Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate To Vote On Legislation That Allows U.S. Military to Detain Americans Without Charge or Trial
The SHTF.com ^ | 25 Nov, 2011 | Mac Slavo

Posted on 11/25/2011 3:06:35 PM PST by Errant

Remember that debate between Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich, where Mr. Gingrich suggested we should expand and strengthen the Patriot Act in the name of protecting US citizens from terrorists? Mr. Gingrich indicated that there exists a line between criminal law and the war on terror, and that we need not worry the government will overstep its bounds.

While Americans enjoy the Thanksgiving weekend and join the annual running of the bulls celebration at malls and retail outlets, something sinister is taking place in Congress – and it should scare the hell out of you. If the President and Senate have their way, your front lawn will soon become a battlefield, and you’ll be subjected to military, not criminal, law.

From the ACLU Via The Daily Sheeple:

The Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

This is happening right now – IN AMERICA! A law that is designed to specifically bypass Constitutional protections and one that will undoubtedly be used against the American people to further advance and expand the national police state.

Once signed into law the President (or anyone of his minions within the Justice Department or Homeland Security acting on his behalf) can issue orders to arrest, detain and imprison an American citizen in the United States without due process. Since most terror arrests fall into the realm of national security, and therefore are secret, no evidence would ever need to be presented for the permanent detainment (and who knows what else) of an American imprisoned under this law.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bob152; civilrights; constitution; lindseygraham; patriotact; possecomitatus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last
SAY WHAT???
1 posted on 11/25/2011 3:06:42 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Errant

This needs to be fact checked.


2 posted on 11/25/2011 3:10:33 PM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant
Do not be disrespecting Dear Leader.
3 posted on 11/25/2011 3:12:15 PM PST by MrBambaLaMamba (This Message Contains Privileged Attorney-Client Communications)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant
What keeps most law abiding citizens honest and regulated is that this country is based on the rule of law.

Take away that, and there is nothing holding down that lid.

People start getting grabbed off their lawn by the US armed forces, per the orders of some puke in DC, and there may well be lawmakers and enforcers of same sporting third eyes.

4 posted on 11/25/2011 3:14:13 PM PST by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant

So, we just throw Amendment IV out the window? Folks, we cannot allow this to pass.


5 posted on 11/25/2011 3:14:31 PM PST by steveab (When was the last time someone tried to sell you a CO2 induced climate control system for your home?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant

I sure hope that this isn’t true.

The thought of it makes me sick to my stomach.


6 posted on 11/25/2011 3:15:04 PM PST by alice_in_bubbaland ( Obama, President of the Democrats and Joe Biden, VP are the top morons of the DNC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant

we have that power now....just a little different wording...


7 posted on 11/25/2011 3:15:32 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant
I'm not sure this passes the smell test. According to the article: In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.” Now how is it that the bad guys are Republicans?

Just asking

8 posted on 11/25/2011 3:17:05 PM PST by garybob (More sweat in training, less blood in combat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jukeman
Yep, that's why I thought it needed to be posted on FR. Freepers WIll get to the bottom of it.

Check out the link to the Daily Sheepe @ the ACLU site. I'm not sure why the Senate even needs to be even voting on a Udall Amendment?

9 posted on 11/25/2011 3:18:28 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: garybob

Never trusted Graham. IMO, the libbs have his FBI file or something and Mccain is McNutty...


10 posted on 11/25/2011 3:23:13 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Errant

I was bemused a few months ago to contemplate (right here on FR) fellows who said they were Marines, boasting of how they roughed up a civilian who was wearing a Marines T-shirt (not a piece of genuine or imitation official military garb) for a purpose not to their liking. They argued that they were the law with respect to such matters.

Isn’t this a trivial extension of the same thing, in fact is such a law even needed on the books?


11 posted on 11/25/2011 3:24:12 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (bloodwashed not whitewashed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
in fact is such a law even needed on the books?

Not at all if you ask me. The only law/act that seems to need to be strengthened is the Posse Comitatus Act

12 posted on 11/25/2011 3:27:37 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Errant

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/112/saps1867s_20111117.pdf

“Section 1031 attempts to expressly codify the detention authority that exists under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) (the “AUMF”). The authorities granted by the AUMF, including the detention authority, are essential to our ability to protect the American people from the threat posed by al-Qa’ida and its associated forces, and have enabled us to confront the full range of threats this country faces from those organizations and individuals. Because the authorities codified in this section already exist, the Administration does not believe codification is necessary and poses some risk...”

OMG I agree with Obama about something!


13 posted on 11/25/2011 3:29:42 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant

“Check out the link to the Daily Sheepe @ the ACLU site. I’m not sure why the Senate even needs to be even voting on a Udall Amendment?”

I sound like the whole darn bill need to be 86ed.


14 posted on 11/25/2011 3:29:42 PM PST by steveab (When was the last time someone tried to sell you a CO2 induced climate control system for your home?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Errant

Well, I meant aren’t the US armed forces, headed by the US President as Commander in Chief, already understood under the present legal system to have all authority over anything that might touch on a military purpose?

Or were those guys just woofing about a wildcat action and actually being a disgrace to the Marines?


15 posted on 11/25/2011 3:31:16 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (bloodwashed not whitewashed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: steveab
I sound like the whole darn bill need to be 86ed.

Exactly!

16 posted on 11/25/2011 3:31:30 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Errant

SHTG doesn’t cite any passages from the bill.


17 posted on 11/25/2011 3:31:53 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant
Posse Comitatus
18 posted on 11/25/2011 3:33:26 PM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

“...The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision of section 1032, which would appear to mandate military custody for a certain class of terrorism suspects. This unnecessary, untested, and legally controversial restriction of the President’s authority to defend the Nation from terrorist threats would tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement professionals. Moreover, applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets”

Probably more to the point. Amazing to read something sensible from those bumbling fools!


19 posted on 11/25/2011 3:33:36 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

Things are Messed Up!


20 posted on 11/25/2011 3:33:43 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Errant

I believe under the Patriot Act the govt can already do this. And have done. Remember the 16 year old kid that they took and held for God knows how long and would not let the Mom see him or let him have an attorney. Apparently someone hacked his phone and was sending out terror threats on it. For all I know they are still holding the kid.

If this is true then I’m not suprised to see McStain as a major player.


21 posted on 11/25/2011 3:42:45 PM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
aren’t the US armed forces, headed by the US President as Commander in Chief, already understood under the present legal system to have all authority over anything that might touch on a military purpose?

Pretty much except domestically where the Posse Comitatus Act is suppose to prevent the DOD from circumventing civilian law enforcement (without Congress's approval).

22 posted on 11/25/2011 3:44:03 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

Link

23 posted on 11/25/2011 3:53:34 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Errant
Wonder if any of this has to do with obamacare (zer0care), and the provision in the zer0care law where all must purchase health insurance otherwise face fines or imprisonment? Do not know about the imprisonment part, but if there are fines in zer0care, imprisonment is in there somewhere (imho).
24 posted on 11/25/2011 4:06:00 PM PST by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen. --> AmeriCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

Ashton Lundeby? Pled guilty to one count, sentenced to time served and 3 years probation.

He’s a local kid so I am very familiar with the case. It was not the way it was portrayed. He made prank calls to various schools and government agencies including the FBI. He recorded the calls and put them on the internet. In some of them his mother could be heard encouraging him and laughing in the background. Some of those calls were made for profit, someone wanted a day off from school school so they paid him to phone in a bomb threat. Many of his “pranks” used to be on youtube.

BTW, his mother claimed he as bring held under the Patriot Act, but that was not the case and retractions were issued by news agencies that reported it.
It was also reported that he was homeschooled. Not exactly the case or if sop not for long. I could not find out what happened at the private school he attended and why he was no longer attending there, but if he was homeschooling it was very short term.


25 posted on 11/25/2011 4:09:39 PM PST by kalee (The offenses we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Errant
The Obama thugs already have a panel, without oversight, that recommends assassinations even of US citizens, to the president, mentioned on Rush today.
26 posted on 11/25/2011 4:13:29 PM PST by stockpirate (Real hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black; Quix

PING,

Quix you were saying about rounding us up....


27 posted on 11/25/2011 4:14:35 PM PST by stockpirate (Real hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrBambaLaMamba
"Do not be disrespecting Dear Leader."

Things were so much better when Our Dear Leader W was running things than Their Dear Leader.

28 posted on 11/25/2011 4:24:18 PM PST by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate
thugs already have a panel, without oversight, that recommends assassinations even of US citizens, to the president

Assassinations of Citizens can't happen under our Constitutional form of Government upon which the Executive, Congressional and Judicial Branches have all sworn to uphold!

29 posted on 11/25/2011 4:32:03 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Errant
The easiest way to look at this is to imagine that the Supreme Court ruled that "the people", meaning you and I, could undertake to enforce laws that the government was too weak to enforce, or about which it didn't care.

We could then hunt down and kill armed combatants who slipped in over the border, or who were otherwise notorious terrorists, or whatever.

Ron Paul and his running dog lackeys would be among the first to screech "That's not what we mean ~ we want the government to not only be able to stop the military from defending you from terrorists we don't even want you to be able to do that".

We know their type.

Regarding American citizens who engage in warfare against this country or our people, they are dead meat ~

30 posted on 11/25/2011 4:37:33 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant; Mr. Silverback; cripplecreek; NoLibZone; Lucky9teen; Pete; bicyclerepair; apillar; ...

Pinging Agenda 21 folks.

There is quite the discussion on whether or not it is true that the Senate is proposing legislation that allows the military to detain citizens without charge or trial. I thought that some of you might be interested in weighing in on this.

If you wish to be on or off this list, please let me know via FReepmail. It is a relatively low volume ping list. We have been studying the UN Agenda 21 and other related issues. The thread where we have been collecting links and discussions can be found here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2738418/posts


31 posted on 11/25/2011 4:41:37 PM PST by TEXOKIE (Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Christmas to all FREEPERS EVERYWHERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TEXOKIE

“...allows the military to detain citizens”

God forbid the Alabama Highway Patrol detain illegal aliens!!!


32 posted on 11/25/2011 4:43:25 PM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

LOL.

Well, if this passes (and provided it’s as described), all I can say is, “So long America. Nice knowing you.”

I’ve joked with people over the years I enjoy more freedom here in Europe because I can smoke in a bar and walk down the street drinking a beer without the brown paper bag.

I was born in L.A. in 1969.......left America in ‘01. Never thought I’d live to see the day that the USA ended up like this. Bodyscanners. Pat-downs. SWAT no-knock raids. Warrantless surveillance. All that’s quite illegal here in the Czech Republic. Ironic, considering this was once part of the Soviet Bloc.


33 posted on 11/25/2011 4:43:41 PM PST by AnAmericanAbroad (It's all bread and circuses for the future prey of the Morlocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

bfl


34 posted on 11/25/2011 4:51:34 PM PST by Excellence ( CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Errant

This is the same bullshit story we saw when The Bent One was in office in the 1990s. The klutz who wrote this forgot to include the 50 Chinese divisions hiding in the sagebrush in Texas, the cattlecars to take us to the concentration camps waiting in Montana and the Army had invented a veg-o-matic guillotine that would chop off the heads of 10 Patriots at a time.

This garbage has as much chance of passing as that commie Alcee Hasting’s legislation to confiscate all handguns. The turd introduces this legislation every year in the house. This is no different.

Can we move onto reality now?


35 posted on 11/25/2011 4:53:45 PM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Regarding American citizens who engage in warfare against this country or our people, they are dead meat

Maybe, but only after they've been given a fair trial. Then you can you take 'em to the nearest tree for a proper hangin'...

The above according to the Constitution - unless you can show me where it says otherwise...

Or do we now have a cabal that decides which laws of this land are to be followed and which are not?

36 posted on 11/25/2011 4:54:14 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Hope you’re right sergeant, but I saw the names “Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.)” in the article.


37 posted on 11/25/2011 4:57:19 PM PST by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

[fyi: Thomas puts search results on ‘temp’ pages so they can’t be linked]

Thanks for finding it. That is just wasted ink.
It occurs to me that the Dems might be trying to finesse authority to close Gitmo in this ‘required military custody’ talk. Not sure how...


38 posted on 11/25/2011 4:58:30 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Jukeman; All

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112UCnD2p:e462417:


39 posted on 11/25/2011 5:02:07 PM PST by djf (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2801220/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Errant
Or do we now have a cabal that decides which laws of this land are to be followed and which are not?

I do not want to go there. In looking at D.C., and what I've learned in the past two or three years from the feds, and the 10th amendment recognition thereof by the feds, well as I said, I do not want to go there.

40 posted on 11/25/2011 5:07:28 PM PST by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen. --> AmeriCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Errant

I looked at the ACLU site regarding the Defense Act and was astounded by the number of amendments. What a mess! It would take a month of Sundays to go through all of them.


41 posted on 11/25/2011 5:20:44 PM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Errant
You want to make war against this country you've given up the protections of the court ~ you become a TARGET.

I know it's a bummer of a thing to happen, but that's the way war is conducted, and if the gub'mnt cain't do it, then we citizens need to be authorized to carry it out as we see fit.

Lak' ah said, they's dead meat!

Yah heyah?

42 posted on 11/25/2011 5:20:53 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Errant

“Hope you’re right sergeant...”

I am right, Errant. Levin is my Senator, and the fat, commie slob hasn’t had the guts to show his fat, commie face in my congressional district for 18 years. I live in hard-core, rural gun country. He’s scared shitless. This legislation is nothing more than a feel-good law to make Levin believe he has some modicum of the military to protect his fat, useless life.

He doesn’t.

Cheers, FRiend.


43 posted on 11/25/2011 5:26:29 PM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: djf

Looky here, Defense money for HILLARY TO SPEND:

“SEC. 1207. GLOBAL SECURITY CONTINGENCY FUND.

(a) Establishment- There is established on the books of the Treasury of the United States an account to be known as the `Global Security Contingency Fund’.
(b) Authority- Amounts in the Fund shall be available to either the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to provide assistance to countries designated by the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Defense...
Funds available to the Department of State for foreign assistance may be transferred to the Fund by the Secretary of State. Funds available to the Department of Defense may be transferred to the Fund by the Secretary of Defense in accordance with established procedures for reprogramming under section 1001 of this Act and successor provisions of law. Amounts transferred under this paragraph shall be merged with funds made available under this section and remain available until expended as provided in subsection (i) for the purposes specified in subsection (b).
(2) LIMITATION- The total amount of funds appropriated and transferred to the Fund in any fiscal year shall not exceed $300,000,000. This limitation does not apply to amounts contributed to the Fund under subsection (h)...
(h) Authority To Accept Gifts- The Secretary of State may use money, funds, property, and services accepted pursuant to the authority of section 635(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2395(d)) to fulfill the purposes of subsection (b).”


44 posted on 11/25/2011 5:28:06 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Errant

Tll that to the two AMericans killed recently by the missle strike.

And I know and agree with what you are saying, but Rush has spoken twice on his show about this panel and that here is NO oversight whatsoever......So if you want to agrue call Rush...


45 posted on 11/25/2011 5:30:44 PM PST by stockpirate (Real hero's don't wear capes, they wear dog tags.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Errant

WAR is “due process of law”. It always was and always will be.


46 posted on 11/25/2011 5:38:43 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

Well, dear friends, if a military panel can presently declare the death penalty upon a declared terrorist, does it not stand to reason it would take only one small step to do the same to our citizenry. Actually that step has already been in effect much longer than any of us would like to believe. Perhaps not in a constitutional manner but it has been taken nonetheless. We know that under Obama, in particular, the U.S. Constitution has been dismissed as have the laws and court decisions they wish to disregard. Most any area of laws, regulations and tradition affecting this republic has been violated by the Obama administration. I am no legal or constitutional scholar but common sense and casual observance tell me this.


47 posted on 11/25/2011 5:44:18 PM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TEXOKIE

You say it’s a low volume ping. I’m surprised really. Didn’t know you had this ping until now, but seems to me there’s one “H” of a lot more involvement with agenda 21 than people think. The UN IS the major tool of the Marxists since its inception, and the Marxists are on the march Worldwide right now, today.

IMO just about everything we suffer today is related to the UN agenda for the 21st Century, or indirectly so. Right down to local community confusion.

Yeah put me on that list please. Appreciate it.


48 posted on 11/25/2011 5:45:34 PM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

No, the bill’s not as described.
Yes.things have gotten worse here. Some government oddicial is involved in more aspects of our life than ever. But viewing it from overseas it must look worse than it is.

Not ironic to me at all. Freedoms are new in the Czech Republic, old in America- and familiarity breeds contempt (sigh...).


49 posted on 11/25/2011 5:47:17 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Errant

Drafted in secret.....Carl Levin, and John McCain eh.

Wouldn’t doubt it.


50 posted on 11/25/2011 5:47:52 PM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson