TexasCHLforum.com

cb1000rider wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: You know.....they were not just intending to sabotage an SUV or an irrigation ditch, they were intending to sabotage devices chock full of explosives and largish amounts of plutonium and refined uranium. The potential for an ecological radiation disaster making a large piece of land uninhabitable to mammalian life for 50,000 years was a significant risk..

Where do you get that information? As I read it, they posted their sign and stopped.. And waited for a very long time before security showed up.
They're smart enough to understand the effects of nuclear radiation. Why are you saying that they were intending to go any farther than they did... I missed it.. and if it's there, I'll agree with running up the charges.

Here:
http://blogs.knoxnews.com/munger/2012/0 ... 12s-u.html

Once they break and enter, I have a tough time believing claims of nonviolent intentions.

Tic Tac wrote: I have a tough time believing claims of nonviolent intentions.

2 guys and a Nun walk into a Uranium storage facility... (sorry, couldn't help it)

So we have a violent terrorist nun on our hands here?

Apparently they were banging on a door somewhere. I still don't get the sabotage charge...

cb1000rider wrote:

Tic Tac wrote: I have a tough time believing claims of nonviolent intentions.

2 guys and a Nun walk into a Uranium storage facility... (sorry, couldn't help it)

So we have a violent terrorist nun on our hands here?

Apparently they were banging on a door somewhere. I still don't get the sabotage charge...

No, they took a sledge hammer to the Uranium containment facility walls, not banging on a door. As I proved in response to your last post.

As one example, security police officers on the night of the incident incorrectly assumed that trespassers who were beating on the external wall of the HEUMF with a hammer were plant maintenance workers.

Hammer or sledge hammer? I guess it doesn't make a difference.

If you'd lock 'em up for life, I respect your opinion...

cb1000rider wrote:

As one example, security police officers on the night of the incident incorrectly assumed that trespassers who were beating on the external wall of the HEUMF with a hammer were plant maintenance workers.

Hammer or sledge hammer? I guess it doesn't make a difference.

If you'd lock 'em up for life, I respect your opinion...

What about your statement:

cb1000rider wrote:Where do you get that information? As I read it, they posted their sign and stopped.. And waited for a very long time before security showed up.
They're smart enough to understand the effects of nuclear radiation. Why are you saying that they were intending to go any farther than they did... I missed it.. and if it's there, I'll agree with running up the charges.

Even the feds can repair damaged fencing for a lot less than $8500. The damage to the HEUMF wasn't just a couple flakes of concrete and some paint. So I must ask, do you stand behind your statement or not?

What in the world does this nun-hippies-nuclear-site tangent have to do with stand your ground?

Dadtodabone wrote: Even the feds can repair damaged fencing for a lot less than $8500. The damage to the HEUMF wasn't just a couple flakes of concrete and some paint. So I must ask, do you stand behind your statement or not?

No, I don't think that banging on the walls with a hammer meant they were looking to cause some sort of major nuclear incident. I wouldn't put them away for life, based on the evidence that we've read...

I concede to more damage that originally assessed by the original article, that's absolutely true.. That much you've got me on.

A-R wrote:What in the world does this nun-hippies-nuclear-site tangent have to do with stand your ground?

I was scratching my head wondering the same. We seem to have digressed a bit in this one.

UGH: Dick Durbin to hold hearing on ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws

http://therightscoop.com/ugh-dick-durbi ... ound-laws/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These socialist will not rest until you are unarmed and a victim

cb1000rider wrote:Where do you get that information? As I read it, they posted their sign and stopped.. And waited for a very long time before security showed up.
They're smart enough to understand the effects of nuclear radiation. Why are you saying that they were intending to go any farther than they did... I missed it.. and if it's there, I'll agree with running up the charges.

cb1000rider wrote:

Dadtodabone wrote: Even the feds can repair damaged fencing for a lot less than $8500. The damage to the HEUMF wasn't just a couple flakes of concrete and some paint. So I must ask, do you stand behind your statement or not?

No, I don't think that banging on the walls with a hammer meant they were looking to cause some sort of major nuclear incident. I wouldn't put them away for life, based on the evidence that we've read...

I concede to more damage that originally assessed by the original article, that's absolutely true.. That much you've got me on.

I'll take that as a no.

TexDotCom wrote:

A-R wrote:What in the world does this nun-hippies-nuclear-site tangent have to do with stand your ground?

I was scratching my head wondering the same. We seem to have digressed a bit in this one.

Because the US is also prosecuting these 3, presumably under the direction of Holder.

AndyC wrote:Uncle Corruption should hold his mouth before getting himself tangled-up in subjects about which he's clueless.

Evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.

Sir, I would disagree with your statement as to the seeming cluelessness of Uncle Corruption.

You see, I really do believe he does have a clue. I really doubt anyone working in Justice for as long as he has would have risen to that level without having at least a few clues.

The problem is, he is an inveterate liar whose comments and actions have sided with criminals and AGAINST the citizens of the United States and the Constitution he swore to uphold and defend AGAINST ALL ENEMIES foreign and domestic.

His performance and public statements in office should have caused the Republicans in the House and Senate to kick his traitorous self out of office.

So much for retaining the rest of my composure.

So either you sir, are completely correct and he's an idiot who doesn't have the brains to hold that office, or he's broken his oath and become a traitor to this country.

Either way, based on his performance, public statements and 'judgements', he needs to be ejected from the office of Attorney General of the United States.

I won't hold my breath.

Except for just a few people, the whole city of Washington D.C. and all three branches are covered in a stench of vomit.

And I really doubt they can clean their mess up.

K.Mooneyham wrote:

5thGenTexan wrote:Another winner from the Department of Injustice and the Obamanation. All these Uber-Conservative fools had better wake up this next election and vote for the least offensive canidate not sit out another one playing with the few marbles they have left. We dang sure don't need to empower a second comming of the Clintons after this band of gangsters. There will be no country left to reclaim, I fear.

They won't do it. They would rather sit around fuming that they didn't get the perfect candidate and all that, and stay home, and let hardcore thuggish liberal-progressive leftwingers run the government, and thus the nation, right into the ground. This argument has run around and around on this site, and you cannot win. And considering how many conservatives (and libertarians, for that matter) that are on this site, it doesn't bode well for the future. All hail Queen Hillary, the nation will bow at her feet, if things hold true-to-form.

when I'm presented with a couple of thugs, you can't convince me to pick one up on the clean side.