You've aged well I'd say.It's Canada. I have always been in favor of invading British Columbia and seizing territory connecting Alaska and the mainland, ever since President Polk went back on his 54°40' or Fight campaign promise.
Much more important than some internal bickering with their socialist French government, about which I see no sense in getting involved and could not change the outcome in a foreign country even if I tried.
Next we know they will go on a hunger strike until they get some respect, eh.
Yes it isNo, but it sure is racking up the $$$$
I'm sorry Malum but your statement here renders any response to you as being totally pointless in my unlearned, oft times, downright stupid and lowly opinion.I watched the trailer, and, to be honest, it looks like it makes pretty dramatic claims that it will not possibly be able to back up.
Yessir. You can absolutely "go off what" others say and base your opinion on that.And apparently, judging by the responses here, they didn't back up the promises made in the trailer. I can only go off what the rest of you have posted. You've seen it. I haven't. Apparently, it does not make its case very well.
It is available for 3 day rental or purchase on SalemNOW - Movies, Events, and MoreI wanted to see the movie last week, but didn't want to have to go to Dothan to see it. They're saying that they are going to release everything they have. I guess we will see if they have any real evidence then.
If they have evidence of malfeasance in there with holding it in order to make a movie, they are complicit.[QUOTE="Smilodon, post: 3074709, member: 69059]They're saying that they are going to release everything they have. I guess we will see if they have any real evidence then.
It is suggestive that it is merely thus/ I contend that it is more likely a continuation of plans long ago devised and implemented. We are in history where we are. We did not get here by happenstance. Trump banned bump stocks so I do not believe it to be a Republican vs Democrat conflict.That is a separate debate from whether this latest purchase is merely a Biden administration ploy to corner the market in ammunition and leave us disarmed and helpless in the face of coming tyranny.
For the record. You are the one who couched this in terms of a singular debate, to be looked at under a microscope with no other variables to be considered to explain what is going on in this once great Nation.That is a separate debate from whether this latest purchase is merely a Biden administration ploy to corner the market in ammunition and leave us disarmed and helpless in the face of coming tyranny.
You are correct that I really don't know you or your position. I have my suspicions but that is all.What record?
LOL, ok. I imagine a lot of posts on a discussion forum fall short of discussing all possible variables that might have some tangential relevance to whatever the original point was that was being made, which is, if you look at the article you link or Gaetz's assertions, simply the "singular debate" that I places under a microscope. I don't really see the need to apologize because you did not like what you saw under the microscope.
Nope. I addressed Gaetz's silly assertion.
My answer to your question ought to be well known to the point that your question would be taken by me as merely rhetorical. You and I have been here a long time, and you really don't know me or my position on this matter of your question? Reiterating my prior posts on the Sixteenth Amendment and income taxes seemed really off topic when compared to the thesis being presented by Gaetz.
i concurI think the purchase was just business as normal, planned spending, as a part of a budget set some time ago.