Americans have just lost the right to a fair trial

[kasaa]

That's not the point, the point is they called her a "terrorist". According to the NDAA, they can indefinitely detain her without a trial now.

 

Yes, but are they? No, so they aren't abusing the NDAA leaving your point null and void.

[Saffire]

Yes, but are they? No, so they aren't abusing the NDAA leaving your point null and void.

 

Again, that's not the point.

 

The point is, they don't need to have a trial to prove she's a terrorist. They can simply call her one and then indefinitely detain her as a result.

 

I'm not claiming they're "abusing the NDAA" here, only that it's a legal avenue that's available to them now.

[Reilly]

YOU'RE missing the point.

 

The point is, they don't need to have a trial to prove she's a terrorist. They can simply call her one and then indefinitely detain her as a result.

 

Until that actually happens then I don't see what the fucking link is.

[Saffire]

Until that actually happens then I don't see what the fucking link is.

 

Well I wouldn't expect you to. :P

[kasaa]

Again, that's not the point.

 

The point is, they don't need to have a trial to prove she's a terrorist. They can simply call her one and then indefinitely detain her as a result.

 

I'm not claiming they're "abusing the NDAA" here, only that it's a legal avenue that's available to them now.

 

But see, when you post that link and say "That happened fast" you're implying they're abusing the NDAA, your point in this thread all along, but they aren't. So there wasn't any point in you posting that link at all.

[Wyrd]

And where did I say that I hate you?

You're just as immature as he is then.

Well I guess I just ignored you because I don't care what you think! :cool:

Hahaha, new way of ignoring people .... replying to their posts by quoting and saying in the reply you just ignored the person. Also, this is not at all answering her question.

 

and I agree with cool sombrero emoticon using guy, you were implying that they already abused the NDAA or are at the verge of doing so. At least, that's how I read it and apparently others as well. If not, then I don't see why this was brought up at all.

[Reilly]

^When I saw what you just quoted I felt bad for him. It's like hes not even trying to pretend hes not a childish jerk anymore, he's just blatantly acting like it.

 

That was pathetic, he went completely off topic about how he doesn't care that she hates him, even though she's never said that, then she points that out and he acts like a total fucktard for all to see.

 

Well I wouldn't expect you to. :P

 

Sigh.

[Saffire]

Hey, a den of statist, economically-illiterate, naive, elitist children.

 

What else is new?

 

I'm done responding to you people.

[Saffire]

But see, when you post that link and say "That happened fast" you're implying they're abusing the NDAA, your point in this thread all along, but they aren't. So there wasn't any point in you posting that link at all.

 

I'm going to go ahead and paste what I said in my previous response to you, since you appear to either have missed it or maybe you didn't understand it:

 

I'm not claiming they're "abusing the NDAA" here, only that it's a legal avenue that's available to them now.

 

I know most of you agree with uhh... the National Review... lol. But I have a different view. Sorry.

[Kiame]

.

[chuck kottke]

Hey, a den of statist, economically-illiterate, naive, elitist children.

 

What else is new?

 

I'm done responding to you people.

 

Howooo, I'm howling here in the den, and believe me, there ain't no "statist, economically-illiterate, naive, elitist children" here!

What I see is this tendency to defer to an oversimplified economic belief that if we just went back to those early days, somehow things would be just grand; a fur for a stone implement, some native copper for a few dipper gourds. Ah, pure markets, the dreams of a utopian long-ago place, 10,000 BC or thereabouts. But that was a world of fewer people, simpler civilizations, and we're just not going back.

Economically illiterate is quite a stretch, I might not have a PhD in economics, but I've seen enough of how the economy operates under the current regime to understand things are resting on shaky ground, and the whole system is skewered to create a debt pyramid and exorbitant usury fees stacked upon the workers of the world, all the while the investment class riding atop us all slices themselves a huge piece of the pie and exempts themselves from real regulation, responsibility, and reform. We need honest government that works for we, the people to straiten this mess out, and that takes fair election, a ridding of the buying of influence by an elite over almost all the politicians.

Almost, I say, since among the very few elected officials that are honest, we have Bernie Sanders from Vermont for instance who has proposed an amendment to the US Constitution to end corporate personhood and allow for the regulation of money flowing unchecked into politician's campaign pockets. A modest start I agree, but there's a beginning.

As for being elitist, wow, what a dream that would be! :laugh3: I king of the Bohemians, hereby declare that all my loyal subjects are entitled to at least one free Coldplay concert, including horderves and sparkling wine, and your choice of either baked potato, hash browns, cottage fries, or salad with thousand island or blue cheese dressing. :)

[para-para-parrotdies]

That's not the point, the point is they called her a "terrorist". According to the NDAA, they can indefinitely detain her without a trial now.

 

Bumped for reference: So what exactly does the bill do?

 

It does not, contrary to what many media outlets have reported, authorize the president to indefinitely detain without trial an American citizen suspected of terrorism who is captured in the US.

 

Source: http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/defense-bill-passed-so-what-does-it-do-ndaa

 

Happy Holidays :santa2:

[Saffire]

Oh you too! Hey there.

 

 

Mother Jones... National Review... Lindsey Graham...

 

You're building up quite a list! ;)

[Kiame]

Parrothipsterparrot, how is he supposed to be paranoid and irrationally afraid of the government if this is true? We need him for humour - please don't do this!

 

Come on, give him a break. Surely you can go to a coffee shop and get some free wifi while listening to the shins instead?

[Kiame]

Oh you too! Hey there.

 

 

Mother Jones... National Review... Lindsey Graham...

 

You're building up quite a list! ;)

 

Saffire's technique for "debating"

 

-Spew nonsense and wait for someone to reply

 

-Call whoever replies something they have no allegiance to whatsoever

 

-If encountered with a link, call it a bad source.

 

By the way Saffire, you link Russia Today. That's a laughably bad source.

[Saffire]

Hahahaha!!

 

MORE MORE! GIVE US MORE!

 

[Reilly]

^Now THATS a late joke, trying hard aren't we?

[Prince Myshkin]

:lol:

 

:lock:

[kasaa]

I'm going to go ahead and paste what I said in my previous response to you, since you appear to either have missed it or maybe you didn't understand it:

 

 

I understood it, but you don't seem to understand what I'm saying, there was no point what so ever in you posting that link, it has nothing to do with the discussion, the police are doing nothing illegal and you're arguements are becoming worse and worse since page one. Seriously, just give up.

[Kiame]

.

[kasaa]

That could be the best post I've ever seen. Kudos Kiame. Also you have Tupac as your avatar, so that's at least 15 cool points alone.

[RazorEye]

So it's over

This time I know it's gone

Salt water

tasted it too long

 

I only know I'm wrong

now I know it's gone

 

Up in flames

Up in flames

Up in flames

We have slowly gone.

 

So it's over

this time you're flying on

this time i know no song

can stop its slowly burn

can stop its slowly gone

 

Up in flames

Up in flames

Up in flames

We have slowly gone

 

Up in flames

Up in flames

Up in flames

We have slowly gone

We have slowly gone

 

Can we pour some water on?

 

R.I.P. Abraham Lincoln. Unfortunately he couldn't live forever to protect American and it's Constitution.

 

Mr. Obama, on January 21, 2009, I witnessed you pledge to protect the American constitution and the freedom and liberties of your people.

What more is there to say now than I am a lucky Australian? Living in a country where the government may be stupid, but not corrupt like you and your government.

Have a nice time in office while it lasts. The people will get their revenge.

[Saffire]

People think differently. You can't put your head onto their shoulders. It doesn't work. Chill out. Discuss, have fun - but don't push it any further.

 

Oh I completely agree, Kiame!

 

I would only ask that you not advocate violence against peaceful people who disagree with you. :)

 

EDIT:

 

 

R.I.P. Abraham Lincoln. Unfortunately he couldn't live forever to protect American and it's Constitution.

 

He was actually one of the worst violators of the Constitution in my nation's history.

[RazorEye]

We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.

-Abraham Lincoln

 

Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.

-Abraham Lincoln

 

plz explain

[Saffire]

The Constitution was written under the pretense that the Union was voluntary, not enforced. The states created the Federal Government. No state would have joined the union had it known in advance that it was not a voluntary union.

 

But besides that, Lincoln conscripted young men (read: Enslaved) to fight for him in his war. Most Northerners believed the Southern states had a right to secede, so Lincoln imprisoned the newspaper editors who disagreed with him. He also suspended Habeus Corpus, and even sent a politician who disagreed with him overseas. He threatened to bomb the Maryland legislature if they voted to secede.

 

Here's a good interview explaining why Lincoln wasn't such a great guy:

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbFty9nZUac]Abraham Lincoln | Thomas J. DiLorenzo - YouTube[/ame]