Bush invokes 9/11 to justify torture, domestic spying and war

What I think is odd, is that it's an issue at all. They're going to use it whether it's allowed or not. Since when do we give rights to POW's. Just as the Constitution is an old piece of paper and has no bearing on laws passed today, the Geneva Convention no longer applies to today's War on Terror and the tactics used by our blood thirsty terrorist opponets.

I heard a number the other day, I think it was something like 7 out of 10 suspected terrorists are eventually released? OOOOHHHH. That must be why it's such an issue. Because they're waterboarding private citizens ... like you and I.

"hmmm. Whoops our mistake. Sorry for the torture and all, but you're neighbor said you might be a terrorist. You know, we just had to make sure. Sorry you thought your were going to die and all that nonsense – no hard feelings, right?. Anyway, you're free now, so have a good life."

Domestic spying indeed. Tripped over this on my way into the office this morning:

slashdot.com

On October 8, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati granted the government's request for a full-panel hearing in United States v. Warshak case centering on the right of privacy for stored electronic communications. ... the position that the United States government is taking if accepted, may mean that the government can read anybody's email at any time without a warrant. The most distressing argument the government makes in the Warshak case is that the government need not follow the Fourth Amendment in reading emails sent by or through most commercial ISPs

This is the first time I've heard it openly said that the government need not heed the Bill of Rights. Why isn't this bigger? I mean... I guess that's a little rhetorical. I suppose a better question is how do we get bovine America to give a s#%!?

Whenever I bring up my distaste with the perpetual flushing of our rights, my peers only wish they could roll their eyes higher.

!colorful metaphor!

[edit on 5-11-2007 by memoir]

[DELETE]
Sorry, I posted in the wrong thread.

[edit on 5/11/2007 by khunmoon]

Originally posted by memoir
This is the first time I've heard it openly said that the government need not heed the Bill of Rights.
[edit on 5-11-2007 by memoir]

I understand what you're saying, but this is far from the first time that the government has argued that the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to a new technology. The results have been mixed, but usually the Fourth Amendment is extended to the new technology through the term "effects." Is an E-mail an effect? As a matter of policy, it seems to flow from the intent of the Amendment that it is protected, but on the other hand, is it really so obvious?

When I send an E-mail or participate in electronic communications, I'm sending information into the public domain, so it is protected then?

And just because there is a colorable argument that the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply doesn't mean that there is cause for freaking out. The government has made some really strange arguments in the past; doesn't the government have the right and the obligation to argue in behalf of its own interests when there is something vague in the law? It doesn't seem fair to allow otherwise because then we have lawlessness.

The solution here is an amendment that explicitly extends the protection of the Fourth Amendment to electronic communications. I can't help but believe that there would be widespread support for such an amendment.

But I can't throw the entire government under the bus for doing what they think is best, even when they're totally wrong when there is no evidence that they are acting in bad faith. These are the people who will be on the hook--and we'll be the first people to pillory them--when the bomb goes off or the millions of credit cards are stolen.

Originally posted by tyranny22
I heard a number the other day, I think it was something like 7 out of 10 suspected terrorists are eventually released?

Sorry to say. If I wasn't a domestic terrorist going in, I'd definately be one comming out.

reply to post by Togetic


A very fair and honest post. I can't claim to not agree with you. The problem is that there is no amendment being suggested that would extend the protection of the amendments beyond their original scope. Rather, we're witnessing the opposite. Bills and laws are being written and passed that directly remove the protection the Constitution and Bill of Rights from today's (and the future's) social scope.

In all situations, it's easier to keep something well maintained than it is to fix it after it's broken (or just let it break and replace the whole lot). So as we sit idly by and watch it break under the guise of "oh, it's just a little broken, it will be just fine", what we're actually doing is idly watching from the bottom, the snowball start down a long and powdery slope.

A question we need to ask is; will a shout of "Caution!" give cause for a honest stander-by in the right place and time to stop the progression or will that shout start an avalanche which results in a compete loss of all that's been worked for?

Originally posted by tyranny22
I heard a number the other day, I think it was something like 7 out of 10 suspected terrorists are eventually released? OOOOHHHH. That must be why it's such an issue. Because they're waterboarding private citizens ... like you and I.

Is it possible, and I don't claim to know either way, that if they're releasing 7 out of 10 prisoners, it is because they're following the law, even if they have suspicion that the released prisoners might be involved in illicit activity? Yours is not the only conclusion that can flow from the facts here. Just a thought.

[edit on 11/5/2007 by Togetic]

Just another reason to move to amsterdam.
But really, this country needs to wake up and realize what the current administration is doing to our rights as american citizens. I cant help but think of how are founding forefathers and anyone whos ever died defending our freedom is probably rolling in thier graves right now

Mod Note: Do Not Evade The Automatic Censors -- Please Review

[edit on 5-11-2007 by chissler]

Shsssh 86! You hear that cam idling? That's Jefferson and Franklin at 1000 RPM in their graves~!

[edit on 5-11-2007 by jpm1602]

reply to post by SilentBob86


On top of that, it's hardly this administration. This administration is just another rotation of the snowball that's been trucking down "the hill" for quite some time. I think the real difference is that this administration is doing a very poor job of keeping it on the low down.

Originally posted by tyranny22
Since when do we give rights to POW's.

Ever since we stepped up to try and be a "free and democratic" role model for the world.

Just as the Constitution is an old piece of paper and has no bearing on laws passed today

Please only state this as your opinion and not as fact. Either you haven't studied law or you're being sarcastic.

the Geneva Convention no longer applies to today's War on Terror and the tactics used by our blood thirsty terrorist opponets.

Which is why Bush and his cronies tried to change the definition of a pow? Just because the rest of the world follows it and one man chooses not to does not make it invalid.

I heard a number the other day, I think it was something like 7 out of 10 suspected terrorists are eventually released?

Ah, so being a suspected terrorist automatically makes you guilty of terrorism? I guess all the innocent people "suspected" of terrorism that were freed should be sent back to jail, eh?

"hmmm. Whoops our mistake. Sorry for the torture and all, but you're neighbor said you might be a terrorist. You know, we just had to make sure. Sorry you thought your were going to die and all that nonsense – no hard feelings, right?. Anyway, you're free now, so have a good life."

Speak Arabic in public or look "Muslim" and everyone suspects you as a terrorist.

To attack your self to invoke gustapo type laws for total control over what our forefathers died for . Freedom. We will still prevail!!!!

Well, Hamilton, sounds like you had the Reichstag fire incident right on the tip of your tongue. We might as well say it.

Wow. A lot of well said posts. HAMILTON, I see what your picturing. It does indeed say to me "Those who study the history, are bound to improve upon it."
Kind of a play on "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" and yes, I do see a likening to NAZI tacticts. It's sickening and I'm ashamed, to a point, of my government.

Grrrr.
Cuhail

torture is distasteful, but effective. its better to kill our enemies from afar with missiles and autonomous machines? thats not distasteful? takes the humanity out of it, and neccessary things are often hard to take.

at least this way its humanizing. untill we're able to extract information by some other fuzzy, warm method, its the only way. asking nice doesnt always seem to work.

like all agenda driven criticism, there is never an alternative solution offered. untill some better method than torture is offered it would be nice if the bleeding hearts could please shut up.

Originally posted by planetfall
torture is distasteful, but effective.

Effective at what? Getting good information or keeping the masses in check?

its better to kill our enemies from afar with missiles and autonomous machines? thats not distasteful?

Who said that it isn't?

at least this way its humanizing. untill we're able to extract information by some other fuzzy, warm method, its the only way. asking nice doesnt always seem to work. (Emphasis mine)

Humanize \Hu"man*ize\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Humanized; p. pr. &
vb. n. Humanizing.] [Cf. F. humaniser.]
1. To render human or humane; to soften; to make gentle by
overcoming cruel dispositions and rude habits; to refine
or civilize.
From the unabridged Mirriam Webster's dictionary.

If you had taken two seconds to look it up you would know that torture is the direct opposite of humanizing or humane behavior. It is proven that there is a direct correllation between children who torture animals and more violent behavior (rape, murder) later on in their lives. George W. Bush blew up frogs using firecrackers as a youth.

like all agenda driven criticism, there is never an alternative solution offered. untill some better method than torture is offered it would be nice if the bleeding hearts could please shut up.

Here is a solution. We stop torturing.

We shut down guantanamo bay, and the rest of our black site prisons around the world.

We pull out of Iraq and end our alliance with Israel.

We end domestic spying and restore civil liberties to Americans.

We prosecute the elected officials who used their power to obstruct the rule of law and override the constitution.

It occurred to me the other day the oddity of the argument "We shouldn't torture unless there is an emergency." If one of the main arguments against torture is that it doesn't yield useful information, why would we do it especially when there is an emergency? Either it does yield useful information or it doesn't.

Hello Cuhail, this is a video from a friend of mines sisters mate, it is up for an award...

www.mydamnchannel.com...