Uploaded by keithmsnbcer on May 21, 2009
Part 1 of 2: On The Rachel Maddow Show, Rachel discusses Obama's speech today with Vincent Warren with the Center for Constitutional Rights, who met with Obama at the White House yesterday with other human rights activists and civil libertarians about the concerns with Obama's embrace of Bush and Cheney policies. 'Preventive detention' at the top of the list. 5/21/09
See Part 2 at:
Part 2
Uploaded by keithmsnbcer on May 21, 2009
Part 2 of 2: On The Rachel Maddow Show, Rachel discusses Obama's speech today with Vincent Warren with the Center for Constitutional Rights, who met with Obama at the White House yesterday with other human rights activists and civil libertarians about the concerns with Obama's embrace of Bush and Cheney policies. 'Preventive detention' at the top of the list. 5/21/09
Originally posted by Indenu
I really see nothing special here.
Just because you dont agree with something your government does, Doesn't mean you need to throw a riot at them. Move to another country or take it up with your local federal representative, it's all you can do.
by the way, I agree with Obama. Arresting someone in the present is a great way to stop crime in the future.
( Smart people have to stop dumb people from doing what they think is right. )edit on 13-12-2011 by Indenu because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Azekual
That did not just happen. Please tell me that did not just happen?!
.......And to think, I stopped drinking today because I convinced myself I was over reacting. Damn I threw away some good vodka. Time to go get it out of the trash..... and maybe go buy some more. Im not sure I can deal with this with just two bottles of Smirnoff
by the way, I agree with Obama. Arresting someone in the present is a great way to stop crime in the future.
Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant
Originally posted by Azekual
That did not just happen. Please tell me that did not just happen?!
.......And to think, I stopped drinking today because I convinced myself I was over reacting. Damn I threw away some good vodka. Time to go get it out of the trash..... and maybe go buy some more. Im not sure I can deal with this with just two bottles of Smirnoff
NOOOOOO! Wasted booze is a sin, and I'm not even religious.
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
The world is becoming an interesting and terrifying place. Who knows what will come, though? MAybe enough people (including many of our troops) will awaken as a result.
Originally posted by baddmove
Wow.. just WoW!!
watch this video ATS..
I am speechless.
.
Did he just say all that....really?:puz
A legal regime to make indefinite detention legal??
edit on 13-12-2011 by baddmove because: (no reason given)
The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: "Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq") is a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States. It establishes that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, subject to possible further negotiations which could delay withdrawal and a referendum scheduled for mid-2009 in Iraq which may require U.S. forces to completely leave by the middle of 2010. ....
... Ratification by Iraqi Parliament
On November 27, 2008, the Iraqi Parliament ratified a Status of Forces Agreement with the United States, establishing that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, but allowing for further negotiation if the Iraqi Prime Minister believes Iraq is not stable enough. The pact requires criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and requires a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that are not related to combat.[3] U.S. contractors will be subject to Iraqi criminal law. If U.S. forces commit still undecided "major premeditated felonies" while off-duty and off-base, they will be subject to the still undecided procedures laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certifies the forces were off-duty.[3][4][5][6] A referendum of Iraqis will be held in mid-2009 on the pact, which may require Coalition forces to leave by the middle of 2010.[1] Parliament also passed another U.S.-Iraqi bilateral pact called the Strategic Framework Agreement, aimed at ensuring minority Sunni interests and constitutional rights.[9]
In Iraq's Parliament, the pact was supported by 149 of 275 members (~54%) from SCIRI, Dawa, the two Kurdish parties and members of the Sunni-based Iraqi Accord Front.[35] The pact was opposed by 35 members, mostly from the Sadrist bloc.[36] 91 members did not vote, fearing for their future if they said yes, others fearing the same if they said no.[11]
Originally posted by SunnyDee
Originally posted by 46ACE
seriously old news: Maddows' piece was first uploaded May21, 2009
Why the astonishment?
(Most of "you guys"here voted for him...)edit on 13-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
Sorry, but that's a really dumb comment. Did anyone vote in any president in the hopes that they go against our constitution? I doubt it.
Did anyone vote for GWB in the hopes that he'd take us to war and create the Patriot act? Doubt it.
It's very ignorant to condemn people for voting for Obama, just like it is for any of the Presidents we've voted in.
None of them have lived up to what we were sold in Campaign seasons.
Besides, it's all a game, so the Obama attacks or any other prez attacks are a waste of all out time. Think, us against the illuminati, and then you're on the right train.
