Students attempt Citizens Arrest on Rove!

reply to post by percievedreality

Originally posted by percievedreality

Originally posted by jsobecky
No, I'm not satisfied. How did Bush lie on his inauguration day? And remember, you'll need more than just your opinion here: you're accusing the President of the United States of lying.

Under oath he declared to uphold the Constitution of our country. Instead he has pissed on it and is about to throw out the 2nd admendment with the help of his stacked Supreme Court. This is not my opinion alone,

[snip]

Originally posted by jsobecky
Very clever, inserting NOT into the paragraph. Did you think of that all by yourself? Are you playing "Is so! Is NOT!"? And so Bush issued some Executive Orders. So what? So have many presidents.

Originally posted by percievedreality

Do some research, he has issued MORE than ANY president out of the 43 we have had.

And this means...what, exactly? So he has issued more eo's than any other president. So what? An eo is meant to clarify a law, and seeing as how we have been through some unprecedented times, it is not surprising that more laws need clarified.

Originally posted by percievedreality
FYI, Clinton did not fire "every" US Attorney.

Wrong again.

We should not forget that Bill Clinton�s first act as president was to fire all the U.S attorneys across the U.S. � an unprecedented act by an American president.

archive.newsmax.com...

You're getting a pretty good education here for free. I should start charging you.

Originally posted by jsobecky
I certainly do have faith in our system, our country, and our Constitution.

Originally posted by percievedreality
Wow, thanks for ruining mine!

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

Originally posted by jsobecky
That doesn't mean he can get off scot-free if he does anything illegal - he can't. He can be prosecuted as a private citizen for crimes he committed as President.

Originally posted by percievedreality
Wrong again. They have secured a spread in Paraguay, with no extradition laws (note that many Nazis fled there to after WWII) to the US. They will get away scot-free. They are not accountable for anything.

And until that happens, I suggest you chill out. You cannot arrest someone for something he might do.

But you seem to think that it's OK to persecute people because of your own insecurities and internal worries.

Originally posted by percievedreality
Does this bring down your "faith in our system, our country, and our Constitution." at all. It should, it certain has for me.

[snip]

Mod notes: Please review these links
Terms & Conditions Of Use.
ATS General Discussion Etiquette

[edit on 16/3/2008 by watch_the_rocks]

Originally posted by percievedreality
And LBJ or Nixon was not plotting the next false flag operation against their own citizens either.

Didn't LBJ whack JFK? At least that is what some claim. And he escalted the Vietnam War, imagine that a Democrat actually for the use of military force.......

reply to post by jsobecky


[snip]

I think you are the ONLY one who didn't quite get it. But after reading your posts it does not surprise me.

Now you call me a closeted Homophob? lol wow so you have nothing intelligent to contribute so you resort to this. and I am obviously not one you make no sense good lord. Its dumbfounding.

You are a sad person and I will not respond to you antics again. I was actually being light hearted with you but oh well...


Mod notes: Please review these links
Terms & Conditions Of Use.
ATS General Discussion Etiquette

[edit on 16/3/2008 by watch_the_rocks]

The bush apologists never cease to amaze me.

I agree that this was not the way that the kids should have made their point, but it sure is hard to get the attention of the media otherwise. I mean, the other day I saw a "don't tase me bro" t-shirt. Young people are passionate. We all spent years learning about how wonderful our country was supposed to be, and then we grow up and find out that it is all a struggling mass run by a corrupt pile of dung. I felt the same way and I still do today.

I think the argument can be made that the kids actions were too emotionally charged, but it was intended to gain attention and it served its purpose. Nevertheless, to continue to defend this bloody fascist administration is ridiculous. Why people continue to vote, for liars, against their best interests out of manufactured fear is simply beyond my comprehension. On another board today, I read a so-called conservative arguing for pages that the weakened dollar is actually going to benefit our economy.

These are truly strange days.

Originally posted by jsobecky
And until that happens, I suggest you chill out. You cannot arrest someone for something he might do.

Ah, but you can! All you have to do is to declare him/her to be an "enemy combatant". That changes all of the rules.

In fact, that's what this entire military campaign is about; imagining the worst possible crime that our "enemy" might commit, and killing/punishing them, now, before they might get the chance.

"We cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."

Those words were drummed out over, and over again; and it's a fundamental shift from the way things have been done in the past.

We've gone from "hope for the best, and prepare (defensively) for the worst", to "fear the worst, and preemptively take the offensive".

With a shift like that, those with the scariest imaginations become all powerful because they are the most "forward thinkers" with the latest ideas.

We're only a few gadgets away from Minority Report "Pre-Crime Units"; and in this case Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz are our "precogs".

I'm sorry, I guess you did say "arrest". Regardless, you most certainly can arrest someone for something they might do. Simply add "conspiracy to commit" in front of whatever felony it is that said person may commit, and you have an arrestable offense. Planning to commit a crime is illegal too.

Originally posted by jsobecky
But you seem to think that it's OK to persecute people because of your own insecurities and internal worries.

If that is what percievedreality is doing, then I'd have to chalk it up to being a product of the environment. Again, persecuting people because of our own insecurities and internal worries is exactly the fundamental shift that is occurring in our nation, and it's been trickling down, from the top, for quite awhile now.

[edit on 3/14/08 by redmage]

reply to post by flashback

Originally posted by flashback
The bush apologists never cease to amaze me.

Nobody here is apologizing for Bush. What we are doing is saying that to resort to violence before utilizing the system is illegal.

Do you disagree with that?

Originally posted by flashback
Young people are passionate. We all spent years learning about how wonderful our country was supposed to be, and then we grow up and find out that it is all a struggling mass run by a corrupt pile of dung. I felt the same way and I still do today.

I think the argument can be made that the kids actions were too emotionally charged

Yes, they are. That's natural. It's uncommon to find a young person with the patience of maturity, although they are out there.

Maybe that's why there is a minimum age to serve as President or Congresscritter?

Originally posted by flashback
Nevertheless, to continue to defend this bloody fascist administration is ridiculous.

I'm not picking on you, but that statement shows another trait of youth: knee-jerk reaction, and inability to look at something objectively.

Once again, this has nothing to do with Bushco. It has to do with the consistent application of our rights and legal system.


One final point for you to ponder: the protestors were not "kids" or students. They were members of the Des Moines Catholic Community "Happy Warriors" contingent. If I were a student there, and my school had laid out $40K for Rove to speak, I'd want my money's worth. I'd be awful upset at these two outsiders who decided to interrupt the speech.

reply to post by redmage

Originally posted by redmage

Originally posted by jsobecky
And until that happens, I suggest you chill out. You cannot arrest someone for something he might do.

Ah, but you can! All you have to do is to declare him/her to be an "enemy combatant". That changes all of the rules.

It certainly does change the rules. An Enemy Combatant does not have the full benefit of the Geneva Conventions.

Originally posted by redmage
I'm sorry, I guess you did say "arrest". Regardless, you most certainly can arrest someone for something they might do. Simply add "conspiracy to commit" in front of whatever felony it is that said person may commit, and you have an arrestable offense. Planning to commit a crime is illegal too.

In the case of conspiracy, the planning is the actual illegal act. But you made a good point.

Originally posted by redmage
If that is what percievedreality is doing, then I'd have to chalk it up to being a product of the environment. Again, persecuting people because of our own insecurities and internal worries is exactly the fundamental shift that is occurring in our nation, and it's been trickling down, from the top, for quite awhile now.

[edit on 3/14/08 by redmage]

That must be an individual thing, because I sure don't see it.

God Bless Iowa, those kids definately have my respect. I pray for the day these criminals all are brought up on charges.

Originally posted by jsobecky
It certainly does change the rules. An Enemy Combatant does not have the full benefit of the Geneva Conventions.

Right, once again according to the interpertation of your new false God, GW Bush. The Geneva Conventions were to be applied to the entire human-race to end abuses during times of war. Bush says no to a 60 year old internationally agreed upon treaties and this is okay? During times of war, all laws are off the table, you say? Okay, well when all our rights given to us are thrown out during martial law, which is the case during martial law, you going to be okay with that too? Well, when he has done the same thing to our own Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence, maybe then you will see how seriously corrupt he is.

Originally posted by jsobecky
In the case of conspiracy, the planning is the actual illegal act. But you made a good point.

Wow, I am so glad to see that someone else beat me to the part of reminding you of "conspiracy to commit" and that you can say you were wrong and they made a GREAT point.

Originally posted by jsobecky
That must be an individual thing, because I sure don't see it.

You don't see it? You just saw it in the event that is the TOPIC of this thread. 2 individuals acted out, persecuting Rove because of their internal worries! As I said before, this will continue to increase exponentially in our society as long as the iron curtain is in place at the Justice Department protecting these scum bags!

BTW, Thanks redmage for having my back man. Glad to see the truth seekers actually finding the truth and trying (hopefully but miserably) to inform those who are oblivous to the fact of the changes in our "democracy".

[edit on 14-3-2008 by percievedreality]

Mod Note: The Digital Ego – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 16/3/2008 by watch_the_rocks]

Originally posted by percievedreality

Originally posted by jsobecky
It certainly does change the rules. An Enemy Combatant does not have the full benefit of the Geneva Conventions.

Right, once again according to the interpertation of your new false God, GW Bush. The Geneva Conventions were to be applied to the entire human-race to end abuses during times of war. Bush says no to a 60 year old internationally agreed upon treaties and this is okay? During times of war, all laws are off the table, you say? Okay, well when all our rights given to us are thrown out during martial law, which is the case during martial law, you going to be okay with that too? Well, when he has done the same thing to our own Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence, maybe then you will see how seriously corrupt he is.


[edit on 14-3-2008 by percievedreality]

Just to be fair here- Bush didn't change what the Geneva Convention said with regards to protections of different types of people. The Geneva Convention always had provisions for combatants that were not part of a uniformed, national military unit. His point was that terrorists don't get the same rights/protections as soldiers or (US citizens in a court). This isn't to say that they have no rights, but certainly greatly diminished rights.

reply to post by percievedreality

Originally posted by percievedreality

Originally posted by jsobecky
It certainly does change the rules. An Enemy Combatant does not have the full benefit of the Geneva Conventions.

Right, once again according to the interpertation of your new false God, GW Bush.

Knock it off with the childish snipes, OK?

How many times do I have to say:


Nobody here is apologizing for Bush. What we are doing is saying that to resort to violence before utilizing the system is illegal.

Once again, this has nothing to do with Bushco. It has to do with the consistent application of our rights and legal system.

Originally posted by percievedreality
The Geneva Conventions were to be applied to the entire human-race to end abuses during times of war.

Actually the focus was treatment of POWs

Originally posted by percievedreality
Bush says no to a 60 year old internationally agreed upon treaties and this is okay?

His interpretation of what is a POW differs from yours. Keep the facts straight and cease with the emotion, please.

Originally posted by percievedreality
During times of war, all laws are off the table, you say?

No, I never said that. You did. [snip]

Originally posted by jsobecky
In the case of conspiracy, the planning is the actual illegal act. But you made a good point.

Originally posted by percievedreality
Wow, I am so glad to see that someone else beat me to the part of reminding you of "conspiracy to commit" and that you can say you were wrong and they made a GREAT point.

Don't get too slap-happy. I wasn't wrong. I merely acknowledged the point that redmage made. You might take a lesson from him and try to make sane points instead of your hyper rhetoric.

Originally posted by jsobecky
That must be an individual thing, because I sure don't see it.

Originally posted by percievedreality
You don't see it? You just saw it in the event that is the TOPIC of this thread. 2 individuals acted out, persecuting Rove because of their internal worries! As I said before, this will continue to increase exponentially in our society as long as the iron curtain is in place at the Justice Department protecting these scum bags!

Don't you get a headache from exaggerating so much?

Originally posted by percievedreality
BTW, Thanks redmage for having my back man. Glad to see the truth seekers actually finding the truth and trying (hopefully but miserably) to inform those who are oblivous to the fact of the changes in our "democracy".

I can't speak for redmage, but I don't think he was covering your back. It seemed he was attempting to discuss the topic rationally, unlike you.

You really need to calm down and accept the fact that people have different opinions than you. That's not an excuse for you to snipe at them. My acknowledgment of the good point he made was an attempt to encourage the type of reasoned debate he showed.

Mod notes: Please review these links
Terms & Conditions Of Use.
ATS General Discussion Etiquette

[edit on 16/3/2008 by watch_the_rocks]

reply to post by percievedreality



Hate to break this to you, but there are a lot of people fully capable of doing what Timothy Mcveigh did, with no recourse to gov't. black ops. required. It only takes a little bit of intelligence, a little bit of insanity, and a whole lot fertilizer, mix in a little hatred and bingo, there you go.

Welcome to the post 911 world. There is no going back.
I'm afraid that unless Bush and minions are held accountable for a breathtaking array of abuses of power, unimaginable ineptitude and blatant cronyism, a litany of future tryants, their cabals and professional election thiefs will well study the groundbreaking methodology and tactics of this administration. Rove's handbook will be must-read.
The die is cast, and the blueprint of future US governance has been revealed.
There are no higher stakes on the planet than that of the control of the United States government and military. Our once seemingly solid democracy has shown itself to be stunningly vulnerable to those in key poitions able to subvert once reliable checks and balances at will - in pursuit of dark, secretive agendas.
Beware of the next false flag operation that may very well make the 'attacks' of 911 seem like a cake walk by comparison.

reply to post by ExpertTexpert


It never ceases to amaze me how the other side sees things.

It's like Bush created AQ and the 9/11 attacks. Never mind that AQ was around far before Bush took office and the previous U.S. govt did next to nothing to stop his continual escalating of attacks. You keep believing it's all a big bad NeoCon plot. Just wait till Pres Obama has to invade Pakistan, then you will be chirping about how he is just a "stooge" too. Heck, you'll probably still blame Bush and the Republicans for that won't you?

Do you honestly think that Radical Islamic Fundamentalism is a creation of the U.S, specifically the Republicans?

Originally posted by jsobecky
An Enemy Combatant does not have the full benefit of the Geneva Conventions.

Please attempt to quote that from the convention.

Even an "unlawful belligerent" holds "habeas corpus" under the detaining state.

Sri Oracle

Originally posted by pavil
Do you honestly think that Radical Islamic Fundamentalism is a creation of the U.S, specifically the Republicans?

1) There is suffering.
2) Suffering has cause.
3) Suffering can be cured.
4) Nowhere on the Nobel Eightfold Path to the cure did the Buddha mention entering a sovereign nation by force, bombs, and depleted uranium.

Although, I could see how a mistranslation in that direction could accidentallylead to a radical islamic fundamentalist guerrilla movement.


Suffering does have cause.

Sri Oracle

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by ExpertTexpert

 

It never ceases to amaze me how the other side sees things.

It's like Bush created AQ and the 9/11 attacks. Never mind that AQ was around far before Bush took office and the previous U.S. govt did next to nothing to stop his continual escalating of attacks. You keep believing it's all a big bad NeoCon plot. Just wait till Pres Obama has to invade Pakistan, then you will be chirping about how he is just a "stooge" too. Heck, you'll probably still blame Bush and the Republicans for that won't you?

Do you honestly think that Radical Islamic Fundamentalism is a creation of the U.S, specifically the Republicans?

reply to post by gormly


Hate to tell you this, but he wasn't called on the carpet because of his political views, it was because of his use of profanity and death threats. Whether or not they were "rhetorical flourishes" or not, there is no need to write like that. If you can't make your point without resorting to profanity and threats, maybe you ought to consider taking a creative writing course.

Okay, as you can see, I've made some edits. I should not have to make any more after this post.

If one member personally attacks another after this post, warns will be issued, and then post bans if the member does not stop.

You are here to discuss the topic in the OP, and not snipe at each other.