Smoking, Trans fats, and terrorists

[Shogun]

I couldn't find any evidence that the email addresses were part of the trial. If you read about the trial, it's pretty amazing that the guy was convicted of anything at all.

How do you feel about thought crimes?

I think that criminal behavoiur is still a crime regardless of the motives behind it. I also think that conspiracy to commit criminal behaviour is valid for prosecution.


perhaps the "Defensive Jihad" will work next time.

 

[Larkinn]

Also Shogun, how do you feel about the argument that he was not entitled to civilian courts...ever?

Are you comfortable with a US citizen being held in jail and NEVER getting any form of civilian due process?

 

[Shogun]

Are you blind? When have I ever said he was innocent? My point is that every US citizen, NO MATTER WHAT THEY HAVE DONE, should be able to avail themselves of the US justice system and have the right to habeus corpus. Apparently you disagree. You think the US government can arbitrarily take away those things based on unproven accusations . Oh, and you lied when you said no Americans had been denied HB...want to take that moronic comment back?


Ahhh.. so GUILT of potential terrorism is less important than weather or not a terrorist has the right of HC? Gotcha. Tim Mcveigh and you would probably have been fine chemistry lab partners.

UNPROVEN? yea, nothing says UNPROVEN like a fucking 17 year conviction.

terrorism is hardly arbitrary. But, then again, why give a damn about the wanton disregard for actual American Liberties being shat upon ARBITRARILY while citizens that aren't fucking terrorists actually have their rights diminished? Indeed, ID defend some homegrown unibomber goodness too!





No, I don't care what he is doing because I believe in fundamental rights of knowing what you are being charged with, a quick and speedy trial and not being held in detention with no trial for FOUR YEARS for everyone regardless of the acts one is accused of.


Gosh, I wonder if a rabid muslim hellbent on his own McVeigh solution was in the fucking DARK considering his charge! Indeed, if a drug dealer is caught with 5 balloons of heroin up his ass he is probably having his 4th amendment rights violated!

Like I said, people like you are to this side of the spectrum what ann coulter is to the right..



Right. Way to confuse two completely and distinct issues.

By the way...if he has done so much, any idea why the government was only able to indict him on conspiracy? (basically a thought crime...oh wait, but its ok against terrorists because terrorism is a bad crime as compared to killing someone cause they are black...that crime ain't that bad). Oh, and why they needed to wait FOUR YEARS to bring him to trial?


So, uh, are you REALLY suggesting that a criminal charge of Conspiracy to commit murder is a 1984 attempt to control your mind? For fucking christs sakes, dude... what does DEFENSIVE JIHAD mean to you? Yea, cry me a fucking river that a nefarious asshole looking to kill Americans was caught before having a chance to enact some DEFENSIVE JIHAD. For real, my nuts ache with sorrow just thinking about this poor bastard rotting in jail. Hey, I hear to Rosenbergs were good people too! How can we convict without DNA avidence!?!?!?! let alone put them to death.. for fucking ESPIONAGE.

 

[Shogun]

Also Shogun, how do you feel about the argument that he was not entitled to civilian courts...ever?

Are you comfortable with a US citizen being held in jail and NEVER getting any form of civilian due process?

I guess that depends on the nature of the criminal charge. For some reason I just don't put petty theft on par with FUCKING TREASON.

 

[Shogun]

[JURIST] US District Judge Marcia Cooke [official profile] ruled Thursday that jurors in the terror trial of Jose Padilla [JURIST news archive] and co-defendants Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi [GlobalSecurity profiles] will not be able to consider the "defensive jihad" defense, agreeing with federal prosecutors that the defendants can be convicted even if they believed that their "conduct was religious, politically, or morally required, or that ultimate good would result." The ruling is a setback for the defense, which had argued that Islam allows "defensive jihad" and that this is different from terrorism because it is intended to defend Muslims from aggression and not intended to threaten innocent lives. Jurors are expected to begin deliberations after closing statements Monday.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/08/padilla-terror-trial-judge-bars.php


yea, cry me a fucking bloody river, dude. CLEARLY, we also shit on his first amendment religous freedom by NOT letting him use a DEFENSIVE JIHAD against Americans! How fucking EVIL are we now??

 

[Larkinn]

Ahhh.. so GUILT of potential terrorism is less important than weather or not a terrorist has the right of HC? Gotcha. Tim Mcveigh and you would probably have been fine chemistry lab partners.

Yes. Guilt is less important that the government denying fundamental constitutional rights to American citizens. So if the government doesn't let people smoke or eat trans fats its all "omg they are infringing on civil liberties, wah wah wah", but its all cheery if they infringe on peoples constitutional rights to habeus corpus, speedy trial, and the like, eh?

You want guns in case because its all "omg can't trust the government they might turn on us and we'll need to defend ourselves (cause your glock will stand up to tanks...right)", but when the government accuses someone of terrorism, well they have to be guilty, right? I mean we don't even need a trial, eh?

UNPROVEN? yea, nothing says UNPROVEN like a fucking 17 year conviction.

He was convicted AFTER he was held for 4 years with no trial. When he was being held with no trial his accusations were unproven .

terrorism is hardly arbitrary. But, then again, why give a damn about the wanton disregard for actual American Liberties being shat upon ARBITRARILY while citizens that aren't fucking terrorists actually have their rights diminished? Indeed, ID defend some homegrown unibomber goodness too!

Oh, well its ok to throw away the constitutional rights of people if the government deems them a terrorist, eh?

Gosh, I wonder if a rabid muslim hellbent on his own McVeigh solution was in the fucking DARK considering his charge! Indeed, if a drug dealer is caught with 5 balloons of heroin up his ass he is probably having his 4th amendment rights violated!

Yes, he was. It took the government FOUR YEARS to charge him. He had no idea what he would be charged with, what evidence they had, his chance of acquittal, etc.

Like I said, people like you are to this side of the spectrum what ann coulter is to the right..

LMFAO...right, people who believe that all Americans deserve habeus corpus are the lefts versions of ann coulter. What idiocy. Yes...extreme leftists like the Cato institute

So, uh, are you REALLY suggesting that a criminal charge of Conspiracy to commit murder is a 1984 attempt to control your mind?

Its a thought crime, Shogun. NO crime was committed except for intent.

For fucking christs sakes, dude... what does DEFENSIVE JIHAD mean to you? Yea, cry me a fucking river that a nefarious asshole looking to kill Americans was caught before having a chance to enact some DEFENSIVE JIHAD. For real, my nuts ache with sorrow just thinking about this poor bastard rotting in jail. Hey, I hear to Rosenbergs were good people too! How can we convict without DNA avidence!?!?!?! let alone put them to death.. for fucking ESPIONAGE.

Thats nice. What someone is alleged to do does NOT remove their due process. To believe otherwise is simply un-American.

 

[Larkinn]

I guess that depends on the nature of the criminal charge. For some reason I just don't put petty theft on par with FUCKING TREASON.

LMFAO...we can remove peoples constitutional rights "depending on the nature of the criminal charge". Not even conviction, but the CHARGE.

Fucking fascist.

 

[Larkinn]

[JURIST] US District Judge Marcia Cooke [official profile] ruled Thursday that jurors in the terror trial of Jose Padilla [JURIST news archive] and co-defendants Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi [GlobalSecurity profiles] will not be able to consider the "defensive jihad" defense, agreeing with federal prosecutors that the defendants can be convicted even if they believed that their "conduct was religious, politically, or morally required, or that ultimate good would result." The ruling is a setback for the defense, which had argued that Islam allows "defensive jihad" and that this is different from terrorism because it is intended to defend Muslims from aggression and not intended to threaten innocent lives. Jurors are expected to begin deliberations after closing statements Monday.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/08/padilla-terror-trial-judge-bars.php


yea, cry me a fucking bloody river, dude. CLEARLY, we also shit on his first amendment religous freedom by NOT letting him use a DEFENSIVE JIHAD against Americans! How fucking EVIL are we now??

Nice non-sequiter. It has never been held in this country that the first amendment allows religious individuals to do whatever they want if their religion allows, or even commands it.

 

[Larkinn]

I'm still waiting on an apology for this LIE, by the way.

We've yet to see a single example of ANY AMERICAN losing their right to Habeas. Zilch. None of this "could be" shit. none of this "might happen" crap.

By the way...its fascinating to see you defend the Bush administration by saying that "well, no Americans have lost their right to HB, so its ok!" and then when I point out that we HAVE lost our right to HB, you change the goal posts and say "well its ok when the charge is sufficiently heinous".

 

[Shogun]

Yes. Guilt is less important that the government denying fundamental constitutional rights to American citizens. So if the government doesn't let people smoke or eat trans fats its all "omg they are infringing on civil liberties, wah wah wah", but its all cheery if they infringe on peoples constitutional rights to habeus corpus, speedy trial, and the like, eh?

riiiight.. well you and terry nichols can share that little piece of wisdom while the rest of us go ahead and keep treasonous bastards from blowing up any more innocent american citizens. Indeed, go tell it to the ghost of Abe Lincoln who did the same thing in order to, again, protect innocent civilians from becoming a footnote in a larger conflict. As it is, the ONLY example of an American you can provide was, in fact, convicted after all. I guess some of us comprehend how damning the attempt at "Defensive Jihad" is to those being charged with acts of conspiracy to commit terrorism. Hey, maybe we can ignore a few more actual examples of ACTUAL muted liberty just because Al Capone was convicted on Tax Evasion rather than, you know, the gov prove that he was a fucking killer mobster!





You want guns in case because its all "omg can't trust the government they might turn on us and we'll need to defend ourselves (cause your glock will stand up to tanks...right)", but when the government accuses someone of terrorism, well they have to be guilty, right? I mean we don't even need a trial, eh?


No, they don't HAVE to be guilty. But, in your single example it turned out that he was, in FACT, guilty. Then again, you know how those jurors are probably Karl Rove plants!

I know, Jose Padilla probably should have pulled a ruby ridge and killed some law enforcement agents, eh? Would he raise to an entirely new plateau in your shrine of dickheads if Rage Against the Machine wrote a song about him? Indeed, boofuckinghoo, a man who was caught acting treasonous AND LATER CONVICTED didn't get a chance to kill Americans. For real, I'm creating a new branch of the mississippi river right now with the tears that im collecting in his honor.

the flaw in your silly fucking gun strawman is that the NRA doesn't defend the gun rights of felons with a criminal background in violent gun use. I wouldn't suppose you'd think that little piece of stupidity a few moves in advance.


He was convicted AFTER he was held for 4 years with no trial. When he was being held with no trial his accusations were unproven .

Indeed, this OBVIOUSLY means that he should be free to continue with, uh, conspiring to kill Americans! This is TOTALLY how our legal system works! Hell, didn't you know that Jeff Dahmer had conjugal visits before his trial?? Oh wait.. no, he didn't. What a fucking TRAVESTY that a murderer didn't get a chance to enjoy every second of pre-conviction, lemme tellya!



Oh, well its ok to throw away the constitutional rights of people if the government deems them a terrorist, eh?

In this case, yes. You know, since Padilla WAS a fucking terrorist conspiring to kill Americans. DOH! silly me, I should have known his jury conviction was rigged! obviously. Like I said, go tell it to the ghost of Abe Lincoln and tell him what kind of a Fascist asshole he was for winning the civil war.






Yes, he was. It took the government FOUR YEARS to charge him. He had no idea what he would be charged with, what evidence they had, his chance of acquittal, etc.


Do YOU know what he did or didn't know or are you making assumptions based on the position of your arguement? Post your source that proves that Padilla didn't know that his actions were the reason for his detention. OR, call me a fascist. That always seems to work for mouth foamers and goofball nutters..


LMFAO...right, people who believe that all Americans deserve habeus corpus are the lefts versions of ann coulter. What idiocy. Yes...extreme leftists like the Cato institute

I'll let your own words speak for itself. You'd rather American's die than admit the necessity of preventing terrorist actions against this nation. That is the kind of blinded demagoguery that sells Ann's books and is exactly what causes you to make brilliant statements like:

Guilt is less important that the government denying fundamental constitutional rights to American citizens.


Its a thought crime, Shogun. NO crime was committed except for intent.


yea, conspiracy to commit murder is an innocent frolic through innocent-land too. Hey, maybe you can take a few minutes from your trite little tantrum to read a few case studies about just what type of sentence criminal CONSPIRACY will result in..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(crime)

Yea, I know.. Facts tend to suck when they don't support your predictable fucking rant, eh?





Thats nice. What someone is alleged to do does NOT remove their due process. To believe otherwise is simply un-American.

No, acting like a lemming enough to let a man who conspired to kill Americans go because of some silly fucking technicality, DESPITE THE GUILTY CONVICTION, is unamerican. Padilla got his day in court and, unfortunately for you, didn't turn out to be the saint that you wished he was in order to throw dirt on the Bush admin. Indeed, lecture me on what in unamerican when there are enough examples to set precedence in AMERICAN history some more.

 

[Shogun]

LMFAO...we can remove peoples constitutional rights "depending on the nature of the criminal charge". Not even conviction, but the CHARGE.

Fucking fascist.

yea.. tell it to the ghosts of the Rosenbergs... Calling me a fascist probably makes them not spies after all. Indeed, GUILT is less important than their rights, eh? After all, it's probably true that we handle petty theft and a serial murderer the same way too!

no, REALLY!

After all, Charles fucking Manson didn't kill anyone, right? It's a THOUGHT crime to conpsire to murder!

 

[Shogun]

Nice non-sequiter. It has never been held in this country that the first amendment allows religious individuals to do whatever they want if their religion allows, or even commands it.

b-b-b-b-but his FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS are being VIOLATED! I-i-i'ts UN AMERICAN to keep a zealot from killing in the name of GOD! He's got RIGHTS you know!


non-sequiter my ass. The "Defensive Jihad" was a FACT of Padillas trial... Facts sure are a pain in your ass, arent they?

 

[manifold]

I'm still waiting on an apology for this LIE, by the way.



By the way...its fascinating to see you defend the Bush administration by saying that "well, no Americans have lost their right to HB, so its ok!" and then when I point out that we HAVE lost our right to HB, you change the goal posts and say "well its ok when the charge is sufficiently heinous".

Psst. To that guy this place isn't about discussing ideas and perhaps even learning a thing or two in the process. To him it's some kind of ego stroking competition. So anytime you bring up a good point, his only reaction is to craft a rebuttal, no matter how he must spin the debate to do so. If you think he ever actually stops to consider your point, you're fooling yourself.

 

[Shogun]

I'm still waiting on an apology for this LIE, by the way.



By the way...its fascinating to see you defend the Bush administration by saying that "well, no Americans have lost their right to HB, so its ok!" and then when I point out that we HAVE lost our right to HB, you change the goal posts and say "well its ok when the charge is sufficiently heinous".

No, WE haven't lost shit. A wannabe terrorist did. You can go suck John Walker Lind's cock as long as it makes you feel good about hating the Bush presidency all you need to. You'd let a killer go on a self-righteous technicality despite the laughable charge that American's are losing out on HC are are bing tossed into a fucking gulag for traffic tickets and passing bad checks. You, sir, are a fucking nutter and are easily disregarded as rabid fringe.


Enjoy knowing that.

 

[Shogun]

Psst. To that guy this place isn't about discussing ideas and perhaps even learning a thing or two in the process. To him it's some kind of ego stroking competition. So anytime you bring up a good point, his only reaction is to craft a rebuttal, no matter how he must spin the debate to do so. If you think he ever actually stops to consider your point, you're fooling yourself.

myawww. dont' be bitter, mani... Being the sad puppy with droopy eyes won't make your weak assed pebbles turn into boulders...

 

[manifold]

myawww. dont' be bitter, mani... Being the sad puppy with droopy eyes won't make your weak assed pebbles turn into boulders...

Thanks for making my point, as if there were ever any doubt.

 

[Shogun]

It's only a thought crime!

 

[Shogun]

Thanks for making my point, as if there were ever any doubt.

bitter tears probably make your case better than facts all day long, dude... Hell, you are probably not the first person to attack the messenger when you can't assimilate the message.

 

[manifold]

bitter tears probably make your case better than facts all day long, dude... Hell, you are probably not the first person to attack the messenger when you can't assimilate the message.

YOU RULE!!

Hopefully someday I'll be as brilliant and learned as you so I too can close my mind as to not fuck with it's perfection.

 

[Shogun]

maybe your first step can be learning a thing or two about Conspiracy laws...



Say.. what does


Title 18, US Code, Section 241

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

"If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured-

"They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000241----000-.html



mean to you?