Patriotism: A Menace to Liberty

neue regel wrote:

Personally, I don't have much of a problem with someone with a bomb in their shoe being treated differently by our law enforcement than your 'run of the mill' murderer.

I guess the moral to this story is, don't pack your person with explosives before getting on a plane, for that may cause the authorities to be upset with you, and yes, perhaps, jail you.

And had any of the 9/11 a**holes survived, it would not have broken my heart to not see their case played out like Scott Peterson's on MSNBC, either. If that makes me a cold hearted bastard, I can live with that.

There's nothing so wrong with our legal system that we can't try and convict shoe bombers AND wife killers.

0 Replies

Larry434 wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Larry434 wrote:
What 4 rights did you have in 1999 that you do not have today, debra?

I know the Patriot Act makes it tougher on criminals to escape justice, but what about you?

Just curious.

And I guess that fact that the administration has a US citizen locked up for three years without charging him with a crime or giving him his day in court is immaterial to the argument that our civil liberties are being eroded?

Jose Padilla: No Charges and No Trial, Just Jail

Profile: Jose Padilla

Jose Padilla is being held in a military jail
Jose Padilla (also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir) had a number of run-ins with the authorities before achieving fame - or infamy - as a "dirty bomb" suspect.
His last came in Florida in 1991, when he was arrested after a road-rage shooting incident and spent a year in a Florida jail.

He completed his probation for aggravated assault and firing a weapon in August 1993.

Prior to that, Mr Padilla, a US citizen of Puerto Rican origin, had a number of gang-related encounters with police in Chicago - where his family had moved from New York City when he was four years old.

Glad this thug is off the streets. Aren't you?

Well, this is from the article you so obviously didn't read:

Cato Institute article on Jose Padilla wrote:

Padilla may deserve the treatment he is receiving -- perhaps worse. That is not the point. When Americans are taken into custody, they have the right to retain an attorney. Congress must first set the rules. Then an impartial judge, not the president, should make the ultimate decision as to whether the arrest and imprisonment comport with the Constitution. James Madison, in Federalist No. 47, put it succinctly: "The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands ... may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."

But sure, he's a bad guy. We can lock up the bad guys and throw away the key because they're bad guys!

If they start requiring travel permits, will you go along with that too?

Try reading BPB's sig. That is the message I am trying to get across to you.

0 Replies

neue regel wrote:

Personally, I don't have much of a problem with someone with a bomb in their shoe being treated differently by our law enforcement than your 'run of the mill' murderer.

I guess the moral to this story is, don't pack your person with explosives before getting on a plane, for that may cause the authorities to be upset with you, and yes, perhaps, jail you.

And had any of the 9/11 a**holes survived, it would not have broken my heart to not see their case played out like Scott Peterson's on MSNBC, either. If that makes me a cold hearted bastard, I can live with that.

No, Neue, that doesn't make you a cold hearted bastard at all.

But does the expression "Don't throw out the baby with the bath water" have any meaning for you at all?????

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

They just do not understand.

Hey...let's be fair. In order to "understand"...one must have a functioning mind.

They're conservatives.

My meaning should be clear to the non-conservatives among us!

Frank, I can understand your frustration, but let's not let this degenerate in to name calling.

Oops, too late.

0 Replies

neue regel wrote:

Personally, I don't have much of a problem with someone with a bomb in their shoe being treated differently by our law enforcement than your 'run of the mill' murderer.

I guess the moral to this story is, don't pack your person with explosives before getting on a plane, for that may cause the authorities to be upset with you, and yes, perhaps, jail you.

And had any of the 9/11 a**holes survived, it would not have broken my heart to not see their case played out like Scott Peterson's on MSNBC, either. If that makes me a cold hearted bastard, I can live with that.

Well,

a) Jose Padilla didn't have a bomb in his shoe; that was some other schmuck.

b) We have laws for a reason; they are to protect everyone. Even the folks you don't like. Perhaps especially people you don't like.

Edit: on re-reading your post I realized that you were not specifically replying to the Jose Padilla stuff.

0 Replies

Good ol' Jose Padilla.

I think someone should give Frank's IP to the FBI so they can put him on the watch list. Then, they can take his liberties away, one golf course at a time...

So far, Debra has supplied us with a list of what if's and could be's as well as the fact that if you act like an idiot with the ciops, they may lock you up.

No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Individual cases are just that, individual cases. No mass liberties hindered, lost or otherwise maligned.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Good ol' Jose Padilla.

I think someone should give Frank's IP to the FBI so they can put him on the watch list. Then, they can take his liberties away, one golf course at a time...

So far, Debra has supplied us with a list of what if's and could be's as well as the fact that if you act like an idiot with the ciops, they may lock you up.

No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Individual cases are just that, individual cases. No mass liberties hindered, lost or otherwise maligned.

Everyones dearly held beliefs that do not agree with yours seem to be bullshyte McGentrix....and yet you take offense when that same opinion is applied to yours.....hmmmm....

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Good ol' Jose Padilla.

No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Individual cases are just that, individual cases. No mass liberties hindered, lost or otherwise maligned.

I emphatically disagree. A precedent is being set for removing constitutional protections from at least one US citizen. Do you think that this could not then be used to justify doing the same to others? And how would we know until it happened to us? Either all Americans are protected by the constitution or we are all not protected.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Translation: None of McGentrix's liberties have been lost. Apparently, this is all that matters.

0 Replies

That is the problem with people like Debra when it comes to these questions is the inability to be specific. When ever they are asked they always point to the patron saint of the ACLU. No other info is provided and no proof of said violations can be pointed to, just a reference to the ACLU.

When those of us that want proof ask for it we are told to get educated by those of the elite who happen to know it all. Well I want proof and since you are the ones complaining about it then you must provide the proof of your complaint. Show the facts of the govt abuse don't force others to do your research for you.

While the laws are written and show that abuse can take place it doesn't mean that the abuse takes place. Show the proof of the abuse!

So you all know, the powers granted to the govt through the Patriot act were already there but in dealing with drug dealers and the mafia. The powers were expanded to terrorism.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Translation: None of McGentrix's liberties have been lost. Apparently, this is all that matters.

I have lost plenty of liberties. I have lost the liberty of free travel because Islamic terrorists threaten too many of the locations I'd like to travel to. I have lost the sense of security I once had because Islamic terrorists have taken it away. I have lost the liberty to not pre-judge young Islamic males because they may be Islamic terrorists.

However, these liberties were not granted me by the constitution of the US. All those liberties are still as safe and secure as they always have been because the government works and because our system works.

If you wish to shed tears over Padilla, you are welcome to, you have that liberty. If you wish to insult the president, you may, youy have those liberties. If you wish to hope the US fails in Iraq, you are free to, you have those liberties. Just do not expect every one else in America to share your views as "patriotic" instead of "foolish" though.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

It's not bullshit.

Rights can be lost without the event occuring to you.

For example, I could lose my right to due proceess without actually being in an example of said process.

It would be a significant loss to me.

Your requirement that one must individually experience the realization of the lost rights ignores the nature of said rights.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Translation: None of McGentrix's liberties have been lost. Apparently, this is all that matters.

I have lost plenty of liberties. I have lost the liberty of free travel because Islamic terrorists threaten too many of the locations I'd like to travel to. I have lost the sense of security I once had because Islamic terrorists have taken it away. I have lost the liberty to not pre-judge young Islamic males because they may be Islamic terrorists.

However, these liberties were not granted me by the constitution of the US. All those liberties are still as safe and secure as they always have been because the government works and because our system works.

If you wish to shed tears over Padilla, you are welcome to, you have that liberty. If you wish to insult the president, you may, youy have those liberties. If you wish to hope the US fails in Iraq, you are free to, you have those liberties. Just do not expect every one else in America to share your views as "patriotic" instead of "foolish" though.

that's (see remarks in bold) a personal choice...not a lost liberty.....

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
They just do not understand.

Hey...let's be fair. In order to "understand"...one must have a functioning mind.

They're conservatives.

My meaning should be clear to the non-conservatives among us!

Frank, I can understand your frustration, but let's not let this degenerate in to name calling.

Oops, too late.

Shhhh...most won't even realize it.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Good ol' Jose Padilla.

I think someone should give Frank's IP to the FBI so they can put him on the watch list. Then, they can take his liberties away, one golf course at a time...

So far, Debra has supplied us with a list of what if's and could be's as well as the fact that if you act like an idiot with the ciops, they may lock you up.

No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Individual cases are just that, individual cases. No mass liberties hindered, lost or otherwise maligned.

The liberties are going...or at least being eroded...whether you are able to acknowledge that or not.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Translation: None of McGentrix's liberties have been lost. Apparently, this is all that matters.

They've been lost...whether he realizes it or not...whether he acknowledges it or not.

But conservatives are eroding the rights...and we all know that McG has lots of trouble seeing any faults in conservative initiatives.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

It's not bullshit.

Rights can be lost without the event occuring to you.

For example, I could lose my right to due proceess without actually being in an example of said process.

It would be a significant loss to me.

Your requirement that one must individually experience the realization of the lost rights ignores the nature of said rights.

I disagree. A single individual may have exceptional circumstances surrounding that individual that allows that individual to no longer be protected by their rights.

Look at the loss of the right to vote by felons. Voting is a constitutional right, but in some states if you commit a felony you lose that right. Does that lead to everyone losing their rights? No. It applies to those that break the law.

Jose Padilla has a sorted history of interaction wioth the law and his being held is hardly a noteworthy cause.

I have no requirement that one must individually experience the realization of the lost rights to have the rights lost. I do however have the requirment that the right must have been lost.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Translation: None of McGentrix's liberties have been lost. Apparently, this is all that matters.

They've been lost...whether he realizes it or not...whether he acknowledges it or not.

But conservatives are eroding the rights...and we all know that McG has lots of trouble seeing any faults in conservative initiatives.

How about instead of the constant chain of insults you provide some evidence of the erosion and loss of rights.

It has been asked for by many, answered by none.

Honestly Frank, if this is the extent of your participation here, perhaps the philosophy threads are better suited for you...

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I disagree. A single individual may have exceptional circumstances surrounding that individual that allows that individual to no longer be protected by their rights.

Look at the loss of the right to vote by felons. Voting is a constitutional right, but in some states if you commit a felony you lose that right. Does that lead to everyone losing their rights? No. It applies to those that break the law.

But we are talking about due process. The very example you give is one of due process. A person may not have their right to vote taken away without due process. Once he is tried and convicted of a felony, if the law so states, he may lose his right to vote.

If a person loses his right to due process, well, what's left? If the government doesn't have to provide all citizens the right to not be held without charges, the right to challenge charges, the right to a defense, and the right to be tried by a jury of their peers, then they don't have to provide it to any of us. You are going by the say-so of someone you don't know (but appear to have faith in) that this person is so bad that they don't deserve these rights. If he's that bad, they shouldn't have any problem explaining it to a jury.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
No liberties lost yet though. As far as this "if one loses rights, we all lose rights" battle cry of the left... BullShyte.

Translation: None of McGentrix's liberties have been lost. Apparently, this is all that matters.

I have lost plenty of liberties. I have lost the liberty of free travel because Islamic terrorists threaten too many of the locations I'd like to travel to. I have lost the sense of security I once had because Islamic terrorists have taken it away. I have lost the liberty to not pre-judge young Islamic males because they may be Islamic terrorists.

Forgive me, but where is your safety guaranteed in the Constitution? Or your sense of security?

On the other hand, the right to a trial is guaranteed in the Constitution; and the branch of government entrusted with carrying out the law of the land is blatantly disregarding said guarantee.

Edit: Edited last word in last sentence from "law."

0 Replies

Patriotism: A Menace to Liberty

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know