exactly.. the **** if you know. Your lack of trust means two things: jack and shit. given the reality of 9/11 versus the fabrication of your 1984 fantasy I'll go ahead and give credit to the actual threat rather than your silly, childish foot stomping tantrum.
Right...lets trust the government on everything, hey? Oh wait...the FBI was just found to be spying on Americans. Oh wait, the government jailed tens of thousands of Japanese without cause during WWII. Oh but its ok...lets just piss on the constitution and trust the government. I mean we don't even need a judiciary or a constitution, right? We can just trust that the government will respect our rights.
and, yet, at the end of the day.. he was found... say it with me.. GUILTY.
You still haven't explained why him being guilty is relevant. But no surprise there.
Indeed, quite the ******* robin hood figure you've got there.
Sorry, when did I say he was robin hood, or brave, or anything good at all? Oh right, its you LYING again. No surprise.
yea, there sure is nothing nihilistic about automatically distrusting the gov when they are out trying to keep your stupid ass from becoming the next bomb fodder for disillusioned ***** who, similarly, hate this nation. Indeed, you ARE the true patriot. Yea, you sure ARE the majority opinion in America when it comes to cases like Padilla!
Oh, well if the government is trying to protect me (thats their job, yes?), then we'll just let them do anything. And yes, I'm the majority opinion. Notice how I've gotten several people backing me up in this thread, and you've gotten exactly NONE?
HA! Yea, I can see that by the evidence peppered throughout your posts! Now, don't forget to take your meds today.. We don't want to have to confiscate your trenchcoat again.
Try sticking to substance bucko. Although if you do it might be difficult to keep up this charade.
profound response! Gosh, I've been bested with the wit of the GODS.
See above.
uhh, according to.. YOU? Gee, skippy... Having YOU state as much carries so much water in an ocean of opinions! Shit, why weren't we asking for YOUR opinion the day after 9/11?? Folly, I tellya... Next time we'll have to ask WWLD before taking history into context!
Also according to the USSC, who are the interpretors of the Constitution. Try learning a little bit of history before you tell me to learn some, genius.
OH NOW we've got to apoint where you admit that there are LIMITS... ahhh... gotcha. I guess the nation should accept YOUR opinion on where to draw the line in the sand then? You mean there is no precedent on the first like, uh, THERE IS IN SUSPENDING HC?
Actually how about the nation accept the constitutions opinion on where to draw the line in the sand? The line is already drawn, its just that Bush wants to go past that.
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
Thats in Article ONE...which is the legislative branch. Bush does NOT have the authority to suspend HC without a directive from Congress. By the way...neither rebellion nor invasion has happened (except of other countries, but I'm pretty sure thats not what the founders had in mind.
As I said, learn some history.
Hey, which of is is the one insisting that Padilla's case is the first chuck of sky falling to the ground regarding the rights of AMERICANS? Oh yea, that would be you. Poor guy... I mean, if you are going to defend a position maybe you should have the balls to do so even while having your ass handed to you... Just a thought.
Padilla was AN AMERICAN. THAT is an infringement of an Americans rights, I'm not using a slippery slope argument here. Just because you are willing to take away someones rights on a charge alone, doesn't mean the rest of America is.
Given which of us is defending the TERRORIST you might wanna limit the "you want to destroy america" joke to your circle jerk chomsky wannabe friends. I know, I know... Abe Lincoln sure was a ******* eeeevil fascist!
Your right...we had to arrest Padilla, because if we didn't America would be destroyed! No wait...the worst he would have done is set off some bombs and been caught. Bad, yes. America destroyed? No. Sorry, but I'll risk my life to keep my liberty. Its a shame that you don't have the same balls.
Oh well hey, NOW you proved your point!
Gosh, that changes EVERYTHING! Hell yea it's perfectly clear that the Bush admit is JUST LIKE NAZIS now that you cleared that up..
Wait did I say it proved my point? Oh, no I didn't. However it adds onto the heaping pile of evidence that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Poor guy.... It's probably STILL a total mystery why Padilla tried to use a DEFENSIVE JIHAD defense.... Clearly, watching you split hairs over the first amendment while crying like a ***** about HC, despite historic precedence no less, is not a giant bowl of hilarity!
Intent matters, son. And unless you think the founders intended to allow murder to be legal if done by a religious extremist, your point holds no water. Oh, and by the way historic precedence means JACK SHIT. LEGAL precedence means something. And there is loads and loads of legal precedence as to why your defensive jihad idiocy doesn't work.
Which HC is a part of.
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
so is this.
And Congress needs to determine that, not the president.
uh, yea.. precedence sure is RETARDED!
As an argument for legality? Yes.
Lincoln was a ******* WAR CRIMINAL!
Umm, thats an international law term. We are talking about domestic law. Try and know what the hell you are talking about.
You just asserted that RGS is the only person that I was talking about regarding laughing at your silly little posts... Indeed, you should proabbly call MORE people liars with honestly like that, buddy!
No, I didn't. Its quite obvious from what I said.
