IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons   
   XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival   
   From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.   
   BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
      
   On 12/11/2014 3:44 PM, David Hartung wrote:   
   > On 12/11/2014 09:26 AM, milt.shook@gmail.com wrote:   
   >> On Wednesday, December 10, 2014 7:41:37 PM UTC-7, David Hartung wrote:   
   >>> On 12/10/2014 06:55 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:   
   >>>> David Hartung  wrote in   
   >>>> news:U6Kdna2LG6ejPhXJnZ2dnUU7-UsAAAAA@giganews.com:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 12/08/2014 02:31 PM, milt.shook@gmail.com wrote:   
   >>>>>> How the fuck do you know? You assume that. Besides, that's not the   
   >>>>>> businessman's decision to make, moron. It's the individual's. Right,   
   >>>>>> mr. Libertarian?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The business is owned by an individual, or group of individuals.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       A business is licensed by the government.   
   >>>   
   >>> Which is immaterial.   
   >>   
   >> First of all, there are few to no "sole proprietors" of businesses   
   >> anymore. More than likely, the business is NOT owned by the   
   >> individual, but a corporation he created. Second of all, obviously a   
   >> business license is NOT immaterial, because in the license, you agree   
   >> to abide by all laws, which means you have to be open to the entire   
   >> public, not just the ones you like.   
   >>   
   >> It's not at all "immaterial," especially to ths conversation. You may   
   >> find it inconvenient, but it's not "immaterial."   
   >   
   > When a law is in violation of the US Constitution, it is an illegal.   
   > law. You are saying that I can be forced to obey illegal laws?   
   >   
   Ask him if it was legal to force the Jews to wear a star and kill the   
   Jews in Germany since the law in Germany was being followed?  Does that   
   mean that a law saying he has to kill Jews could pass in the U.S. and   
   then he and you would be forced by law to kill Jews, at least till you   
   could get the law overturned which might take years.  What if we have a   
   law passed that says we have to stone the gays? Or maybe one that says   
   we have to drone the terrorists rather than torture them in a   
   comfortable Prison(didn't someone make that law already)? Will he help   
   kill the terrorists rather than making them uncomfortable in a prison?   
      
      
   Seems to me that Obama created an edict on that last one about killing   
   terrorist rather than putting them in prison for interrogation.   
      
   If we look at that we see that two blacks killed by police created an   
   uproar but Obama has killed hundreds of Terrorists and hasn't managed to   
   get but a few alive and in a prison....  it seems Obama's record on   
   getting them into custody alive is a lot worse than that of the police   
   in Ferguson and NYC.   
      
   Maybe we already have a law(edict) that Milt has to participate in   
   killing people and he can't get out of it because It's the law,   
   constitutional or NOT.  It's been years that Milt has been helping kill   
   "terrorists" and the collateral damage "Babies" and Milt has to obey the   
   law and he can't defy this one man's edict to murder people from a chair   
   in Langley VA rather than capture them for a prison cell in GITMO.   
      
   --   
                        *Rumination*   
   #42 - What people won't say, is as telling as what they do say.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)