[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Mass job losses as major factory owner moves business overseas

Israel kills IDF soldiers in Lebanon to prevent their kidnap

46% of those deaths were occurring on the day of vaccination or within two days

In 2002 the US signed the Hague Invasion Act into law

MUSK is going after WOKE DISNEY!!!

Bondi: Zuckerberg Colluded with Fauci So "They're Not Immune Anymore" from 1st Amendment Lawsuits

Ukrainian eyewitnesses claim factory was annihilated to dust by Putin's superweapon

FBI Director Wray and DHS Secretary Mayorkas have just refused to testify before the Senate...

Government adds 50K jobs monthly for two years. Half were Biden's attempt to mask a market collapse with debt.

You’ve Never Seen THIS Side Of Donald Trump

President Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon as CDC Director

Joe Rogan Tells Josh Brolin His Recent Bell’s Palsy Diagnosis Could Be Linked to mRNA Vaccine

President-elect Donald Trump Nominates Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture

Trump Taps COVID-Contrarian, Staunch Public Health Critic Makary For FDA

F-35's Cooling Crisis: Design Flaws Fuel $2 Trillion Dilemma For Pentagon

Joe Rogan on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine Aid

Joe Rogan on 62 year-old soldier with one arm, one eye

Jordan Peterson On China's Social Credit Controls

Senator Kennedy Exposes Bad Jusge

Jewish Land Grab

Trump Taps Dr. Marty Makary, Fierce Opponent of COVID Vaccine Mandates, as New FDA Commissioner

Recovering J6 Prisoner James Grant, Tells-All About Bidens J6 Torture Chamber, Needs Immediate Help After Release

AOC: Keeping Men Out Of Womens Bathrooms Is Endangering Women

What Donald Trump Has Said About JFK's Assassination

Horse steals content from Sara Fischer and Sophia Cai and pretends he is the author

Horse steals content from Jonas E. Alexis and claims it as his own.

Trump expected to shake up White House briefing room

Ukrainians have stolen up to half of US aid ex-Polish deputy minister

Gaza doctor raped, tortured to death in Israeli custody, new report reveals

German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party 'Anti-Human'


Miscellaneous
See other Miscellaneous Articles

Title: they are the Supreme Court who has the unchallenged power to decide the matter
Source: Anonymous Dead Indian
URL Source: http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/reada ... rtNum=26558&SC=228&EC=267#C228
Published: May 21, 2006
Author: Anonymous Dead Indian
Post Date: 2006-05-21 14:52:22 by A K A Stone
Keywords: stupid statement, doesn, ignorance is bliss
Views: 223
Comments: 31

they are the Supreme Court who has the unchallenged power to decide the matter

What an incredible ignorant statement. This federal propagandist would have us believe that the supreme court is the dictators and we must obey and disregard the constitution.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: All (#0)

The dead indian would have us obey the supremes, even when they use foreign law. They get to decide everything according to the propagandist posting this nonsense.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   14:54:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: All (#0)

I nominate this for stupidest quote of the year.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   14:55:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: A K A Stone (#1)

The dead indian would have us obey the supremes, even when they use foreign law. They get to decide everything according to the propagandist posting this nonsense.

Link Mr. kook desperately trying to construct a strawman?

And be sure the highlight the "foreign law" part.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   14:57:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#3)

Link Mr. kook desperately trying to construct a strawman?

You said it. Can't you stand by your drivel.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   14:59:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: A K A Stone (#4)

Link Mr. kook desperately trying to construct a strawman?

You said it. Can't you stand by your drivel.

Link Mr. ---- DISHONEST -- kook desperately trying to construct a strawman?

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:00:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: A K A Stone (#4)

And don't forget to prove up the part about "foreign law".

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:01:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#5)

Did you or did you not say that about the supreme court? Are you backpedling now?

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:01:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#6)

You said the supremes are unchallengeable. So they are a law unto themselves. You admitted you dont think they have to obey the constitution. They are in fact using foreign law. You still support them because marbury said they are the say so. So in reality that is what you support.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:02:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: A K A Stone (#7)

Did you or did you not say that about the supreme court? Are you backpedling now?

You said I said it.

Let's see the link --- kook.

It should be no problem if you are being honest.

Let's see if you can twist an out of context statement enough to save your ass here.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:03:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#9)

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=26558&SC=228&EC=267#C228

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:03:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: A K A Stone (#8)

You said the supremes are unchallengeable. So they are a law unto themselves.

Link Kook?

I think you are a liar.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:03:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#11)

Link Kook?

Thats what they call us who knows wtc was an inside job.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:04:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: A K A Stone (#10)

To: Anonymous Dead Indian

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=26558&SC=228&EC=267#C228

That doesn't say what you said I said --- kook.

But you knew that when you posted it.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:04:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: A K A Stone (#8)

You said the supremes are unchallengeable. So they are a law unto themselves. You admitted you dont think they have to obey the constitution.

To your face I am calling you a dishonest, lying kook.

You are a liar.

Post the link where I said this and prove me wrong -- kook.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:06:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#14)

Your the on lying.

they are the Supreme Court who has the unchallenged power to decide the matter and you are some silly dick on the internet.

But go ahead and tell us how you would like things to be.

Anonymous Dead Indian posted on 2006-05-21 14:46:56 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:06:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: A K A Stone (#8)

You said the supremes are unchallengeable. So they are a law unto themselves. You admitted you dont think they have to obey the constitution.

C'mon Stone.

Is it time to lie and spin for Jesus, or can you post the quote where I said this?

Liar.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:08:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#16)

o they are a law unto themselves. You admitted you dont think they have to obey the constitution.

I said that part. That is the reality of your position when you say they are unchallengeable. What are we supposed to go back and only be able to challenge parts of their decisions that are based on foreign law. What does that imaginary process involve.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:10:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: A K A Stone (#15)

they are the Supreme Court who has the unchallenged power to decide the matter and you are some silly dick on the internet.

You are spinning like a top now.

Tell one person in authority who seriously challenges the Supreme Court's right to decide Supreme Court cases?

Here is what you actually said when cooking up your strawman:

You said the supremes are unchallengeable. So they are a law unto themselves. You admitted you dont think they have to obey the constitution.

Where did I say this kook? Where did I say they were utterly unchallengable? Where did I say that they were a law unto themselves? Where did I say they were above the Constitution?

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:12:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Stone (#18)

Oh, and Stone, you still haven't explained the "foreign law" part of your strawman. Better start spinning or else come up with a quote.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:13:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#19)

Oh, and Stone, you still haven't explained the "foreign law" part of your strawman. Better start spinning or else come up with a quote.

You didn't say foreign law. I never said you did. I was saying that is the logical conclusion of your can't challenge the supreme courts decisions. If you can't challenge them then they can use foreign law can't they. Unchallengeable you said. That means can't challenge for any reason. that's wht UN means. Traitor

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   15:16:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: A K A Stone (#20)

You didn't say foreign law. I never said you did.

From your first post on this thread --- LIAR.

"The dead indian would have us obey the supremes, even when they use foreign law."

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:18:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: All (#21)

The dead indian would have us obey the supremes, even when they use foreign law."

Stone, go get the link where I said "even when they use foreign law" and post it here.

Or else have the balls to admit that you are caught in a lie.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:20:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: A K A Stone (#20)

The dead indian would have us obey the supremes, even when they use foreign law."

Bald faced liar.

Lying for Jesus are we?

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:22:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: A K A Stone (#20)

he dead indian would have us obey the supremes, even when they use foreign law."

Stone, with this simple demonstration that you are in fact a bald faced liar, I will leave you for a while.

It is a nice day and I think I will go work outside.

The point I am taking with me is that you will lie to disparage another person's character in an effort to save yourself from admitting you were wrong on a silly internet thread.

You are a person seriously lacking in character and morals.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:25:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: A K A Stone, zipporah, christine (#0)

Why do you find it necessary, to leave YOUR forum and start a flame war here?

It is kind of like being invited to someone's home and then walking in and taking a large dump on their living room carpet - only to retreat to your nice clean home.

I think you are being rude to your hosts.

CAPPSMADNESS  posted on  2006-05-21   15:26:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: A K A Stone (#20)

You are a person seriously lacking in character and morals.

This is more than simply my opionion.

There is proof of this right here on this thread.

Anonymous Dead Indian  posted on  2006-05-21   15:26:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#25)

Ya think it's time???

Zipporah  posted on  2006-05-21   15:30:58 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#25)

Why do you find it necessary, to leave YOUR forum and start a flame war here?

Running things are you huh?

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   23:52:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#24)

Stone, with this simple demonstration that you are in fact a bald faced liar, I will leave you for a while.

There is no lie. I didn't put your part it quotes as I should have. The first sentence is what you said. Followed by my opinions.

The point is you said "hey are the Supreme Court who has the unchallenged power to decide the matter"

So you are saying the supreme court has unchallenged power to decide cases. That is the point you were making.

I say no the constitution is superior to the supreme court and if the supreme court makes a decision that conflicts with the constitution that it is really not a law.

Ok back to the foreing law dispute. I said the logical conclusion to your opinion is that the supreme court could use foreign law to make its decisions. They are using foreign law to make decisions. Are those decisions binding on us? Do you think we should follow them? What if they didn't tell us that they were using foreing law to make the decisions, would the decisions then be binding because they didn't tell us? You see when you give the supremes unquestionability you destroy the constitution. You get a group of men who are making up the law as they go along, instead of the PLAIN reading of the text of the constitution.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-21   23:58:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: A K A Stone (#28)

Knock it off...

CAPPSMADNESS  posted on  2006-05-22   18:36:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#30)

Knock it off...

So you are running things? Seriously.

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson

A K A Stone  posted on  2006-05-22   19:32:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]