or  substantially
    supported  al-Qaeda,  the  Taliban,  or  associated  forces
    that  are  engaged  in  hostilities  against  the  United
    States  or  its  coalition  partners,  including  any  person
    who  has  committed  a  belligerent  act
  or  has  directly
    supported  such  hostilities  in  aid  of  such  enemy  forces.
        (c)  DISPOSITION  UNDER  LAW  OF  WAR.—The  disposi-
tion  of  a  person  under  the  law  of  war  as  described  in  sub-
section (a) may include the following:
        (1)  Detention  under  the  law  of  war  without  trial
        until  the  end  of  the  hostilities  authorized  by  the  Au-
thorization for Use of Military Force.
        (2)  Trial  under  chapter  47A  of  title  10,  United
        States  Code  (as  amended  by  the  Military  Commis-
sions  Act  of  2009  (title  XVIII  of  Public  Law  111–
84)).
        (3)  Transfer  for  trial  by  an  alternative  court  or
        competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
        (4) Transfer  to  the  custody  or  control  of  the  per-
son’s  country  of  origin,  any  other  foreign  country,  or
        any other foreign entity.

    (d)  CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing  in  this  section  is  in-
tended  to  limit  or  expand  the  authority  of  the  President
or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
    (e)  AUTHORITIES.—Nothing  in  this  section  shall  be
construed  to  affect  existing  law  or  authorities,  relating  to
the  detention  of  United  States  citizens,  lawful  resident
aliens  of  the  United  States  or  any  other  persons  who  are
captured or arrested in the United States.
    (f)  REQUIREMENT  FOR  BRIEFINGS  OF  CONGRESS.—
The  Secretary  of  Defense  shall  regularly  brief  Congress  re-
garding  the  application  of  the  authority  described  in  this
section,  including  the  organizations,  entities,  and  individ-
uals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of sub-
section (b)(2).
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
    (a)  CUSTODY  PENDING  DISPOSITION  UNDER  LAW  OF
WAR.—
(1)  IN  GENERAL.—Except  as  provided  in  para-
graph  (4),  the  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States
    shall  hold  a  person  described  in  paragraph  (2)  who
    is  captured  in  the  course  of  hostilities  authorized  by
    the  Authorization  for  Use  of  Military  Force  (Public
    Law  107–40)  in  military  custody  pending  disposition
    under the law of war.
            (2)   COVERED    PERSONS.—The   requirement   in
    paragraph  (1)  shall  apply  to  any  person  whose  deten-
tion  is  authorized  under  section  1031  who  is  deter-
mined—
(A)  to  be  a  member  of,  or  part  of,  al-Qaeda
        or  an  associated  force  that  acts  in  coordination
        with  or  pursuant  to  the  direction  of  al-Qaeda;
        and
        (B)  to  have  participated  in  the  course  of
        planning  or  carrying  out  an  attack  or  attempted
        attack  against  the  United  States  or  its  coalition
        partners.
        (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—For pur-
poses  of  this  subsection,  the  disposition  of  a  person
    under  the  law  of  war  has  the  meaning  given  in  sec-
tion  1031(c),  except  that  no  transfer  otherwise  de-
scribed  in  paragraph  (4)  of  that  section  shall  be  made
    unless   consistent   with   the   requirements   of   section
    1033.
    (4)  WAIVER  FOR  NATIONAL  SECURITY.—The  Sec-
retary  of  Defense  may,  in  consultation  with  the  Sec-
retary  of  State  and  the  Director  of  National  Intel-
ligence,  waive  the  requirement  of  paragraph  (1)  if  the
    Secretary  submits  to  Congress  a  certification  in  writ-
ing  that  such  a  waiver  is  in  the  national  security  in-
terests of the United States.
          (b)  APPLICABILITY  TO  UNITED  STATES  CITIZENS  AND
LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1)  UNITED  STATES  CITIZENS.—The  requirement
    to  detain  a  person  in  military  custody  under  this  sec-
tion  does  not  extend  to  citizens  of  the  United  States.
    (2)   LAWFUL   RESIDENT   ALIENS.—The   require-
ment  to  detain  a  person  in  military  custody  under
    this  section  does  not  extend  to  a  lawful  resident  alien
    of  the  United  States  on  the  basis  of  conduct  taking
    place  within  the  United  States,  except  to  the  extent
    permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
        (c) IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES.—
(1)  IN  GENERAL.—Not  later  than  60  days  after
    the  date  of  the  enactment  of  this  Act,  the  President
    shall  issue,  and  submit  to  Congress,  procedures  for
    implementing this section.
            (2)    ELEMENTS.—The    procedures    for    imple-
menting  this  section  shall  include,  but  not  be  limited
    to, procedures as follows:
                (A)  Procedures  designating  the  persons  au-
thorized   to   make   determinations   under   sub-
section  (a)(2)  and  the  process  by  which  such  de-
terminations are to be made.
                 (B)  Procedures  providing  that  the  require-
ment   for   military   custody   under   subsection
        (a)(1)  does  not  require  the  interruption  of  ongo-
ing  surveillance  or  intelligence  gathering  with
        regard  to  persons  not  already  in  the  custody  or
        control of the United States.
                (C)  Procedures  providing  that  a  determina-
tion  under  subsection  (a)(2)  is  not  required  to  be
        implemented  until  after  the  conclusion  of  an  in-
terrogation  session  which  is  ongoing  at  the  time
        the  determination  is  made  and  does  not  require
        the interruption of any such ongoing session.
                (D)  Procedures  providing  that  the  require-
ment   for   military   custody   under   subsection
        (a)(1)  does  not  apply  when  intelligence,  law  en-
forcement,  or  other  government  officials  of  the
        United  States  are  granted  access  to  an  indi-
vidual  who  remains  in  the  custody  of  a  third
        country.
                (E)   Procedures   providing   that   a   certifi-
cation  of  national  security  interests  under  sub-
section  (a)(4)  may  be  granted  for  the  purpose  of
        transferring  a  covered  person  from  a  third  coun-
try  if  such  a  transfer  is  in  the  interest  of  the
        United  States  and  could  not  otherwise  be  accom-
plished.
        (d)  EFFECTIVE  DATE.—This  section  shall  take  effect
on  the  date  that  is  60  days  after  the  date  of  the  enactment
of  this  Act,  and  shall  apply  with  respect  to  persons  de-
scribed  in  subsection  (a)(2)  who  are  taken  into  the  custody
or brought under the control of the United States on or after
that effective date.

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2011, 05:05:28 PM »
Again, I would contact those that are voting on this legislation.  They would be the experts on it, at the federal level.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline Fafrd

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +547323/-805
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2011, 09:45:27 PM »
Different name, but simialiar style of cut and paste and harrassment of Dave.  Im thinking mark has to accts.  I know Dave can take care of himself, but come on this is getting reciculous

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2011, 10:01:33 PM »
 He has a space on here to ask him questions. I don't think its "harassment".
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline Fafrd

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +547323/-805
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2011, 10:04:03 PM »
i think it is when he has told you that he doesnt deal with legislation at the federal level  and you keep posting about it

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2011, 10:07:06 PM »
 I didn't start this thread paco! You came on here starting crap and kissing butt, and I hadn't even commented on this thread!
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin

Offline Fafrd

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +547323/-805
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2011, 12:08:37 AM »
I didn't start this thread paco! You came on here starting crap and kissing butt, and I hadn't even commented on this thread!
First of all my name is not paco.  Im also not starting crap and kissing butt.  I stated my opinion.  That opinion is think you have more than one acct and using it to ask questions about federal level legislation to a state level representative.  You came on and with this post calling names.  I know who you are mark and know that this is how you are.  Someone disagrees with you, you attack them.  So i will make comment about that. Unlike others on here i wont come down to your level and start calling you name.  As for the kissing butt comment i have know Dave since 76 when i moved to dixon and went to school and gradutated with Dave.  And kissing butt wouldnt do me any good since i no longer live in his district.  And even if i did i respect him to much to ask for anything.

Offline noseyneighbor2

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 114
  • Karma: +11714/-7
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2011, 02:25:29 AM »
Mark does not have two accounts.  I atarted this thread.  I would hope that with martial law being on the table that Mr. Day would have known something about it.  Just a little at least.  This is a pretty big deal in my book. 

Offline Pete

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1505
  • Karma: +90258/-1279
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2011, 04:48:15 AM »
Fafrd you were the one to first call someone out one this. Maybe you need to get more info before you type. No I am not sticking up for Mark, he does that all by himself. You sir thru the first egg so to speak.
If your going to be dumb, you better be tough!

Offline Fafrd

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +547323/-805
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2011, 12:51:34 PM »
Fafrd you were the one to first call someone out one this. Maybe you need to get more info before you type. No I am not sticking up for Mark, he does that all by himself. You sir thru the first egg so to speak.

With this advise coming from you pete that is funny. considering all the stuff you remark on with no facts.  First of all there were two simialiar post to Rep Day,  In which he replied that he didnt know about the federal level legislation, because he is at the state level.  With Marks penchant for cut and paste, and the way he acts on here its seems a plausible conclulsiion.  Once again i said it was my opinion that mark had two accts.  I did not call him a name or anything else.  This is a public forum for people to state thier opinion on different postings.  I posted mine.  If were are required to respond with factual information, well lests just say, You, Mark, and Dixonbob would have less postings on here.  If there is a problem with my posting im sure Mr. Lepard will inform me of and ask me to stop posting.  But considering You, Mark and Dixonbob are still able to post, im not worried.  I have not come close to making the accusations against anyone that the three of you have made towards each other.  Which by most people on her would say were is the proof in the statements you make. I cant track ip addresses on this site to prove or disprove my statement, that is why it is an opinion.

Offline David Day

  • Moderator
  • *************
  • Posts: 1450
  • Karma: +241468/-53
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #10 on: December 14, 2011, 12:52:04 PM »
Mark does not have two accounts.  I atarted this thread.  I would hope that with martial law being on the table that Mr. Day would have known something about it.  Just a little at least.  This is a pretty big deal in my book. 

I don't know what to tell you.  I don't have time to read, research, and follow hundreds of federal bills that might be a big deal in your book, sorry.  That is why you have federal elected officials, I would again suggest contacting them on federal issues...they are the ones that can actually vote for or against them.  Also, not being in Washington, I have no idea what bills might move, what ones are filed just to make someone at home happy.  Why would I want to sit and waste time reading bills that are not intended to move?

Right now we have about 60 bills filed in Missouri and official filing has not even started.  We will likely have around 800-1000.  I am working on my own bills and trying to get those read over.  There are just not enough hours in the day. 

Sorry you are not happy I am not as informed as you would like about legislation I have no control over, with any luck the next person will be.

Dave
Political Website:  www.StateRepDay.com
Back Roads Recording:  www.backroadsrecording.com
Band Website:  www.MFNband.net
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/RepDay

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #11 on: December 14, 2011, 12:57:45 PM »
So get this straight.  the president and congress derive their authority from the Constitution.  IF martial law is declared, that means the Constitution is suspended.  Where then do they derive their authority?  Think about it.  And it would not be the first time since Posse Comitatus that troops were used against American citizens.  You have only to look up "Bonus Soldiers" to find out.  and those troops were led by MacArthur, Patton and Eisenhower.  And let us not forget Lincoln who suspended habeus corpus during the American Civil War.  The precedent is already there.

Offline noseyneighbor2

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 114
  • Karma: +11714/-7
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #12 on: December 14, 2011, 05:46:48 PM »
Thank you Mr. Day, I will fo to the Federal Level for any more information.  I appreciate your response in a timely manner.

Offline Pete

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1505
  • Karma: +90258/-1279
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #13 on: December 14, 2011, 06:56:24 PM »
With this advise coming from you pete that is funny. considering all the stuff you remark on with no facts.  First of all there were two simialiar post to Rep Day,  In which he replied that he didnt know about the federal level legislation, because he is at the state level.  With Marks penchant for cut and paste, and the way he acts on here its seems a plausible conclulsiion.  Once again i said it was my opinion that mark had two accts.  I did not call him a name or anything else.  This is a public forum for people to state thier opinion on different postings.  I posted mine.  If were are required to respond with factual information, well lests just say, You, Mark, and Dixonbob would have less postings on here.  If there is a problem with my posting im sure Mr. Lepard will inform me of and ask me to stop posting.  But considering You, Mark and Dixonbob are still able to post, im not worried.  I have not come close to making the accusations against anyone that the three of you have made towards each other.  Which by most people on her would say were is the proof in the statements you make. I cant track ip addresses on this site to prove or disprove my statement, that is why it is an opinion.

I have never been put on the watch list here or anywhere. I am sure you know who has. If you can track ip addies you know if what you said is true. If true I wonder why? This is a moderated board and there are folks watching. I guess If he does, it with their approval. Wonder what I posted YOU found incorrect or offensive?
If your going to be dumb, you better be tough!

Offline Fafrd

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +547323/-805
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #14 on: December 14, 2011, 10:26:36 PM »
I have never been put on the watch list here or anywhere. I am sure you know who has. If you can track ip addies you know if what you said is true. If true I wonder why? This is a moderated board and there are folks watching. I guess If he does, it with their approval. Wonder what I posted YOU found incorrect or offensive?
Never said you were put on a watch list, so dont try to make is sound like i did.  Also i said i couldnt track someone's ip address, so i can check to see if they match...so what i said was an opinion of mine.  As for being a moderated board doesnt mean that moderator has the ability to track an ip address, but the owner of this site does and at his discrection can check.  Not asking him to do it either. As for what you posted that i found incorrect or offensive.  On the incorrect part of your statement i have no idea, i dont spend my time fact checking your statements. As to offensive, you said i called out mark.  Well thats like the old saying "calling the kettel black" you call out dixonbob on a constant basis.  So why should you be so upset about me stating an opinion (not calling out mark) and if you think i did so be it.  Its your problem not mine.  I have the right to state my opinions just like you do.

Offline mark

  • http://www.gayalpinesurvival.com/
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5138
  • Karma: +90/-81225007
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Father
    • View Profile
Re: Martial Law Vote - Is this true Mr. Day?
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2011, 10:35:11 PM »
 I wish Mr. Day had this attitude!

State of Emergency Anonymous Marine
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.
~Teilhard de Chardin