And it says that where? Quote please? Seriously, come on, less hysterics, more intelligence.Ikarti wrote:
How many of you are going to defend it when it just explicitly says "You have no rights"
That was precisely his point. No police state would blatently tell its people they were being oppressed.=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:
And it says that where? Quote please? Seriously, come on, less hysterics, more intelligence.Ikarti wrote:
How many of you are going to defend it when it just explicitly says "You have no rights"
Why don't you do something about it then, Shipbuilder?
Can someone tells me what happens if someone completely innocent gets indefinitely detained without trial? Is there an appeals process? Oh I'm sorry, there isn't even a trial process. LOL
PS It's just as well US troops are COMPLETELY INFALLIBLE, otherwise people might end up in a torture camp they shouldn't be in.
PS It's just as well US troops are COMPLETELY INFALLIBLE, otherwise people might end up in a torture camp they shouldn't be in.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-09-29 13:20:44)
its true, if your too fucking stupid to get this: the Us goverment can do WHATEVER they want with a suspected terrorist as long as they want, thats no rights.=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:
And it says that where? Quote please? Seriously, come on, less hysterics, more intelligence.Ikarti wrote:
How many of you are going to defend it when it just explicitly says "You have no rights"
Last edited by [n00b]Tyler (2006-09-29 13:21:49)
Just a small point. This still has to get past the Supreme court. Yea, that whole checks and balances thing. IF it is deemed unconstitutional it will be over turned and they will have to fix the language. If the language is too vague it should get kicked back the congress to be fixed. And you know there is no way in hell this one won't be challenged in the courts.
I sympathize with anyone who is unjustly treated. I am saddened when innocent people are hurt no matter how I feel on a particualr subject or what bill is passed. I expected more from you Cameron ..
CameronPoe wrote:
don't expect any sympathy when the terrorists do likewise to your brethren. You are now morally equivalent.
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-29 13:23:29)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Like vote for the Democrat Party perhaps, and get all of his friends and family to do likewise? Two party systems - you gotta love them. A system that truly embraces all views and opinions and shuns absolutism.DesertFox423 wrote:
Why don't you do something about it then, Shipbuilder?
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-09-29 13:24:36)
Easy bro...not calling anyone stupid here... But pardon me for not taking your opinion as fact, just because you say it. Re-read the thread, actually text from the bill, it doesn't support your opionion. Therefore and opionion not based in fact is really pretty worthless.[n00b]Tyler wrote:
its true, if your too fucking stupid to get this: the Us goverment can do WHATEVER they want with a suspected terrorist as long as they want, thats no rights.=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:
And it says that where? Quote please? Seriously, come on, less hysterics, more intelligence.Ikarti wrote:
How many of you are going to defend it when it just explicitly says "You have no rights"
ye i take it back abit harsh there but i dont get why ppl defend bush and those ppl just piss me off=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:
Easy bro...not calling anyone stupid here... But pardon me for not taking your opinion as fact, just because you say it. Re-read the thread, actually text from the bill, it doesn't support your opionion. Therefore and opionion not based in fact is really pretty worthless.[n00b]Tyler wrote:
its true, if your too fucking stupid to get this: the Us goverment can do WHATEVER they want with a suspected terrorist as long as they want, thats no rights.=CA=lamcrmbem wrote:
And it says that where? Quote please? Seriously, come on, less hysterics, more intelligence.
It's harsh I know but I'm really sad for America today. They really did take a very serious turn for the worst. The US is no longer fit to preach morals and ethics to any other nation starting today and ending when that bill is torn up.Kmarion wrote:
I sympathize with anyone who is unjustly treated. I am saddened when innocent people are hurt no matter how I feel on a particualr subject or what bill is passed. I expected more from you Cameron ..CameronPoe wrote:
don't expect any sympathy when the terrorists do likewise to your brethren. You are now morally equivalent.
First chance for that is some time from now. He keeps.....I don't want to say "whining" but for a lack of words..... something he can do against it NOW. Likewise, when you and other Europeans post this stuff about the President and are seeking redress, what exactly are you doing besides attacking the man? No point in it when you can see it on every news channel.CameronPoe wrote:
Like vote for the Democrat Party perhaps, and get all of his friends and family to do likewise? Two party systems - you gotta love them. A system that truly embraces all views and opinions and shuns absolutism.DesertFox423 wrote:
Why don't you do something about it then, Shipbuilder?
He is doing something. He's speaking out. That's all he can do. And not for long at that.DesertFox423 wrote:
First chance for that is some time from now. He keeps.....I don't want to say "whining" but for a lack of words..... something he can do against it NOW. Likewise, when you and other Europeans post this stuff about the President and are seeking redress, what exactly are you doing besides attacking the man? No point in it when you can see it on every news channel.CameronPoe wrote:
Like vote for the Democrat Party perhaps, and get all of his friends and family to do likewise? Two party systems - you gotta love them. A system that truly embraces all views and opinions and shuns absolutism.DesertFox423 wrote:
Why don't you do something about it then, Shipbuilder?
Up to debate if speaking out is action or not?
Guys if you aint got shit to hide don't worry about it. If your doing something that fucked up then, stop doing it or get the fuck out of the country. Go fuckin live in china if you dont like the new Law, THIS WORLD IS FUCKED.....................................
Good for the short term, bad for the long term.
fuck thats harsh bush is a dillhole
Cameron, didn't you just come from a trip to Cuba?CameronPoe wrote:
It's harsh I know but I'm really sad for America today. They really did take a very serious turn for the worst. The US is no longer fit to preach morals and ethics to any other nation starting today and ending when that bill is torn up.
Your take on this is rather skewed, I think.CameronPoe in the 'Which people in history do you admire thread' wrote:
In no particular order:
...
Political/Military:...
Fidel Castro (Political Activist & Guerrilla)
...
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=42162
It would appear to me that you hold a double standard here.Wikipedia wrote:
Castro and human rights
Thousands of political opponents to the Castro regime have been killed, primarily during the first decade of his dictatorship;[98] however exact numbers are not known. Some Cubans labeled "counterrevolutionaries", "fascists", or "CIA operatives" have been imprisoned in extremely poor conditions without trial.[99] Professor Marifeli Pérez Stable, a Cuban American who once supported the revolution, reflects on the costs of the Cuban revolution. "[There were] thousands of executions, forty, fifty thousand political prisoners. The treatment of political prisoners, with what we today know about human rights and the international norms governing human rights ... it is legitimate to raise questions about possible crimes against humanity in Cuba."[100]Castro acknowledges that Cuba holds political prisoners, but argues that Cuba is justified because these prisoners are not jailed because of their political beliefs, but have been convicted of "counter-revolutionary" crimes, including bombings.[101]
Fidel Castro portrays opposition to the Cuban government as illegitimate, and the result of an ongoing conspiracy fostered by Cuban exiles with ties to the United States or the CIA. Many Castro supporters say that Castro's measures are justified to prevent the fall of his government, whereas his opposition says he uses the United States as an excuse to justify his continuing political control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro
Um. It has been the primary weapon of the activist for all of history. Hippies, Luther, Jesus, the list is long.DesertFox423 wrote:
Up to debate if speaking out is action or not?
So to fight terrorism, they are taking away the liberties of people who do believe in them, and don't want to kill people?Colfax wrote:
I think this gives our country the tools they need to fight terrorism.
You can't take liberties away from those who don't believe in them and want to only kill people.
OK, GG Bush Administration.
A man can commit worse crimes than admiration.Darth_Fleder wrote:
It would appear to me that you hold a double standard here.
I'm of the belief that half the people who passed it never even read the damn bill. They just think, "Security bill... it'll look good, PASS!" I cannot believe that this bill will pass the Supreme Court, it explicitly revokes the right of Habeas Corpus, which can only be revoked in times of war by the President. Congress has not declared war, and it isn't just the President who is able to authorize this. This is a law which violates the Constitution, plain and simple. I can't believe that Washington has become so much of a mess that it does this sort of thing just to get votes.
It can't make it to the supreme court if there are no trials from which to appeal.starman7 wrote:
I'm of the belief that half the people who passed it never even read the damn bill. They just think, "Security bill... it'll look good, PASS!" I cannot believe that this bill will pass the Supreme Court, it explicitly revokes the right of Habeas Corpus, which can only be revoked in times of war by the President. Congress has not declared war, and it isn't just the President who is able to authorize this. This is a law which violates the Constitution, plain and simple. I can't believe that Washington has become so much of a mess that it does this sort of thing just to get votes.
Wrong...because Bush was doing this before and it made it to the courts who told him he couldn't unless Congress authorized it. he gets the bill passed to comply with the court. It'll be challenged again.jonsimon wrote:
It can't make it to the supreme court if there are no trials from which to appeal.starman7 wrote:
I'm of the belief that half the people who passed it never even read the damn bill. They just think, "Security bill... it'll look good, PASS!" I cannot believe that this bill will pass the Supreme Court, it explicitly revokes the right of Habeas Corpus, which can only be revoked in times of war by the President. Congress has not declared war, and it isn't just the President who is able to authorize this. This is a law which violates the Constitution, plain and simple. I can't believe that Washington has become so much of a mess that it does this sort of thing just to get votes.
The op's links are dead to the Bill and it's specifics. Anyone have a link handy?
Xbone Stormsurgezz