Thread
:
Instructors: is no combat better?
View Single Post
#
62
March 10th 04, 12:21 AM
ArtKramr
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a
Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 4:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:
Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 1:52 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:
Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: "Tarver Engineering"
Date: 3/9/04 10:33 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
"Seagram" wrote in message
...
Ok tribe members, its time to cast your vote. Who wants Art off
the
island
Nice thread Art, don't let the bottom feeders troll you.
Excellent signal, to all that participated.
I made it through WW II . There is no way the bottom feeders stand
a
chance,
especially the wannabee bottom feeders. But then again all the
wannabees
are
bottom feeders.
Catfish have a biologically useful role. Did you mean lawyers?
Without lawyers there would be no rule of law. There would be no equal;
protection under the law. There would be no courts and no constitution.
Be careful what you wish for lest you get it, And what you seem to be
wishing
for can be the end of freedom as we know it. Those who undermine the
lawyers
are undermining the law. And they have agendas that are well worth
examining.
No I am not a lawyer. Be watchful. Justice Thomas has been making noises
that
may well lead to overturning the 14th amendment. A disaster. Yup. You hit
a
nerve.
I admit to being a bit facetious. But I will state, in good conscience,
that there are lawyers that use technical knowledge to undermine the
rule of law.
Then we must strengthen the rule of law. And I know you were kidding.( :-)
Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
ArtKramr