Posted on 09/08/2009 11:50:20 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch
It’s hard to find good editors these days.
“It will likely not be used for border issues, but against American citizens.”
That is correct. If you don’t pay your property taxes they will use these armored vehicles against you.
http://www.swattrucks.com/info/LaCrosseTribune.pdf
“That is correct. If you don’t pay your property taxes they will use these armored vehicles against you.”
All our property really belongs to the State. If you don’t pay your rent to the State for the property they allow you to “own”, they will come for you.
Gotta love the “Land of the Free!”
“You have no idea what it will be used for, I wonder if you are even very familiar with that part of Texas.”
I half grew-up in Harlingen, so wonder all you want.
All our property really belongs to the State. If you don’t pay your rent to the State for the property they allow you to “own”, they will come for you.
Gotta love the “Land of the Free!”
____________
The last remaining Native Americans could not agree with you more.
Then you should be able to imagine that the region may have a use for a bullet resistant transport/rescue vehicle besides using it to oppress law abiding Texans.
“Then you should be able to imagine that the region may have a use for a bullet resistant transport/rescue vehicle besides using it to oppress law abiding Texans.”
I’m confident I have a pretty good handle on what SWAT is often used against.
Well I tried, you are just too buggy for me, you seem to have something on your mind but you aren’t very coherent in getting it out.
“Well I tried, you are just too buggy for me, you seem to have something on your mind but you aren’t very coherent in getting it out.”
What is so “buggy” about an aversion to increasing the power of the state? Others in this thread seem to understand me.
That is a good example of being buggy right there, you don't really think that is what I meant when I said that you are too buggy and incoherent for me, but you pretend to because it is easier for you to write both sides of the conversation.
Nice.
“That is a good example of being buggy right there, you don’t really think that is what I meant when I said that you are too buggy and incoherent for me, but you pretend to because it is easier for you to write both sides of the conversation.”
Perhaps you have not been following the thread and the tenor of your own posts?
I am aware of my posts and how buggy your posts have been that you post to me, your very first post to me was typical of what I called buggy, and they haven’t improved since.
“I am aware of my posts and how buggy your posts have been that you post to me, your very first post to me was typical of what I called buggy, and they haven’t improved since.”
Then our communication problem is unsolvable. Good evening.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.