Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
thasnks to post Offline-events, i really don't wanna think about shit and carpets....ViolentPanda said:
The US secret war
- Thread starter Mickey2star
- Start date
Wanna' see a postin' example of pomposity?
However, I think I have been "pwned" (whatever that means -- alas I am only an occassional denizen of the internet). I admit I did not know Hamdi was released.
rogue yam said:
My advice, sweet potato should not cast the first stone.rogue yam said:
However, I think I have been "pwned" (whatever that means -- alas I am only an occassional denizen of the internet). I admit I did not know Hamdi was released.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Mickey2star said:
Yawn....
Is there supposed to be something new in there?
This is not entirely accurate. There are three terms involved, not two: Terrorist, POW, and "enemy combatant", the latter a new term invented by the Bush Regime. The reason it was invented is they were well aware that if they claimed the prisoners at Gitmo and elsewhere were "terrorists", then the US public would clamour for fair trials (or at least military tribunals). If they said "POW" they knew there would be pressure to honor the Geneva Conventions. So out of thin air they invented a heretofore unused term, "enemy combatant", to by fiat define human beings in ways not previously covered by law, military regulation, or treaties. Thus they could claim a right to treat them any way they wanted to, because it's something "new" without precedent and they are making new precedent. As you know, sweet potato, 9-11 changed everything.rogue yam said:
Is this right? This is what you support? Neither you nor I know if every person imprisoned in Gitmo is accurately defined by any of these terms. We know that mistakes were made, as they released handfuls over the years. But without evidence, we are expected to agree that every person rotting in our various "black" prisons is guilty -- they're all ambassadors of evil, GWB would have us believe. But we were also expected to believe that Iraq presented a threat to the US, that Saddam Bin Laden might attack Kansas with anthrax-spraying balsa toy airplanes (I'll spare you a long list of other preposterous claims on both the domestic and foreign fronts).
Do you claim to be a conservative? You don't espouse any conservative ideal here. Instead, you express the morality of a schoolyard bully. If you were a conservative, then you would be very concerned that the executive branch of the USG has taken on the unconstitutional power to declare even US citizens "enemy combatants". When challenged they hide behind a veil of secrecy in the name of "national security". (I'm still waiting to see the minutes from Cheney's Energy Summit from way back in 2001.)
How can a purported conservative accept the usurpation of power to imprison US citizens for long periods of time without charges? What's to stop the Regime from jailing Rove (o if we'd be so lucky!) or Ted Kennedy (o if you were so lucky!) or, well, you? A real conservative and patriot would not accept this situation.
Again, these people are not your friends, you mean nothing to them. Why defend the undefendable? By your words on this thread it cannot be because you have a principled position.
On Edit: Bush rules over us by the power of lawyerly redefinition. Is waterboarding torture or not? The Regime says no, they have legal opinion that defines it as frat pranks. Is it unconstitutional and illegal spying on US citizens? Naw, they found another lawyer to redefine that. As a conservative, how can you tolerate this? Libertarians on both the Left and Right should be banding together to restore the democratic ideals of our nation before it is too late.
But then perhaps you share the authoritarian mindset of uber-rightists like Hitler, Mussolini, George Bush, etc. Which is it, sweet potato?
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
you mean, like all those links were sooo new, that you disinterred to substantiate the myth of a jewish diaspora from france?Johnny Canuck2 said:
glass houses, stones etc.
tt...ttt...ttt...
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
even if he was, it's - at best - incidental to the main thread-theme. nickel 'n' dime, as I believe you chappies would say.davekriss said:
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Well, I'd certainly enjoy it more if it were more of a challenge.rich! said:
I suppose we could all take turns pretending to be Bush supporters, perhaps by lottery or something, in order to improve their performance?
JC2, I don't suppose you'd reconsider supporting Bush would you? This kind of stuff was way more interesting back when there was always a chance of you jumping in to bail these guys out.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Bernie Gunther said:
I'd try, just for old time's sake, but my heart wouldn't be in it.
I am, however, all in favour of the CIA killing bad guys wherever they find them. I'm just not happy that it's Bush issuing the marching orders.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Ah well, I have to say you're a hell of a lot more likeable since you stopped channelling Darth Vader JC, but I do miss the adrenaline buzz of arguing with the previous version of you. It had that 'life or death' edge, instead of, as Rich! put it, 'shooting fish in a barrel'. Our bushbots are a sad bunch without you.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Bernie Gunther said:
Bernie, it's all me. Different things just come out at different times, is all.
Besides, you can only scream for people's deaths for so long, before you get a little tired of it.
I suppose that's why we're not fanatics. Problem is, fanatics do exist, and they don't give up the way that us reasonable people do.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
rogue yam said:
You're a right auld larf, pal.
Similar threads
- Poll
