![]() |
| |||||||
Become a Gold or Silver Member
![]() |
| | Thread Tools |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Member | All those nay-sayers and free thinkers opposite to American typical beliefs in all aspects... you are in danger. Good job to America, for taking a step closer and making an identical Enabling Act of 1933. http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=16337 May luck be with all those who ever thought or said anything opposed to America.. I am leaving, this country is no longer safe for my thoughts. |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Member | W T F They cand do anythingto us based on what we think about america. We have free speech, free speech has been in effect since they made the bill of rights. IT'S IN THE CONSTITUTION. This country is becoming communist. If that is true, which I doubt because I have never heard of that website/news source before. |
| | |
| | #6 (permalink) |
| Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: Canada
Posts: 986
![]() ![]() | If anyone's interested, you can read the Military Commissions Act here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...930enr.txt.pdf I'll post more details on what I've been able to find out about it tomorrow, but for now I need to go to sleep. This is discusting, a complete violation of human rights. |
| | |
| | #8 (permalink) |
| Gunzfactorian Soldier | Yay, more anti-Bush propaganda. Honestly, what are you trying to accomplish at this point? He's out of office in 2008, at which point our next president can fix his screw ups (hopefully). That site is biased beyond reason. XD |
| | |
| | #9 (permalink) | |
| Gunzfactorian Commando | Quote:
So technically any other presidents don't qualify under this act? and that it is nullified? | |
| | |
| | #10 (permalink) |
| Gunzfactorian Soldier Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
![]() | who is to say another president like maybe the next one wont just use this act for their own gain? all it takes is a president having the majority of the people on his side in each state and he can do anything he wants. bush can do whatever he wants and say whatever he wants, but people will always think what they wish and he will never stop that. i think this war in iraq is wrong since we have no real reason for being over there. saddam wasnt connected to bin laden as they never proved it, he didnt have weapons of mass destruction and if he did he would have used them before, and we have no right interferring and taking over another government. we rebelled agaisnt our monarch 200 years ago and they can too if they wanted. bush is wrong for going to war with iraq, but i do support him in the war on terrorism. still, bush can come to my house if he wants and say whatever he wishes, but my mind and thoughts are my own and he can never strip them from me. i have no reason to fear this act since i am doing nothing wrong, so if i do gain reason to fear it, i will know that is the day that america has gone from a democracy to a dictatorship. incase bush forgot, he has 8 years in office at most, so he better know how to please the public if he thinks otherwise. however, he better remember that doing something illegal does not mean that he is safe from the supreme court, as they have their positions for life. |
| | |
| | #11 (permalink) |
| Former Caustic Mod Golden Gunzfactorian ![]() | .....Dear fraud. If you're going to piggyback might as well do it with style and well...at least you can say that they aren't lacking balls. I like the bright side. Tans are fun. |
| | |
| | #12 (permalink) |
| Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: Canada
Posts: 986
![]() ![]() | Yes, the site is biased. However, if you look at several resources, and the bill itself, it's clear that it allows many things that should not be allowed. A few examples off the top of my head (things I personally read from the act, as found on the Library of Congress website; this isn't from an indirect source): Alien unlawful enemy combatants (for a definition you're going to have to read it) can be held in custody, without trial, and without even being told why they are being held, until it is "practical" to do so. Meaning people can be held indefinitely without a reason being given to them. Alien unlawful enemy combatants cannot invoke the Gineva Conventions as a source of rights in there defense -- the detainees cannot claim basic human rights. And who can be called an unlawful enemy combatant (alien simply means non-US citizen)? Anyone as decided by a tribunal, whose members are decided by the President, or the Secretary of Defense. Those are just a few.. interesting details at the top of my head, there's a lot of questionable details in there, at any rate. |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |