Where does AO lie on the Political Compass?

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by impostal22


too bad you couldn't defend against his other post

There's a huge difference between defending and dismissing.

Can someone explain to me why the left leaning members of AO seem to have uncontrollable outbreaks of Tourretts Syndrome?

What the heck is up with the cussing?

You oughta get a fresh bar of Lifeboy stuck in your chops.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by NJPaint


Can't defend what? Arresting criminals? Please specify where I was against procecuting criminals. I ask that people be treated fairly and justly. Nothing more nothing less.

Actually this was just Facts taking a cheap shot at our state. Hey Facts: When is NY Sen Clinton up for re-election?

How about this? Is it a crime to lie about something and go to war about it? Its accepted as an american pastime (see entry into WWI, Vietnam and Iraq)

Uhm Bush didn't lie. He went with the best intell he had at the time. We elect a president to make tough choices, not govern by polls.

[NJPaint]

See, this is where the patriot act comes in... There are no court records or press coverage of any of this because it is all secretive. How do I know that my friend (since I know him best) was gone for a little under a month? Well... He stopped going to school and when I asked his parents (they are 60s, older as parents go) they said that he was taken by law enforcement officials. They were never given a reason.

He wasn't mistreated by any stretch of the imagination. He just disapeared. Also, beyond the few cases there are of this happening... Why do we have blanket laws that allow people's rights to be violated?


I know you will ask me about proof of him being taken etc. And in all honesty I can't. Neither can his parents. They asked the local PD for information regarding what happend and they didn't get anything.


"I disagree. If that was the case, there would not be vehement enforcement of hate crimes against Arab-Americans. Besides if anything, it is anti-muslim sentiment, not anti-arab, not that it is any better."

^^^ then why do people support the patriot act? I know many right wing conservatives that are as much against the patriot act as I am. They see it as simply an attack on civil liberties regardless of who it is against (because they want support for their anti-guncontrol laws)

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife


You oughta get a fresh bar of Lifeboy stuck in your chops.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A Christmas Story!!!

He could get soap poisoning and go blind. That would show you Facts

[NJPaint]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
Uhm Bush didn't lie. He went with the best intell he had at the time. We elect a president to make tough choices, not govern by polls. [/B]

Ehhhh, best intel at the time? I'm not going to drag this out (too much) but where are the WMD? Look I'm all for taking out Saddamn. The guy is a homicidal maniac. Did he have WMD and use them against the Kurds and Iranians? Hell yes! Where were they manufactured? US. Who told him to use them? US. The guy is crazy enough to use them, he is threat to stablitity in the region and should be taken out. I agree entirely.

But please, for the love of God, why has nothing been found? I remember bush claiming "500 tons of chemical weapons" well, thats a lot of weapons, where are they? Where is one WMD claim that Bush or anyone has made that has been found true? Thats all you need... One...

It wasn't a tough choice that Bush made. CNN a few weeks ago ran a story about how the Bush administration had drawn up plans for Iraq well before 9/11.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by NJPaint
See, this is where the patriot act comes in... There are no court records or press coverage of any of this because it is all secretive. How do I know that my friend (since I know him best) was gone for a little under a month? Well... He stopped going to school and when I asked his parents (they are 60s, older as parents go) they said that he was taken by law enforcement officials. They were never given a reason.

If these cases are secretly handled, how did Kai's article get published then? I am sorry, but I have a tough time believing this. The ACLU and other liberal interest groups would have had a field day with this. Did you read the Patriot Act link I posted?

He wasn't mistreated by any stretch of the imagination. He just disapeared. Also, beyond the few cases there are of this happening... Why do we have blanket laws that allow people's rights to be violated?

Please read the patriot act link!

I know you will ask me about proof of him being taken etc. And in all honesty I can't. Neither can his parents. They asked the local PD for information regarding what happend and they didn't get anything.

I am sorry. It's just that this country can't keep secrets. Look at our government. We have more leaks then a colander!

"I disagree. If that was the case, there would not be vehement enforcement of hate crimes against Arab-Americans. Besides if anything, it is anti-muslim sentiment, not anti-arab, not that it is any better."

^^^ then why do people support the patriot act? I know many right wing conservatives that are as much against the patriot act as I am. They see it as simply an attack on civil liberties regardless of who it is against (because they want support for their anti-guncontrol laws)

Patriot Act Link!

This is a government website. Please review it. It is mostly about increased and more secret surveillence. It adds new penalties for certain terrorist acts. It does not suspend "Habeus Corpus". It does not allow for the indefinite detention of American Citizens. It takes existing RICO laws and applies them to terrorism.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by NJPaint


Ehhhh, best intel at the time? I'm not going to drag this out (too much) but where are the WMD? Look I'm all for taking out Saddamn. The guy is a homicidal maniac. Did he have WMD and use them against the Kurds and Iranians? Hell yes! Where were they manufactured? US. Who told him to use them? US. The guy is crazy enough to use them, he is threat to stablitity in the region and should be taken out. I agree entirely.

Well then we are both happy Saddam is gone.

But please, for the love of God, why has nothing been found? I remember bush claiming "500 tons of chemical weapons" well, thats a lot of weapons, where are they? Where is one WMD claim that Bush or anyone has made that has been found true? Thats all you need... One...

Since Bush isn't out in the field gathering covert intelligence, he relies on the CIA, etc... He went with what he had.

It wasn't a tough choice that Bush made. CNN a few weeks ago ran a story about how the Bush administration had drawn up plans for Iraq well before 9/11.

So did Bill Clinton. They are called contingency plans. They need to be in place just in case. Would you rather our military not plan for all potential threats and just play it by ear!

[impostal22]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife


There's a huge difference between defending and dismissing.

Can someone explain to me why the left leaning members of AO seem to have uncontrollable outbreaks of Tourretts Syndrome?

What the heck is up with the cussing?

You oughta get a fresh bar of Lifeboy stuck in your chops.

if you're talking to me about cussing, the last time i cussed was back when something really really mean was said to me and i reacted from my gut. the person who said the thing that triggered it realized he was totally out of place and apologized to me. other than that, i dunno what you're talking about.

and acting on your gut from time to time without thinking much is pretty human. i agree just cussing for no apparent reason is pretty silly, but if it's a reaction to something extremely harsh said to you, i think it's pretty understandable.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by NJPaint

Ehhhh, best intel at the time? I'm not going to drag this out (too much) but where are the WMD? Look I'm all for taking out Saddamn. The guy is a homicidal maniac. Did he have WMD and use them against the Kurds and Iranians? Hell yes! Where were they manufactured? US. Who told him to use them? US. The guy is crazy enough to use them, he is threat to stablitity in the region and should be taken out. I agree entirely.

get your facts straight. the US did NOT "tell him to use them".

But please, for the love of God, why has nothing been found? I remember bush claiming "500 tons of chemical weapons" well, thats a lot of weapons, where are they? Where is one WMD claim that Bush or anyone has made that has been found true? Thats all you need... One...

He had tons of time to remove those same weapons to Syria and elsewhere. Or simply bury them in the sand in the desert.[/B]

I have an illegal grain of rice. I'm going to hide it on my 225 acres. In 10 years you have to come and try to find it. I give you 5 months to do so.

I'm thinking that grain of rice will be safe and sound long after you're gone. In fact, I may just move it to my neighbors property before you show up to inspect me. Oh, and I expect no less than 72 hours notification that you're coming. Thanks.

It wasn't a tough choice that Bush made. CNN a few weeks ago ran a story about how the Bush administration had drawn up plans for Iraq well before 9/11.

Really? GASP! Guess what! So did Clinton! GASP! How much do you want to bet there are plans on the table to remove Gaddahfi, Arafat, and every other destabilizing lunatic out there?

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A Christmas Story!!!

He could get soap poisoning and go blind. That would show you Facts

Somebody got that reference!

So what if they go blind? They can't see the truth if it's front of them anyhow!

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


Actually this was just Facts taking a cheap shot at our state. Hey Facts: When is NY Sen Clinton up for re-election?

God curse your eyes!

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife



God curse your eyes!

[impostal22]

first, let me thank kai for helping me out, and i'm sorry i didn't step in earlier.

i've been quite lackadaisical lately, completely ignoring the whole patriot act/enemy combatant argument, thinking that it'll be impossible to convince anyone of anything. but, for kicks, i've done some research on both to give you proof. if you argue that any of these sites are unfairly biased, welcome to the real world, everyone's biased. if you're going to refute what i say is proof, it's YOUR responsibility to prove me wrong. here come a whole bunch of links (note: most warblogging articles have links to "more reliable" sources that they got their info from; i.e. cnn, ny times, washington post, the associated press, etc). also, a lot of these are old, which i know, but it doesn't change their validity:

http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000203.php

this one's about how the department of justice is interpretting the patriot act too broadly

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20021017/4542326s.htm

dick armey, a republican, and one of his many verbal disapprovals of the patriot act (go look up more if you don't like this one, he did plenty)

http://query.nytimes.com/search/arti...52C1A9649C8B63 this one's about total information awareness, a program that gained major pull with the patriot act. fortunately, our congress eventually cut all federal funding to the program because it was far too intrusive. seems that even the government knows to obey the constitution sometimes.

http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000453.php and of course, my favorite topic involving the declaration of enemy combatants...jose padilla. here's a little intro about him, and later links will show further support from our judicial system that ordered the department of justice to let padilla talk to his lawyer, but the DoJ ignored the governmental order multiple times. interesting indeed...

http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000491.php article talking about the suspension of total information awareness, as stated earlier.

http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000526.php two guys arrested for refusing to taking off anti-war t-shirts. this has happened to kids in high school, etc.

http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000537.php an order saying jose padilla must see his attorney...but is ignored in the next link...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true here

http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000779.php and http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/18/pa...ase/index.html show that yet again jose padilla is to be removed from the navy brig he's been stuck in for the past year...can we guess what happened to this order?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3422305.stm it was delayed...by the request of the bush administration


okay in summary...the whole declaration of enemy combatants (especially those on u.s. soil such as padilla) is completely unamerican. it follows a "guilty until proven innocent" mindset, which defies all america stands for. bush and ashcroft subvert the FOUNDATION OF OUR COUNTRY, the constitution, to fulfill their needs. if president's are given this precedence of power, what does that mean for the future? you guys complain about democrats subverting the law through judicial activism. what about subverting the essential beliefs of our country to do what the government sees as right? also, with this power to literally throw someone in a dark hole for eternity, it makes any judicial proceedings hard to occur fairly.

for instance, mike hawash (an intel programmer that was crucial in the success of the pentium processor) was detained as a materials witness (yet his house was raided by armed fbi agents) for months. he was guilty until proven innocent of what? supporting a group that was declared a terrorist supporter after the fact. i would argue that this violates the law that says courts cannot charge someone ex post facto, but i don't understand this enough to argue it (so i'll just bring it up as something to think about). after being detained for months, he was finally charged. then when he finally had a trial, he eventually pleaded guilty to his charges. if we take into account the power of the government to throw citizens into navy brigs, it would seem that his choices were: plead guilty and have the chance of seeing his *american wife* and *american daughters* or being thrown into a brig, like padilla was, and never see anyone ever again. what would YOU choose? i'm not saying he isn't guilty, he very well might be. i'm saying, it's this sort of intimidation that makes it impossible to know for sure if he was truly guilty or not.

have either been given the guaranteed rights given by the sixth amendment? i.e. speedy and public trial, assistance of counsel.

not to mention the patriot act blatantly subverts the rights of privacy (wiretap laws broadened, etc etc), against illegal searches and seizures (you can be searched without a warrant MUCH more easily now).

the point isn't that if you're doing nothing wrong, you won't be subjected to these things. first off, you have to be subjected to governmental spying for them to know whether or not you're doing anything wrong. further, the idea of what is "wrong" is very broad...like the few instances of kids getting in trouble w/ the secret service for wearing anti-bush, anti-war shirts. we are becoming a police state in this way. these provisions, while may increase the efficacy of detaining terrorists (and non-terrorists), it violates the beliefs that our country was founded. you can't use the argument that "i'm not doing anything wrong, i don't care that they're watching," unless you really couldn't care less about the governmental document that guarantees you those precious freedoms that americans pride themselves on possessing (i.e. the constitution...).

if this seems unorganized and hard to follow, i apologize. it was a lot of information, and i tried to convey it in an organized fashion. if i failed at this, i did my best.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by impostal22
first, let me thank kai for helping me out, and i'm sorry i didn't step in earlier.

i've been quite lackadaisical lately, completely ignoring the whole patriot act/enemy combatant argument, thinking that it'll be impossible to convince anyone of anything. but, for kicks, i've done some research on both to give you proof. if you argue that any of these sites are unfairly biased, welcome to the real world, everyone's biased. if you're going to refute what i say is proof, it's YOUR responsibility to prove me wrong. here come a whole bunch of links (note: most warblogging articles have links to "more reliable" sources that they got their info from; i.e. cnn, ny times, washington post, the associated press, etc). also, a lot of these are old, which i know, but it doesn't change their validity:

LOL!!

Try that argument on your teacher the next time you site sources. You have to prove the validity of your on sources sonny!

okay in summary...the whole declaration of enemy combatants (especially those on u.s. soil such as padilla) is completely unamerican. it follows a "guilty until proven innocent" mindset, which defies all america stands for. bush and ashcroft subvert the FOUNDATION OF OUR COUNTRY, the constitution, to fulfill their needs. if president's are given this precedence of power, what does that mean for the future? you guys complain about democrats subverting the law through judicial activism. what about subverting the essential beliefs of our country to do what the government sees as right? also, with this power to literally throw someone in a dark hole for eternity, it makes any judicial proceedings hard to occur fairly.


This is one instance. Please site another. This is a man accused of plotting a mass murder on a scale not imagined.

He should be charged with treason and executed, but the US still needs intel from him I guess!

for instance, mike hawash (an intel programmer that was crucial in the success of the pentium processor) was detained as a materials witness (yet his house was raided by armed fbi agents) for months. he was guilty until proven innocent of what? supporting a group that was declared a terrorist supporter after the fact. i would argue that this violates the law that says courts cannot charge someone ex post facto, but i don't understand this enough to argue it (so i'll just bring it up as something to think about). after being detained for months, he was finally charged. then when he finally had a trial, he eventually pleaded guilty to his charges. if we take into account the power of the government to throw citizens into navy brigs, it would seem that his choices were: plead guilty and have the chance of seeing his *american wife* and *american daughters* or being thrown into a brig, like padilla was, and never see anyone ever again. what would YOU choose? i'm not saying he isn't guilty, he very well might be. i'm saying, it's this sort of intimidation that makes it impossible to know for sure if he was truly guilty or not.

A material witness warrant is a court issued document. This is no a patriot act component. It has existed and found legal for many, many years! Also, he was never charged as an enemy combatant. Further, he had plenty of supporters willing to help foot his legal bills, so pleading guilty was not do to poverty, but to plea bargining.

have either been given the guaranteed rights given by the sixth amendment? i.e. speedy and public trial, assistance of counsel.

Uhm yes! Look at the backlogs in our court system now. How long did it take to try Malvo and Muhammed? How long to try McVeigh? Heck look at jailed mob boss Joey Merlino, they are preparing to prosecute him for a 10 year old crime.

not to mention the patriot act blatantly subverts the rights of privacy (wiretap laws broadened, etc etc), against illegal searches and seizures (you can be searched without a warrant MUCH more easily now).

Yet wire taps and such still do REQUIRE warrants!

the point isn't that if you're doing nothing wrong, you won't be subjected to these things. first off, you have to be subjected to governmental spying for them to know whether or not you're doing anything wrong. further, the idea of what is "wrong" is very broad...like the few instances of kids getting in trouble w/ the secret service for wearing anti-bush, anti-war shirts. we are becoming a police state in this way. these provisions, while may increase the efficacy of detaining terrorists (and non-terrorists), it violates the beliefs that our country was founded. you can't use the argument that "i'm not doing anything wrong, i don't care that they're watching," unless you really couldn't care less about the governmental document that guarantees you those precious freedoms that americans pride themselves on possessing (i.e. the constitution...).

Corporate america and marketing firms spy on us far more then our government does.

As for people over-reacting, it happens, but better to over-react then allow another 9/11 to occur!

[Albinonewt]

On Jose Padilla

His inconvenience and "special" treatment is a direct result of the massiveness of his crime AND his continueing usefullness at preventing further crimes. This is a case where the state has a VERY compelling interest in his detention, because there is an excellent chance his detention has, and continues to save lives.

It always annoys me that the same groups of people that do not "buy" the compelling state interest exception in this case turn around and use it as a reason to allow quotas to artificially create "diversity".

Now, good luck convincing me that Padilla's detention isn't worth it.

As for the Patriot Act as a whole, it is a very important piece of legislation that is quite needed for the new efforts against terror. It will continue to be refined and honed probably for decades, and I can surivive that. It's the first whack a new kind of war, and it isn't perfect. I frankly, don't have any problems with it that I feel are more important then it's usefullness.

And for the guys sent home for having anti-war shirts, so what? There are reports of that kind of thing all the time. For wearing pro-Bush shirts, Anti-Bush shirts, pro-war shirts, anti-war shirts, and so on. I don't like it, but I'm not ready to open ourselves to attack so people don't have to suffer T-shirt discrimination.