If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the New York-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer. Civil liberties groups and others contend that Padilla -- as an American citizen arrested in the United States -- is being denied due process of law under the Constitution.
It turns my stomach that the American people allow this administration to wipe their asses with the Bill of Rights. Even the most heinous criminals have rights when they are US Citizens in the US!!!!
I've already written my Senators and Congressman. I wish other Americans speak up too.
What do you think? Is the nature of the crime relevant? Can Ashcroft pick and choose who has rights and who doesn't?
Originally posted by KC@Nov 30 2003, 05:11 PM At issue is the government's power to designate and detain "enemy combatants," in particular in the case of "dirty bomb" plot suspect Jose Padilla, the New York-born former gang member who was picked up at a Chicago airport 18 months ago by the FBI and locked in a military brig without access to a lawyer. Civil liberties groups and others contend that Padilla -- as an American citizen arrested in the United States -- is being denied due process of law under the Constitution.
It turns my stomach that the American people allow this administration to wipe their asses with the Bill of Rights. Even the most heinous criminals have rights when they are US Citizens in the US!!!!
I've already written my Senators and Congressman. I wish other Americans speak up too.
What do you think? Is the nature of the crime relevant? Can Ashcroft pick and choose who has rights and who doesn't?
I wrote my Senator and asked him to advice your Senator to disregard your letter..
and this si what I think
America is becoming more a dictatorship every day. Americans held by America without counsel. Flaunting the Geneva Convention in Quantanamo. Pulling out of international treaties. Talk of martial law by ex-General Tommy. Assassinians of heads of foreign governments. Establishment of The Fatherland, oops, I mean The Homeland Security bureau. But what does one expect after the suscessful coup in Florida to get Georgie into office to start with?
Reelect Bush! We need some Muslim internment camps in Texas next!
We are at war. And even though I am a great believer in civil rights, we need to recognize that we are at war, plain and simple.
During war time, extraordinary measures are often called for and when the enemy can not be recognized by the uniform he wears; when the enemy can blend and hide in a civilian population; the way the war is fought must match the enemies tactics to be succesful.
The war is far from over, it really has merely begun.
Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Nov 30 2003, 05:55 PM I will not, I swear, I will not call anybody names but...
people, you still don't get whom are you dealing with...
you and your porno agenda makes me laugh...those who perished from Kantor Fitzgerald made more money than thisa entire baord and industry combined.
The ruthless enemy upon us will take EVERYTHING we muster throwing at them.
oh well....let's have another useless demonstration of solidarity with terrorists...
This isn't about a porno agenda. This is about one of my own elected officials taking away rights guaranteed to me since 1791. These officials took an oath to preserve my Constitutional rights when they took office.
This guy is a criminal and PROBABLY belongs behind bars anyway. However, disregarding the 5th and 6th amendments for Citizens it unexcusable. In fact, it puts the public at a greater risk, because eventually this guy will get out because the gov't has fucked up this case so much.
5th Amendment No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
6th Amendment In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
he is classified i believe as an enemy combatant. he was training in terrorist camps, had met with high level leaders of Al Queda and was involved in a plot to kill people in the US.
why are your rights being threatened? have you trained in Afghanistan with Al Queda lately?
5th Amendment No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
let me help you with your quote:
5th Amendment No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Originally posted by JR@Nov 30 2003, 06:52 PM they should have shot him at the airport.
he is classified i believe as an enemy combatant. he was training in terrorist camps, had met with high level leaders of Al Queda and was involved in a plot to kill people in the US.
why are your rights being threatened? have you trained in Afghanistan with Al Queda lately?
All American Citizens have certain rights. This guy is a scumbag, no doubt.
Holding a US Citizen for 18 months without access to legal counsel is also criminal.
Have we been actively "at war" for 18 months? If my memory serves me correctly (which is questionable), we haven't.
Of course we've been occupying and "guarding" many places around the world for years, so *technically* they could hold anyone and say it's a "time of war".
__________________
Need a kick-ass design done quickly?
I recommend Sex Creator - they absolutely ROCK.
Originally posted by Carrie@Nov 30 2003, 04:11 PM Have we been actively "at war" for 18 months? If my memory serves me correctly (which is questionable), we haven't.
Of course we've been occupying and "guarding" many places around the world for years, so *technically* they could hold anyone and say it's a "time of war".
playing semantics over 300 year old and irrelevent wording does not make either side of the argument more correct.
"public danger" - how many terrorist attacks were there in the last two years targeting westerners? how many plots foiled?
actually KC, after looking at it and reading it i think you are incorrect. it says "except in the case of...." nor shall any person...; nor shall any person; etc.
if you were correct, it would make the first part redundant.
KC, there was a time in this country when that motherfucker would have been strung up and hung from a tree by pissed off citizens. Only under a system this fucked up are we required to respect the consitutional rights of people who are trying to fly planes into our buildings.
Originally posted by Buff@Nov 30 2003, 04:33 PM KC, there was a time in this country when that motherfucker would have been strung up and hung from a tree by pissed off citizens.
Yeah, back when niggers and women knew their place, right? lol
Originally posted by JR@Nov 30 2003, 06:52 PM they should have shot him at the airport.
he is classified i believe as an enemy combatant. he was training in terrorist camps, had met with high level leaders of Al Queda and was involved in a plot to kill people in the US.
why are your rights being threatened? have you trained in Afghanistan with Al Queda lately?
KC, how many lives were saved because of his 18 months treatm,ent without a lawyer?
Information he provided was irreplacable...
therefore,
as somebody who has FAMILY in NY and not in Alaska which is not threatened by anybody,
I don't give a fuck about all the amendmends,
my FAMILY interests prevail over them.
It's a controversial issue. I'm surprised there wouldn't be more outrage on this forum.
Thanks for the debate.. I'm happy as long as I am free to write my Senators and Congressman with my first Amendment right to "petition the government for a redress of grievances"
Unfortunately for him, his crimes fall under the Patriot act. And under the Patriot act, they don't ever have to charge him with anything formally as long as he is supposed to have been involved in any terrorist activities. In fact, even if he is a born American, I believe he can lose his American citizenship under the act.. (or is that the Patriot act 2). And people still want to vote Bush back into office.. scary shit.
Originally posted by JR@Nov 30 2003, 06:52 PM they should have shot him at the airport.
he is classified i believe as an enemy combatant. he was training in terrorist camps, had met with high level leaders of Al Queda and was involved in a plot to kill people in the US.
why are your rights being threatened? have you trained in Afghanistan with Al Queda lately?
That is what is alleged by the government - the same government that assured us that Saddam was ready to deploy WMD on 45 minute's notice.
Some of us take seriously thoughts like opposition to "For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences"
And KC - you really shouldn't be suprised at the reaction here. It has nothing to do with Lensman or GFY, guns, Lensman or GFY, democrats, Lensman or GFY, GFY or Lensman ... and did I mention Lensman?
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Nov 30 2003, 09:26 PM It has nothing to do with Lensman or GFY, guns, Lensman or GFY, democrats, Lensman or GFY, GFY or Lensman ... and did I mention Lensman?
"It was Barzini all along. Lensman is a pimp, he would have never outsmarted Santino!"
Originally posted by LadyMischief@Nov 30 2003, 09:08 PM Unfortunately for him, his crimes fall under the Patriot act. And under the Patriot act, they don't ever have to charge him with anything formally as long as he is supposed to have been involved in any terrorist activities. In fact, even if he is a born American, I believe he can lose his American citizenship under the act.. (or is that the Patriot act 2). And people still want to vote Bush back into office.. scary shit.
It will be interesting to see how the Patriot Act plays out. I have a hunch the lawmakers got a little too greedy in some places.
The Constitution contains an oath of office only for the president. For other officials, including members of Congress, that document specifies only that they "shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this constitution." In 1789, the First Congress reworked this requirement into a simple fourteen-word oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."
Serge, I was also a little surprised that you said "I don't give a fuck about amendments"
I think YOU also took this oath when you became a US Citizen!!
Quote:
INA: ACT 337 - OATH OF RENUNCIATION AND ALLEGIANCE
Sec. 337. [8 U.S.C. 1448]
(a) A person who has applied for naturalization shall, in order to be and before being admitted to citizenship, take in a public ceremony before the Attorney General or a court with jurisdiction under section 310( an oath
(1) to support the Constitution of the United States;
(2) to renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which the applicant was before a subject or citizen;
(3) to support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
...
11-30-2003
Nick@ilynx: "MasterP, YOU'RE FIRED!"
an oath 
Linear Mode
