It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme court decision could cost us a CITY

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Supreme court decision could cost us a CITY


rawstory.com

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said that the Supreme Court decision to allow enemy combatants to challenge their detention could lead to the nuclear destruction of a U.S. city.

The decision marked the third time that the Supreme Court has ruled against the Bush administration’s handling of the Guantanamo prisoners, The New York Times reported Friday.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 11:56 PM
link   
What bologna, having your trial in the U.S. civilian courts will not lead to a nuclear destruction of a city. This fear mongering has got to stop, a lot of Americans will actually believe this mess.

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by jhill76
 


Wow, so civil rights = nuclear destruction? Crazy how we have managed to survive as long as we have back when we actually had them. If these guys are really as evil as they are made out to be, then it should be pretty damn easy to present a case against them and use the law to convict them.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by Karlhungis]



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Karlhungis
 


Exactly,
I dont remember any cities being obliterated before we detained and removed rights.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Oh god, just friggin nuke me and get it over with already.



Talk about...



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Mainstream media hard at work. We report you comply.



Biased media? Never.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Something is in the works, I think all of this fear mongering is pushing for us to believe that is was the terriosts, which in fact will be a false flag attack.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by jhill76
 


Indeed. Once they think we have become complacent with our fears, they will stoke the fires once again.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Dude... You went GIF crazy there.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   
A few things about this bother me.

First and foremost, this story has had zero MSM push. There have been a few commentators who addressed it on the day the ruling came out, but no real hoopla or analysis for a major civil rights victory. Not to mention this was the third such defeat on this issue for Bush.

Secondly, as alluded to above, I find it very disturbing that the neo-cons will try to link civil rights to a security threat. This seems to be a recurring theme -such as free speech zones, warrantless surveillance without probable cause, etc.

Next, why haven't we heard of any lawyers for detainees immediately filing a writ of Habeas Corpus?

And finally, why haven't Conyers, Wexler and Kucinich used this to bolster the argument for impeachment? Crickets, I hear nothing but crickets on this front.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Karlhungis
 


A bit "overkill" you might say?



Overkill is especially used to refer to a destructive nuclear capacity exceeding the amount needed to destroy an enemy.

The term was probably coined in the 1940s and was in common use during the Cold War era, referring to the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both nations possessed (and still possess) more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy one another many times over — nuclear overkill.

source



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 05:03 AM
link   
So If the NeoCons don't get what they want out of us, something horrible will happen - perhaps the loss of a city?

Didn't this used to be Called Racketeering?

This is like a gangster Taking "Protection fees" to make sure 'nobody' hurts you.... so nothing bad 'happens'

-Maybe if the NeoCons take enough of our rights and civil liberties away, the terrorists won't hate us "For our Freedoms" anymore... so to be one the Safe side, they will just take them all away (sort of like a pre-emptive strike).



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by doctormcauley
 


You are absolutely correct and I think the term that most applies is "extortion". The Neo-cons like to spread FUD - fear, uncertainty and doubt - as a means of consolidating power.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Yeah, sounds like another false flag operation just over the horizon doesn't it? I wonder which city will bite it. Ugh.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I see Gingrich is busy spinning up a little fearmongering. No surprise there.


The equating of civil rights with nuclear annihilation...

Let's just say I didn't see that one coming!



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
This sounds EXACTLY like the same tactics they have been using for the last 8 years....straight from the mind of ROVE!

No one can possibly take this kind of rhetoric seriously....

The tactic of using fear is causing the real terror of the free people of the world.
These kind of statements make these guys the real terrorists. Look at the definition if you disagree:




"the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion."


Fear-mongering......nothing less.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grafilthy
This sounds EXACTLY like the same tactics they have been using for the last 8 years....straight from the mind of ROVE!

No one can possibly take this kind of rhetoric seriously....


But many of the masses will. There are those who listen and accept what is repeated over and over to them. It is hard for me to believe this but the past seems to back it up.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   
This is the same fear tactic used by the KKK and others of low degree in the '50s and '60s.

It is always the refuge when logic fails, a fallback position that allowing "X" to happen will mean "Y" doom right on it's heels.

And really, are they saying all the terrorists are now in Gitmo, and the chance of them going free increases the chance they'll nuke some place later? OK, Let's just keep them locked up and end the war on terror and call it quits.

Or are they trying to say that the chance to have a court trial will influence people already willing to kill themselves in an act of terror? Do they really think it would influence the decision to act.

"Abdul, did you hear the news? If you get arrested, you actually get a trial?"

That's great to hear Mohammed. Now I feel a lot better about blowing myself up into a trillion tiny pieces."




posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Gingrich has always led the hyperbole Olympics of the neo-con mantra of the week contest in the search to find a catch phrase that would whip the party faithful into righteous indignation. Nice to see he is still active... How stupid can some people get and still breath?



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by mpriebe81
 



You read it right???

Move North!!! AAAaaaaaahahhhhh.....



new topics




 
3

log in

join