Pres. Bush

[Tasty]

People like you are what prevents the inch from becoming a mile. But the reason our relatives ARENT in Guatanamo bay is because they aren't terrorists. You are saying that every terrorist who cries should get a bottle. People like you forget 9/11 waaaaaaaaay to readily and there is aboslutely NOTHING linking McCarthyism with terrorism.



I agree that Bush is an idiot. Any other president would have been smooth and manipulative enough to justify his actions properly and get the whole world behind him.

I said nothing of the sort. I just have a problem with holding these people for years without even charging them with anything. People who are criminals should be treated accordingly, but it should be proven in a court in an appropriate manner. I forgot 9/11?? That's insulting, and posts like that are the reason this thread will be closed. Funny how it's become so un-American to defend civil liberties.

 

[Spilchy]

"civil liberties" do not apply to non-US citizen enemy combatants which is what they are appropriately labeled. They are not prisoners of war.



You had 2 American Taliban members who were treated accordingly as you indicate. John Walker Lindh was sentenced to 20 years and the other chap was air mailed back to Saudi Arabia where his family lives. He was born in Louisiana and grew up in Saudi Arabia.



Others have been released from Gitmo with a handful RECAPTURED on the battle field. I am ALL for sending back each Gitmo prisoner. Let the secret police in each one of their native countries deal with them. They'll cry to come back to Gitmo because these trouble makers are better off dead in their native countries - no longer a threat.



One of the more successful psychological interrogation methods was dressing an Egyptian American in an Egyptian Colonel's outfit and walking him among the enemy combatants speaking to them in perfect Arabic (to the Arabs). He used a marker and masking tape and wrote names of countries and placed the tape on their chest. These named countries (Egypt, Pakistan, Morroco, Saudi Arabia, Jordan) were going to be where they will be headed for further "questioning." Well, they freaked out and began spilling the beans with fruitful intelligenece.



My point is, these guys have it made in Gitmo compared to where they'll end up. Try them in a military tribunal like we did with the Nazi and Japanese after WW2.



Hey, crime doesn't pay :lol

 

[percynjpn]

I think it's good that we have people in this country who are willing to go up versus things like the Patriot Act simply because it provides for a check against the possiblity of government's complete control over citizens. I mean, imagine if everyone was gung-ho nationalists, we'd end up having 1984 come alive! That being said, it's irrational to believe that the CIA is watching your every move right now and listening to your telephone calls. Increased security is worth a little bit of freedom. It's when that little bit turns into a lot that we have a problem. But wiretapping of a handful of suspected terrorsists and drug cartels really has very little bearing on your freedom and well-being.

I couldn't have said it better myself!! :xyxthumbs

 

[percynjpn]

"civil liberties" do not apply to non-US citizen enemy combatants which is what they are appropriately labeled. They are not prisoners of war.



You had 2 American Taliban members who were treated accordingly as you indicate. John Walker Lindh was sentenced to 20 years and the other chap was air mailed back to Saudi Arabia where his family lives. He was born in Louisiana and grew up in Saudi Arabia.



Others have been released from Gitmo with a handful RECAPTURED on the battle field. I am ALL for sending back each Gitmo prisoner. Let the secret police in each one of their native countries deal with them. They'll cry to come back to Gitmo because these trouble makers are better off dead in their native countries - no longer a threat.



One of the more successful psychological interrogation methods was dressing an Egyptian American in an Egyptian Colonel's outfit and walking him among the enemy combatants speaking to them in perfect Arabic (to the Arabs). He used a marker and masking tape and wrote names of countries and placed the tape on their chest. These named countries (Egypt, Pakistan, Morroco, Saudi Arabia, Jordan) were going to be where they will be headed for further "questioning." Well, they freaked out and began spilling the beans with fruitful intelligenece.



My point is, these guys have it made in Gitmo compared to where they'll end up. Try them in a military tribunal like we did with the Nazi and Japanese after WW2.



Hey, crime doesn't pay :lol

But those facts won't stop many of our fellow citizens and "allies" from treating the U.S. as the enemy and the terrorists as innocent victims. Incredible.

 

[Spilchy]

Has anyone ever looked into the anti-terror policies of fellow Western Democracies? They make the Patriot Act look like a wimpy document. Look at France's (yes France) anti-terror legislation and secret service powers for the past couple decades in their fight against Algerian terrorists. That's "police state" material!



The President does not have unchecked power as the media is stating. I'll mention it again - Behind closed doors, Congress was briefed 12 TIMES about this eaves dropping. If he first got the rubber stamping warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to eaves drop on terror suspects, then everyone would be ok with it? Eaves dropping has occured LONG before Bush was ever in office.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

I support the government maintaining a certain element, that we don't really want to know about, which undertakes the type of activities that fall into the "secret police" and "police state" category, which the CIA has been accused of recently. September 12, 2001 was a good day for that kind of activity; I still remember the sense of dread on 9/11 when there were still 3,500 planes in the air, an unknown number of them already hijacked or yet to be hijacked, or on 9/12, the feeling that this was the tip of the iceberg, with more attacks, suicide bombings in public places, water supplies being poisoned, yet to come.



The problem is when that type of activity becomes normal, instead of emergent. When it becomes standard operating procedure on a large scale, and not a tool used for extreme instances. That is when the line is crossed, where we are no better than the tyrants we topple.



In this case, the administration had legal methods to authorize the eavesdropping, why not use them? I don't want to live in France, so I really don't care if their laws are closer to a police state than ours. That's kind of like saying you can't use Collinite, you have to use (insert name of mid-range paste wax), and be happy about it, because most people have to use DC3!

 

[MSOsr]

Very easy way to avoid the government "illegally" listening to your messages:

QUIT COMMUNICATING WITH OUR ENEMIES! Nobody has claimed regular citizens are targets.



As President Bush said, "Don't complain the government should have "connected the dots" before 9/11 and then say it's wrong to monitor the communications with those we KNOW were behind 9/11.



I'm sure, if you're charged with a crime as a result of these "wiretaps", that if it's obvious the charge had nothing to do with terrorism, you can get the recordings suppressed by any judge and the charges thrown out.



Kind of like my 1970's response, "Search my car.......I don't have any drugs."



Why do so many people worry about the criminal being searched or stopped? If you're not guilty of anything, what's the problem?



This is different from being stopped repeatedly while driving because you meet some profiled identity.

 

[Larrycolorglo]

I hope everyone understands its not blind luck we have not had another attack on US soil since 9-11. The plan for 9-11 began in 1995 so understand these animals spend all their time thinking of ways to kill Americans on a large scale and they are very patient. The first attack on the towers was in 1993 if some of you have forgotten. If you do not believe they would use a nuclear weapon against us then you live on the same planet all these jerks in the media do.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

This is different from being stopped repeatedly while driving because you meet some profiled identity.

Is it? What if you were being repeatedly wiretapped because you met some profiled identity?

 

[jfelbab]

Is it? What if you were being repeatedly wiretapped because you met some profiled identity?

Well unless you have something to hide then it is a non-event. I, for one, am happy to know terrorists are being monitored. Listening to yours or my conversations, if we happen to appear on some terror list (highly unlikely), does us no harm and only can make us all safer.



Then again they are only monitoring some people who make or receive certain international calls. Hardly big brother. I believe that many of you who are griping about this would be griping even louder if there were to be another horrendous attack and it was found that the administration could have but failed to monitor suspected terrorist conversations.



So how is this practice harming you specifically.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

So how is this practice harming you specifically.

It's not. There is supposed to be oversight by the judicial branch, and it was sidestepped. Regardless of my opinion or your opinion, the matter is going to be investigated on a bipartisan basis, and the outcome of that should satisfy both of us that terrorists are being pursued, and that civil liberties aren't being trampled on.

 

[salty]

Well unless you have something to hide then it is a non-event. I, for one, am happy to know terrorists are being monitored. Listening to yours or my conversations, if we happen to appear on some terror list (highly unlikely), does us no harm and only can make us all safer.





IF YOU APPEAR ON THEIR LIST YOU ARE THERE FOR SOME TIME!





Then again they are only monitoring some people who make or receive certain international calls. Hardly big brother. I believe that many of you who are griping about this would be griping even louder if there were to be another horrendous attack and it was found that the administration could have but failed to monitor suspected terrorist conversations.



I SEE THIS AS A PLOY TO OPEN UP THE LIMITS TO PERSONAL PRIVACY





So how is this practice harming you specifically.

Because in Ten years, in might be common place to not talk on the phone.

 

[salty]

It's not. There is supposed to be oversight by the judicial branch, and it was sidestepped. Regardless of my opinion or your opinion, the matter is going to be investigated on a bipartisan basis, and the outcome of that should satisfy both of us that terrorists are being pursued, and that civil liberties aren't being trampled on.

We have the same sort of thing going on in Canada. The police want to update their power towards cell phones, internet, e-mail and others. To "git with the times". They claim they need more power to fight this new technology.



They want the power to bypass a warrant or cause and search out ANY information that they need.

 

[salty]

Is this freedom or com- i don't even want to say it as it might bring me up on their list!

 

[salty]

How many of you are using a chain proxy -server. They know where you live!

 

[jfelbab]

Because in Ten years, in might be common place to not talk on the phone.

But at least I'd be here and not buried in a pile of rubble.



In case you want a good read, you might want to read this, this and this.

 

[White95Max]

In case you want a good read, you might want to read this[/URL], this

FOXnews is hardly an unbiased read. I wrote a paper on media bias for my Communications + Media class a couple years ago.

 

[Sherman8r44]

But at least I'd be here and not buried in a pile of rubble.



In case you want a good read, you might want to read this, this and this.

Not to go up against my original points, but all three of those articles are from extremely biased sources.

 

[stilez]

FOXnews is hardly an unbiased read. I wrote a paper on media bias for my Communications + Media class a couple years ago.

Yep.





According to my Mass Comm buddies, Fox is the most conservative news channel. Its sad to hear from many of them, if you want the "truth" about what is going on, watch BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation).

 

[jfelbab]

FOXnews is hardly an unbiased read. I wrote a paper on media bias for my Communications + Media class a couple years ago.

And the Times is? :LOLOL



I provided links to three sources. Are they all biased in your opinion or is it just everyone who disagrees with you is biased? :think: