Profile
Search
Register
Log in
National Defense Authorization Act
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
3flip



Joined: 30 Dec 2003
Posts: 2201
Location: Minneapolis
 Reply with quote  

empti wrote:
Obama not only retracted his threat to veto but also endorsed the bill mere moments before it went for a vote in the house last night, where it passed, 283 to 136.
It goes to the Senate today where an earlier version of the legislation passed something like 93-7.
Shit is bonkers.


fuckin a
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:23 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
jakethesnake
guy who cried about wrestling being real


Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 6311
Location: airstrip one
 Reply with quote  

And thus, inalienable rights are no longer inalienable. That was a quiet death.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:37 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Bicycle



Joined: 17 Nov 2008
Posts: 413
 Reply with quote  

empti wrote:
Obama not only retracted his threat to veto but also endorsed the bill mere moments before it went for a vote in the house last night, where it passed, 283 to 136.
It goes to the Senate today where an earlier version of the legislation passed something like 93-7.
Shit is bonkers.


dont worry. He'll fix everything in his second term

Obama 2012
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:00 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

crash wrote:
this isn't a conspiracy, it's out in the open.


I think the point is, conspiracy theorists have been saying that this type of thing will happen and now it's happening. People have been trying to warn the public that the government is turning the country into a police state and people would laugh at them. Now, noone is laughing.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
crash



Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 5456
Location: the chocolate city with a marshmallow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption
 Reply with quote  

We all agree the government slowly eroding our basic freedoms in the name of security. I think that’s indisputable, even Republicans wouldn’t disagree with that (though they might argue it’s both good and necessary). The disagreement between the “conspiracy theorists” and the mainstream left* is in how far those rights will be restricted and what the motivation for those restrictions are.

The conspiracy mineded tend to think that our government is deliberately turning this country into a 1984-style police state in order to cement the control of the elite over the people. I, and most of the left, think that we’re headed in a dangerous direction but we’re nowhere near a true police state, and that the people in our government who are supporting these restrictions are doing it out of an misguided but honest attempt to protect our security (or at least to secure the votes of those who believe so).

You’re building a strawman – “they said this could never happen” – and then claiming victory when you knock it over.



*I realize this is a pretty vague term but I couldn’t think of anything better. I’m not referring to Democrats, who tend to swing pretty hard to the right on national security. I’m thinking more of the media, the New Yorker, Harpers, Salon, who have been deeply concerned with loss of civil liberties but not FEMA camps and the Amero.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:22 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

I'm definitely not claiming "victory". haha. But I know what you mean and there are people out there who are so obssessed with "proving the sheeple wrong" that they will gloat and even worse only see their side of the coin when confronted by dissent.

I can't say I agree with you though when you say that the leaders are making honest but misguided attempts to protect us when I can see absolutely no reasonable argument why ANYONE should be held indefinitely without a right to a trial or how that can make society any safer. If authorities suspect someone of a crime they should feel confident that they can convict said person. Its WAY too ignorant to be a mistake in my opinion.

It also goes against the fundamental principles of a free society. People have compared this act as treason and I would have to agree. Not only is there no practical/reasonable explanation for this, it makes it way too easy to establish a Totalitarian state.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:40 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MCGF



Joined: 22 Feb 2010
Posts: 367
 Reply with quote  

...

ron paul 2012?
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 4:02 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

Why is Rand Paul the only voice of reason here:

Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:18 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
crash



Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 5456
Location: the chocolate city with a marshmallow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption
 Reply with quote  

firefly, i think you give people too much credit, plenty of well educated people believe completely ridiculous things.

principled liberals like sanders also spoke out against it, but people don't seem to care because he's not a bat shit insane libertarian. the vote was 87-13. rand paul is not the only voice of reason on this topic.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:42 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
firefly



Joined: 27 Sep 2002
Posts: 3990
Location: Montreal
 Reply with quote  

In the media I mean. And when I said that I meant it as in "WHY HIM!?"

In other news ....

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/police-include-occupy-movement-on-%E2%80%98terror%E2%80%99-list.html
City of London Police have sparked controversy by producing a brief in which the Occupy London movement is listed under domestic terrorism/extremism threats to City businesses.

The document was given to protesters at their “Bank of Ideas” base on Sun Street – a former site of financial corporation UBS. City police have stepped up an effort to quell the movement since they occupied the building on 18 November, with the document stating: “It is likely that activists aspire to identify other locations to occupy, especially those they identify with capitalism.

“Intelligence suggests that urban explorers are holding a discussion at the Sun Street squat. This may lead to an increase in urban exploration activity at abandoned or high profile sites in the capital.” The Occupy movement is listed alongside threats posed by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC), Al Qaeda and Belarusian terrorists.

“Just the words themselves are enough to deceive the public opinion and this is what we see at the moment,” Occupy spokesman Spyro Van Leemnen told Yahoo! News. “We are clearly nothing to do with extremists or terrorists, we are a peaceful group and we do use direct action to raise our point but definitely not terrorism.

“The building has been abandoned for a good few years now and we think it is crazy for a bank to have it empty and not used when we know at the same time there are so many family homes that have been repossessed. Occupying that building and giving it back to the community is definitely not a terrorist act,” he added.

Commenting on the document, City of London Police said: “[We] work with the community to deter and detect terrorist activity and crime in the City in a way that has been identified nationally as good practice.

“We’ve seen crime linked to protests in recent weeks, notably around groups entering office buildings, and with that in mind we continue to brief key trusted partners on activity linked to protests.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If American occupy protesters are seen this way, with this new law in place that is a very scary prospect.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:49 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19373
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Issues like this is where you could really justify a Ron Paul led tea party having a good chunk of votes in congress.

Pretty disappointed in Obama. 2012 is going to be a direly depressing vote between two incredible evils.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 6:00 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
mancabbage



Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 9263
Location: london
 Reply with quote  

has obama explained his U turn anywhere?
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 6:19 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
empti



Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 132
Location: everywhere you want to be
 Reply with quote  

mancabbage wrote:
has obama explained his U turn anywhere?


I think it had something to do with a last minute change defining how much control/involvement the executive branch would have over military "detainees".
His advisers had told him it'd the shrink counter-terrorism abilities if passed as is, and thus the change to appease Obama('s advisers) was made last minute, veto threat dropped, endorsement given, and away we went.

edit: but nah, i dont think he's actually, publicly, explained the reasons behind his backpedal.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 6:25 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2216
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

Once he ok'd the targeted killing of Anwar Al Awlaki, it would be hard for him to say much about this.
Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 6:30 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Plum Puddin'



Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 1829
Location: Run Ebola, Run.
 Reply with quote  

Post Thu Dec 15, 2011 7:23 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:03 am
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon