Tear down those laws

Posted by: Lea

Tear down those laws - 04/03/08 07:09 PM

Makes it easier to build a wall. From the Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 65/Thursday, April 3, 2008/Notices, page 18293.<br><br>DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary Determination Pursuant to Section 102 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, as Amended AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Notice of determination.<br><br>It's available as a PDF download, but gosh, it's so long, I figured I'd just cutNpaste the relevant part. Ready? Here goes . . .<br><br><br>Accordingly, I hereby waive in their entirety, with respect to the construction of roads and fixed and mobile barriers (including, but not limited to, accessing the project area, creating and using staging areas, the conduct of earthwork, excavation, fill, and site preparation, and installation and upkeep of fences, roads, supporting elements, drainage, erosion controls, safety features, surveillance, communication, and detection equipment of all types, radar and radio towers, and lighting) in the Project Areas, all federal, state, or other laws, regulations and legal requirements of, deriving from, or related to the subject of, the following laws, as amended: The National Environmental Policy Act (Pub. L. 91–190, 83 Stat. 852 (Jan. 1, 1970) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)), the Endangered Species Act (Pub. L. 93– 205, 87 Stat. 884 (Dec. 28, 1973) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act) (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)), the National Historic Preservation Act (Pub. L. 89– 665, 80 Stat. 915 (Oct. 15, 1966) (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.)), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), the Archeological Resources Protection Act (Pub. L. 96–95, 16 U.S.C. 470aa et seq.), the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.), the Noise Control Act (42 U.S.C. 4901 et seq.), the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.), the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act (Pub. L. 86–523, 16 U.S.C. 469 et seq.), the Antiquities Act (16 U.S.C. 431 et seq.), the Historic Sites, Buildings, and Antiquities Act (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.), the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Pub. L. 90–542, 16 U.S.C. 1281 et seq.), the Farmland Protection Policy Act (7 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.), the Coastal Zone Management Act (Pub. L. 92–583, 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), the Wilderness Act (Pub. L. 88–577, 16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Pub. L. 94–579, 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (Pub. L. 89–669, 16 U.S.C. 668dd–668ee), the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (Pub. L. 84–1024, 16 U.S.C. 742a, et seq.), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (Pub. L. 73– 121, 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), the Otay Mountain Wilderness Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 106– 145), Sections 102(29) and 103 of Title I of the California Desert Protection Act (Pub. L. 103–433), 50 Stat. 1827, the National Park Service Organic Act (Pub. L. 64–235, 16 U.S.C. 1, 2–4), the National Park Service General Authorities Act (Pub. L. 91–383, 16 U.S.C. 1a–1 et seq.), Sections 401(7), 403, and 404 of the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–625), Sections 301(a)–(f) of the Arizona Desert Wilderness Act (Pub. L. 101–628), the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403), the Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.), the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 1996), the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. 2000bb), the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.), and the Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 528–531). <br><br><br>Yes, Virginias, if you spot a law you're especially fond of up there in that paragraph, you may now kiss its ass goodbye. Then come on down and watch the wall go up.<br><br>Excuse me. I have to go puke.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/03/08 07:50 PM

And here I thought we were a nation of laws. All you've got to do is assert that you "waive" a law, and it's gonzo? What's that all about??<br><br>[color:red]&#63743;</font color=red> [color:orange]&#63743;</font color=orange> [color:yellow]&#63743;</font color=yellow> [color:green]&#63743;</font color=green> [color:blue]&#63743;</font color=blue> [color:purple]&#63743;</font color=purple>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/03/08 08:01 PM

This is the preface to the paragraph I posted ~<br><br>Determination and Waiver: I [Chertoff] have a mandate to achieve and maintain operational control of the borders of the United States. Public Law 109–367, §2, 120 Stat. 2638, 8 U.S.C. 1701 note. Congress has provided me with a number of authorities necessary to accomplish this mandate. One of these authorities is found at section 102(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (‘‘IIRIRA’’) . . . in section 102(c) of the IIRIRA, Congress granted to me the authority to waive all legal requirements that I, in my sole discretion, determine necessary to ensure the expeditious construction of barriers and roads authorized by section 102 of IIRIRA.<br><br><br>Sorry. Gotta puke again. It's not like we didn't know this, but still. And for me, it's beyond too close to home.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/03/08 08:42 PM

Interesting that in 1996 Congress granted the authority to do something to the secretary of a department that didn't exist, and wouldn't exist for five or six more years.<br><br>[color:red]&#63743;</font color=red> [color:orange]&#63743;</font color=orange> [color:yellow]&#63743;</font color=yellow> [color:green]&#63743;</font color=green> [color:blue]&#63743;</font color=blue> [color:purple]&#63743;</font color=purple>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/03/08 09:08 PM

They didn't. But this is his interpretation of that law. Everything DHS has tried to accomplish, at least down here, as gone very very badly. He's almost out of time (read: office), so he's essentially pulling the trigger. Good timing, since everybody is focused on the run for POTUS.<br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: Shooshie

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 12:46 AM

I'm burning mad. I hope that bastard gets his comeuppance. Someone's got to rescind all those orders. <br><br>What's the use in a law, if a sh[i][/i]ithead can come along and just wipe it out any time he finds it inconvenient?<br><br>This is worse than just being full of himself. This is evil. He's showing off. Well, I'll pay attention when someone finally teaches him a lesson. Until then, he's persona non grata.<br><br><br>Shooshie<br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:green]Pictures and things</font color=green>
Posted by: DLC

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 07:21 AM

"Sorry. Gotta puke again."<br><br>Lea you better watch yourself, girl... you're going to get dehydrated !! <br><br><br>If I puked everytime the Bush Admin made me sick, I'd be so thin, I'd make Mahatma Ghandi look like the Pillsbury dough boy !!<br><br>I agree though... but what other stink can these guys pull...<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: Lea

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 08:03 AM

Typical MacBabe here, David. I can't be too thin or too rich. Just can't figure out the too rich part. <br><br>We'll be back working in the Valley starting next week, and it always adds another dimension to the trip reading, listening, being literally at Idiot Wall ground zero. The past two years down there, we've seen the awareness and momentum grow into outrage and law suits. Hell, maybe I'll go anti-wall guerrilla underground. If y'all don't hear back from me . . . <br><br><br><br> <br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 08:14 AM

Well if we hear on the news of a new terrorist group operating in S Texas called AL-Lea Quada... <br><br>we'll know it's you !! <br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 10:08 AM

<br>Please Post the Link<br>to the Story & PDF<br>Thanx.<br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Celandine

javascript:popup('http://wRe: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 12:28 PM

So far all I've turned up is:<br>http://www.bibdaily.com/<br>Then: select date in question<br>In this case: April 3rd, 2008<br><br><h2>Environmental Laws to Be Waived for Fence</h2><br><br>National Guardsmen weld a section of wall being erected along the international border that separates San Luis, Mexico, and San Luis, Ariz.<br><br>Lawmaker Accuses Administration of Abusing Authority to Build Barrier at Mexican Border<br><br>The Bush administration will waive more than 30 environmental and land-management laws in order to finish building 470 miles of border fence in the Southwest by the end of the year, officials said yesterday.<br><br>The move, permitted under an exemption granted by Congress, will be the most sweeping use of the administration's waiver authority since it started building the fence to curb illegal immigration. It will affect environmentally sensitive areas in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.<br><br>However, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee, said the administration has exceeded what Congress intended when it granted the department added flexibility under the Real ID Act. "Today's waiver represents an extreme abuse of authority," he said in a statement. "Waiver authority should only be used as a last resort, not simply because the Department has failed to get the job done through the normal process. It was meant to be an exception, not the rule."<br><br>James L. Connaughton, who chairs the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said his aides have been working with the Department of Homeland Security to assess the environmental impact of the fence construction even if it does not meet the strict requirements of the law.<br><br>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * <br><br><h2>Environmental rules waived for Mexican border fence</h2><br><br><br>WASHINGTON -- In an aggressive move to finish 670 miles of barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border by the end of the year, the Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday announced plans to waive federal and state environmental laws.<br><br>The two waivers, which were approved by Congress, will allow Homeland Security to slash through a thicket of more than 30 environmental and cultural laws to speed construction.<br><br>"The Bush administration's latest waiver of environmental and other federal laws threatens the livelihoods and ecology of the entire U.S.-Mexico border region," said Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope. "Secretary Chertoff chose to bypass stakeholders and push through this unpopular project on April Fool's Day. We don't think the destruction of the borderlands region is a laughing matter."<br><br>Critics, however, say the department's environmental assessments have been rushed efforts that present a distorted and incomplete picture.<br><br>"It's surprising how cursory their reviews have been," said Kim Delfino, director of the California branch of Defenders of Wildlife. "There's a lot of boilerplate and analysis shifted from one document to another. It's kind of like they were going through the motions."<br><br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 12:42 PM

<h2>DETERMINATION AND WAIVER HTML Version</h2><br><h2>The PDF</h2><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 01:48 PM

It's not a "story." It's two pages from the Federal Register.<br><br><br>http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a080403c.html<br><br>PDF<br><br><br>You just don't know how tempting it was to tell you to find it yourself, you know, the way you tell people you don't like when they ask about your "stories."<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/04/08 03:45 PM

<br>I did find it myself<br>and I don't recall telling anyone to "find it themselves"<br><br>but my point in asking was not one of doubt or disbelief<br>s much as I felt the topic was so important as to (in mojo's words)<br>transcend party politics. I genuinely want to see the the entire PDF<br>& archive it, since it may be of monumental importance to our future.<br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: mojo_jojo

Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 04:15 PM

<br><br>I wouldn't shed a tear over losing the left coast, but I'd sure miss Texas. Having lived there for four years I came to really like the place. <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by mojo_jojo on 04/04/08 07:18 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 04:50 PM

At least some of that we did steal fair and square, no?<br><br>[color:red]&#63743;</font color=red> [color:orange]&#63743;</font color=orange> [color:yellow]&#63743;</font color=yellow> [color:green]&#63743;</font color=green> [color:blue]&#63743;</font color=blue> [color:purple]&#63743;</font color=purple>
Posted by: mojo_jojo

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 05:08 PM

I suppose all of it. We'd have to haul our collective a$$es back off of Plymouth Rock if we gave the same consideration to Native Americans. <br><br>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 05:22 PM

We did buy some of it, maybe at first from folks who didn't know you could own land, but eventually from more sophistical types.<br><br>[color:red]&#63743;</font color=red> [color:orange]&#63743;</font color=orange> [color:yellow]&#63743;</font color=yellow> [color:green]&#63743;</font color=green> [color:blue]&#63743;</font color=blue> [color:purple]&#63743;</font color=purple>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 07:14 PM

My concern is less that we're building a wall to keep <br>others out, than they're building a wall to keep us in.<br><br>Another part of that package is the REAL ID that has now<br>been enacted, ...that people swore would never happen,<br>just like the WALL which Lea said would never happen.<br><br>It still seems to me that we're placidly accepting the <br>bonds that once shackled the people of the former USSR.<br><br>A good analogy is Gore's frog in a pot of boiling water:<br>the Boiling Frog Syndrome: <br>if you put a frog into a pot of boiling water, it will leap <br>out right away to escape the danger. However, if you put <br>that same frog into a kettle that is filled with water that <br>is mild and pleasant, and then you gradually increase the <br>heat in the kettle until it starts boiling, the frog will not <br>become aware of the threat until it is too late. <br>(voila: frog fricassee).<br><br>[color:white]. . . </font color=white><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Celandine on 04/04/08 10:24 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 07:19 PM

Who is "they" and why would "they" build a wall to keep us . . . in???<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: VarmintBlubber

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 07:22 PM

True enough. There can come a time when the fence meant to keep the rabble out becomes the device by which the slaves are kept penned in. I'd be keeping an eye out for yet more shredding of your fabulous constitution. No doubt some of the more wary & feisty among you are already stockpiling weapons in advance of the possibility of a unilateral declaration of martial law 'for the good of all.'<br><br>We're rushing into some strange times, after all.<br><br>[color:red]_________________________</font color=red><br>[color:white]Max </font color=white><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 07:25 PM

<br>Do you still live in Houston?<br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 08:42 PM

Yes. Do you still live in the real world?<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 08:43 PM

You're too smart to be serious. I hope.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: VarmintBlubber

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 09:18 PM

I am serious. Whether or not I'm smart is something I'll leave to wiser folks to answer. I don't care either way as it makes no difference in either of our lives. But I am concerned that BushCo has steadily been working away at the precious supports to previously inalienable rights and freedoms. It's taken years but they're still at it. They get away with it because they appeal to American patriotism. Alas, that can be a terrible smokescreen.<br><br>When state security becomes the be all and end all, you have to start worrying about who's minding the store and what's really going on. Generally speaking, fascists don't announce their true nature until they're quite comfortable that there's no one left to mount a truly effective opposition.<br><br>[color:red]_________________________</font color=red><br>[color:white]Max </font color=white><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 09:40 PM

Generally speaking, we change the Party in Control every four to six years. That obvious point aside, do you really believe that the "fence," or "wall," as you understand (or, obviously don't) is meant to be some kind of weird trap to keep . . . I'm just out of taffy to stretch around your premise.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/04/08 11:00 PM

BINGO!<br><br>the other day when I mentioned "PinHead Inc. having rekindled the Cold(Forever)War"<br>on a different forum far, far away, the most polite reply had been:<br><br>"In some town in Texas, the Village Idiot had gone missing"<br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: eckhard

NIMBY? - 04/05/08 12:44 AM

<br>What do you have against walls?<br>They are wonderful screens for graffiti, can hide unsightly neighbourhoods, keep the riff-raff out/in, and if they get old enough, can become superb tourist magnets.<br>I'd say, give it a try.<br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: katlpablo

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/05/08 01:36 AM

George Carlin knows who "they" are and who "they" want to keep… in and ignorant!<br><br><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AMqJvhmD5Yg&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AMqJvhmD5Yg&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br><br>
Posted by: electricron

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/05/08 07:27 AM

Candidates past votes on the Wall!<br><br>Feb 22 - Eleven days before Texans, and voters in three other states head to the polls, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton participated in a CNN and Univision debate in Austin.<br>Immigration was a key issue, as it is to many Texans. Both candidates seemed to alter their positions in Texas last night on the border fence. Both Clinton and Obama said they do not support a border fence. But they both voted for it in the Senate last year.<br><br>To be fair, McCain also voted for the Secure Fence Act.<br><br>Specifically:<br>Clinton voted for an immigration overhaul bill in 2006 that would have legalized millions of immigrants in the U.S. She also supported a bill to create 700 miles of border fencing and co-sponsored a bill to help qualifying illegal immigrants pay in-state college tuition and eventually gain permanent status. She backed a proposal that would have legalized some farm workers. <br><br>Obama voted for the Senate immigration overhaul bill to strengthen border controls, create a guest-worker program and legalize millions of foreign workers here now. Obama also backed the Secure Fence Act. He co-sponsored a bill to allow states to offer illegal immigrants in-state tuition. <br><br>In 2006, McCain co-sponsored the Senate immigration bill that would have legalized millions of immigrants in the U.S., strengthened border control and created a guest-worker program. McCain says he recognizes the economic value of immigrant workers, and so he backs what he calls a "sensible" guest-worker program for workers who are in the country without legal status. McCain calls for strengthening penalties for those who hire undocumented immigrants. <br><br>Which presidential candidates voted for Real ID? <br>All of them who were members of Congress at the time voted for Real ID except Rep. Ron Paul, a Republican. The vote in Congress was overwhelmingly in favor of the proposal, part of a broader government spending and tsunami relief bill that was approved unanimously by the Senate and by a vote of 368 to 58 in the House of Representatives. Sens. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John McCain voted for it. <br><br>Which states have rejected Real ID?<br>Residents of the five states--Maine, South Carolina, Montana, Oklahoma, and New Hampshire--that have firmly rejected Real ID. Fifteen states and the District of Columbia have not decided yet, meaning they could fall into this category too. <br><br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/05/08 04:53 PM

<br>Oh! That's RIGHT! <br><br>You're the one laying the Ground(ZERO)Work for the Wall! <br><br>No wonder you kicked right into ~DENIAL MODE~ <br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/05/08 05:19 PM

[censored] crazy because you've always got your head shoved up your ass anyway.<br><br> Now, go cry baby to the Mod 'cause I talked mean to you. One . . . two . . .<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/05/08 05:39 PM

You know? What the Bush administration does no longer surprises/shocks me. <br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/05/08 07:37 PM

<br>Quisling<br>you know that they're using your work <br>as a shortcut to further their "Project"<br><br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: Tear down those laws - 04/05/08 07:52 PM

I used to think you couldn't possibly be as stupid as you sound. <br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: VarmintBlubber

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/05/08 08:55 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Generally speaking, we change the Party in Control every four to six years. That obvious point aside, do you really believe that the "fence," or "wall," as you understand (or, obviously don't) is meant to be some kind of weird trap to keep . . . I'm just out of taffy to stretch around your premise.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Well, that's too bad - both the taffy and your reaction. You want to think I'm being far-fetched; I certainly understand that impulse. I was speaking of the wall's potential for abuse, for becoming something else than its stated purpose. I gather you apparently want me to be some conspiracy theorist. Whatever.<br><br>It used to be proud Lady Liberty in the harbour, greeting the boats coming in from foreign shores. Now it's a grey wall to keep out the thronging masses. How times change. But such barriers usually claim victims on both sides... at the very least they emanate an energy that is far from benevolent. That's all I was saying.<br><br>In any case, Eck might be right: In fifty years' time the people can throw massive street parties when everyone triumphantly pulls the ugly slabs down. I bet that'll be a real party... for some people, anyway.<br><br>[color:red]_________________________</font color=red><br>[color:white]Max </font color=white><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Welcome to an Absolut world - 04/06/08 02:44 AM

[censored][censored],<br>but to those of us with a MEMORY... that perhaps grew up (like me) wondering just<br>"HOW THE BLOODY HELL THE PEOPLE OF THE (former) SOVIET UNION EVER STOOD<br>BY AND ALLOWED THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT TO WALL THEM IN AND NEVER PROTEST<br>UNTIL IT WAS FAR FAR TOO LATE TO STOP "THEM"!?!?!?"---or DIED TRYING---<br><br><br>So... Back to The Frog in the Kettle...<br><br>I'm still struggling to figure out <br>exactly WHAT POINT should he jump out and Run For His Life....<br><br>LOL ...or if there's some Slimy B___ch telling him that he's "Just Paranod" too? <br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: MacBozo

This should 'splain it! - 04/06/08 03:09 PM

All access pass<br><br>
Posted by: Lea

Re: This should 'splain it! - 04/06/08 03:43 PM

Thank god that pass is set to expire. We've got our fingers crossed, because come November, there sure as hell better be a new sheriff in town. We're hoping that will put a stop to the lunacy down here.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:white]xx</font color=white>[color:blue]I always deserve it. Really.</font color=blue><br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: This should 'splain it! - 04/06/08 03:44 PM

<center><br><br><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ypa75axdK6o&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ypa75axdK6o&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br><br></center><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: Celandine

It's important to Rescue the Frog - 04/06/08 03:59 PM

<center><br><br><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/K7_3Wmet9IQ&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/K7_3Wmet9IQ&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br><br></center><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>