View Full Version : Torture bill
w2amr
10-17-2006, 09:48 PM
The idiot #gets his torture bill.
Wonder what Jesus would think?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15301023/
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
w0aew
10-17-2006, 09:56 PM
Quote[/b] ]The bill also eliminates some rights common in military and civilian courts. For example, the commission would be allowed to consider hearsay evidence so long as a judge determined it was reliable. Hearsay is barred from civilian courts.
Yeah, like the hearsay evidence from Ahmed Abdel Hadi Chalabi that got us into Iraq because of WMDs.
Gotta love that hearsay evidence.
n2ize
10-17-2006, 09:58 PM
The question is, what is the next torture bill going to include...smirk he he he he.
KC4HGH
10-17-2006, 10:10 PM
"The law protects detainees from blatant abuses during questioning _ such as rape, torture and "cruel and inhuman" treatment"
Re-read the article...post the bill as well so we can see the wording...don't assume & call names, it belittles you....
w2amr
10-17-2006, 10:19 PM
Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 17 2006,15:10)]"The law protects detainees from blatant abuses during questioning _ such as rape, torture and "cruel and inhuman" treatment"
Re-read the article...post the bill as well so we can see the wording...don't assume & call names, it belittles you....
I haven't assumed anything. I have been following this thing pretty closely, most of my objections can be found in this article.
BTW, I thought bush was an idiot long before this bill.
Can agree with your evaluation of Bush, but in this case I'm afraid this tool is needed. Of the bill did not have specific language outlining protections during questioning, than I would be in 100% agreement.
But folks need to remember, the ones that crashed those planes into the towers and want badly to have a repeat performance are the same ones chopping heads off of folks for a few seconds in the press. A 6 x 6 cell with color TV and cable won't quite cut it.
n7rjd
10-17-2006, 11:02 PM
Oh, that kind of torture bill. I thought we were going to poke Bill Clinton in the eye with a stick. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
KI4PEQ
10-17-2006, 11:08 PM
Or "spin" Bill O'Reiily!
w2amr
10-17-2006, 11:21 PM
Quote[/b] (KE7DLG @ Oct. 17 2006,16:02)]Oh, that kind of torture bill. I thought we were going to poke Bill Clinton in the eye with a stick. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Or make Hillary stay home with him.
n2ize
10-17-2006, 11:32 PM
Quote[/b] (n0ov @ Oct. 17 2006,15:50)]Can agree with your evaluation of Bush, but in this case I'm afraid this tool is needed. Of the bill did not have specific language outlining protections during questioning, than I would be in 100% agreement.
But folks need to remember, the ones that crashed those planes into the towers and want badly to have a repeat performance are the same ones chopping heads off of folks for a few seconds in the press. A 6 x 6 cell with color TV and cable won't quite cut it.
Nobody is giving anyone a 6x6 cell with color TV. But a billlike this is dangerous. You may not think it directly applies to you today and that it will only apply to some bearded shady looking guy wearing a towel on his head. Looki at the provisons for detainment, elimination of habeaus corpus, hidden evidence, secret information, etc. Think about it. Is this the direction you want to see America go ?
KC2ESD
10-18-2006, 02:07 AM
I say GOOD!!! Its about time the bad people get the extreem Punishment they Deserve. I don't give a Poop about terrorist's rights, I care about Protecting America. fight Clean? Forget it I just want to WIN!!!
KE5FRF
10-18-2006, 03:05 AM
Quote[/b] (KE7DLG @ Oct. 17 2006,18:02)]Oh, that kind of torture bill. I thought we were going to poke Bill Clinton in the eye with a stick. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
You beat me to it. I was going to ask how we were going to torture him. My suggestion was going to be by dressing Janet Reno up in a pink teddy and locking them together in a cell for 6 months.
Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Oct. 17 2006,20:05)]Quote[/b] (KE7DLG @ Oct. 17 2006,18:02)]Oh, that kind of torture bill. I thought we were going to poke Bill Clinton in the eye with a stick. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
You beat me to it. I was going to ask how we were going to torture him. My suggestion was going to be by dressing Janet Reno up in a pink teddy and locking them together in a cell for 6 months.
Make him wear Janet Renos panties as a ski mask.
K0RGR
10-18-2006, 03:36 AM
That's "President Idiot" to you.
We have crawled down into the pit with our adversaries.
Sometimes that is necessary. This isn't one of those times.
Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 17 2006,20:36)]That's "President Idiot" to you.
We have crawled down into the pit with our adversaries.
Sometimes that is necessary. This isn't one of those times.
The same pit?
I had no idea we were now allowed to behead our enemy and tape it for propaganda purposes. Woo-Hoo this next tour may get really fun!
Character and personality. The two are intertwined. One reveles the other. Is you know how to read a person, these are the things you look for.
Go look at recruitment pages on websites of police. Then for limited duty police services. Notice anything?
Now go to websites recruiting jailers.Notice anything?
Jailers are by far the foulest, nastiest, unsoficated, crudest, crulist persons you can ever come aceoss. If they were not, they would not survive in that paticular work enviroment.Those who do pay a price. Absolute contempt for their fellow man. Period.
Qualities like these are sought after in recruiting jailers.Now on to Torturers.
Go to the CIA recruitment website. Look under Federal Police Officers. Then go to Paramilatary Officer. Notice anything?
These are the people who will carry out the torturing of prisoners.
Not a one requires anything above a High School Diploma or equivilent.
Just thought you would like to know.
By the way, longtime cops and milatary types now cops just love it that they are the national concensious of the right wing gun owner. What they like, dislike, want hate, is publicized for all the cattle to agree upon.
Not a one of those jobs require anything about High School or equivilent.And these are the persons held up high as what your ideals must be, or you do not measure up.Period.
7/11 clearks, Gas pump jockies, truck drivers, janitors you name it. That is the lever of intelligence these people really have. Get them together in a group, and the dynamice are frightening.You do not get intelligent reasoning. You get a group of toughs with guns who hate.
Political science 101. The text: "The Ironery of Democracy." Read what the scolars have to say on this concensious of the police brotherhood. And when you are reading it, remember, they are mostly toughs with guns who hate. Period.
I wish the democrate would shake off the peacenicks, the treehuggers, animal rights activits, anti abortionisrts etc. Then maybe they will be ready for me to join their ranks. Until then.
"Decline to State."
We made great strides during the Billary years in dividing this concencious. Many, many police cheifs tolerant of misconduce were replaced with those not so tolerant. Many police went to prison, or nearly did so,helping socioity by ensuring cops do not invent evidence, or entrap, or even murder knowing they will not be punished. The newer crops of police every decade or so are less inclined to do such. The bull cops who rule over their peers in a reign of terror are being retired, fired or imprisoned by an ever increasing intolerant peer group.
"We no longer want your kind amoung us!"
Exit Clinton. Who was set up, with the help of rouge cops with a desire to force the country to be run the way they want it to be, whenever the people like it or not. Clinton, dealt with like Furhman was, Lied on the stand when evidence contrary to his testimony was presented after he lied.
Just the way bad cops are dealt with when their nonsence gets too nasty.
And let's not forget the voters in Florida who voted for Gore, but were discounted. A cop or two or three had their hand in that one. Or at least helped.
Now the country is being run the way cops like it. Intelligence units in police forces are springing up, and a reign of terror is sweeping across the land. But the NRA(I am a member) tells us. "Everything is going to be O.K." and we accept it all.
We just passed a tourture bill.
America is now cop heaven.
All that is needed is a High School Diploma or equivilint to join a brotherhood that rocks the very foundations of our constitution, so things will be run the way their High School or equivilint group concecsious desires. The hell with what the people want.
KI6FFF
10-18-2006, 05:13 AM
Quote[/b] (nq6v @ Oct. 16 2006,22:59)]Not a one of those jobs require anything about High School or equivilent.And these are the persons held up high as what your ideals must be, or you do not measure up.Period.
All that is needed is a High School Diploma or equivilint to join a brotherhood that rocks the very foundations of our constitution, so things will be run the way their High School or equivilint group concecsious desires. The hell with what the people want.
I haven't looked at your profile to see where you live, but here in California, at least a HS diploma is required with continuing college education is required to promote. #
Many agencies in California have required at least a two year degree or better for entry level police officer. In my department, command staff is usually required to have a four year degree or better.
The state sets the standard for education for law enforcement here and I am required to attend refresher training for "perishable skills" annually.
It took me 3 years and multiple applications as well as interviews to finally get hired into law enforcement because I was trying to get a job when "affirmative action" was prevalent in this state and I was told straight out that because I am a caucasian heterosexual male with military experience, I would be overlooked for a lower scoring minority. #When I was eventually hired after college and military, I took a position as a civilian jailer with Los Angeles County Sheriff and worked my way up as a Deputy Sheriff. #I have since left the department and now work for a local municipality as a police officer.
Edit: after looking at your call, I realize that you reside in California, have you looked at your local law enforcement agencies that are hiring officers to see what the minimum requirements for entry level police officer are?
kc7jty
10-18-2006, 06:30 AM
Quote[/b] (w0aew @ Oct. 17 2006,14:56)]Quote[/b] ]The bill also eliminates some rights common in military and civilian courts. For example, the commission would be allowed to consider hearsay evidence so long as a judge determined it was reliable. Hearsay is barred from civilian courts.
Yeah, like the hearsay evidence from Ahmed Abdel Hadi Chalabi that got us into Iraq because of WMDs.
Gotta love that hearsay evidence.
The reason we went into Iraq was evidenced on the Frontline show "the lost year in Iraq" tonight. Anyone see the show?
kc7jty
10-18-2006, 06:34 AM
Quote[/b] (KC2ESD @ Oct. 17 2006,19:07)]I say GOOD!!! Its about time the bad people get the extreem Punishment they Deserve. I don't give a Poop about terrorist's rights, I care about Protecting America. fight Clean? Forget it I just want to WIN!!!
Iraq is a total failure. Afghanistan will eventually be the same. The enemy is US.
Who are the "terrorists" anyway? The enemies of Israel?
k9kxq
10-18-2006, 06:37 AM
Military Commissions Act of 2006 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:2:./temp/~c109NXAVrI::)
kxq
w2amr
10-18-2006, 09:45 AM
Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,16:32)]Quote[/b] (n0ov @ Oct. 17 2006,15:50)]Can agree with your evaluation of Bush, but in this case I'm afraid this tool is needed. #Of the bill did not have specific language outlining protections during questioning, than I would be in 100% agreement.
But folks need to remember, the ones that crashed those planes into the towers and want badly to have a repeat performance are the same ones chopping heads off of folks for a few seconds in the press. #A 6 x 6 cell with color TV and cable won't quite cut it.
Nobody is giving anyone a 6x6 cell with color TV. But a billlike this is dangerous. You may not think it directly #applies to you today and that it will only apply to some bearded shady looking guy #wearing a towel on his head. Looki at the provisons for detainment, elimination of habeaus corpus, hidden evidence, secret information, etc. Think about it. Is this the direction you want to see America go #?
Under this bill ANYONE who is considered an "Enemy Combatant" can be hauled away to one of booshes torture camps and held indefinitely, with NO rights. Wonder how long it will be before the bush crime family decides anti war protesters and critics of the administration are "Enemy Combatants"?
Don't you just love those that have more concern for the rights of terrorists than they do for lives of our citizens. #This bill has absolutely nothing to do with US citizens, it's about people who want to kill you and your family. #One sure way of knowing it's a good bill, the ACLU opposes it.
I guess the left wing, jihad, lawyer that was assisting terrorists in New York and received a slap on the wrist from a Clinton appointed judge, is the hero to the "hate america" crowd this week.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006062.htm
k9kxq
10-18-2006, 12:34 PM
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 18 2006,07:23)]Don't you just love those that have more concern for the rights of terrorists than they do for lives of our citizens. #This bill has absolutely nothing to do with US citizens, it's about people who want to kill you and your family. #One sure way of knowing it's a good bill, the ACLU opposes it.
I guess the left wing, jihad, lawyer that was assisting terrorists in New York and received a slap on the wrist from a Clinton appointed judge, is the hero to the "hate america" crowd this week.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006062.htm
You got to be kidding, Michelle Malkin another Ann Coulter wanabe.
kxq
w3bny
10-18-2006, 01:44 PM
Quote[/b] (KC2ESD @ Oct. 17 2006,19:07)]I say GOOD!!! Its about time the bad people get the extreem Punishment they Deserve. I don't give a Poop about terrorist's rights, I care about Protecting America. fight Clean? Forget it I just want to WIN!!!
Bravo! Thats the Republican far right spirit! Now just keep blindly supporting these so called "anti-terror" leglislations then one day poof...where did my rights go? Besides that, its never ok when the enemy has your kid tired to a chair for 48+ hours sticking pins/needles/creator knows what in places that you can only imagine exsist. But its way ok for us to do it. Tell me, under what logic is that ok? Jesus kampf said its ok to do it as long as they arent xtians? BAH!!!
Why dont you ask Senator John McCain if it was ok to be tortured? He wasnt considered part of the "Geneva Convention" according to his keepers in Hanoi or have you conveniently fogotten that. How about folks in Battan... Auchwitz, Treblinka, Siberia. need more?
Torture dosnt work. Never has...Never will. If I stick things into you...given enough time, pain, cuarre, LSD, drain cleaner, and trash bags over your head, you will admit to shooting President Lincoln! Dosent mean you have it just means that you want the pain to stop and you will say anything to get it to do so.
So again. Stand up for that flag you have behind you in your avitar and support that this country will not and shall not stoop to torture and maybe...just maybe... in some dank dark hell hole, someones kid waiting to be interrogated, wont be put thru the HORRORS that you espouse.
Enjoy yer Kool-aid!
W3BNY...out!
K0HWY
10-18-2006, 01:48 PM
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 18 2006,05:23)]One sure way of knowing it's a good bill, the ACLU opposes it.
The ACLU is highly under-rated. There's no way they should take second place to any other anti-American terrorist organization.
k9kxq
10-18-2006, 01:54 PM
good read on terrorist bill (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061018/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_terrorism_29;_ylt=AtsOZEt5yOJfxqxvXCLSn3dg.3Q A;_ylu=X3oDMTA2ZGZwam4yBHNlYwNmYw--)
kxq
KC2ESD
10-18-2006, 02:15 PM
Quote[/b] ]W3BNY...out!
Look I grew up with Red Hair and got picked on a lot. What stopped that? The use of FORCE! People did not give a rat's behind about me so why should I give a poop about Terrorist's rights. I'v delt with bad people so I know how bad Humanity can be and I am for hard Punishment on those who want to harm me or my fellow Americans.
73 de Rick KC2ESD
w3bny
10-18-2006, 02:38 PM
Quote[/b] (KC2ESD @ Oct. 18 2006,07:15)]Quote[/b] ]W3BNY...out!
Look I grew up with Red Hair and got picked on a lot. What stopped that? The use of FORCE! People did not give a rat's behind about me so why should I give a poop about Terrorist's rights. I'v delt with bad people so I know how bad Humanity can be and I am for hard Punishment on those who want to harm me or my fellow Americans.
73 de Rick KC2ESD
What does red hair have to do with torture or the approval of its use. #Uhhh whats the phrase im looking for.... #NOT A DARN THING
Lemme be a member of the do ya one better club for a moment. #I grew up hispanic in South Texas and was treated just a wee bit worse than your oh so horrible red hair days. #At least you werent forced into special education because of your hair color eh? #Were you automatically spoken to in "immigration spanish" because of your red hair? #Automatically called Pablo because of your red hair? or told to go back to Mexico because of your red hair? #But I digress.
Again, you seem to go with the "they did it to us so that makes it right for me to do it" frame of mind so lets use your logic for a moment.
That means... according to your "logic" #Blacks have a right to enslave you, break up your family and treat you like crap for a few years.
Jews have the right to exterminate people of Germanic desent in oh so horrible means
I can go on with this but it seems you shall never get the point until a few of your neighbors that dont like you call the 1-800-MYNEIGHBORISHELPINGBINHOOCHI hot line and keep suggesting that you are a terrorist sympathiser. #Then my friend you would pretty much come under the letter of the bill you so blindly support and guess what.. #BLAM.. the door kicks open... a black sack is put over your head and you, your family your dog is hauled off to a non-disclosed location where you have NO expectation of humane treatment. #NO expectation of relief allowed you by the constitution..(why now by the way does not apply to you since you are considered a terrorist sympatiser).
No Habeus Corpus
Do not pass go
Do not collect 200 bucks
and you get to enjoy the feeling of the New York City yellow pages "gently" being applied to the side of your noggin... Just to see if it will shake your memory of where you are hiding Bin Laden at. #OOOH and you have an Amateur radio so you must be talking to him.. #WHAP...WHAP...WHAP.. #but dont worry my friend.... #a nice man who trained under a Mr. J. Dahmer will be with you in a minute to show you some films of what he did with your dog and explain how your family will be next if you dont cooperate.... But first a refreshing injection of Ketamine...there you go..
See where this is going....obviously not.
Again...ENJOY YER KOOL-AID!
w2amr
10-18-2006, 02:49 PM
Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,06:48)]Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 18 2006,05:23)]One sure way of knowing it's a good bill, the ACLU opposes it.
The ACLU is highly under-rated. There's no way they should take second place to any other anti-American terrorist organization.
Yeah, gotta stomp out those civil rights.
K0HWY
10-18-2006, 03:39 PM
The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
I really wonder how many of you chicken little types have actually read the new law.
Not the news accounts of it, but the law.
From it:
‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.
Notice the word ALIEN. It applies to NON US CITIZENS.
So anyone who has posted anything about "what if they grab you" and "our rights are gone" the rights of US CITIZENS are not affected at all.
W3BNY, W2AMR perhaps you should actually read it before making your chicken little screams about "if your neighbors report you you will be taken away" and "political protesters will be declared enemy combatant"
Since you guys obviuosly have not read the bill, HERE IT IS (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf).
kc7jty
10-18-2006, 04:50 PM
This whole "terrorist", Iraq, Afghanistan mess is due to correctness and ignorance on our part. We deserve all it has given us and will give.
No better lesson could be taught.
k4kyv
10-18-2006, 05:07 PM
Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,09:03)]‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.
Notice the word ALIEN. It applies to NON US CITIZENS.
So it could still apply to your law-abiding British step-father and your Norwegian aunt who have been legal residents with green cards for decades. It even applies to your Canadian girlfriend who pops over for a weekend visit. They just happened to have been reportedly seen in the wrong place at the wrong time, maybe conversing with the wrong person.
Not just to shaggy-haired, poorly shaven brown-skinned young males carrying passports written in Arabic.
Quote[/b] (k4kyv @ Oct. 18 2006,10:07)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,09:03)]‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.
Notice the word ALIEN. It applies to NON US CITIZENS.
So it could still apply to your law-abiding British step-father and your Norwegian aunt who have been legal residents with green cards for decades. #It even applies to your Canadian girlfriend who pops over for a weekend visit. They just happened to have been reportedly seen in the wrong place at the wrong time, maybe conversing with the wrong person.
Not just to shaggy-haired, poorly shaven brown-skinned young males carrying passports written in Arabic.
True, they might be eligible, if they have engaged in activities such that they are ruled to be such by the Combatant Status Review Tribunal. They still will nto be grabbed by any wayward Federal agent who wants to, there is a review procedure that will require more than just being in the wrong place or talking to the wrong person.
What evidence do you have that all it takes is beng seen in the worng place or talking to the wrong person?
The same as the chicken littles that are screaming we will all be drug from our homes. None. Do you honestly think they will set the bar that low? What evidence do you have to support such a claim?
As for those who have had green cards for decades, I guess that is the risk they take by not going all the way and becoming citizens. As for alien visitors, unless they make a habit of associating with terrorist suspects why would they draw attention?
Personally I think it is a fairly written law, and has enough safeguards. It does not apply to US citizens, requires certain steps to be taken before a non-citizen is declared to fall under it, and has a yearly report to Congress as a review. Do some of our temporary visitors technically remain eligible if they do certain things? Yes, they do, but guess who the vast majority of both our successful and foiled attacks here have come from. Non-citizens who were here. At most it provides incentive for our otherwise harmless guests to behave a little better.
Also a report will be made yearly to congress on all person retaiend and trials held, so there is a review proccess as well.
Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 18 2006,09:50)]This whole "terrorist", Iraq, Afghanistan mess is due to correctness and ignorance on our part. We deserve all it has given us and will give.
No better lesson could be taught.
Yeah, we are a bunch of damm fools for our freedom, equal treatment of women, and freedom of worship.
Which way is Mecca so i can start my prayers, and where can I find some fashionable headscraves or burkas for the women in my family...because until we all do that they will not stop.
w2amr
10-18-2006, 05:41 PM
Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,09:03)]I really wonder how many of you chicken little types have actually read the new law.
Not the news accounts of it, but the law.
From it:
‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.
Notice the word ALIEN. It applies to NON US CITIZENS.
So anyone who has posted anything about "what if they grab you" and "our rights are gone" the rights of US CITIZENS are not affected at all.
W3BNY, W2AMR perhaps you should actually read it before making your chicken little screams about "if your neighbors report you you will be taken away" and "political protesters will be declared enemy combatant"
Since you guys obviuosly have not read the bill, HERE IT IS (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf).
I found this interesting tidbit on antiwar.com
"The term 'unlawful enemy combatant' means – (i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or (ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."
It doesn't say "alien" or "terrorist," although it specifically includes members of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It says "person" – any person, including American citizens. As Bruce Ackerman, professor of law at Yale and author of Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism, puts it:
"Buried in the complex Senate compromise on detainee treatment is a real shocker, reaching far beyond the legal struggles about foreign terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay fortress. The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights."
w2amr
10-18-2006, 05:55 PM
More interesting food for thought..............
On Tuesday, "Countdown" host Keith Olbermann talked to Jonathan Turley, a #constitutional law professor at George Washington University about a new bill signed by President Bush that redefines the right of habeas corpus.
Read the transcript below.
History does not play well at this White House. #Expressionless faces would probably greet references to how John Adams ended his political career by insisting he needed the Alien and Sedition Acts to silence his critics in the newspapers, or how Franklin D. Roosevelt’s executive order to seize Japanese-Americans during World War II necessitated a formal presidential apology eight presidents later.
But even so, somebody probably should have told President Bush that today was the exact 135th anniversary, to the day, that President Grant suspended habeas corpus in much of South Carolina for the noble and urgent purpose of dispersing the Ku Klux Klan and making sure the freed slaves had all their voting rights, neither of which has yet truly occurred. It is your principal defense against imprisonment without charge and trial without defense thrown away for no good reason, then and now.
Our fifth story on "Countdown": President Bush, happy Habeas Corpus Day. #
First thing this morning, the president signed into law the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which does away with habeas corpus, the right of suspected terrorists or anybody else to know why they have been imprisoned, provided the president does not think it should apply to you and declares you an enemy combatant.
Further, the bill allows the CIA to continue using interrogation techniques so long as they do not cause what is deemed, quote, “serious physical or mental pain.” #And it lets the president to ostensibly pick and choose which parts of the Geneva Convention to obey, though to hear him describe this, this repudiation of the freedoms for which all our soldiers have died is a good thing.
PRESIDENT BUSH: #This bill spells out specific, recognizable offenses that would be considered crimes in the handling of detainees, so that our men and women who question captured terrorists can perform their duties to the fullest extent of the law. And this bill complies with both the spirit and the letter of our international obligations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: #Leading Democrats view it differently, Senator Ted Kennedy calling this “seriously flawed,” #Senator Patrick Leahey saying it’s, quote, “a sad day when the rubber-stamp Congress undercuts our freedoms,” and Senator Russ Feingold adding that “We will look back on this day as a stain on our nation’s history.”
Outside the White House, a handful of individuals protested the law by dressing up as Abu Ghraib abuse victims and terror detainees. #Several of them got themselves arrested, but they were apparently quickly released, despite being already dressed for Gitmo.
To assess what this law will truly mean for us all, I’m joined by Jonathan Turley, professor of constitutional law at George Washington University.
I want to start by asking you about a specific part of this act that lists one of the definitions of an unlawful enemy combatant as, quote, “a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a combatant status review tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense.”
Does that not basically mean that if Mr. Bush or Mr. Rumsfeld say so, anybody in this country, citizen or not, innocent or not, can end up being an unlawful enemy combatant?
JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR: #It certainly does. #In fact, later on, it says that if you even give material support to an organization that the president deems connected to one of these groups, you too can be an enemy combatant.
And the fact that he appoints this tribunal is meaningless. #You know, standing behind him at the signing ceremony was his attorney general, who signed a memo that said that you could torture people, that you could do harm to them to the point of organ failure or death.
So if he appoints someone like that to be attorney general, you can imagine who he’s going be putting on this board.
OLBERMANN: #Does this mean that under this law, ultimately the only thing keeping you, I, or the viewer out of Gitmo is the sanity and honesty of the president of the United States?
TURLEY: #It does. #And it’s a huge sea change for our democracy. #The framers created a system where we did not have to rely on the good graces or good mood of the president. #In fact, Madison said that he created a system essentially to be run by devils, where they could not do harm, because we didn’t rely on their good motivations.
Now we must. #And people have no idea how significant this is. #What, really, a time of shame this is for the American system. #What the Congress did and what the president signed today essentially revokes over 200 years of American principles and values.
It couldn’t be more significant. #And the strange thing is, we’ve become sort of constitutional couch potatoes. #I mean, the Congress just gave the president despotic powers, and you could hear the yawn across the country as people turned to, you know, “Dancing with the Stars.” #I mean, it’s otherworldly.
OLBERMANN: #Is there one defense against this, the legal challenges against particularly the suspension or elimination of habeas corpus from the equation? #And where do they stand, and how likely are they to overturn this action today?
TURLEY: #Well, you know what? #I think people are fooling themselves if they believe that the courts will once again stop this president from taking over—taking almost absolute power. #It basically comes down to a single vote on the Supreme Court, Justice Kennedy. #And he indicated that if Congress gave the president these types of powers, that he might go along.
And so we may have, in this country, some type of uber-president, some absolute ruler, and it’ll be up to him who gets put away as an enemy combatant, held without trial.
It’s something that no one thought—certainly I didn’t think—was possible in the United States. #And I am not too sure how we got to this point. #But people clearly don’t realize what a fundamental change it is about who we are as a country. #What happened today changed us. #And I’m not too sure we’re going to change back anytime soon.
OLBERMANN: #And if Justice Kennedy tries to change us back, we can always call him an enemy combatant.
The president reiterated today the United States does not torture. #Does this law actually guarantee anything like that?
TURLEY: #That’s actually when I turned off my TV set, because I couldn’t believe it. #You know, the United States has engaged in torture. #And the whole world community has denounced the views of this administration, its early views that the president could order torture, could cause injury up to organ failure or death.
The administration has already established that it has engaged in things like waterboarding, which is not just torture. #We prosecuted people after World War II for waterboarding prisoners. #We treated it as a war crime. #And my God, what a change of fate, where we are now embracing the very thing that we once prosecuted people for.
Who are we now? #I know who we were then. #But when the president said that we don’t torture, that was, frankly, when I had to turn off my TV set.
OLBERMANN: #That same individual fell back on the same argument that he’d used about the war in Iraq to sanction this law. #Let me play what he said and then ask you a question about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT BUSH: #Yet with the distance of history, the questions will be narrowed and few. #Did this generation of Americans take the threat seriously? #And did we do what it takes to defeat that threat?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: #Does he understand the irony of those words when taken out of the context of this particular passage or of what he perceives as the war against terror, and that, in fact, the threat we may be facing is the threat of President George W. Bush?
TURLEY: #Well, this is going to go down in history as one of our greatest self-inflicted wounds. #And I think you can feel the judgment of history. #It won’t be kind to President Bush.
But frankly, I don’t think that it will be kind to the rest of us. #I think that history will ask, Where were you? #What did you do when this thing was signed into law? #There were people that protested the Japanese concentration camps, there were people that protested these other acts. #But we are strangely silent in this national yawn as our rights evaporate.
Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,10:41)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,09:03)]I really wonder how many of you chicken little types have actually read the new law.
Not the news accounts of it, but the law.
From it:
‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.
Notice the word ALIEN. It applies to NON US CITIZENS.
So anyone who has posted anything about "what if they grab you" and "our rights are gone" the rights of US CITIZENS are not affected at all.
W3BNY, W2AMR perhaps you should actually read it before making your chicken little screams about "if your neighbors report you you will be taken away" and "political protesters will be declared enemy combatant"
Since you guys obviuosly have not read the bill, HERE IT IS (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf).
I found this interesting tidbit on antiwar.com
"The term 'unlawful enemy combatant' means – (i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or (ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."
It doesn't say "alien" or "terrorist," although it specifically includes members of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It says "person" – any person, including American citizens. As Bruce Ackerman, professor of law at Yale and author of Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism, puts it:
"Buried in the complex Senate compromise on detainee treatment is a real shocker, reaching far beyond the legal struggles about foreign terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay fortress. The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights."
It is obvious you still have not read the law.
What you saw on antiwar.com (yeah, a great unbiased source I am sure they are) is also from the text of the law.
But what I also posted is also from it, in fact it comes not far after that definition. You see, even if one meets all that criteria, because of the text I posted if one is a citizen of the United States that law still does not apply.
Non-citizens are the only ones that can be tried by military commission. Period
Instead of expecting others to explain it to you, read the law for yourself. If you can post the actual cite form the law that contrdicts the portion I posted, do so.
kc7jty
10-18-2006, 06:02 PM
Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,10:25)]...because until we all do that they will not stop.
another mindwash lie.
Have fun subduing them in their own lands, it's outta my hands. I don't have the power to stop our government's rogue behavior, nor it's unswerving devotion to Israel.
KC4HGH
10-18-2006, 06:22 PM
Obviously, many people ASSUME that U.S. laws pertain to non-U.S. aliens- THEY DO NOT! Anyone attempting force against U.S. citizens or territory ARE NOT eligible to be tried in the U.S. court system because they are NOT U.S. citizens. Therefor, a military court is applicable and proper.
Many also forget that Islamic terrorists are forgoing the first two steps of the religion they're supposed to be supporting: convert or enslave- they're going right to the "or kill" solution. They don't CARE about your rights under U.S. law or any other human right- THEY WANT YOU DEAD! They don't care about our Constitution or whether or not they'll violate it- THEY WANT YOU DEAD! They don't care about the Geneva Convention- THEY WANT YOU DEAD! And this has been going on for centuries, it's NOT a new thing! Muslim conquest of the world has been an ongoing attempt and even 'way back, THEY STILL WANTED YOU DEAD!
So, DON'T think the ACLU needs to get into the question whether or not Gitmo or any other military jail or tribunal is violating THEIR rights- they HAVE NO RIGHTS OR PROTECTIONS under our Constitution- that is reserved for U.S. CITIZENS. I DARE any of you to go to Gitmo and walk anywhere near a cell where a prisoner is kept- if they can get their hands on you, they'll do their best to KILL YOU! The spit on our military men & women there, throw things at them, do whatever they can to belittle or harm them. You think they want to play fair behind bars? Don't bet on it- if they had the chance, they'd KILL our military and hop a raft to come to the U.S. to KILL YOU!
The sooner you get that through your thick chicken little skulls, the better- THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU, YOUR FEELINGS OR YOUR WANTING "RIGHTS" FOR THEM, THEY - WANT - YOU - DEAD!
w2amr
10-18-2006, 06:53 PM
Being neither a lawyer or scholar , when I read something as complex as this bill, I'm afraid I must rely on someone schooled in constitutional law to explain what it really means. Especially considering I don't trust the people who wrote it ,or the person who signed it into law. Please excuse my skepticism, but in my humble opinion these folks are somewhat less than trustworthy.
Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 18 2006,11:02)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,10:25)]...because until we all do that they will not stop.
another mindwash lie.
Have fun subduing them in their own lands, it's outta my hands. I don't have the power to stop our government's rogue behavior, nor it's unswerving devotion to Israel.
I've been there, talked to them, and had long talks with many muslims who have been exposed to both sides.
I hate to break it to you, but many don't even have a clue what Israel is, and most that do couldn't show it to you on a map. For the rest it is an excuse, set forth for those either gullible enough or blinded enough by thier own anti-semitism to foolishly believe.
Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,11:53)]Being neither a lawyer or scholar , when I read something as complex as this bill, I'm afraid I must rely on someone schooled in constitutional law to explain what it really means. #Especially considering I don't trust the people who wrote it ,or the person who signed it into law. Please excuse my skepticism, but in my humble opinion #these folks are somewhat less than trustworthy.
Fair enough, well show me where one of your pundints explains exactly where it says so in the law. All I have seen is "buried deeply", but the whole thing is under 40 pages, how deep can it be?
A homeland security director wanted to see just what agency of the government were the best detainee interviewers. So he arranged for representives of the CIA, the FBI and of the (name your favorite city) police dept. to join him.
He released a rabbit and called on the FBI to find it.
Half an hour later, the agents returned.
"How did it go?" the director asked.
"Well, we found the rabbit, but the rabbit was not violating any federal law, so we let the rabbit go."
"Hmmm," thought the director. Then he turned to the CIA agents, and said:"O.K, it"s your turn." With that, the CIA agents entered the woods.
Half an hour later, the CIA agents returned. "Did you find the rabbit?" the director asked.
The Cia agents looked at each other, and the lead agent spoke to the director."We found the rabbit, we debriefed the rabbit, we turned the rabbit. Then we let the rabbit go."
The director still was not pleased. He turned to the remaining prospects for the "interviewer" posts, and said. "O.K, it's your turn. Go get the rabbit. With that, the city detectives entered the woods.
The CIA agents slid up to the FBI agents. "What criteria does your agency ask for when considering employment? We are required at least a B.A. or a Masters in whatever our field is." The FBI agents replied. "The same here too." Suddenly, there was a ruckus at the edge of the woods.
A large bear crashed thru the brush. It staggered forared, and fell to the ground, shivering. As the observers approached, the bear burst into uncontroable hysteria.
"O.K. I CONFESS! I'M A RABBIT, I'M A RABBIT! It then passed out from emotional distress and trama.
The homeland security director turned to his aids. "It looks like the High School Graduates or equivelemts get the job. Step up recruitment efforts aimed at police deptartments. I want them all in the field as soon as possible.
And that is how Bush found so many persons willing to tourture their fellow man.
w2amr
10-18-2006, 10:20 PM
Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,08:39)]The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
And why would they do that?
And to back up my assertations, I would like to point out the psychological condition of those who survive as jailers and tourters.
"Anti Sociol Personality Disorder."
Doesn't sound like much? In my experiences, that disorder must be present in large numbers in order to effect the dynamics of group criminal behavior. Everybody in a group has to pretty much agree that a segment of the population of this planet in this corner of the galaxy we call home are not deserving of basic human rights.
No wonder Ailens have never invited us to join the galactic community.
We let the undereducated to occupy a position in socioity where their mass influence causes sociol change, regardless of the results or of the peoples will.
KC4HGH
10-18-2006, 10:53 PM
Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)]Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,08:39)]The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
And why would they do that?
Check your history; you'll find their statement, "Communism is the goal." Plus their everyday attacks on family values....BTW, it was one of their lawyers (can't remember his name now) that wrote an opinion on "separation of church and state" back in 1947, presented it to a liberal Judge Black who liked it so much, he legislated it from the bench...and so went the lie that has NEVER appeared in the U.S. Constitution that somehow continues to surface.
Wasn't it Former President Clinton that stated that if you told a lie often enough, you/others would believe it?
n4sva
10-18-2006, 11:12 PM
Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 18 2006,15:53)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)]Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,08:39)]The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
And why would they do that?
Check your history; you'll find their statement, "Communism is the goal." #Plus their everyday attacks on family values....BTW, it was one of their lawyers (can't remember his name now) that wrote an opinion on "separation of church and state" back in 1947, presented it to a liberal Judge Black who liked it so much, he legislated it from the bench...and so went the lie that has NEVER appeared in the U.S. Constitution that somehow continues to surface.
Wasn't it Former President Clinton that stated that if you told a lie often enough, you/others would believe it?
You are correct Bud. The founder was Roger Baldwin who said that
People need to realize what roots these left-wing organizations come from. Take Planned Parenthood, for example. Read what their founder Margaret Sanger said in her essay “We Must Breed a Race of Thoroughbreds"
A real eye-opener.
w2amr
10-18-2006, 11:15 PM
Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 18 2006,15:53)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)]Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,08:39)]The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
And why would they do that?
Check your history; you'll find their statement, "Communism is the goal." #Plus their everyday attacks on family values....BTW, it was one of their lawyers (can't remember his name now) that wrote an opinion on "separation of church and state" back in 1947, presented it to a liberal Judge Black who liked it so much, he legislated it from the bench...and so went the lie that has NEVER appeared in the U.S. Constitution that somehow continues to surface.
Wasn't it Former President Clinton that stated that if you told a lie often enough, you/others would believe it?
No, I think that was Joseph Goebbels
kc7jty
10-19-2006, 02:21 AM
Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,11:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 18 2006,11:02)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,10:25)]...because until we all do that they will not stop.
another mindwash lie.
Have fun subduing them in their own lands, it's outta my hands. I don't have the power to stop our government's rogue behavior, nor it's unswerving devotion to Israel.
I've been there, talked to them, and had long talks with many muslims who have been exposed to both sides.
So...did they insist that you ask "Which way is Mecca so i can start my prayers"?
kc7jty
10-19-2006, 05:55 AM
Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,16:15)]No, I think that was Joseph Goebbels
I remember him! Wasn't he the guy who invented the pinball machine, then had his whole family, kids & all exterminated?
KC4HGH
10-19-2006, 05:52 PM
Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,16:15)]Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 18 2006,15:53)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)]Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,08:39)]The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
And why would they do that?
Check your history; you'll find their statement, "Communism is the goal." #Plus their everyday attacks on family values....BTW, it was one of their lawyers (can't remember his name now) that wrote an opinion on "separation of church and state" back in 1947, presented it to a liberal Judge Black who liked it so much, he legislated it from the bench...and so went the lie that has NEVER appeared in the U.S. Constitution that somehow continues to surface.
Wasn't it Former President Clinton that stated that if you told a lie often enough, you/others would believe it?
No, I think that was Joseph Goebbels
Doing a search on Roger Nash Baldwin reveals this:
Reflecting on his early years as the ACLU's Executive Director, Baldwin candidly revealed his original motives and objectives. "I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately, for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion," he stated. "I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the properties class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. It all sums up into one single purpose -- the abolition of dog-eat-dog under which we live. I don't regret being part of the communist tactic. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the communists wanted and I traveled the United Front road to get it."
BTW, Former President Clinton probably parrotted Goebbels- I remember FPC saying it on TV. Isn't funny how late-history politicos mimic their predecessors?
w2amr
10-20-2006, 09:12 AM
Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 19 2006,10:52)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,16:15)]Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 18 2006,15:53)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,15:20)]Quote[/b] (kb4tow @ Oct. 18 2006,08:39)]The ACLU has nothing to do with civil rights. Perhaps they were concerned with civil rights at some point but that has long since been abandoned. Their current mission is to destroy what little moral fiber is left in this country. And, they are doing it very effectively.
And why would they do that?
Check your history; you'll find their statement, "Communism is the goal." #Plus their everyday attacks on family values....BTW, it was one of their lawyers (can't remember his name now) that wrote an opinion on "separation of church and state" back in 1947, presented it to a liberal Judge Black who liked it so much, he legislated it from the bench...and so went the lie that has NEVER appeared in the U.S. Constitution that somehow continues to surface.
Wasn't it Former President Clinton that stated that if you told a lie often enough, you/others would believe it?
No, I think that was Joseph Goebbels
Doing a search on Roger Nash Baldwin reveals this:
Reflecting on his early years as the ACLU's Executive Director, Baldwin candidly revealed his original motives and objectives. "I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately, for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion," he stated. "I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the properties class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. It all sums up into one single purpose -- the abolition of dog-eat-dog under which we live. I don't regret being part of the communist tactic. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the communists wanted and I traveled the United Front road to get it."
BTW, Former President Clinton probably parrotted Goebbels- I remember FPC saying it on TV. #Isn't funny how late-history politicos mimic their predecessors?
Roger Nash Baldwin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Roger Nash Baldwin (January 21, 1884 – August 26, 1981) was a noted civil libertarian, pacifist, and social activist who held Communist views in his youth. He was one of the founders of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and its executive director until 1950; many of the ACLU's original landmark cases took place under his direction.
[edit]
Biography
Roger Nash Baldwin was born in Wellesley, Massachusetts to Frank Fenno Baldwin and Lucy Cushing Nash. He earned his bachelor's and master's degrees at Harvard University; afterwards, he moved to St. Louis, where he worked as a social worker and became chief probation officer of the St. Louis Juvenile Court. He also co-wrote Juvenile Courts and Probation with Bernard Flexner at this time; this book became very influential in its era, and was, in part, the foundation of Baldwin's national reputation.
In St. Louis, Baldwin became greatly influenced by the radical social movement of the anarchist Emma Goldman. He joined the Industrial Workers of the World and developed a sympathy for the Soviet Union and for Communism that lasted until 1939 when he was disillusioned by the Nazi-Soviet Pact and broke off all radical ties. In 1927, he had visited the Soviet Union and wrote a book, Liberty Under the Soviets, which contained extensive praise for the Soviet Union. However, he later denounced communism in his book, A New Slavery, which condemned "the inhuman communist police state tyranny" [1]. In the 1940s, Baldwin led the campaign to purge the ACLU of Communist Party members [2].
Baldwin was a lifelong pacifist; he was a member of the American Union Against Militarism (AUAM), which opposed American involvement in World War I, and spent a year in jail as a conscientious objector rather than submit to the draft. After the passage of the Selective Service Act, Baldwin called for the AUAM to create a legal division to protect the rights of conscientous objectors. On July 1st, 1917, the AUAM responded by creating the Civil Liberties Bureau (CLB), headed by Baldwin. The CLB separated from the AUAM on October 1st, 1917, renaming itself the National Civil Liberties Bureau, with Baldwin as director. In 1920, NCLB was renamed the American Civil Liberties Union with Baldwin continuing as the ACLU's first executive director. [3]
As director, Baldwin was integral to the shape of the association's early character; it was under Baldwin's leadership that the ACLU undertook some of its most famous cases, including the Scopes Monkey Trial, the Sacco and Vanzetti murder trial, and its challenge to the ban on James Joyce's Ulysses. Baldwin retired from the ACLU leadership in 1950, but remained active in politics for the rest of his life.
In 1947, General Douglas MacArthur invited him to Japan to foster the growth of civil liberties in that country. In Japan, he founded the Japan Civil Liberties Union, and the Japanese government awarded him the Order of the Rising Sun. In 1948, Germany and Austria invited him for similar purposes.
President Jimmy Carter awarded Baldwin the Medal of Freedom on 16 January 1981.
Overall not such a bad guy.
Clinton. #
Can't have a an exchange without saying it at least once.
KC2ESD
10-20-2006, 03:06 PM
Quote[/b] ]THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU, YOUR FEELINGS OR YOUR WANTING "RIGHTS" FOR THEM, THEY - WANT - YOU - DEAD!
Well Said. The terrorists don't give a rats behind about our rights and don't fight fair. So why sould we care about their rights? I DON"T!!!
Quote[/b] (KC2ESD @ Oct. 20 2006,02:06)]Quote[/b] ]THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU, YOUR FEELINGS OR YOUR WANTING "RIGHTS" FOR THEM, THEY - WANT - YOU - DEAD!
Well Said. The terrorists don't give a rats behind about our rights and don't fight fair. So why sould we care about their rights? I DON"T!!!
So, you have no problem with the prospect of the CIA marching into your home whie you are sitting there happily watching the next volume of American Idol, and labeling you as a known terrorist and shipping you to camp X-Ray without recourse?
You are cool with this plan? Cause if you ain't, you have a beef with the torture bill. You just don't know it yet.
And DON'T CALL ME IF THEY DO THIS. Because you don't get a call.
KC2KFC
10-20-2006, 03:24 PM
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,08:21)]Quote[/b] (KC2ESD @ Oct. 20 2006,02:06)]Quote[/b] ]THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU, YOUR FEELINGS OR YOUR WANTING "RIGHTS" FOR THEM, THEY - WANT - YOU - DEAD!
Well Said. The terrorists don't give a rats behind about our rights and don't fight fair. So why sould we care about their rights? I DON"T!!!
So, you have no problem with the prospect of the CIA marching into your home whie you are sitting there happily watching the next volume of American Idol, and labeling you as a known terrorist and shipping you to camp X-Ray without recourse?
You are cool with this plan? Cause if you ain't, you have a beef with the torture bill. You just don't know it yet.
Try this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin-foil_hat)
Hearsay is all that is required (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/10/18/highlights_of_the_act/)
Read and weep.
With this new bit of ledlesation, I think It prudent to point out that the constitution makes provisions for overthrowing the government and establishing another if for some reason the government sceased to fuction properly. I belive our government is not fuctioning properly.
KC4HGH
10-20-2006, 08:21 PM
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,08:21)]Quote[/b] (KC2ESD @ Oct. 20 2006,02:06)]Quote[/b] ]THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU, YOUR FEELINGS OR YOUR WANTING "RIGHTS" FOR THEM, THEY - WANT - YOU - DEAD!
Well Said. The terrorists don't give a rats behind about our rights and don't fight fair. So why sould we care about their rights? I DON"T!!!
So, you have no problem with the prospect of the CIA marching into your home whie you are sitting there happily watching the next volume of American Idol, and labeling you as a known terrorist and shipping you to camp X-Ray without recourse?
You are cool with this plan? #Cause if you ain't, you have a beef with the torture bill. #You just don't know it yet.
Please show us where, in the bill, that it specifically supercedes the U.S. Constitution regarding U.S. citizens. Terrorists, or "enemy combatants" are not U.S. citizens- and IF a U.S. citizen breaks the law, once convicted, loses his/her rights under the U.S. Constitution. So therefor, if your neighbor plans to mount an attack, a'la Timothy McVeigh, where do YOU stand on the issue?
I can't tell you how many times I've seen people freak out, literally run around the room frantically & shreik, "They're taking my freedoms away!" when it doesn't even apply to them! Stop, sit down, breath into a bag, then get out your reading glasses...and IF you see something that describes and scares YOU after you read the bill and U.S. Constitution, then YOU must be a part of the problem....
If you have trouble understanding the bill, call your Congresscritter for a full explaination. Then ask how it pertains to your rights under the U.S. Constitution and if any of your rights have been or are in danger of being violated in the future. THEN and ONLY THEN make a future post regarding this matter. You KNOW better than to trust the media, who twist things out of proportion to suit their needs....
Quote[/b] ]Defines an "unlawful enemy combatant" as a person who has: (1) engaged in or supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant
THOMAS Library of Congress (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN03930:@@@D&summ2=m&)
Neocons squeel on here constantly on not judging before they are tried. This takes out the civilian public trial. This allows the Feds to deem anyone an enemy combatant and stick them in a secret court. This court is filled with cookies and cream.
Drink your Kool Aid.
Oh, and you were less than truthful in your line... Quote[/b] ]Terrorists, or "enemy combatants" are not U.S. citizens
Read this... Quote[/b] ]On Sunday, June 9, the day before Padilla could have been released under laws protecting U.S. citizens from indefinite detention, President Bush approved Padilla's reclassification as an "enemy combatant." Time Magazine (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,262917,00.html)
Don't whine to me your made-up world of sugar plum fairies and make-believe. There is madness to the method.
KC4HGH
10-20-2006, 09:15 PM
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,13:47)]Oh, and you were less than truthful in your line... #Quote[/b] ]Terrorists, or "enemy combatants" are not U.S. citizens
Read this... Quote[/b] ]On Sunday, June 9, the day before Padilla could have been released under laws protecting U.S. citizens from indefinite detention, President Bush approved Padilla's reclassification as an "enemy combatant." #Time Magazine (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,262917,00.html)
Don't whine to me your made-up world of sugar plum fairies and make-believe. #There is madness to the method.
Cite me the reason why he was reclassified as a terrorist by the government/President Bush and the basis for Time Magazine's article. I tend not to believe them very much, as I've seen several misquotations in their periodical...remember my admonition about the media, who always have an axe to grind....
BTW, what do you have to hide? Or are you just spouting off, afraid you may be picked up for questioning for some dubious misdeed?
Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 20 2006,08:15)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,13:47)]Oh, and you were less than truthful in your line... Quote[/b] ]Terrorists, or "enemy combatants" are not U.S. citizens
Read this... Quote[/b] ]On Sunday, June 9, the day before Padilla could have been released under laws protecting U.S. citizens from indefinite detention, President Bush approved Padilla's reclassification as an "enemy combatant." Time Magazine (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,262917,00.html)
Don't whine to me your made-up world of sugar plum fairies and make-believe. There is madness to the method.
Cite me the reason why he was reclassified as a terrorist by the government/President Bush and the basis for Time Magazine's article. I tend not to believe them very much, as I've seen several misquotations in their periodical...remember my admonition about the media, who always have an axe to grind....
BTW, what do you have to hide? Or are you just spouting off, afraid you may be picked up for questioning for some dubious misdeed?
Look. I get on the internet. I assume you are truly HGH, but what if you are bin Laden? I'm accountable for conversing with you.
How am I supposed to know? I could have things to hide that I don't know about?
I really did not believe you would find the government's text understandable. I posted it for you anyway to let you argue your constitutional opinion.
If you have evidence to the contrary of the Bush Admin making US citizens "enemy combatants", feel free to post that here. I know you can't find any, only criticism of the truth I post.
Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 18 2006,19:21)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,11:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 18 2006,11:02)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,10:25)]...because until we all do that they will not stop.
another mindwash lie.
Have fun subduing them in their own lands, it's outta my hands. I don't have the power to stop our government's rogue behavior, nor it's unswerving devotion to Israel.
I've been there, talked to them, and had long talks with many muslims who have been exposed to both sides.
So...did they insist that you ask "Which way is Mecca so i can start my prayers"?
Being that I/we had the upper hand and the firepower, no.
The good ones who worked with us were not afraid to tell us, however, what the other side preached. Many of our terps had prices on thier heads for working with the "infidels"
But look at several recent examples of hostages who professed to convert to Islam and were then released. Convert...or die.
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,08:47)]Hearsay is all that is required (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/10/18/highlights_of_the_act/)
Read and weep.
FOR NON CITIZENS.
Damm the left is so intellectually dishonest they completly ignore that very important part of the law, so long as it helps push thier agenda.
Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 20 2006,12:33)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,08:47)]Hearsay is all that is required (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/10/18/highlights_of_the_act/)
Read and weep.
FOR NON CITIZENS.
Damm the left is so intellectually dishonest they completly ignore that very important part of the law, so long as it helps push thier agenda.
I wish the right could read.
That Child was Left Behind.
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,15:07)]Quote[/b] (KC4HGH @ Oct. 20 2006,08:15)]Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,13:47)]Oh, and you were less than truthful in your line... #Quote[/b] ]Terrorists, or "enemy combatants" are not U.S. citizens
Read this... Quote[/b] ]On Sunday, June 9, the day before Padilla could have been released under laws protecting U.S. citizens from indefinite detention, President Bush approved Padilla's reclassification as an "enemy combatant." #Time Magazine (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,262917,00.html)
Don't whine to me your made-up world of sugar plum fairies and make-believe. #There is madness to the method.
Cite me the reason why he was reclassified as a terrorist by the government/President Bush and the basis for Time Magazine's article. #I tend not to believe them very much, as I've seen several misquotations in their periodical...remember my admonition about the media, who always have an axe to grind....
BTW, what do you have to hide? #Or are you just spouting off, afraid you may be picked up for questioning for some dubious misdeed?
Look. #I get on the internet. #I assume you are truly HGH, but what if you are bin Laden? #I'm accountable for conversing with you.
How am I supposed to know? #I could have things to hide that I don't know about?
I really did not believe you would find the government's text understandable. #I posted it for you anyway to let you argue your constitutional opinion.
If you have evidence to the contrary of the Bush Admin making US citizens "enemy combatants", feel free to post that here. #I know you can't find any, only criticism of the truth I post.
When one takes up arms against the United States, or swears alligence to another state, one relinquishes thier citizenship.
Note that this law requires more than hearsay before revocing citizenship and has nothing to do with the other law being debated here.
Here is a good read on how to lose your citizenship. (http://foia.state.gov/masterdocs/07fam/07m1260.pdf)
I have not dug very deep into the case, but I would bet his citizenship was revoked for specific acts that he did. And that takes meeting a pretty high standard.
http://www.toothlandclinic.com/images/fairy.gif
Here is your Tooth Fairy you believe in also.
Jose Padilla was born in Brooklyn of US born parents.
I do not see how the naturalization works in his instance.
KI4PEQ
10-21-2006, 02:08 AM
Quote[/b] (nq6v @ Oct. 20 2006,11:49)]With this new bit of ledlesation, I think It prudent to point out that the constitution makes provisions for overthrowing the government and establishing another if for some reason the government sceased to fuction properly. I belive our government is not fuctioning properly.
But if you try to overthrow the current government, you're an enemy combatant!
This is beginning to sound like a Joseph Heller novel.
Quote[/b] (KI4PEQ @ Oct. 20 2006,13:08)]Quote[/b] (nq6v @ Oct. 20 2006,11:49)]With this new bit of ledlesation, I think It prudent to point out that the constitution makes provisions for overthrowing the government and establishing another if for some reason the government sceased to fuction properly. I belive our government is not fuctioning properly.
But if you try to overthrow the current government, you're an enemy combatant!
This is beginning to sound like a Joseph Heller novel.
Sounds more like Catch 22.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 20 2006,19:06)]http://www.toothlandclinic.com/images/fairy.gif
Here is your Tooth Fairy you believe in also.
Jose Padilla was born in Brooklyn of US born parents.
I do not see how the naturalization works in his instance.
Try reading more than the big bold letters, read the entire document.
That first part refers to if you are naturalized by another nation, yet one of many ways to lose your citizenship.
Scroll down to read about taking up arms against the US or for another nation.
Have I made it simple enough for you?
But seriously, try reading things before you comment. I can run it through my PDF editor and make it all large bold print if that helps, since that is obviously the only part you either read or understood.