0
mikkey

Defenders of justice and human rights?

Recommended Posts

Quote

You see, there's a new policy many people aren't aware of. Congressional approval is only required to declare war on abstract things. War on drugs, war on illiteracy, war on terror. If the pres wants to invade another country with US troops causing death and mayhem to both sides, he can do that whenever he wants. The next official wars will be: War on free speech (that one is brewing now), war on presidential detractors, and the war on thought.

A new department of Homeland Peace, will be created to carry out these wars. And since we will be officially at war, and constitutional restrictions or guarantees will be suspended anytime it is in the best interest of defeating the enemy, or suspected enemy, or anyone that seems like they could potentially one day become the enemy.



But all this already fall under the war on terror right? I mean, since we're at war with terror and all, and have no due process (see Jose Padilla) they can lock me up just because they don't like me right?

Never go to a DZ strip show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

The next official wars will be: War on free speech (that one is brewing now), war on presidential detractors, and the war on thought.



Paranoia is great, isn't it?



Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.:)

Never go to a DZ strip show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hot of the news wires:

"Twenty-three Afghans and three Pakistanis held at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay have been freed, the American military has said.

The men were released in Afghanistan and Pakistan, US officials said.
No specific reason was given for their release. In a statement, the Pentagon defended retaining 610 "enemy combatants" at the base in Cuba.
The US says that in all, 119 detainees have been released and 12 have been transferred for continued detention.
"

So 119 have been released without charge so far and no way to know how many will follow. The legal limbo these people are held in was always justified by saying that Gitmo was full of dangerous Al-Qaida operatives that would be a threat against the US and its allies.

Again, the facts as they emerge are:

- There was a “kids prison” within Gitmo holding 11 –14 year old “kid soldiers”. Hardly your hardcore terrorist operatives.
- Over 100 of around 700 prisoners have so far been released without charge and have to be either innocent or really “small fries”. These people have been held for over 2 years without any charges, without any access to lawyers or others, with no knowledge when they would be released.
---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

holding 11 –14 year old “kid soldiers”. Hardly your hardcore terrorist operatives.



Take a look at the picture I uploaded. Any clue who they are? Any idea how old they were in that picture?

Yes, I know who and how old they were. Wanting to know if you do since you seem to be up to speed on the situation and have expert inside knowledge on terrorism and how to combat it.



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

and have no due process (see Jose Padilla) they can lock me up just because they don't like me right?



I wish I lived in your world. It would make my job a lot easier. I mean I wouldn't have to do all of this investigation and evidence crap. The arrests are the most fun anyway.


"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

and have no due process (see Jose Padilla) they can lock me up just because they don't like me right?



I wish I lived in your world. It would make my job a lot easier. I mean I wouldn't have to do all of this investigation and evidence crap. The arrests are the most fun anyway.



Usually when there is evidence they arrest and charge, maybe even call a grand jury, who might decide if there's enough evidence to charge. And the person arrested has a right to call some dude called a lawyer and maybe present some evidence of his own and maybe have a trial by jury if he so pleases. And this is because every now and then you guys get it wrong. I know you'd like to think you've always got the right guy. And I'm sure to you they've all done something wrong and should probably be locked up anyway but that damn constitution keeps on making you prove that you were right. Except now, Georgie yells "ENEMY COMBATANT!" and we lock 'em up, throw away the key, no lawyer, no chat with mom, no charges, no trial, no due process, all so you can stay alive. I'll tell you what, I'd don't give a f#@k if you or I live if you take away my freedom. And yes, as far as freedom is concerned, I will kill anyone to keep it, including myself dying trying. But, I'm sure you just really care about an easy day at work.:S

Never go to a DZ strip show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikkey:

I agree with you and I disagree with you.

Here's where I agree:
I have a deparate occassions in different careers raised my right hand and sworn to defend the Constitution of the United States. Once in college (ROTC), once when I got my commission, and twice as an attorney (federal and state swearing in). As such, I have an issue with holding people indefinitely without access to the courts. Deliberately defining people in a way that the law does not contemplate it means that no mechanism is in place. The US should not treat lawlessness and lack of civility with lawlessness. I'd rather have America destroyed from outside than from within. What makes America "America" is being pushed aside.

Sure, they may be bad guys. Security may be necessary in the event they dig something up on them. But, I remember "Give me liberty or give me death." Turns out it is being changed into "Take my freedoms, just let me live." Robots are not free, nor are they truly alive.

Disagree:
You have no idea what kids are capable of. Kids are, in fact, the most horrible and brutal killers and mercenaries in the world. Their minds are most malleable, and they are the ones who do not understand the consequences. They only understand what they are told, and if they are told and encouraged to kill and massacre, they are extremely effective at it.

Why? They do not hesitate to kill us, but we will hesitate to kill them. Damned effective. And heartbreakingly horrible.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are right about the children and how they can be heartless killers. Mikkey likes to live in a world where all 11-14 year olds are sweet, innocent, video game-playing angels who wouldn't dare dream of hurting anyone.

That picture I posted? That is Luther and Johnny Htoo. They were Myanmar rebels and leaders of the Christian guerrilla group, God's Army. Do some research and you'll see how "innocent" these twins were.

Oh, by the way, they were 12 in that picture.



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, we agree on the “agree part” of your post .....;)


In regard to the kids. I am aware that kid soldiers can be dangerous. But Gitmo was supposed to hold Al-Qeda terrorists who were detained in order to be able to obtain important information, stop them from committing terror and put them on trial for crimes. I have a problem seeing those 11-14 year olds in this scenario. (But no doubt I could imagine them throwing a hand grenade at US soldiers in Afghanistan) And by the way they were all released after about a year or two and reunited with their family. It just does not make that much sense to me.

The reason I am bringing the issue with the kids up, is that we were told that the US admin knew what they were doing in Gitmo, that these were all terrorists, that we need not to worry about their lack of rights and the “home made” unfair legal process that has been created for them if they ever get put in front of the commission. The said “trust us” (like they said with the WMD’s).

But the fact that they were holding these kid soldiers for the time they did and the large number of prisoners (119 so far) that have been released without charge – tells me that it might to a degree have been quite random who ended up in Gitmo and who did not. (The original story I was referring to at the start of the thread talked about that the UK prisoner in question had been held as a prisoner by the Taleban before being taken by the US and put into Gitmo for 2 years).

I am bringing this issue up because Gitmo is part of this slippery slope where we start to compromise the exact thing that we are supposed to defend: Justice and human rights. I am not soft on terrorists – but I am strongly against undermining the principles that our western democracies are build upon. No matter how much abuse I am going to receive…
---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

holding 11 –14 year old “kid soldiers”. Hardly your hardcore terrorist operatives.





Quote

I am aware that kid soldiers can be dangerous.




So which is it? You have been proven wrong and made countless contradicting statements. Do you actually believe the things you say and type?



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But, I'm sure you just really care about an easy day at work.



Well, that and I would also like to be able to lock up people I don't like.

Come do my job for a few days. You'll be surprised at how little of this rhetoric you and the liberals keep spouting is true.

Quote

And I'm sure to you they've all done something wrong and should probably be locked up anyway but that damn constitution keeps on making you prove that you were right.



Yeah, I hate that damned constitution. It keeps getting in the way of all of my plans.

Quote

Except now, Georgie yells "ENEMY COMBATANT!" and we lock 'em up, throw away the key, no lawyer, no chat with mom, no charges, no trial, no due process,



What lawyers represented the "enemy combatants" in WWII, or Korea, or Vietnam? I'm confused.

Quote

all so you can stay alive



When weighing a terrorists freedom vs a law abiding citizens life? I vote the terrorist loses his freedom.

Quote

I'll tell you what, I'd don't give a f#@k if you or I live if you take away my freedom.



I'm sorry. I didn't realize you were incarcerated. I know the name of a good lawyer. Want his number?


"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

holding 11 –14 year old “kid soldiers”. Hardly your hardcore terrorist operatives.





Quote

I am aware that kid soldiers can be dangerous.




So which is it? You have been proven wrong and made countless contradicting statements. Do you actually believe the things you say and type?



So you don't know the difference between a terrorist and a soldier? A kid with an AK47 is very dangerous, but I do not expect a 12 year old being involved in blowing up trains and planes and especially the planning of it.
Quote

You have been proven wrong and made countless contradicting statements.


Really - where? Facts not insults please. Why can't you guys have a discussion without pouring shit over peoples head?
---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but I do not expect a 12 year old being involved in blowing up trains and planes and especially the planning of it.



Did you not do any research on the twins I posted? Figures. Your style is to post uneducated remarks and ignore any enlightening remarks and education tossed your way.

Oh, by the way, since you think 12 year olds aren't capable of planning terrorist activities (your words), you'll be happy to know they orchestrated a seige on a hospital in Thailand. And yes, taking over a hospital is a terrorist act. They were also linked to several other terrorist activities along with flat out uprisings against local militias.



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But Gitmo was supposed to hold Al-Qeda terrorists who were detained in order to be able to obtain important information



Have you somehow determined that we didn't get important information from the detainees that were released?


"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, since it's pain-stakingly obvious you have blinders on and refuse to keep your mind open to other opinions, I'm bailing out of this pointless debate you started for the pure sake of arguing. When you get the "Been there done that" t-shirt and obtain some educated thoughts and ideas from first-hand experience and not rumors you get from the BBC while sitting in front of your computer, let me know. Then we'll "debate."



Forty-two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No, but if they are terrorists, why are they being released without charge?



The fact that you have committed a crime does not mean you will be found guilty. We release people daily from our jails that committed the crime but against whom we didn't have enough evidence to prove they did the crime. It takes a lot more evidence to convict someone of a crime than it does to arrest them. They still have a tremendous amount of information to provide us.

Lots of people have information about crimes and criminals, and are unwilling to provide that information, that may not have committed crimes themselves. We needed that information and we were at war with the people we needed it from.

There are lots of possibilities.


"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Haven't we heard this before from Cheney and Rumsfeld - either you're with us or you're a TRAITOR?



I believe that they said, "either you're with us or you're against us". Nothing in there about being a traitor.



I paraphrased - see any quotation marks?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Haven't we heard this before from Cheney and Rumsfeld - either you're with us or you're a TRAITOR?



I believe that they said, "either you're with us or you're against us". Nothing in there about being a traitor.



Actually, I believe it was, "Ether you're with us, or your with the terrorists." And it was Bush who said it.

Much more effective. Being against the US is one thing, but being with the terrorists is something completely different. Rhetorical strong point.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

No, but if they are terrorists, why are they being released without charge?



The fact that you have committed a crime does not mean you will be found guilty. We release people daily from our jails that committed the crime but against whom we didn't have enough evidence to prove they did the crime. It takes a lot more evidence to convict someone of a crime than it does to arrest them. They still have a tremendous amount of information to provide us.

Lots of people have information about crimes and criminals, and are unwilling to provide that information, that may not have committed crimes themselves. We needed that information and we were at war with the people we needed it from.

There are lots of possibilities.



That argument could apply to all sorts of people. Some of us still believe in something called Habeas Corpus.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0