Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: hawk220 on September 11, 2002, 02:45:17 PM
-
10 points to the first person who can count the number of Amendments that were ripped up for the Patriot Act.
Monday, September 09, 2002, 12:00 a.m. Pacific
New law changes some legal rights of Americans
By The Associated Press
Some of the fundamental changes to Americans' legal rights by the Bush administration and the USA Patriot Act after the terror attacks:
• Freedom of association: To assist terror investigation, the government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity.
• Freedom of information: The government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public-records requests. "Sensitive" information has been removed from government Web sites.
• Freedom of speech: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.
• Right to legal representation: The government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
• Freedom from unreasonable searches: The government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
• Right to a speedy and public trial: The government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.
• Right to liberty: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them. "Enemy combatants" have been held incommunicado and refused attorneys. Plans for military tribunals have been initiated.
Information from Knight-Ridder Newspapers is included in this report.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/134531987_rights09.html
(by the way..this won't be changing anytime soon...at least not in our lifetimes during the 'forever war')
-
Are the points redeemable?
-
And, as I recall, correct me if I am wrong, but there is a sunset clause in there so this is only good for a small period of time, then everything will go back to normal. Welcome to war.
-
Im glad you mentioned that Greese...on paper it looks great.. but there will be no 'end' per-se to the 'war on terrorism'.. there can't be. whereever there is a pissed off dude with a bomb belt or rifle and a grudge against the US, there will be terrorists and the machinery (now in motion) to stop them.
-
blame our mideast buddies
-
Originally posted by Eagler
blame our mideast buddies
No, it's Clinton's fault.
-
Good points.
-
Originally posted by Oedipus
Long Live Dubbya!!
Yeah he sure does know how to write and pass legislature don't he!
House of Representatives.....
Senate........
Noway our congress could be partially responsible huh?
:rolleyes:
it's temporary just be glad you don't get a freakin portion of meat to last the family one week like in the big WWII........
-
oh yes, and the US addiction to oil had nothing to do with it.. neither did US foreign policy.. its our god-damned RIGHT to drive our SUVs and Dodge RAM 4500s!
-
Liberty...Security... Ben Franklin.
(quoted too often, go look it up)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Liberty...Security... Ben Franklin.
(quoted too often, go look it up)
Tree of Liberty...
Blood of tyrants and patriots....
Time to time....
Tree's getting thirsty :(
-
Originally posted by Udie
Tree of Liberty...
Blood of tyrants and patriots....
Time to time....
Tree's getting thirsty :(
Udie...that's terrorist talk.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Udie...that's terrorist talk.
No that's Jeferson talk and it's been proven true throughout the history of the USA.
Same as what MT posted from Ben Franklin.
-
Originally posted by Oedipus
Udie, all totilitarian states require(d) that kind of allegiance to the head of state. That's all I meant by that. It added dramatic flair to the point I was supporting. Not that Dubya is responsible personally.
It's been a long road to this point. Started by people well before any of us were born. I do think however the current adminstistration (includes Dubya, his staff, the Judiciary arm, Congress staff etc etc) have simply taken advantage of the situtation and have expidited the loss of our liberty two fold in a years time.
There is no declaration of war. And there won't be. But we will be subjected to loss of liberties as if there was. Those who are doing this are setting it up that way for thier future. Terrorism is todays devil that continues to keep the general populace scared and the result is these people are able to get away with all of this by acting as thier champion and defender.
Don't get me wrong. Terrorism is real and a definite evil that has to be defeated. My worry for the future, especially for my kid, is that when the smoke clears the U.S government won't be something they have to fear as much or more.
Well if congress would do it's job (which it hardly seems to ever do) there will be a declaration for Iraq. Should have been for EVERY war we've ever faught. WW2 was the last one right?
And don't get me wrong. I don't want to surrender any of my rights at all. I'm willing to suspend some of them for a short period of time, but that's it. They try to usurp and I'll be there fighting right along side of you :)
-
Originally posted by Udie
No that's Jeferson talk and it's been proven true throughout the history of the USA.
Same as what MT posted from Ben Franklin.
I know Udie.
*sigh*
I also know that I'm not an American and it's not my problem. But what's happening down there saddens me. I mean look what's happened to your civil liberties in one year. What rights are you going to lose in the next?
-
I haven't lost any. I live life the same way now as I did then. Except I quit smoking pot a couple of weeks ago, but that had nothing to do with this..........
I still debate...
and I'm still the master at it :D
I still can have any religion I want....
I can still own a gun.... (damn good thing I don't at least a couple of weeks ago)
-
Originally posted by Udie
thing I don't at least a couple of weeks ago)
Yes you still have rights. No one is saying otherwise. You just have less now then you did a year ago.
-
Um... if we allow our rights to be "suspended", they will be suspended when we need them the most. Democrat, Republican, I don't care who's to blame, the fact remains that this government is perverting our basic liberties, and most people are standing back and cheering them on.
Yeah, it's that small percentage of terrorists that's ruining it for the rest of it? Screw it. Any US citizen not willing to die for her or his rights isn't worthy of citizenship. And if that means suffering fifty 9/11-class attacks a year, and possible death, so be it.
-
And if that means suffering fifty 9/11-class attacks a year, and possible death, so be it.
You can't be serious.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
Um... if we allow our rights to be "suspended", they will be suspended when we need them the most. Democrat, Republican, I don't care who's to blame, the fact remains that this government is perverting our basic liberties, and most people are standing back and cheering them on.
Yeah, it's that small percentage of terrorists that's ruining it for the rest of it? Screw it. Any US citizen not willing to die for her or his rights isn't worthy of citizenship. And if that means suffering fifty 9/11-class attacks a year, and possible death, so be it.
ruining what? exactly what has changed for YOU?
and don't give me that crap that this is just the start and big bad big brother gov is going to slowly take away all of your rights, blah, blah, blah
what did the above mentioned article change er "RUIN" for you?
just what I thought, not a dam thing...
statements like this:
"And if that means suffering fifty 9/11-class attacks a year, and possible death, so be it"
tells me your under 25 or retarded or both - hell of a thing to say on any day esp this day
-
Originally posted by Kieran
You can't be serious.
Freedom is NOT free.
Freedom can only be maintained at the cost of lives. The civil liberties in this country are falling apart because nobody is willing to die for them.
We've become complacent. Our government has been fairly helpfull to us, especially compared to so many others. The unites states is one of the richest countries in the world. Now, civil liberties are of little importance to most people if it means a few people's lives can be saved. As we surrender more rights, the government will keep pushing to take more away. A "temporary" reduction in rights will simply show the government how little americans care, so they can take them permanently once we get used to it. You may never notice any significant difference. Even your children may not notice it, but it's there, slowly but surely it's there.
People die. People die constantly. The WTC attacks were a big event, simply killing a lot of people at once. Car accidents kill FAR more people every year than americans have been killed by terrorists.
The US is built on the graves of those who died for our freedom. And now we're giving it up, all to save an insignficant few.
The WTC attacks were a terrible thing, and we should be going after the SOB's who did it. But sacrificing our own rights because of it is NOT AN OPTION.
Fast forward 50 years,
"Welcome to the United Police State of America"
-
There is no evidence whatsoever SOB was involved.
What are the points good for?
-
What are the points good for?
You can redeem them for comps at the Luxor, Las Vegas.
-
Folks.....we're putting the blame on the wrong person methinks. In regards to Iran, the UN stipulated in 1991 that arms inspectors will be in Iran to verify that weapons of mass destruction aren't available, being made, or being bought. So, where are the arms inspectors the UN placed in Iran? They sure aren't in Iran.....they were unceremoniously booted. What did the UN do to rectify this problem? Nothing. So for a number of years, a man who is guilty of gassing his own people, has been left alone to do as he sees fit in acquiring, building, and purchasing weapons of mass destruction. If my memory serves me, I remember at least two people in the last century of making it obligatory to kill his own people. I think Hitler and Stalin were their names. I also remember in History a gentlman, a well meaning gentleman by the way decided along with his political superiors to give part of a country away, by the way not his country, to appease a certain dictator. I don't remember a vote being taken in the unfortunate country whether they wanted to be part of Germany again. Doesn't matter. The appeasement unfortunately didn't work and alas.......another world war occured shortly thereafter.
My take since 9/11.......the UN is even more worthless then I had thought. Sorry to say that but it's obivious there's no backbone there. I don't recall any other country having lost 3000 people in one day during the recent past. Oh........I forgot citizens of 92 coutries died during 9/11/01. So....does the world let Hussein continue until he decides to nuke, gas or murder more people and become a larger threat to mankind? Or does the US, Great Britain......appears also France is going to enter along side the US and Great Britain, and from what I've read recently that Spain is also leaning that way, dispose of this threat? Or does the UN do what it does best......let the US be the badguy so that their image as a peace making body is not tarnished? Or do they tell Iran..........look..........w eapons inspectors are going to be a way of life as we declared in 1991?
Nelson Mandella has chimed in and said " The US is the biggest threat to World Peace." I wonder what Nelson has for intelligence gathering equipment seeing as how he is no longer of any consequence as an elected official. I wonder what intelligence information he could dig up with two dug out canoes and a kite. As always opinions vary.....but you've heard this quote many times "Those who forget History are doomed to repeat it." It's corny and oft repeated....but guess what...it has proven to be true.
Let's Roll one way or the other UN backed and supported.......or do it without the testically impaired.
War is ignorant.......it's a waste of many things. But what is more ignorant, is hoping that the threat will go away.....and finding out the threat is in your backyard, and many people have died or been injured because of a lack of action of some nature. Hopefully it's not war.
Hajo
-
Originally posted by Eagler
ruining what? exactly what has changed for YOU?
He apparently is losing the following rights, right now. As are you.
• Freedom of association
• Freedom of information
• Freedom of speech
• Right to legal representation
• Freedom from unreasonable searches
• Right to a speedy and public trial
• Right to liberty
I'm imagining that the act will be taken to court. And I hope that if it proved to be unconstitional that your courts will overturn it.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
Um... if we allow our rights to be "suspended", they will be suspended when we need them the most. Democrat, Republican, I don't care who's to blame, the fact remains that this government is perverting our basic liberties, and most people are standing back and cheering them on.
Yeah, it's that small percentage of terrorists that's ruining it for the rest of it? Screw it. Any US citizen not willing to die for her or his rights isn't worthy of citizenship. And if that means suffering fifty 9/11-class attacks a year, and possible death, so be it.
Um... exactly how do you enjoy your rights when you are dead?
I don't mind giving up my right to go skulking about plotting terrorism and I sure don't mind giving up your right to the same.
-
Hajo, out of couriosity, what the heck did your anti-UN diatribe have to do with US civil liberties?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Um... exactly how do you enjoy your rights when you are dead?
Good question to ask the American revolutionaries.
-
Originally posted by hawk220
10 points to the first person who can count the number of Amendments that were ripped up for the Patriot Act.
Monday, September 09, 2002, 12:00 a.m. Pacific
New law changes some legal rights of Americans
By The Associated Press
Some of the fundamental changes to Americans' legal rights by the Bush administration and the USA Patriot Act after the terror attacks:
• Freedom of association: To assist terror investigation, the government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity.
• Freedom of information: The government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public-records requests. "Sensitive" information has been removed from government Web sites.
• Freedom of speech: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.
• Right to legal representation: The government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
• Freedom from unreasonable searches: The government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
• Right to a speedy and public trial: The government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.
• Right to liberty: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them. "Enemy combatants" have been held incommunicado and refused attorneys. Plans for military tribunals have been initiated.
Information from Knight-Ridder Newspapers is included in this report.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/134531987_rights09.html
(by the way..this won't be changing anytime soon...at least not in our lifetimes during the 'forever war')
Waaa Waaaa Waaaaa
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Good question to ask the American revolutionaries.
OK, since you seem so willing to sacrifice 150,000 American a year let me ask you what sacrifice you have made to defend your rights? Furthermore, it would seem that since your so willing to die for the perceived loss of rights what are you in fact willing to do to preserve them?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
OK, since you seem so willing to sacrifice 150,000 American a year let me ask you what sacrifice you have made to defend your rights? Furthermore, it would seem that since your so willing to die for the perceived loss of rights what are you in fact willing to do to preserve them?
Most likely "Let someone else take care of it".
-
all to save an insignficant few.
God forbid your loved ones should be categorized as "insignificant".
-
"The only good bureaucrat is one with a pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's good-by to the Bill of Rights."
-H.L Mencken
----------------------------------------------------
"The main political problem is how to prevent the police power from becoming tyrannical. This is the meaning of all the struggles for liberty."
- Ludwig von Mises
Fact is U.S government is limiting the rights of the people in U.S.
I don't know if its good or bad but usually it's been bad for the "Average Joe" in another countries.
When a criminal has decided to make a crime it's naive to think laws would stop him.
-
we're putting the blame on the wrong person methinks. In regards to Iran, the UN stipulated in 1991 that arms inspectors will be in Iran to verify that weapons of mass destruction aren't available, being made, or being bought. So, where are the arms inspectors the UN placed in Iran? They sure aren't in Iran
Hajo you said Iran 4 times :)... don’t you mean Iraq? be that as it may Iran is also seeking WMD. speeking of WMD, why aren't we going after N. Korea? their program is much more advanced.
So for a number of years, a man who is guilty of gassing his own people, has been...
Back in 1985 the Reagan administration sold Saddam the materials to make the gas. In fact during the Iran/Iraq war, the U.S. looked the other way when gas was being used on the Iranians.
I also remember in History a gentlman, a well meaning gentleman by the way decided along with his political superiors to give part of a country away, by the way not his country, to appease a certain dictator.
Using the German analogy really doesn’t work either, for one thing Hitler had the means to take over all of Europe I seriously doubt Saddam could do the same with the middle east. The U.S on the other hand, has the means to take over all of the middle east along with Israel for control of the oil reserves.. Isn’t what all this is really about?
So....does the world let Hussein continue until he decides to nuke, gas or murder more people and become a larger threat to mankind? Or does the US, Great Britain......appears also France is going to enter along side the US and Great Britain, and from what I've read recently that Spain is also leaning that way, dispose of this threat?
On the other hand, you could say the same thing about China or N. Korea or a number of other countries. Containment has worked for the past 50 years so why wouldn’t it work here?.. I’ve got an idea this is all about the oil.
Nelson Mandella has chimed in and said " The US is the biggest threat to World Peace." I wonder what Nelson has for intelligence gathering equipment seeing as how he is no longer of any consequence as an elected official
Interesting smear on Nelson Mandella. His words carry weight. He has more honor and integrity in his little finger than all the chicken hawks who never served in combat put together.
War is ignorant.......it's a waste of many things. But what is more ignorant, is hoping that the threat will go away.....and finding out the threat is in your backyard, and many people have died or been injured because of a lack of action of some nature. Hopefully it's not war
Fine, but what if we go in there kill thousands of Iraqi citizens and don’t find any WMD?... Do we just say well we’re sorry?
It doesn’t matter, we’re building up for an attack like crazy. Already there’s something like 75,000 troops in theater. It doesn’t matter what Congress, the U.N. or the world think.
Forget all the nonsense propaganda Hajo, we going in for that oil.. I’m cool with that.. no need to lie about it.
As far as loosing our Constitutional or Bill of Rights, Global Corporations have no need for any of that.. So be a good consumer and consume.
-
Originally posted by 10Bears
Fine, but what if we go in there kill thousands of Iraqi citizens and don’t find any WMD?... Do we just say well we’re sorry?
You can't possibly be so insanely stupid as to present this as a literal statement... can you?
-
Right on Oedipus
For you uneducated types try reading two books.
-1984
-Brave New World
1984 - a path of bad intentions ... if these intentions are bad will be something like 1984 crossed with 1930's Italy.
-Brave New World -path of good intentions (which i somehow doubt) will lead to something like this horrible vision in the name of "safety & stabilty"
Vote for ANYTHING but democrat or republican next time around ....
if things don't change ...
anyone gotta job for me in Canada?
P.S.
Oh btw I agree .. have the balls to say the risk is worth freedom ... I'd rather have risk 50 WTC or OK City bombing than live in Facism And yes it'd be every amreican who takes the risk ...I plan to be NYC next newyears ... big target for a terrorist right? not gonna stop me from going.
Got anyone you don't like? see that link up above? Hope noone hate's you ... cause now you don't even have the right to counsel.
And yes i've had cop's stomp on my right's before (just got the bs charges droped ; proably should have sued thier tulips off when i had the chance)... too bad if they did the same thing now it'd be leagal.
It doesn't bother you that our forefather's DIED for these things? They died for them for thier children. I can't fight US goverment only WE can. DO NOT VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS OR DEOMCRATS they are evil. EVIL! it's the Constitution people!!!
I'll proably be in US for another election... if things arn't changed ... anyone got a job for me in Canada?
BRAIN DRAIN! talk to today's college students not many want to stay. Because they can't do it alone .. WE must do it THEY can't. But if this is what the US wants.
-
Unbelievable.
-
oh had to add.. did noone see the Irony of giveing up the rights Patriots fought and died for in somethign called the
"Patriot act"
-
You can't possibly be so insanely stupid as to present this as a literal statement... can you?
Tumor, you can't be so insanely stupid as to believe this is any thing other than control of oil.
Humor me, answer my stupid question, what if they don't find any weapons of mass destruction?... What will they say?
Ugh.. well.. um Saddam was a bad bad man and had to go anyway..
- 1. 1 billion Muslims will thank George Bush and say what a bad bad man that Saddam Hussane was.. they won't rise up and attack every American Embassy in the world.
- 2. Fundemental Islamics won't bother to try and take over leadership positions in Iraq.
- 3. Fundemental Islamics won't try and take over leadership positions in Saudi Arabia.
- 4. India won't decide to do a preempitive strike on Pakistain seeing as how the United States lead the way.
- 5. The U.N will still be the body of International Law.
- 6. the Patriot Act will be sunshined.
-
A lot of talk about lost freedoms. Most of it in very general terms without specifics or real effect. Security vs Freedom has always been a compomise. When the threat is greater you compromise more. Military people understand this. When a country goes to war we all become more like soldiers.
When the threat is gone demand whatever rights you feel you've lost back. Die for them then if you must.
-
Problem is, 10bears, you have so much a hard-on for Cheney you see everything in terms of oil.
-
Oh funny you should bring up Chaney Kieran, while I got you here, maybe you can answer me this: If Saddam is such an evil guy, why is it that Chaney did 24 MILLION in business with him AFTER the sanctions were in place?
-
AKIRon: Ben Franklin. This ain't a police state.
Oil: I dunno if I'd be that reductionist, but Kuwait was created to prevent Iraq from having so much oil. At the time of the Gulf War, Iraq and Kuwait each had 40% of the world's oil reserves. 40% of the world's oil is a darn good reason to go to war, especially if we can put in power a friendly government less draconian than Saudi Arabia. Put in new government, build a big-ass airbase, support them for twenty years until we find something better. Now that's realpolitik, baby.
Frankly, I'd rather see the US get ruined then abandon the principles it claims it stands for. In that way, we'd be able to face humanity and say we were better. We shouldn't shuck our rights and liberties like a prom dress, and hell yeah, I'll do what it takes to defend them. Unfortunately, if I said any more, I'd be subject to indefinite detainment.
-
Originally posted by 10Bears
Oh funny you should bring up Chaney Kieran, while I got you here, maybe you can answer me this: If Saddam is such an evil guy, why is it that Chaney did 24 MILLION in business with him AFTER the sanctions were in place?
"Gore and Lieberman could have made hay about how the wannabe GOP veep had been in cahoots with Saddam. Such explosive revelations may well have swayed voters and boosted Gore's chances in what was shaping up to be a close electoral contest.
The Democratic standard-bearers dropped the ball in part because Halliburton's conduct was generally in accordance with the foreign policy of the Clinton administration.[/u] Cheney is certainly not the only Washington mover and shaker to have been affiliated with a company trading in Iraq.
Former CIA Director John Deutsch, who served in a Democratic administration, is a member of the board of directors of Schlumberger, the second-largest U.S. oil-services company, which
also does business through subsidiaries in Iraq."
Yeah, it was really, really different before. We just can't remember when "before" was, because it's so far back none of us were born yet.
Or something.
-
I don't think I could break it down simple enough for you, 10bears. You live in a "get Cheney at all costs" world, so no matter what I say, it isn't going to change your mind.
We do business with Russia now, and enemy of 45 years prior to that time. Does that give you a hint? What's more, we even did business with Russia during the Cold War. How could this be!?X
You're absolutely right, there isn't the slightest possibility Iraq might be in violation of U.N. terms. There is no way they have WMD. It's simply about the oil. :rolleyes:
-
i dont think any gov't ever stops any crime, from dope smokin' right up to the big t. gov't just punishes the unlucky SOB they finger for the crime after the fact, but the damage is already done, so why give up rights?
for that matter why have gov't? insurance is cheaper.
-
Originally posted by 10Bears
Fine, but what if we go in there kill thousands of Iraqi citizens and don’t find any WMD?... Do we just say well we’re sorry?
If that ends up being the case then the US will be planting WMD material all over Iraq faster than a white cop planting a gun on an unarmed black man he just shot in an inner city.
Lonz
-
OK, since you seem so willing to sacrifice 150,000 American a year let me ask you what sacrifice you have made to defend your rights? Furthermore, it would seem that since your so willing to die for the perceived loss of rights what are you in fact willing to do to preserve them?
I never said that or even implied it.
As for what I would do to preserve my rights. I've been luckily enough not to have been in that situation. My government tried to pass a similar bill, to your Patrot Act, but it didn't fly.
A lot of talk about lost freedoms. Most of it in very general terms without specifics or real effect.
I suggest you read the first post in this thread to see what the "real" affect seems to be. As this is what the thread was about.
Security vs Freedom has always been a compomise. When the threat is greater you compromise more.
If this is the case, then once again, I wonder how the US could have revolted against Great Britain at all. It seems to me that you are saying that you only fight for your rights when it is convient. If it was convient I don't imagine that you would have had to fight in the first place.
Military people understand this. When a country goes to war we all become more like soldiers.
I don't think you speak for all miliary peoples. So ,the US is at war. Out of curiosity, when does that war end? I really don't see an end to all international terrorism any time soon, I guess you are all like soliers unto perpetuaty?
When the threat is gone demand whatever rights you feel you've lost back. Die for them then if you must.
I don't imagine that the threat will ever be gone. Not fully at least. In the mean time you still have to exist with your government. And I think that is what this thread is about.
-
"If this is the case, then once again, I wonder how the US could have revolted against Great Britain at all. It seems to me that you are saying that you only fight for your rights when it is convient. If it was convient I don't imagine that you would have had to fight in the first place."
I read the initial post as well as yours. Looks to me like nothing more than political mud slinging and whining.
A terrorist (my definition: someone that has or is planning to commit an act of terror against the US or US citizen) deserves no rights IMO, even though they may be granted such I'll happily take them or see them taken away.
Do you really think the currrent US Government has ulterior motives and is out to take away the basic liberties of it's citizens? At least any more than is temporarily necessary to ensure our right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? If so then I am wasting my "breath".
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I read the initial post as well as yours. Looks to me like nothing more than political mud slinging and whining.
Parts of it looks that way to me as well. But not all of it.
A terrorist (my definition: someone that has or is planning to commit an act of terror against the US or US citizen) deserves no rights IMO, even though they may be granted such I'll happily take them or see them taken away.
Yes, I agree that a terrorist can be a US citizen. No I can not believe that they can (not neccarily shouldn't) have there rights taken away under your constitution. But we would really need to have some knowledge about in US law to discuss this much further.
Do you really think the currrent US Government has ulterior motives and is out to take away the basic liberties of it's citizens? At least any more than is temporarily necessary to ensure our right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? If so then I am wasting my "breath".
No I do not. I do know that in my country that a temporary "income tax" was started during war time back at the beginning of the last century. And you know what, we are still paying it.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
No I do not. I do know that in my country that a temporary "income tax" was started during war time back at the beginning of the last century. And you know what, we are still paying it.
Well, if we're going to talk about oppresive taxes then I have to admit that the US Government weighs much heavier on me than I would like.
-
Most of the so called civil liberty injustices we won't individually have to be concerned with. How many of you expect to be unlawfully searched or seized? How many in this post are worried they won't have rights to legal representation? Have any of you suffered yet?
Come on now........let's not get ridiculous. You're fretting over something that probably wont' remotely effect you.
Now...if you want some effect....during WW2 in the US daily staples such as meat , sugar, and dairy products were hard to obtain. I don't remember anyone whining about that. If you owned an automobile good luck getting fuel, and getting tires for that automobile was out of the question.
Methinks the greatest generation might just have spawned the most sniveling, whining, generation.....sheeeeeesh
-
Nazis considered allied bomber crew in WWII to be terrorists - same went for the heroic french resistance dudes. the IRA was terrorist until they became part of the government - same w/ the PLO...so i guess terrorist is a civlian combatant on the other side
-
the IRA was terrorist until they became part of the government...
The IRA never has, is not and never will be allowed to enter into any form of government in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It is an outlawed terrorist organisation and therefore you are comitting a crime just being affiliated with it.
Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Republican movement, has been allowed to stand for and enter into government; some of the members this party were active IRA members (Martin McGuinness for one).
Big difference (unless your name is Reverend Paisley).
-
"Don't get me wrong. Terrorism is real. A definite evil that has to be defeated. My worry for the future, especially for my kid, is that when the smoke clears the U.S government won't be something they have to fear as much or even more.
The smoke off of Noelle Bush's crack pipe.
Oed
Karaya2
-
Hajo ; i guess you've never had your rights trampled on.... ever spent a night in jail for no reason and had to call a lawyer and freinds for help ? I have ... under these laws I wouldn't have that right..... ever hear of the Maranda rights? "You have the right to remain silent", is about all thats left now. No right to trial no right to a lawyer. THIS "WAR" IS AN EXCUSE FOR THEM. Better not go protest in Washinton now.... remember you have the right to remain silent
go on thinking this is a 'WAR'... you can't stop all of terrorism; CAN'T ... if they want to they will find a way. We may eradicate Al-Qu'aida... but they will never stop all terrorists...remember OK City?
Stupid naivie people... wake up... when you need these rights they won't be there ... and I thought the 'greatest genaration' fought and sacrficed to keep such rights. They never gave up these rights to stop Nazi spies... which could have killed or caused the death of ten times the number of americans at that time...
look who's fighting this thing anyway Camebridge MASS hummm they don't have any educated people there.....
-
Of course you're right, Mane. Security is too tight in the country. Let's ease up a bit.
By the way, didja catch any TV yesterday?
-
There's a four year limitation on those laws.
Feel free to worry yourself sick that in four years your Congress.... which passed the laws.... (that would be the Congress we collectively elected to represent us) will have to vote to extend them, end them or modify them.
This November of 2002 you have the chance to change the structure and political outlook of the Congress. I suggest you ask pointed questions of those you intend to vote for concerning these laws.
You will get another such chance in November of 2004.
Don't waste these chances....... that is, if you are truly concerned.
It's always far easier to b*tch than work for change, isn't it?
Now, if these laws stay longer than needed, I'll be happy to be a grunt in the Second American Revolution. We'll win too... because IMO the military in this country probably has a better understanding of and devotion to the Constitution & the Bill of Rights than the politicos do. It'll be the military and the common man against the politicos.. should last about 15 minutes after we go to Congress to throw the rascals out. ;)
Then we can start over where we left off and elect new scoundrels, scoundrels more in tune with robbing us of our paychecks than of our liberty.
It'll be just like the "good ole days" which are .. well, right around now. :)
-
Oedipus,
I did the same voted Independent in 92 & 1996 (Perot both times). I voted Independant on EVERYTHING except Bush. SOLELY, because I own guns and wanted to try and protect that right.
I agree, the two party is a pathetic dog and pony show for Exxon, and other lucrative donations to try and guarantee kickbacks.
Oedipus
Karaya2
-
i have yet to come accross a ballot that does not leave wondering if i should write in myself or Bill the Cat, or if the ballot might actually server a decent purpose in the bathroom
-
Oh, absolutely, Oed, the way to prove your point is to liken anyone ok with the laws to people desiring the most extreme measures. Sure, I must have said we should dig a moat around America, didn't I? I didn't? Oh. Don't let that ruin your fun, though.
The ludicrous concept has been forwarded that your freedom to do whatever you like, whenever you like (and so on) is worth the lives of 50 x 9/11 a year. It's also suggested those lives would be "insignificant". Are you suggesting we shouldn't be concerned with security? Are you suggesting there is no threat?
Better yet, tell me, no, SHOW ME how to make things more secure without tightening homeland security. Go ahead, bet you can't do it. Tell me how we can get a handle on terrorists that use our own lax security measures and civil liberties laws against us (and with maniacs eager to stand up and defend them because of their "rights"). Tell me how people that sneak into our country have rights of citizenship. Tell me how people that overstay their visas have rights of citizenship. Please.