One Step Closer to Tyranny

[Pekka]

* Allows hearsay evidence.
* Bars individuals from protesting violations of Geneva Conventions standards in court.

Wow. You guys truly ****ed up big time.

[Pekka]

And who is fearmongering? Defendors of making torture legal and bunch of other undemotratic things say you're fearmongering. Who is freamongering again? The one who says terrorists will strike your family when you sleep, kill you all and everyone else too.

Who is the one fearmongering I ask?

What if some other country makes the same law. Kidnaps your citizen based on a hearsay or a hint, tortures them. You can't do nothing about it, you already gave up the moral highgrounds.


And why are the same people who support this .. why were they so outraged and disgusted about international court in Belgium, waving their shirts that it doesn't matter because we'll come with choppers and take our people back.

I mean, what's wrong with you? How do you see yourself as 'a good guy'???!! What would Jesus do.. I'm sure he wouldn't be supporting this idiotic thing. Maybe Jesus was against us after all

[Darius871]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
The people got the government they deserved.

Enjoy it

This is about all it boils down to folks; why get our panties in a bunch?

[Pekka]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irLosdf5Yp4

Does it sound like the leader of 'free world' or the leader of NK or Iran or something? Seriously.. wake up with the argumentation of these.. screwed up new laws. The worst thing is, this won't make US any safer. Not a single drop.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Pekka
And who is fearmongering? Defendors of making torture legal and bunch of other undemotratic things say you're fearmongering. Who is freamongering again? The one who says terrorists will strike your family when you sleep, kill you all and everyone else too.

Who is the one fearmongering I ask?

Yeah... that one. The one that claims the terrorists are a threat worthy of surrendering personal liberties for.

This is about all it boils down to folks; why get our panties in a bunch?

Because that government could now kidnap people abroad, take them off to Cuba to be never heard from again.

[Garth Vader]

Originally posted by Victor Galis


Yeah... that one. The one that claims the terrorists are a threat worthy of surrendering personal liberties for.



Because that government could now kidnap people abroad, take them off to Cuba to be never heard from again.

From what I have seen there is nothing limiting it to abroad. If the president says you are a "terrorist" you can be taken away.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Am I the only one here who doesnt think this will lead to tyranny?

Apparently so, probably because you don't understand the full ramifications of the bill. The bill gives to the adminstration the authority to declare someone a terrorist and nab and torture them. A person designated a terrorist has no right to file a writ of habeas corpus. So if they grab you, you're fuct. You can't sue to get released, because you've got no habeas corpus rights. Unless they actually try you before one of these kangaroo courts, you've got no judicial options at all.

This is an administration that has already demonstrated its willingness to break the law, to lie to the American people, to spy on people who disagree with their policies, to label people as coddling terrorist for disagreeing, to disappear and torture people, and so. And now we just gave them the legal authority to get away with most of that.

And you aren't concerned?!?! Technically, you're right, it won't lead to tyrrany, because it's already a tyrrany. The only thing that stops it from being a dictatorshp is that the President can't rule by fiat, but with a rubber-stamp Congress, he doesn't need to, does he?

What would it take for you to realize the danger? Kristalnacht?

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
No, I think that was it.

I see the right-wing lynchmob continues to associate - you're hoping to gain a whole wit between you by contributing a fraction of one each

[chequita guevara]

Can you stop trying to measure your dicks?

[Elok]

Huh. Che, you *do* realize that Nazi Germany had a relatively liberal constitution still on the books, right? I believe the USSR had lots of decent laws under Stalin as well. They just completely ignored them. What it boils down to is, he'd need a certain amount of popular support, especially among the military, to pull anything nasty off. He'd also need to be able to crack down on the media pretty hard. The fact that he bothered to get a law passed at all is encouraging. He's ignored plenty of other common-sense limitations, but he's not feeling ballsy enough to ignore the SCOTUS.

[chequita guevara]

He doesn't need majority support. The Nazis never had more than a 25% solid support. In the 1933 election, when they got 44%, their own analysts said half that was a protest vote, and they were never gonna see those numbers again. Bush has a solid core 1/3rd support of the country, people who believe that we found WMDs in Iraq and the Hussein was behind 9/11. And they've got the guns and the military. All he needs then is for the rest of America to act like Edmund Burke's "good men," and do nothing.

[chequita guevara]

But that's beginning to get into parnoiaville. I don't seriosly entertain the notion that he's preparing to set himself up as dictator or that we're in imminent threat of fascism. Then again, I didn't think they'd sell out the only right we have written in to the Consitution for an election ploy either. At this point, I don't really know what the future holds. But I'm gonna organize to fight it.

I hope you're with me.

[Elok]

They've got the military? Really? After he kept abusing intel and turning them into political tools, putting them in danger for a needless war, do you think they'll be on his side if he asks them to turn their guns against the people they're supposedly fighting for?

And read Arendt's "Totalitarianism," or re-read it if you have and forgot the relevant points. The Nazis relied on a small, loyal core...and several larger, less-loyal sympathist organizations, aided and abetted by a public that had grown utterly apathetic and disillusioned.

There are at least as many people who loathe W with a passion as there are real supporters. Those people are losing because, at the moment, they're led mostly by a batch of spineless, uncoordinated morons. Whereas the GOP is led by 1 spineless moron as a figurehead, and lots of talented politicians backing him up and running interference.

And the Democrats are giving in primarily for fear of their voters. Not for fear of Bush. Those voters would (theoretically) take Bush's side because they're afraid of terrorists. I'm not sure that they would, but that's the rationale. However, Bush does not have anywhere near sufficient control of the media to prevent us from knowing should he start making important people disappear, at which point the public will collectively freak the hell out in the opposite direction.

Really, he's balancing on the edge of a knife here. The only reason this farce passed is because of the election. And Karl Rove and company appear to be brilliant political shysters. But to suggest that he has anywhere near the power needed to start something is downright delusional.

[Elok]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
But that's beginning to get into parnoiaville. I don't seriosly entertain the notion that he's preparing to set himself up as dictator or that we're in imminent threat of fascism. Then again, I didn't think they'd sell out the only right we have written in to the Consitution for an election ploy either. At this point, I don't really know what the future holds. But I'm gonna organize to fight it.

I hope you're with me.

Fair enough. Incidentally, is there an expiration date on any of this nonsense? This sounds like a provisional measure to me.

[Jon Miller]

It passed because the democrats would like that power and think that they will be in power next.



JM