we have and will disagree on a lot of things. but you crossed the line when you threatened to "rat him out".
unconscionable. i don't care what your reasons were or if they were legit or not. you threatened to "RAT HIM OUT." disgusting.

Rick - go to bed it's late. Also - ironically enough, we both posted at the same time ... read that one and you may gain a little more insight as to why & how. If you do, great, if not, oh well ... I still did that man a favor.

Jimmy like Rick I to believed you forced out cttmr to elevate your own opinion through intimidation. However from reading your latest post I believe that you may have been trying to help cttmr. First rule of the internet becareful of giving out personal information, cttmr should know that " Loose Lips Sink Ships ". Also as a good chess player you gave him the opportunity to resign to come back and fight another day as you stated.I look forward to cttmr return. JonR

While not real popular, at the moment, Jimmy was right in pointing out the violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice that CTTMR had violated! He could have gotten into awfully deep trouble. We are at War in a high tech era! Charlie

As I posted in another forum, I honestly believe that Jimmy was looking out for cmmtr regardless of either one's political philosophy. Cmmtr should come back under a new name and continue to express his opinions although I find it hard to believe that we will not recognize his political sentiments, as they are very similar to one of our other fine members! John

OK, the soap opera's over people! Nothing to see here. Move along.

When you lay it out there, seeking a reaction, dont be surprised when you get one. Don't TRY to piss people off with mindless rhetoric, then act surprised when you succeed. I applaud jimmy for standing up for a code, for convictions. You may not like what he did, or threatened to do, but you have to respect it. Unless of course you have never been held to such a code, in which case you opinion of him hardly matters........

or if you are a mindless piece of the machinery putting out pro goverment rhetoric. ooh can i be held to a code please, let me know which one. How about i stand by the constitution, no not how they like to decipher it now, but what it meant when it was written, when seperation of church and state only meant that the Government couldn't tell you how or where to worship, not that we must not have the Ten Commandments on display in the courthouses. Our precious government has ripped the life right out of the backbone of our society, both the conservatives and the liberals.

decasere perfect

decasere: What's your point?

[email protected] "Our precious government has ripped the life right out of the backbone of our society, both the conservatives and the liberals.:

decasere: Oops - almost forgot. Since you bring up the issue of "putting out pro goverment rhetoric"... why don't you review all of the posts and . Then again, if you're nothing more than just hot air, feel free to act like you didn't read this so you won't feel compelled to embarass yourself by answering. Better yet, why don't you and Rick get together this weekend and draft up a response for one of you to post? You know what they say, two heads are better than one. Don't forget the point now, show us here on the forum where I posted any "pro goverment rhetoric".

ok i see your point about keeping him out of trouble, i just dont see the blind loyalty , were you as loyal to Clinton when he was in office, as your commander in Chief, or was that different, just a question, not a challange, i just want to know if you would have defended him so vehemently.

and another thing, i voted for Bush for president, does that make me liberal, i am against abortion, i believe in family, in God and that everyman is created equal. I believe that a man should work if he wants to recieve money, and am in favor of welfare reform. I am against partison politics, i believe in voting by my conscience (bad spelling??) not by a party line, i dont always agree with Rick, and i'm sure he doesn't always agree with me, i try not to look at things with anyones prepackaged view, but rather to open my eyes ears and mind to the truth.

decasere: Feel free to show me where on this forum I "defended him (Bush) so vehemently" as you claim. Blinders aside - the only thing I defended in all of this soap opera of events was my right to own and bear arms and my decision to handle the inappropriate posts made by CTTMR in a fashion to first, allow HIM to make a decision to continue that behavior, then second, provided him an avenue to escape without repercussion or face the consequences of his actions. His last post was clearly an admission of fault and he knew from the start how he should have played the game. Regarding my loyalty, I am loyal to my country, political interests aside. I despise those certain groups of people that deem it appropriate to spit towards a man or woman in uniform. I believe that within the mannerisms of how the irst amendment is written, regardless of the original intent, it does allow a person to burn the American Flag in protest ... I just wish we could pass a law that requires them to be wearing it first. Best of all ... all of my posts were my own words, not cut & paste. Anything I extracted from an article/report regarding statistics with violence/gun control was also indicated as such and as to where I derived the information. You're more than welcome to challenge my intellect within your own response regarding my anti-agglomeration approach to this matter. Here's a question for you though before you respond ... Since the Constitution was written prior to the abolition of slavery, do you feel it should require an amendment to be "all-inclusive" of every American to include their ancestors, and by that virtue in itself, are legal aliens protected within the same provisions as we are? Last point to ponder, what is the true definition of American in your own words. Be honest now, do you believe Indians the only "true" Americans according the definition and, since the Indians never provided a representative to sign the constitution, should they be required to pay taxes and why then are they entitled to special privileges. Remember now, please try hard to focus on this post with your response and not get too carried away.....

jimmy, I'm not sure even he knows why he's objecting to what you did. God knows I cant make out what he's point or angle is. He's response to my post was so far off the point, I refuse to address it. Again, I applaud jimmy for his actions and his stance.

Lot's of food for thought to chew on there Jimmy. I'll pick one item now and maybe another later. The Indians. They have their privileges because they were guaranteed as per certain treaties signed upon cessation of hostilities. The Indian wars. Now there are and were quite a lot of treaties. Bear with me I'm no expert but have picked up some knowledge over the years. Some treaties were never honored. Some are still in force. The Gov picked and chose. Now I guess they are stuck with the situation as it is. Were the indians here first? There is ongoing debate about that. Seems some europeans were here a REALLY long time ago. Since then, they were either assimilated or anhilated. They are gone. The Indians have our written history to use to their advantage. But they probably were not "first".

To paraphrase the 14th amendment: An American is anyone born in the United States of America or any Naturalized citizen thereof.

never mind you seem to concerned with trying to bully everone to deserve a response anymore i am done with you

decasere: you're just so full of it ... bottom line, I was/am correct in what I did and how I went about it. As far as your 'bully everyone' comment, there you go again blowing smoke out of your butt ... I merely presented facts/documentation, didn't take sides, didn't disagree or agree with what was said in the opinions of others, rather just the facet of disclosure of identity which in itself is wrong. Lastly, and of significant interest, is that everything he posted was cut & paste. It is amusing though watching the few who try to justify his right to behave in that manner and deem it acceptable and appropriate start kicking and crying when he crossed the line and got himself calibrated. When, in the future, if you somehow find yourself at wits with a full mental capacity and desire to engage in a colorful debate regarding politics, you may want to find someone less armed and more in tune to your social understanding.