It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Rachel Maddow trashes Obama for shredding Constitution! Must watch!

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 23 2009 @ 11:09 AM
I am in favor of preemptive detention too.

I believe any one who has a predispostion to watch President Obama speak should be detained.

I believe any one who thinks voting Democrat or Republican as a means to straighten out our insanely corrupt and broken government should be detained.

On a side bar I believe anyone who watched American Idol should be detained.

Alright I think everyone should be detained until I have a chance to pass by and visit with the cattle prod.

I am in favor of giving the detainees Animal Crackers and Bugle snack crackers though as well...let's face it they are both fun!

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 11:19 AM

Originally posted by glnflwrs
No one has said anything relevant to the situation Obama was addressing... the people taken prisoner on a battlefield in a foreign country, belonging to no state army and not wearing uniforms.

Points of law...
1) The US Armed Forces do not operate, when in a foreign war, under the Constitution. They are under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The US courts, the Constitution, have no effect. They do apply to the president, and if ordered by the courts, the pres can order the troops

False, you take an oath to the constitution when you join the military. You take an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. To say the thing you are taking an oath to defend and protect has no bearing on things is just a plain out lie. Are you just another chickenhawk who's never served? Because I think pretty much anyone who's joined the military remembers that oath. Oh yeah, the president takes it too.

What is it called when you take an oath to something, and then turn your back and work to destroy/change it instead?

2) When in a foreign war, the Geneva Accords rule the treatment of prisoners taken. In an effort to keep from slaughtering enemy soldiers, everyone fighting must be in uniform, or have a patch, or ???
If there are fighters not in uniform, and they are captured, there is a clause in the Accords saying they do not have protection from the accords. That is there to try and keep gangs and terrorists from joining in a war. These non-recognized enemy fighters can be executed on the spot and don't have to be taken prisoner. We, though, don't do that. We are Americans.

This is again just plain stupid and wrong. If you are in a war, then the people you are fighting are also in a war. The only laws I ever remember in regards to a uniform was dealing with using the opposite sides uniform in order to spy. I guess according to this logic if you catch someone out of uniform then normal laws and such don't apply.

This sound like the British during the revolutionary war. All made because we didn't line ourselves up all the time and took pot shots behind trees. Yeah, they used these same excuses then, of course history looks upon them as being the barbaric ones.

3) Guanatanamo bay is not under the jurisdiction of the US courts.
The US tribunals were set up exactly like the Nuremberg trials. These detainees had no right to a trial, under the Accords, the UCMJ, or the Constitution. Instead, we were going to try the ones we had evidence on, and keep the others detained until the Iraq war was over. That is what everyone did in WWII, except Japan. Even Nazi Germany obeyed the Accords.

Any function of government is bound to the jurisdiction of the courts. Nobody is above the law, and while you and other might like to claim it, it's really just a lie and will eventually be exposed as such. The most one can say is they are not afforded some of the basic rights given to citizens. However, basic human rights are always to be observed and even in the Nuremberg trials they got a trial.

4) Obama was talking about the detainees in Gitmo, no one else. He told the world during his campaign, he would, End the war in Iraq, Close Gitmo, End the Patriot Act, (which has NOTHING to do with the Gitmo prisoners) and a bunch of other things. He has decided he needs the Patriot Act, he needs Gitmo, and we can't leave Iraq until it is stable.

Ok, and when it is clearly defined as that and only that then let us know.

He put on Bush's clothes and went on fighting. He lies about everything, all in the same speach. America, You got exactly what you voted for. And you ain't gonna' like the next three years.

Well something we can agree on there I suppose. Although to be honest I never expected anything less of him. I quit buying into the entire left vs right stuff a long time ago. Combine the government the left wants with the government the right wants and the people end up with a completely authoritarian government. And when was the last time a government program was gotten rid of?

So the people have gotten exactly what they have asked for, they just change who's gonna get what they ask for every few years. Checkmate.

[edit on 23-5-2009 by badmedia]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 11:31 AM
I have read most of that transcript. I have a lot of respect for Maddow even though I don't watch MSNBC. Part of what I understand is that this is a military matter and doesn't follow civilian guidelines. Some of these people have gone through extensive training to damage as much as they can. I'm still holding judgement on this issue.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 11:36 AM

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

I agree. This is the first I've heard on this though. What worries me even more is all the "domestic terrorist" stuff flying around lately.

Is it possible for them to use this on American citizens and completely trounce on pretty much all of their legal rights?

Absolutely! Under Bush's Patriot Act, Habeus Corpus is suspended for terrorists. Under his regime anyone they decided was a terrorist was a terrorist. Funny thing is, very few people seemed to get that. Now, under Obama's regime, it is spelled out very clearly.
Although, the President has the ability to suspend Habeus Corpus at times of war, etc the Patriot Act makes it a possibility anytime.

I was born to two Independent parents, one slightly left leaning the other right leaning. The one thing I am surprised about when I read threads on this site are all of the conservatives trying to trash Obama. I don't like most of what the man has done either but most of what I don't like was initiated by Bush. Where were you guys then?

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 11:53 AM
There is no way that MSNBC is changing its social liberal format,its all about going belly up and or surviving.there ratings are so low that they have to do something to survive.Madcow will never change,just do what she is told like the rest of the Obama usefull idiots.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:01 PM

Originally posted by David9176
Now just imagine for a moment that you were wrongly accused of being a terrorist and were detained by a government agency under the PATRIOT ACT.

Well now you can be held indefinitely WITHOUT TRIAL.

Don't you guys see the implications of this?

It doesn't matter who it's intended for...this is opening up an entire new can of worms.

If you are worried about individual rights and our Constitution...this should open your eyes...regardless of party affiliation.

Needless 2 say lots of you folks, ( come lately's) steered clear from this same concern,
alas it twas the GOP who had the horse...

funny it is the authoritarian righties who scream now...

not you D - other folks

it is very ironic...

PALIN 2012

[edit on 23-5-2009 by mental modulator]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:05 PM

Originally posted by mental modulator
Needless 2 say lots of you folks, ( come lately's) steered clear from this same concern,
alas it twas the GOP who had the horse...

As I pointed out earlier in this thread I am a bit surprised myself.
Seems the whole Jose Padilla case went right over a lot of peoples heads.

How convenient.

- Lee

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:11 PM
People are still discussing about republicans and democrats? Ok, here's the dirt on that one: The elephant is an ass, and the donkey is the elephant in the room.

There is no distinction, they don't matter. Political parties are vapourware, they never manifest change, unless you consider a change of guard substantive.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:23 PM

Originally posted by defcon5
As I stated in the other thread where this video showed up…

Since when is it illegal to hold people who have not committed a crime yet, but are plotting to commit a crime?

These news reporters should be required to take a class in law before they are put on the air to voice their personal opinions.

ya because everyone knows in LAW school they teach you that you can hold people indefinitely without charges just because they MIGHT be Conspiring

what law school did you go to? Satan's University of Liars?
sorry but thats the only school that teaches that junk

and anyways, she is reading a teleprompter, watch her eyes

[edit on 23-5-2009 by muzzleflash]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:26 PM
He's just another effing PUPPET!!! BLARGH.......

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:29 PM

Originally posted by badmedia

False, you take an oath to the constitution when you join the military. You take an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

look you and i both know, no one is defending the Constitution these days, especially the military

rather than soldiers coming to argue with me, why dont they go argue with their superiors about the Constitution instead

im sick of watching these govt goons and their soldiers poop all over our LAW
they consider the Constitution a joke, its only IN THEIR WAY

thats why i consider all of them a joke, they wouldnt know right from wrong if it bit them on the butt

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:02 PM
If he passes the law, then we the people should arrest him without trial

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:07 PM
He said they would hold people who have the potential to make an act of war.

Meaning that anybody who resists the government and fights back, in their mind, is an act of war and can be detained.

This is setting us all up so they take our guns, when we try and fight back, they detain us and probably torture those people into ratting other innocent people and they then detain those people.

Not to mention the dumb people in our society who will be tricked into ratting out their neighbors for something they didn't even do.

It seems this is the clam before the storm.....Storm lasting maybe 3 years and then hopefully we have had enough and even the dumb will join in and stick up for our country.

Thing that sucks is some of the dumb are already in the military and will be the ones killing Americans just because their superiors tell them they are terrorists.

Makes me so angry but I can't talk about it with anyone excetp on here because people will call me crazy or some shat.........even if I showed them that video.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:09 PM
All she does is put words in his mouth, and imply that he is saying things that he is not.

What Obama says is that they are not just going to release the people in Guantanamo until they figure out what to do with them.

The extreme left is not happy with Obama, so now they are attacking Obama just like the extreme right is attacking Obama. The extremists are working together to oppose common sense. Nothing new here.

Do you think they should just dump the people in Guantanamo out on the streets of the U.S.? Clearly, this is a very difficult situation to deal with, and reacting with total hysteria does not solve the problem.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:14 PM
Holy #!!!! Is this really happening? An Obama cheerleader, oops I mean a MSNBC commentator actually criticizing his holiness President Obama? It must be the apocalypse. (sarcasm)

Hahaha but seriously I never thought I’d see the day.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:15 PM

Originally posted by David9176
Obama is NOT matter how much you want it.

I agree on everything else except on this part. Obama is CHANGE, but change into a more Socialist dictatorship, that's what his administration is working on.

The elimination, or the dissolving of the U.S. Constitution, and the Bills of Rights, not to mention his call for a "New Declaration of Independence" which his blind followers like brainwashed, crazed, lunatics were cheering even as he kept making such statements in his speeches.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:22 PM

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage

I'm glad that Maddow brought this to people's attention, but Obama never actually used the preventive detention term and the media has already whipped it out and began hammering it over our heads. Reminds me of when "terrorist" and "enemy combatant" started being said on the news, like, every ten seconds.

Because he is trying to hide away the real statements, as she said, with "euphemisms", he would otherwise spell out if he had complete power.

But if you take away all the rhetoric, and euphemisms, that is exactly what he is saying.

Didn't you know people can imply certain things without spelling them out?

This is why most Americans didn't notice, and won't notice what he was actually saying in his speech. Because most Americans can't separate, and differentiate the euphemisms, and what Obama is implying.

[edit on 23-5-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:26 PM

Originally posted by muzzleflash
look you and i both know, no one is defending the Constitution these days, especially the military

rather than soldiers coming to argue with me, why dont they go argue with their superiors about the Constitution instead

im sick of watching these govt goons and their soldiers poop all over our LAW
they consider the Constitution a joke, its only IN THEIR WAY

thats why i consider all of them a joke, they wouldnt know right from wrong if it bit them on the butt

Well I'm certainly not going to argue that many people do things in the name of things when they don't actually belong or follow those things at all. It's apparent in politics, religion and anywhere you find people looking for power and control over others.

So if you want to argue that they aren't following the constitution and such, then I will agree with you completely. But just because they don't follow it, doesn't mean it's right or how it's supposed to be. And I'm certainly not going to let people pretend that what they do is how it's supposed to be as in the post I replied to.

While many of them may not know right from wrong if it bite them on the butt, I do.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:39 PM

Originally posted by David9176
Well what's even more crazy is that one of Obama's economic advisors is the CEO of GE...which owns NBC and MSNBC which explains the usual railing for Obama because of GE's green agenda.

Amazing really and i'm not quite sure what to make of it....but I"m glad she did this piece regardless.

It is simple, another UnConstitutional move on the part of Obama, as Obama made in his statements clear that certain GM executives should resign, and he had the gulls to state what GM and other auto industries should do. This is not what happens in a Republic, and in the free market.

When a president calls for the resignation of CEOs of private companies, and makes statements on what type of cars should be built, this is a sign of a Socialist society/government, and not a Republic which is supposed to be Capitalistic.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 02:42 PM
Great video. I don't watch much news at all, I really just don't see any reason to believe most of what "they" say. Not that I buy into all the NWO hype, at least not all of it anyways, it's just there are better alternatives to news, period. So I don't know much about the reporter or the networks affiliation, or any of that nonsense, it's really nonchalant in my mind.

So with that said, MO about this is simple: It's no surprise AT ALL. To me, this once wanna-be, fascist sub-type, oppressive regime has been slowly coming together for decades, regardless of what party is in control. Party or no party, I hope you do realize Fed Govt is ONE body, one operation, and ultimately ONE RULE OF LAW. Party's, to me, means jack s....., its sorta like the AL vs. NL in baseball. They both have some different ideas about the rules of the game, but in the end there's only one World Series Trophy, and it's pretty much the same trophy every time....

It's simple. Man (generally here, as a lot of those reading, this including myself, are a minority) is too easily swayed by greed and power, or the potential there-of. Think about it. Most (again, see above) political and financial powerhouses come from pretty long lines of wealth, power, or political influence. If you've been subject to that your entire life, what else do you know? Besides being subject to the behind the scenes operation of politics, or an early understanding of what it's like to really have power, or better yet, influence?

I want to believe man is good; like they guy at my work (me) who found a hundred dollar bill in a restaurant check binder along with a ticket with the server's name on it, and GAVE IT TO HIM even though no-one saw (me) find it. But too many times, I'm afraid, those that know they can will take it... Now not all GOP is bad, but too many high ranking officials and politicians have access to just too many resources to do what they please, even if they think it is justifiable or "right." It's just to easy sometimes to pocket the bill and deny the truth when really, no one who matters is willing to question you in the first place.

Sorry for the long post, if it gets too much, just scroll real fast it all gets blurry anyways
Just one thing to add : This new proposed operation, warnings of the "all new" Homegrown terrorists (this is new????), coupled with the reported homegrown terrorist plot foiled.... Throw all this together in a soup and what do you get? Well, you get a potentially very interesting future plate that could be in store for us. Don't freak, just always pay attention, you have to these days.

(Anyone see the doc. about Guantanamo bay prisoners being mostly derived from bounty hunter type captures turned over for profit??
sounds like a better name would have simply been G-bay!?! (sympothy for thoses wrongly accused, emptiness for those who really did belong there, however many)

Well, back to work, PEACE.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in