Bush Signs Terror Interrogation Law

Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Bush Signs Terror Interrogation Law


    WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush signed legislation Tuesday authorizing tough interrogation of terror suspects and smoothing the way for trials before military commissions, calling it a "vital tool" in the war against terrorism.

    Bush Signs Terror Interrogation Law

  2. New Member
    Sendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Age
    35
    Posts
    152
    Rep Power
    190
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    86.22%

    Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

    I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.
  3. Board Sponsor
    DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Age
    32
    Posts
    7,483
    Rep Power
    1057411
    Level
    64
    Lv. Percent
    58.03%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Sendo
    Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

    I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.
    F*CK THAT. A way to bring people to justice that need it. F*CK these bastards lived better in our detention system than prior, and they killed american citizens on our own soil. Talk to someone who had family in one of the buildings.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend
    •   
       

  4. Board Supporter
    Rage (SoCal)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,928
    Rep Power
    1079
    Level
    32
    Lv. Percent
    35.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Sendo
    Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

    I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.
    It's quite interesting what it actually does too. Any pending requests of any sort from terrorist suspects will be void now.

    If the sh1t ain't hit the fan enough right now, Japan is now heavily considering acquiring nukes.
  5. New Member
    glg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    453
    Rep Power
    332
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    17.89%

    Quote Originally Posted by Sendo
    Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

    I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.

    I agree. Big brother is here he just arrived 20 yrs late.
  6. Board Supporter
    wastedwhiteboy2's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  195 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    41
    Posts
    2,990
    Rep Power
    3016
    Level
    38
    Lv. Percent
    59.34%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    our bill of rights should only apply to americans. screw the terrorists. Let the military do their job. red tape sucks.
  7. New Member
    klugman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Age
    41
    Posts
    460
    Rep Power
    353
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    52.11%

    Quote Originally Posted by wastedwhiteboy2
    our bill of rights should only apply to americans. screw the terrorists. Let the military do their job. red tape sucks.
    You got that right brutha!!!

    Also, did these f*cking animals give Nick Berg any rights???
  8. Elite Member
    BigVrunga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    39
    Posts
    5,063
    Rep Power
    2685
    Level
    49
    Lv. Percent
    26.97%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    You got that right brutha!!!

    Also, did these f*cking animals give Nick Berg any rights???
    That's what Im saying.

    Its understandable why people are alarmed by this though. This bill is to 'protect' us from terrorists. But its the government who defines what a 'terrorist' is. Its pretty clear right now that that's a extreme muslim-type - but what about 25-50 years from now? Maybe it will be someone who doesnt want to pay their taxes, or someone who verbally criticizes the government.

    If they really wanted to take a hard line on terror and bring down radical Islam, there are more direct routes than this. A lot of the decisions made by this administration just reek of ulterior motives.

    BV
  9. Registered User
    spatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    878
    Rep Power
    599
    Level
    24
    Lv. Percent
    44.24%

    Quote Originally Posted by Sendo

    I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.
    I find it disgusting but wasn't surprised at all. It's one of those "yeah I heard about that... can you pass the salt" things.

    Edit- i'm not disgusted with the law on paper, but this will lead to worse things down the road.
  10. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Maybe some of you need to read it before being disgusted.

    DETAINEE BILL AT A GLANCE

    Highlights of legislation on the treatment and prosecution of terrorist suspects the House approved Wednesday:

    War crimes:

    The bill outlines specific war crimes. These include torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, rape and biological experiments. The law provides extensive definitions of each crime.

    The bill does not include a provision President Bush wanted interpreting U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions, the 1949 treaty that sets international standards on prisoner treatment. Also, the president would not be allowed to authorize any interrogation technique that amounted to a war crime.

    But he can "interpret the meaning and application" of Geneva Convention standards applied to less severe interrogation procedures. Such a provision is intended to allow him to authorize methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts.

    Court system:

    Establishes a legal system to prosecute "unlawful enemy combatants." An unlawful enemy combatant is defined as a person "who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents."

    The court would not be used to prosecute U.S. citizens or individuals who fight in foreign forces on behalf of a sovereign state. The phrase "purposefully and materially" is intended to clarify that a person must knowingly support terror networks to be deemed an unlawful enemy combatant.

    The individual must be selected by the government to be prosecuted under the court system, known as a "military commission." The commission can determine the punishment, including death.

    Evidence rules:

    The agreement requires that a defendant be allowed to examine and respond to any evidence given to a jury. If classified information is needed for prosecution, an unclassified summary can be provided.

    When the government wants to protect classified information and an unclassified substitute is not available, the government could opt to drop the charges. Under the laws of war, the president would not be required to release the combatant.

    Defendants could be convicted on hearsay evidence so long as a judge finds it to be reliable.

    Coerced testimony would be allowed in narrow circumstances, generally if the statement was acquired before a 2005 ban on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and a judge finds it to be reliable. Bans coerced statements taken after the 2005 ban took effect if it violates constitutional definitions of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

    Habeas corpus:

    Bars defendants from protesting their detention or treatment in civilian courts.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  11. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by BigVrunga
    TIts pretty clear right now that that's a extreme muslim-type - but what about 25-50 years from now? Maybe it will be someone who doesnt want to pay their taxes, or someone who verbally criticizes the government.
    It doens't apply to US Citizens.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  12. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Rage (SoCal)
    It's quite interesting what it actually does too. Any pending requests of any sort from terrorist suspects will be void now.
    Thats flat out wrong.

    They first go through a Combatant Review Tribunal to determine if he is an unlawful enemy combatant.

    He has the right to appeal that status in the D.C Court of Appeals.

    If the D.C Court of Appeals uphold the decision he has the right to petition the U.S Supreme Court.


    Even after all that and the person is convicited he still appeals again through the same measures as mentioned above.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  13. Banned
    jomi822's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,419
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    52.43%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    legislation legalizing torture, not a good idea.

    when is bush going to stop. it seems that as long as he says "it will protect american lives" you people will let him do anything.

    how long before provisions like these dont apply to just non-U.S. citezens?
  14. Registered User
    Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    964
    Rep Power
    599
    Level
    25
    Lv. Percent
    68.72%

    sounds good to me
  15. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by jomi822
    legislation legalizing torture, not a good idea.

    when is bush going to stop. it seems that as long as he says "it will protect american lives" you people will let him do anything.

    how long before provisions like these dont apply to just non-U.S. citezens?

    Why don't you get a clue. It PROHIBITS TORTURE.

    The senate is going to approve a bill that outlines torture as a war crime yet they are going to allow torture to obtain that information. Yeah, that would pass in a minute.

    And who is "you people" ?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  16. Banned
    jomi822's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,419
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    52.43%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Why don't you get a clue. It PROHIBITS TORTURE.

    The senate is going to approve a bill that outlines torture as a war crime yet they are going to allow torture to obtain that information. Yeah, that would pass in a minute.

    And who is "you people" ?
    "The legislation also eliminates some of the rights defendants are usually guaranteed under U.S. law, and it authorizes continued harsh interrogations of terror suspects."

    "He also insisted that the law authorize CIA agents to use tough _ yet unspecified _ methods to interrogate suspected terrorists."

    In other words, torture. this is america and we need to be above the methods that other countries use, or in my opinion, at least not let people know publicly by passing laws that basically make it ok. i was raised to believe that america was above and beyond other nations in regards to how we handled war, since then, i have been let down. However this is a very large slap in the face.

    "The legislation says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts. "

    In other words, war crimes. bush can now do whatever he wants to terrosist detainees and violate the geneva convention. This really ruins what little of America's superior image there was.

    By what ive said above you might think i am appalled that we are now torturing terrorists and taking away what little rights they had. Not true, i hope we torture them until they literally go insane. i believe they should beg for death after what we do to them behind closed doors at guatanamo. however, what i am appalled at is that we are making this so public. That is not a wise move at all, and does nothing for America's image.
  17. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Why don't you get a clue. It PROHIBITS TORTURE.
    It prohibits torture but it also lets the president define torture and they would not give examples. One of the big up-in-the-air torture examples is water boarding. As an example.
  18. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by jomi822
    "The legislation also eliminates some of the rights defendants are usually guaranteed under U.S. law, and it authorizes continued harsh interrogations of terror suspects."

    "He also insisted that the law authorize CIA agents to use tough _ yet unspecified _ methods to interrogate suspected terrorists."

    In other words, torture. this is america and we need to be above the methods that other countries use, or in my opinion, at least not let people know publicly by passing laws that basically make it ok. i was raised to believe that america was above and beyond other nations in regards to how we handled war, since then, i have been let down. However this is a very large slap in the face.

    "The legislation says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts. "

    In other words, war crimes. bush can now do whatever he wants to terrosist detainees and violate the geneva convention. This really ruins what little of America's superior image there was.

    By what ive said above you might think i am appalled that we are now torturing terrorists and taking away what little rights they had. Not true, i hope we torture them until they literally go insane. i believe they should beg for death after what we do to them behind closed doors at guatanamo. however, what i am appalled at is that we are making this so public. That is not a wise move at all, and does nothing for America's image.


    You seriously need to get a grasp on reality. Harsh interrogations is NOT torture. There is a reason John McCain was involved to make sure that torture was NOT written into the act and why he didn't agree with the wording on the original draft.

    I suggest you do some research on what the English, French, Israeli governments define as harsh interrogations because its MUCH worse than us. We are above and beyond the most lenient of nations on enemy combatants but that's not enough for you.

    If the criteria is that we should be better than most countries when it comes to following the pertaining enemy combatants then we have achieved that already but you are so caught up in your anti-war, anti-bush attitude that you can't even read whats printed. You think harsh interrogations is torture. Sorry, its not.


    "Pacifists emphasize the ideal while igoring the real"

    Ben Franklin
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  19. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
    It prohibits torture but it also lets the president define torture and they would not give examples. One of the big up-in-the-air torture examples is water boarding. As an example.
    No it does not. It lets him interpret them under the Geneva Convention which means he has to abide by them...which means no torture.

    Ask John McCain if he would allow a bill to pass that included torture.

    " The bill does not include a provision President Bush wanted interpreting U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions, the 1949 treaty that sets international standards on prisoner treatment. Also, the president would not be allowed to authorize any interrogation technique that amounted to a war crime.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  20. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran
  21. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    So?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  22. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    It's not allowed by the Military but it's allowed by the CIA still because of it's limbo into torture status. Which is why the defining and interpreting comes into play.

    My point was that that this new signing leaves a lot 'open' for interpretation which can be dangerous long down the road. Maybe not in mine or your lifetime but someone's.
  23. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    Ben Franklin.
  24. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
    It's not allowed by the Military but it's allowed by the CIA still because of it's limbo into torture status. Which is why the defining and interpreting comes into play.

    My point was that that this new signing leaves a lot 'open' for interpretation which can be dangerous long down the road. Maybe not in mine or your lifetime but someone's.
    And can only be applied to a prisoner that is an enemy combatant that attmepted to and/or was involved in the killing of US troops or civilians.


    Thats IF its included.

    I think John McCain has a little better idea of what torture is than you or I and since he approved it after rejecting the first version then I am confident its fine.

    Plus, I could less if they did waterboard Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  25. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    Ben Franklin.
    Adn what essential liberty have you given up?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  26. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    I did want to add that I believe we need strict standards and effective ones to protect our people and those we consider allies but I don't think that taking the blind approach is the answer. it took centuries of hate to get where we are today. Do we think we can squash it with a sweeping bill or two? It's going to take time patience and unfortunately many more lives.
  27. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
    I did want to add that I believe we need strict standards and effective ones to protect our people and those we consider allies but I don't think that taking the blind approach is the answer. it took centuries of hate to get where we are today. Do we think we can squash it with a sweeping bill or two? It's going to take time patience and unfortunately many more lives.
    Who is taking a blind approach?

    I mean all I have seen is criticism and blame here and no alternatives at all.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  28. Banned
    jomi822's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,419
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    52.43%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    So?
    that isnt torture bobo? again, i hope they are doing worse than that. i really dont know how you can read that article and not interpret it as a go ahead for torture on terrorist detainees.

    "The legislation says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts"

    It really doesnt get any clearer than that. where in this article does it say this legislation is preventing torture? I just cant see it. read the above quote and seriously consider my point of view, i have considered yours and i just can see it at all anywhere in this article. it really says the exact opposite

    its not really a matter of if i support the war or bush, we shouldnt pass inflammatory legislation that will make america look like the bad guy.
  29. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    I think John McCain has a little better idea of what torture is than you or I and since he approved it after rejecting the first version then I am confident its fine.

    Plus, I could less if they did waterboard Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
    I agree he does and many others do too. I also do not know John McCain or President Bush or President Clinton, before him. I refuse to blindly place my trust in men or women who I do not know. My trust comes from years of personal knowledge into a person not from their war history or their public achievements.

    I don't think Bush is an evil person hell bent or killing the American people. But I also don't think any one person or groups of people always make the best decisions about everything.

    My belief is to just keep an open mind. Keep myself informed and react accordingly. Maybe this Bill will be one that will go down in the history books as the sole reason terrorism was thwarted. Only time will tell but there's nothing wrong with questioning or clarifying the situation.
  30. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11682
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.82%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    I mean all I have seen is criticism and blame here and no alternatives at all.
    That's frustrating and I agree. I'm not blaming anyone though. I'm just seeing certain things that has caused me to raise an eyebrow over and get some better answers on. Nothing more.
  31. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by jomi822
    that isnt torture bobo? again, i hope they are doing worse than that. i really dont know how you can read that article and not interpret it as a go ahead for torture on terrorist detainees.

    "The legislation says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts"

    It really doesnt get any clearer than that. where in this article does it say this legislation is preventing torture? I just cant see it. read the above quote and seriously consider my point of view, i have considered yours and i just can see it at all anywhere in this article. it really says the exact opposite

    its not really a matter of if i support the war or bush, we shouldnt pass inflammatory legislation that will make america look like the bad guy.

    You do understand this legislations is nothing that any other coutnry has done and we have more leniency than any other country out there?

    You keep saying this is bad but this is the same thing that has been going on since the Geneva Convention was enacted, only now its law so CIA officers can't be prosecuted by a country that doesn't recognize the Geneva Convention. You are so fast to criticize this administration (and I do too because their PR sucks) but this law hasn't approved anything that hasn't gone on for 50 years now and has been legal under the Geneva Convention.

    You can't see where this legislation prohibits torture? Did you actually read it?

    • The bill outlines specific war crimes. These include torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, rape and biological experiments. The law provides extensive definitions of each crime.


    • The bill does not include a provision President Bush wanted interpreting U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions, the 1949 treaty that sets international standards on prisoner treatment. Also, the president would not be allowed to authorize any interrogation technique that amounted to a war crime.

    Since torture is a war crime, and the Presidents interpretation is guided by the Geneva Convestion he CAN'T commit torture.

    as stated here..."But he can "interpret the meaning and application" of Geneva Convention standards applied to less severe interrogation procedures. Such a provision is intended to allow him to authorize methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts.

    International courts that sometimes do NOT recognize the Geneva Convention or have laws such as the mandatory wearing of veil by Muslim women. You automatiaclly assume since its against the law its torture and this is why is says "LESS SEVERE INTEROGATION PROCEDURE"
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  32. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
    That's frustrating and I agree. I'm not blaming anyone though. I'm just seeing certain things that has caused me to raise an eyebrow over and get some better answers on. Nothing more.
    Problem is people complain and blame before they get answers or even read the legislation.

    It amazes me to think people would believe John McCain would allow a bill to go through that could possible have torture. I guess when it coems to politics and some "agendas", common sense goes out the window for paranoia.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  33. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27066
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.19%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo

    "Pacifists emphasize the ideal while igoring the real"

    Ben Franklin
    Yes, and hegemony is maintained through a duality of force and consent, both of which this Administration has convinced the mainstream population are necessary.

    The actual details of the bill do not bother me as much as it signals, in a sense, the final push of the mainstream to a political right which is conflated with a dangerously nationalistic identity. I cannot say its institution surprises me that much either in so far as state-endorsed torture by the United States has a storied history, not only perpetrated by the states, but in terms of 'education in interrogation' in such places as the School of the Americas. And essentially, I am neither appualed nor disgusted at its actual details, I simply recognize the danger in the premise of such a bill

    Most right-wing pundants I imagine will attack me saying such things, or any opposition to this bill as 'anti-american' sentiments, or 'left wing socialism'. However, I do not support extremism in any sense whether it be radical or reactionary, both have an operational premise of the incringement on civil liberties, which, is what this bill is about on a base level. The specifics, can no doubt be argued as just another measure to instill another degree of security, safety, and justice. But the key issue, so aptly put, is pacification. In the West we seem all too tolerant, and moreover encouraging to the incringement of the civil liberties of those whose skin tones differs from ours. How can we be so sure that the current path we are on does not signal the same measures could be put into place domestically?
  34. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
    Yes, and hegemony is maintained through a duality of force and consent, both of which this Administration has convinced the mainstream population are necessary.

    The actual details of the bill do not bother me as much as it signals, in a sense, the final push of the mainstream to a political right which is conflated with a dangerously nationalistic identity. I cannot say its institution surprises me that much either in so far as state-endorsed torture by the United States has a storied history, not only perpetrated by the states, but in terms of 'education in interrogation' in such places as the School of the Americas. And essentially, I am neither appualed nor disgusted at its actual details, I simply recognize the danger in the premise of such a bill

    Most right-wing pundants I imagine will attack me saying such things, or any opposition to this bill as 'anti-american' sentiments, or 'left wing socialism'. However, I do not support extremism in any sense whether it be radical or reactionary, both have an operational premise of the incringement on civil liberties, which, is what this bill is about on a base level. The specifics, can no doubt be argued as just another measure to instill another degree of security, safety, and justice. But the key issue, so aptly put, is pacification. In the West we seem all too tolerant, and moreover encouraging to the incringement of the civil liberties of those whose skin tones differs from ours. How can we be so sure that the current path we are on does not signal the same measures could be put into place domestically?

    Tell me what is "radical" about this bill?


    And I don't think you've seen the polls recenetly but the administration hasn't convinced anything to anyone.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  35. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
    How can we be so sure that the current path we are on does not signal the same measures could be put into place domestically?
    The Constitution.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  36. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27066
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.19%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Tell me what is "radical" about this bill?


    And I don't think you've seen the polls recenetly but the administration hasn't convinced anything to anyone.
    I said the practical implications of the current bill are not what necessarily bother me, but the greater push of the mainstream towards a radical right.

    I have seen George Dubya's approval polls, but I have also seen extremely disturbing polls from the United States where over 40% of the population are still under the impression Iraq had something to do with the attacks of Sep.11. Like I said, the duality of force and consent can be dangerous things to the civil liberties of all people
  37. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27066
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.19%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    The Constitution.
    And? This administration has shown the willingness and, maybe more appropriately put, the anxious desire to 'interpret' the Geneva Convention. Why not the Constitution in the interests of 'national security' at a certain point?

    I am only saying that the larger trend of which this bill is a part of is what fundamentally stikes me as dangerous. It does not bother me if the actual perpetrators of the Sep.11 are lit on fire and left to rot, what does bother me is the attitude of consent which would allow such causing the same activities to be imposed on completely innocent people.
  38. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
    I said the practical implications of the current bill are not what necessarily bother me, but the greater push of the mainstream towards a radical right.

    I have seen George Dubya's approval polls, but I have also seen extremely disturbing polls from the United States where over 40% of the population are still under the impression Iraq had something to do with the attacks of Sep.11. Like I said, the duality of force and consent can be dangerous things to the civil liberties of all people
    Those polls ask if they were "involved" which is open to so many interpretations its the reason why the poll exists. Most poll questions that are put forth are generalized for a reason, to use against the other party for political points. They are rarely specific.

    I don't see this mainstream right movement at all. The Republicans are going to swept out of office November 8th unless some sort of miracle happens. Current polls today show people trust Democrats with national securtity over Republicans now which frankly confuses the hell out of me. The media is predominantly liberal so I don't see this mainstream push at all.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  39. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27066
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.19%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    I don't think this is an issue of political partisan but dominant cultural ideals. Even the allowance of such a bill to pass without resistance shows two things: widespread and recognized ignorance of the masses, and a well documented push towards a trend of nationalism which has many prejudices inherent. Beginning with Sep.11, and I think you would agree, the moral fundamentalist movement in the United States has never been stronger. Right wing politics and right-wing religion are on the verge of being synonymous. In fact, George W. even initially called the attack on Afghanistan "Operation Infinite Justice" along with his call for a 'crusade'. When I say right I refer to neither Democrats or Republicans, quite frankly they both disgust me, but more the culture of 'right'.
  40. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27066
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    41.19%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    *partisan politics, sorry in that first sentence
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law
    By hillbilly_210 in forum Politics
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-12-2009, 01:13 PM
  2. Bush Names Iranian "military Guard" As Terror Group
    By anabolicrhino in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-15-2007, 01:46 PM
  3. Bush Signs Law to Widen Legal Reach for Wiretapping
    By anabolicrhino in forum Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-10-2007, 04:33 PM
  4. Bush Signs No More Torture Law !!!
    By anabolicrhino in forum News and Articles
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-25-2007, 11:06 AM
  5. Terrorism anyone?
    By YellowJacket in forum General Chat
    Replies: 185
    Last Post: 01-12-2003, 10:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in