Welcome to the American Police State

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cole436

lol Keep living under a rock man.
If you need confirmation this bill exists and what is written into it, there's a) a NY times article on the last page
b) an online version of the bill you can read youself

And you didn't post those why? People aren't mocking the bill, they're mocking your junior high school approach.

Oh, they're also mocking your apparent need to start new threads devoted to moderately funny pictures.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cole436

And if 93% wanted it past, do you not think that there's a good chance they'll shoot down the veto as well?

You're not giving anon the respect they deserve in these matters.

I'm not some child, I am a very, very well educated adult who does not need to be treated with this sort of demeaning tone.

I call bull####

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Itse

It's truly amazing that someone could actually use the words "fairly balanced" when talking about a law that effectively makes total military rule a matter of executing the letter of the law.

It's also amazing that a lot of people have been watching this happen for a long time now, telling people that civil rights have been rapidly eroding in America, and for a large part have been dismissed as ranting lefties.

The fact that this bill was even created should be frightening. The fact that it already has enough support to become law should be scary as hell.

I wonder where the constitution-waiving right-wingers are now?

Umm, he's talking about the article being fairly balanced. You know, as in written from a non-partisan perspective. That has nothing to do with the actual content of the bill.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

I remember when I was a conspiracy theorist.

Now I'm employed.

Honestly, a post like that makes me kind of sad. Whether or not you agree with the vid he posted or think he's a bit over the top he is certainly right that a bill such as this getting past two houses is disturbing. The US democracy is crumbling, and these kinds of bills are signs of a time when people ought to be upset and speaking out to protect that democracy and their freedoms.

[Notorious Honey Badger]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Honestly, a post like that makes me kind of sad. Whether or not you agree with the vid he posted or think he's a bit over the top he is certainly right that a bill such as this getting past two houses is disturbing. The US democracy is crumbling, and these kinds of bills are signs of a time when people ought to be upset and speaking out to protect that democracy and their freedoms.

Couldn't agree more. I hope he was just joking tho.

Saying that the only people who distrust the government or are disturbed by things like the patriot act or this bill are unemployed loons is just daft. Pretty ignorant stuff.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Honestly, a post like that makes me kind of sad. Whether or not you agree with the vid he posted or think he's a bit over the top he is certainly right that a bill such as this getting past two houses is disturbing. The US democracy is crumbling, and these kinds of bills are signs of a time when people ought to be upset and speaking out to protect that democracy and their freedoms.

Looking at the history of human civilization, democracies and free societies (using the word "free" loosely), do not tend to last for a very long time. Most humans that have ever lived, and probably at least half that currently live, do not live in democratic situations where liberty is a protected quality. For the past 5000 years or so, different societies have tried to have democratic societies and protection of liberties, but most fall after a few hundred years at the longest. While I wouldn't want to live in a dictatorship personally, it has never been proven that our natural social setting as humans is in a democratic society.

I guess is what I am getting at is that I think democracy will eventually fall in the U.S. (and the rest of the Western world)... "when" is the only question.

[Hemi-Cuda]

new signature?

[mikey_the_redneck]

Obama's reason for vetoing this bill are not what people think they are.

Paul Craig Roberts clears this up in his article;

"I checked the URLs that Lithwick supplied. It is clear that the Obama regime objects to military detention, and I mistook this objection for constitutional scruples.
However, on further reflection I conclude that the Obama regime’s objection to military detention is not rooted in concern for the constitutional rights of American citizens. The regime objects to military detention because the implication of military detention is that detainees are prisoners of war . As Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin put it: Should somebody determined “to be a member of an enemy force who has come to this nation or is in this nation to attack us as a member of a foreign enemy, should that person be treated according to the laws of war? The answer is yes.”
Detainees treated according to the laws of war have the protections of the Geneva Conventions. They cannot be tortured. The Obama regime opposes military detention, because detainees would have some rights. These rights would interfere with the regime’s ability to send detainees to CIA torture prisons overseas. This is what the Obama regime means when it says that the requirement of military detention denies the regime “flexibility.”"

http://www.infowars.com/misreading-t...onal-scruples/

Obama would rather arrest citizens under the Patriot Act, where the Geneva Conventions do not apply.

Anyways ....nothing to see here folks...

[puckluck]

TTC wins a gold medal in this thread.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Looking at the history of human civilization, democracies and free societies (using the word "free" loosely), do not tend to last for a very long time. Most humans that have ever lived, and probably at least half that currently live, do live in democratic situations where liberty is a protected quality. For the past 5000 years or so, different societies have tried to have democratic societies and protection of liberties, but most fall after a few hundred years at the longest. While I wouldn't want to live in a dictatorship personally, it has never been proven that our natural social setting as humans is in a democratic society.

I guess is what I am getting at is that I think democracy will eventually fall in the U.S. (and the rest of the Western world)... "when" is the only question.

Commonly owned and relatively cheap information age technologies and the inability of authorities to "control the message" or "control the spin" as would have been the case in humanity's past is probably a game changer, rendering your analysis a bit moot.

"Divide and conquer" is almost impossible these days, even in places where it had worked for decades and centuries. Activism is remarkably easy.

Regarding the Bill, it seems to be aimed at recognizing the practical necessity of Guantanamo, something even Obama seems to have conceded, and the fact Al Quaeda is employing a lot of common sense in recruiting radicalized American citizens to penetrate the more organized USA defences.

Its a genuine slippery slope though. No one would argue that.

An American Police state? There were people on this Board saying that BEFORE 9/11. The paranoid aren't helping themselves with over-reactions.

Cowperson

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Looking at the history of human civilization, democracies and free societies (using the word "free" loosely), do not tend to last for a very long time. Most humans that have ever lived, and probably at least half that currently live, do live in democratic situations where liberty is a protected quality. For the past 5000 years or so, different societies have tried to have democratic societies and protection of liberties, but most fall after a few hundred years at the longest. While I wouldn't want to live in a dictatorship personally, it has never been proven that our natural social setting as humans is in a democratic society.

I guess is what I am getting at is that I think democracy will eventually fall in the U.S. (and the rest of the Western world)... "when" is the only question.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"

-Thomas Jefferson

[puckluck]

Just watched that video and I think I'm going to have nightmares.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Cole436

I'm not even conservative

Neither is Tower

...he is a "free-man" ...on the land.

[Yasa]

Kinda reminds me of the Espionage Act of 1917. It was put forth as a result of WWI and the first Red Scare, essentially making it a federal crime to speak poorly of the US, the military or trying to dissuade people from enlisting in the military. This lead to raids, arrests of American citizens and deportations of immigrants.

Don't forget Japanese Internment in the US after Pearl Harbor. 100 000+ Japanese forced into camps, many of which were American citizens.

These things aren't new. I'm not saying we should brush them off or everything will be dandy; but the United States is no more of a police state than it ever has been. This is just a modern form of history. These things should be taken seriously, but for different reasons than this fear mongering.

"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain

Edit: Question for Mikey and Cole. A serious one too. Do you believe the US will go into civil war, be it within the next year, 5 years or 50 years?

double edit: Sorry, I meant Cole instead of Coy. I mix you guys up all the time.

[THE SCUD]

Dear god TTC, you are my hero. Brilliant posting.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Yasa

Edit: Question for Mikey and Coy. A serious one too. Do you believe the US will go into civil war, be it within the next year, 5 years or 50 years?

If (more likely when) the economy collapses, unrest will follow and the military will be used to suppress angry Americans, no doubt about it. I think this could happen in the next 5 years. The mechanisms are all in place (Bills like HR-645 for example). This tells me the government is expecting it.

They do have empty FEMA prisons, the Homeland Security fusion centers etc. to suppress unrest. It's concerning to me.

I guess it comes down to this. Will the military fire on American citizens when they try to revolt? I don't know. I think some would follow orders, maybe some would defect.......it's hard to say.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Neither is Tower

...he is a "free-man" ...on the land.

Oh God. I had no idea that there was one of "those" posting on this forum.

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Paul Craig Roberts clears this up in his article;

"I checked the URLs that Lithwick supplied. It is clear that the Obama regime objects to military detention, and I mistook this objection for constitutional scruples.
However, on further reflection I conclude that the Obama regime’s objection to military detention is not rooted in concern for the constitutional rights of American citizens. The regime objects to military detention because the implication of military detention is that detainees are prisoners of war . As Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin put it: Should somebody determined “to be a member of an enemy force who has come to this nation or is in this nation to attack us as a member of a foreign enemy, should that person be treated according to the laws of war? The answer is yes.”
Detainees treated according to the laws of war have the protections of the Geneva Conventions. They cannot be tortured. The Obama regime opposes military detention, because detainees would have some rights. These rights would interfere with the regime’s ability to send detainees to CIA torture prisons overseas. This is what the Obama regime means when it says that the requirement of military detention denies the regime “flexibility.”"

http://www.infowars.com/misreading-t...onal-scruples/

Obama would rather arrest citizens under the Patriot Act, where the Geneva Conventions do not apply.

Anyways ....nothing to see here folks...

On this point, I'm not sure that the "further reflection" of a partisan conservative like Paul Craig Roberts is cogent evidence of much of anything. This looks like pure speculation to me.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

lol Keep living under a rock man.
If you need confirmation this bill exists and what is written into it, there's a) a NY times article on the last page
b) an online version of the bill you can read youself

Neither of which you chose to start the thread with.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Makarov

On this point, I'm not sure that the "further reflection" of a partisan conservative like Paul Craig Roberts is cogent evidence of much of anything. This looks like pure speculation to me.

Paul Craig Roberts isn't in politics anymore. He's retired, and doesn't have a horse in the race you know...he just writes now.

I guess you have to read and decide for yourself. Obama is not some guardian of the constitution.....he signed the Patriot Act into law at the drop of a hat.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Oh God. I had no idea that there was one of "those" posting on this forum.

Oh yes.....

Eventually he was heckled off the board for his views.

I'm not a hater though, it's just unrealistic to be a "free-man" these days.