Congress are going to pass a bill today, that will change your world

What freedoms have we lost?

NOT AGAIN.

ATS Thread

Except for the petty complaints about taking your shoes off to get on an airplane, I didn' see any arguments detailing anyones loss of personal freedoms that were any different than the debate we've had on this thread regarding unlawful detainment. And I'm sure you now my position in that regard.

Yeah right, you red 11 pages in 10 minutes? Yeah, I know you're position, you relativise with North Korea and China and if German Nazi would be there, you would relativise with them.

Sorry, but I find the concept of relativism completly stupid.

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by darkbluesky
What freedoms have we lost?

You really dont know? You dont understand hat is slowly happening do you? I think after reading posts by some of our younger people that we are destined to lose the republic. Every generation let it slip a little further. This has been going on for so long now, slowly but surely we will be lisensed and regulated until we will need a permit and permission for everything we do. That is the definition of totalitarinism. It is the mommy state. Look at the trust we had in each other and the freedom we had in the 1800's then ask me that question again. It is excellerating so fast now more people can percieve it.

You cant take a country by the state like governements used to do. There is too much communication, and they have learned from the past forcfully taking a nation never lasts. So they do what is termed, "The boiling Frog method" I am sure you have heard of this before so I wont repeat it. I am sorry you cannot fathom what is happening, after participating in that torture thread I kind of feel deflated.

I wonder if the Swiss need American trained Firemen?

Except for the petty complaints about taking your shoes off to get on an airplane, I didn' see any arguments detailing anyones loss of personal freedoms that were any different than the debate we've had on this thread regarding unlawful detainment. And I'm sure you now my position in that regard.

We are still free to:

worship any God we choose
assemble
dissent
carry arms
deny quarter to the milita
vote
have a speedy trial w/ representaion (as long as you're not a "you know what")
post bail "not to much"


I understand the concern with warrantless communication inteception. I dont like it either. But whats lost here is the right to an expectation to a certian degree of privacy. Scholars will argue that electronic impulses travelling thru wires and the air are in the public domain, no different than yelling across the street.

Originally posted by darkbluesky

worship any God we choose
assemble
dissent
carry arms
deny quarter to the milita
vote
have a speedy trial w/ representaion (as long as you're not a "you know what")
post bail "not to much"

Once you lose the items above, it is too late to fight back. We are being set up, the tools are being placed for the big attack. Then the majority will ask to give up the above for protection. I cant beleive everyone cannot see that, it is so obvious. Like I said before, is there something in the water?

worship any God we choose

If you're muslim, it's near a no-no.

assemble

Protest is a form of assemble and it depends where, you have free-speech zone, it depends why you protest, if it's a pro-Bush, yeah, against Iraq, you have fair chances of getting arrested, there's plenty of example where people were arrested, and plenty where not. It's illegal to protest for animals rights due to a new bill.

dissent

There's a few example that are against you're point, the guy who get arrested because he critized Cheney.

carry arms

Less and less.

vote

Vote!! HAHAHA, voting is a pure joke, democrats and republicans are the same crap, also Diebold.

have a speedy trial w/ representaion (as long as you're not a "you know what") post bail "not to much"

Abuses, place to more and more abuses, patriot act, military commission act.

Also, here a little GOP video for everyone who's scare of Osama in his cavern. Source


[edit on 19-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

Originally posted by darkbluesky
What freedoms have we lost?

You really dont know? You dont understand hat is slowly happening do you? I think after reading posts by some of our younger people that we are destined to lose the republic. Every generation let it slip a little further. This has been going on for so long now, slowly but surely we will be lisensed and regulated until we will need a permit and permission for everything we do. That is the definition of totalitarinism. It is the mommy state. Look at the trust we had in each other and the freedom we had in the 1800's then ask me that question again. It is excellerating so fast now more people can percieve it.

You cant take a country by the state like governements used to do. There is too much communication, and they have learned from the past forcfully taking a nation never lasts. So they do what is termed, "The boiling Frog method" I am sure you have heard of this before so I wont repeat it. I am sorry you cannot fathom what is happening, after participating in that torture thread I kind of feel deflated.

I wonder if the Swiss need American trained Firemen?

LoneGunMan, I feel your passion about this and I admire it but it's not the 1800's anymore. Neverwill be again. We live in a different world, and Im not talking about terrorism or politics, it's everything. Pace of life, technology, population size, degrading of common cilivilities, etc.
Remember when you were 10, 18, 30. You think, behave, feel differently now dont you? Society is growing up and changing as well.

My advice is, and dont take this the wrong way....Channel your passion about this in a dfferent way. Instead of debating these points here, organize a group in your neighborhood, hook up with another one in another neighborhood, and another, march downtown, then to DC in BIG numbers, Tell "the bastards" what you want. Do it at the voting polls too. Before you tell me there is no difference in the parties - get your own candidate on the ballots.

When you go to DC let me know I'll be there with ya.

Im not "pro"-Military Commissions Act - I'm just not afraid of it, so I'll be happy to help you bring it down.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Yeah right, you red 11 pages in 10 minutes?

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

yes I did. that's approx. one page/54seconds - not too tough.

Originally posted by darkbluesky

My advice is, and dont take this the wrong way....Channel your passion about this in a dfferent way. Instead of debating these points here, organize a group in your neighborhood, hook up with another one in another neighborhood, and another, march downtown, then to DC in BIG numbers, Tell "the bastards" what you want. Do it at the voting polls too. Before you tell me there is no difference in the parties - get your own candidate on the ballots.

When you go to DC let me know I'll be there with ya.

Im not "pro"-Military Commissions Act - I'm just not afraid of it, so I'll be happy to help you bring it down.

I was born in the wrong time...



[edit on 19-10-2006 by LoneGunMan]

Isn't your freedom and the freedom of your kids worth a job?

I guess the only thing I have left to say is I hope you're wrong about all this.

Best of luck to you.


[edit on 10/19/2006 by darkbluesky]

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Except for the petty complaints about taking your shoes off to get on an airplane, I didn' see any arguments detailing anyones loss of personal freedoms that were any different than the debate we've had on this thread regarding unlawful detainment. And I'm sure you now my position in that regard.

Interesting. You did actually read this bill, did you not? How about the Patriot Act? Or Patriot II? I'm thinking you didn't, I suggest you do.

We are still free to:
worship any God we choose

So far.

assemble

Yeah, as long as you aren't a property rights activist, a defender of the consitution against the federal government or the UN, anti-abortion, gun rights activist, or other related "terrorist" groups. Click and see.

dissent

See above.

carry arms
deny quarter to the milita
vote
have a speedy trial w/ representaion (as long as you're not a "you know what")
post bail "not to much"

Infringed
I can't believe you're bragging about that one
Why vote when Diebold does it for you
Speedy trial...unless they're too busy torturing you.
post bail...see above.

We're not seeing a Nazi takeover of America, but the constitution is being no less sidestepped. I have not personally been effected by this, but I also am not living a pipe dream where I think this'll never happen.

I understand the concern with warrantless communication inteception. I dont like it either. But whats lost here is the right to an expectation to a certian degree of privacy. Scholars will argue that electronic impulses travelling thru wires and the air are in the public domain, no different than yelling across the street.

I haven't heard "scholars" argue that; were it legal, it wouldn't have made the waves it did.

Again, I'll never understand why people feel the need to glorify and/or play down these laws like there's nothing wrong. It doesn't matter if Bush is a perfect angel and really does nothing wrong; the powers he's leaving in place take our guarantees out of the constitution and leave them up to a man, whether than man's the president, VP, SoD, or a faceless federal agent, it's wrong.

Originally posted by Astygia

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Except for the petty complaints about taking your shoes off to get on an airplane, I didn' see any arguments detailing anyones loss of personal freedoms that were any different than the debate we've had on this thread regarding unlawful detainment. And I'm sure you now my position in that regard.

Interesting. You did actually read this bill, did you not? How about the Patriot Act? Or Patriot II? I'm thinking you didn't, I suggest you do.

Astygia,

I did read the Military Comm Act. every word- i just dont interpret it the same way you do.

Also read the Patriot Act.

As I've already pointed out in this thread, PA II is not law, it was a draft that no one ever saw, that was never submitted for a vote. It was a political play to get congress to re-authorize P.A. I




[edit on 10/19/2006 by darkbluesky]

[edit on 10/19/2006 by darkbluesky]

Astygia: Nice post in the other thread! This is very disturbing, so by these definitions of terrorists, I'm a terrorist and a lot of ATS members are too.

Why i'm a terrorist?
- defenders of the US constitution against federal government or the UN... I'm a pacifist one, but in case of extremists situations, I could be violent in self-defense. Anyway, even if i'm a pacifist, i'm a terrorist. So being a conscient american trying to defend his own country and his own law from domestic tyranny is a terrorist act? The government is admitting that they want you to shut up if they delete the constitution?
- Refuse to identify themselves. Sorry, but I don't give my identification to the police if they ask me, they don't have any reasons to do so and they don't have a warrant? Fark them.
- Attempt to police the police. Of course. If they are violating the constitution, i'll police the police because it's my duty.
- Political motivation is leninist/marxist. It's a crime to be a socialist?
- Animal Rights. It's a crime to try to defend animals from cruel treatments? They do human torture now, so i don't think they care about animals.
- Eco-terrorism. It's a crime to try to defend the ecosystem from pollution?

And I don't want to know the others states definition of terrorism, because i would be too sad. But just for the information, I would like a website with all of them... if anyone have a link.

Thanks from a domestic terrorist.

Astigya, I would ask you, if you have time and because you have much more knowledge than a lot of people here about those laws, to write an ATSNN OP/ED article about how's everyone could be jailed as a terrorist... Just an idea...

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Astygia,

I did read the Military Comm Act. every word- i just dont interpret it the same way you do.

Also read the Patriot Act.

How many different ways can you interperet "We have sidestepped American constitutional guarantees and have granted ourselves immunity from any prosecution"?

As I've already pointed out in this thread, PA II is not law, it was a draft that no one ever saw, that was never submitted for a vote. It was a political play to get congress to re-authorize P.A. I

No one ever saw it? Then reading it should be a trip for you.

You're partially right, though. Patriot II was never signed into law. Instead, on the day Saddam Hussein was captured (Saturday, December 13, 2003), Bush siged the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2003, also known as HR 2417, which had a different name but included most of Patriot II's provisions.

Bottom line,
The laws the american citizens used to thrive under and enjoy no longer matter.

The United states government is guilty of the highest level of treason.
They have removed your ability to question them, or the ability to decide the future of your own damn country.

you are now powerless, the corporate elite own your country.

If you dont agree with me, how about asking the people, who are meant to represent YOU, some hard questions.

They wont even give you a 'no comment' they will simply scoff at you, walk of smirking knowing you mean nothing any more. They are in control, are you are merely a means to the end.

The people that dont understand this, your the saddest people of all.
How do you not see what your government has done to your future?
How do can you not comprehend the level of treason they have committed?
all in the name of money.

God Bless America,
because it is resting in peace.

Welcome to the new world.



[edit on 20-10-2006 by Agit8dChop]

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies

In no way would I ever advocated putting the lives of other people in danger so that one innocent man doesn't get to go to jail,

You say that now, but if that one innocent man turns out to be YOU, some time in the not too distant future, you will be changing your tune.

Strange how those who are willing to see someone else treated unjustly don't think it will ever happen to them.

If and when it comes to your doorstep, you just remember as you're being dragged out at the point of some weapon, that it is o.k. according to you.

Afterall, you're just one innocent person...why should anybody put their own self on the line to save you?

When a president goes around the Constitution with new laws and bills and makes statements that his power as Commader-in-Chief under war givens him the authority to bypass the very law he had just signed claiming that Presidential power must be unilateral, and unchecked . . . that is the road to totalitarian government.

For him and for any other government to come after him.

The president bypass on the constitution and his claim on unilateral executive power can not be questioned, ask about his motivations or the way he is thinking while using his power.

This means that his unilateral executive power is geared to favor unilimited power under war, that is what he is doing and using during his presidential term.

That is why he has to keep wagging the hoax of war on terror, and under that executive power he is able to get any bills he wants passed with citizens knowledge or behind close doors at will.

Every time that Bush signs a bill he add a statements to it, under that statement he can expand his power, under his own interpretation of the law in question.

While we don’t get enough media attention of this littler fact the true is that President Bush has been very aggressive using this Presidential statements on bills.

He can interpret the law anyway he wants too anytime he signs a bill, this ensures that he can have control over the executive branch and its functions.

Other presidents has used the same signing statements But Bush has done it more than any other president.

The supreme court keeps a very close look to these statements as to see how far it may go over against the constitution.

Bush favorite term is "Unitary executive” and he from the 435 signing statements in his frist term alone has used it 95 times.

What that means well it means that Mr. Bush has given rights to bypass congress or the courts, base on interpretations of the constitution violate treaties, go against his own signed legislation.

What many forgot or perhaps the new generation of young people is having a problem understanding is

That Separation of powers is not just a phrase, but the foundation of our system.

James Madison wrote in the The Federalist Papers, No,47. that

The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny

www.vote-smart.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

To me I see the Bush administration opening the door for other presidents that will come after him, presidents that will be not chosen by the people but chosen with the help of the powers behind the government.

Yes we may still vote and have elections but the outcome of those elections will not be the ones that the people may want.

We in the US are only allowe two main political parties and any other alternative is quashed right away.

So actually our elections are pretty much controlled.

This my opinion and my views.

Originally posted by Astygia

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Astygia,

I did read the Military Comm Act. every word- i just dont interpret it the same way you do.

Also read the Patriot Act.

How many different ways can you interperet "We have sidestepped American constitutional guarantees and have granted ourselves immunity from any prosecution"?

Astygia, I don't know where your quote about sidsteping constitutional gaurantees comes from, but it isn't in the Military Commissions Act and therefore not subject to my interpretation on the Act. Is this your statement, or the statement of another's opinion?

A word regarding retro-active immunity, it's the same as grandfathering. When any, and I mean ANY new law is passed that defines crimes and possible punishments, the new law always states that activities occuring before the enactment of the law will not be punishable under the law.

As I've already pointed out in this thread, PA II is not law, it was a draft that no one ever saw, that was never submitted for a vote. It was a political play to get congress to re-authorize P.A. I

No one ever saw it? Then reading it should be a trip for you.

Soylent Communications? Daily Rotten? Electronic Frotier Foundation? Please, do not try to pass off a manufactured document that alleges to summarize a Draft US government document, that no one here has ever seen, as legitimate. Take note of how the authors formatted the document to fool people into thinking it was an official library of Congress document. When you have not seen the actual document, how can you trust the "transcribers" to faithfully convey the information.

If EFF or Alex Jones or whomever, had a leaked version of PA II, why didn't we ever see a scanned copy on the net? Why just transribed item by item summaries and opinions? If you can find a copy of the actual DRAFT doc. I'd like to read it.

I could say I saw some leaked draft legislation, retype it to make it look official, and have it say whatever I want. How can anyone debate its points? Your link goes to a fraudulent and useless document in IMO. I'd still be happy to discuss actual actual laws point by point however.

You're partially right, though. Patriot II was never signed into law. Instead, on the day Saddam Hussein was captured (Saturday, December 13, 2003), Bush siged the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2003, also known as HR 2417, which had a different name but included most of Patriot II's provisions.

Your link goes to the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2004. A quick review indicates its basically funding legislation. I see nothing sinister in it. And I'm sorry, no matter what it said, I'd argue that you couldn't say it included most of the provisions of the "Patriot Act II" since as I stated above, who knows what was in Patriot Act II?

If you want to discuss HR2417 we should start a new thread.

One more thing. You pointing out that HR 2417 was signed the day Saddam was captured seems to indicate you think the Admin. tried to slip it by. Please remember it was debated and voted on in both houses of congress well before the Pres signed it. Nothing secretive here IMO.

Marg, Your concerns about Mr Bush's use of signing statements seem like they may br well founded. I admit I don't know much about their use and potentcy. I'm going to delve into this. Thanks.