Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Huh what?

Be more clear Shuma. Your ability to attack me blatantly is slipping into veiled attacks.

Fateweaver wrote:Oh my Lord Mann, it's even sadder that you and others take me seriously about my RAW vs RAI of where the Magna Carta applies.

I figured people could figure out the sarcasm for themselves when I started mentioning the RAW vs RAI of "on US soil".

Got to love how mods attack people. Nice on Mann. If I made that exact same post toward another poster I'd get a warning. Perhaps you should warn yourself?

I don't listen to Rush or Sarah and I don't watch the news. Not to mention Liberals LOVE to watch NBC and the Daily Show 'cuz you know they is right about them damn foreigners being treated unfairly and we should treat them as well as we do our own citizens.

I paid attention in History class but only when it pertained to the US kicking ass (like the Revo war, WW1 and WW2) and not to feel good bs like "we need to treat foreigners with dignity and respect even when they try to kill US citizens".

So you are full of total bs. You listen to what you wanna hear, America does good, but turn a blind eye when they do illegal acts. Thats Absolutely teriffic. You are uninformed.

Frazzled wrote:Everyone does realize the Magna Carta is utterly irrelevant and has no standing at all in the US right?

Well, if it were still 1775, it would be highly relevant...

When someone performs an illegal act against us it is horrible that we keep those same people in a white collar resort sucking tax payer dollars away while they await trial?

If Gitmo is so horrible and illegal than why is it JUST now that it's on the verge of being closed down. Clinton was liberal and he didn't see the wrong in it; so was Carter.

Surely if it was so illegal what we were doing it would have been brought up before the SJC decades ago?

Frazzled wrote:...If they show up with a bomb in their pants....

Wow.. see what I miss when I show up late to a thread!!

I could go so many ways with that quote....

GG

Fateweaver wrote:When someone performs an illegal act against us it is horrible that we keep those same people in a white collar resort sucking tax payer dollars away while they await trial?

If Gitmo is so horrible and illegal than why is it JUST now that it's on the verge of being closed down. Clinton was liberal and he didn't see the wrong in it; so was Carter.

Surely if it was so illegal what we were doing it would have been brought up before the SJC decades ago?

When you say Gitmo do you refer to the US base at Guantanano Bay, or the detention camp inside the base?

Maybe besuase just now, Gitmo wzs doing crap it wasn't supposed to, maybe just now, Gitmo did illegal acts.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:When someone performs an illegal act against us it is horrible that we keep those same people in a white collar resort sucking tax payer dollars away while they await trial?

If Gitmo is so horrible and illegal than why is it JUST now that it's on the verge of being closed down. Clinton was liberal and he didn't see the wrong in it; so was Carter.

Surely if it was so illegal what we were doing it would have been brought up before the SJC decades ago?

When you say Gitmo do you refer to the US base at Guantanano Bay, or the detention camp inside the base?

The detention camp I assume is where the terrorists are being held.

Fateweaver wrote:Huh what?

Be more clear Shuma. Your ability to attack me blatantly is slipping into veiled attacks.

I was implying that you didn't know of the relative relevance of the magna carta until frazzled told you what to think.

Frazzled wrote:Everyone does realize the Magna Carta is utterly irrelevant and has no standing at all in the US right?

The tragic humor being that FW literally had no idea.

But it’s not irrelevant at all. It’s a foundational document for modern, western democratic civilization, and for Habeus Corpus. We are trying to protect our civilization, right? We consider ours better because we believe in freedom, and in human rights, no?

Well I do believe you were also arguing about the applicability of the Magna Carta (pah, it probably has haggis stains on it)

Fateweaver wrote:When someone performs an illegal act against us it is horrible that we keep those same people in a white collar resort sucking tax payer dollars away while they await trial?

If Gitmo is so horrible and illegal than why is it JUST now that it's on the verge of being closed down. Clinton was liberal and he didn't see the wrong in it; so was Carter.

Surely if it was so illegal what we were doing it would have been brought up before the SJC decades ago?

You are incredible.

IT'S NOT THE EXISTENCE OF A LEASED BASE ON FOREIGN SOIL THAT'S THE DARN PROBLEM. IT'S USING THAT BASE AS A PLACE TO HOLD PRISONERS AND THEN CLAIMING THAT THIS SOMEHOW EXEMPTS THOSE PRISONERS FROM THE PROTECTIONS OF US LAW.

Wake the heck up.

Fateweaver wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:When someone performs an illegal act against us it is horrible that we keep those same people in a white collar resort sucking tax payer dollars away while they await trial?

If Gitmo is so horrible and illegal than why is it JUST now that it's on the verge of being closed down. Clinton was liberal and he didn't see the wrong in it; so was Carter.

Surely if it was so illegal what we were doing it would have been brought up before the SJC decades ago?

When you say Gitmo do you refer to the US base at Guantanano Bay, or the detention camp inside the base?

The detention camp I assume is where the terrorists are being held.

Then the reason why Clinton and Carter didn't speak out against it is probably because it was established during the Bush II presidency in 2002.

It was brought up before the Supreme Court in 2006. They ruled that the prisoners were entitled to protection under Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.

Fateweaver wrote:
I paid attention in History class but only when it pertained to the US kicking ass (like the Revo war, WW1 and WW2) and not to feel good bs like "we need to treat foreigners with dignity and respect even when they try to kill US citizens".

So, the least accurate parts are the ones you remember. Well, actually, that's not fair. Pretty much all of high school history is inaccurate, or full of holes.

The darn problem is us kissing the ass of foreign nationals and foreign countries and the resultant ass kissing is making terrorists nations bolder.

I don't give a goddamn that some document penned in 1215 led to some document that had prudence in 1776. As far as I am concerned if you aren't a legal citizen of the US and you commit crimes against the US you should not expect protection under the same set of laws and rights US citizens have. If humanitarians don't like it tough gak. The Bill and Constitution were not penned with humanitarians and civil rights leaders in mind; they were also not penned under the premise that 200+ years later people from other countries would be crashing planes into towers or trying to blow them apart in midair.

We aren't the bully country lots of other countries pen us as. We are the skinny nerd weakling shoved into lockers and pushed down onto the ground because the ones doing the bullying know they can get away with it because we won't fight back.

I'm done. Self-serving liberals will continue to pat their own backs and congratulate themselves on making wrongs right totally forgetting that had these extremists who hate the West and want to exterminate us (big news flash for some people on here I know) had NOT attacked us or engineered attacks on the US would NOT be getting tortured and would not be sitting in prison.

You break the goddamn law (and terrorism is an illegal act as well) you suffer the goddamn consequences.

I tire of humanitarian and libertarian bs. The same lot of you defending terrorists defend child molesters and rapists. I don't agree with that line of thought.

Had I been on that plane to Detroit that underwear bomber would have gotten stomped with a size 13 boot until his brain ceased to function. See, that is me doing my part to ensure fair justice in the US.

Fateweaver wrote:The Bill and Constitution were not penned with humanitarians and civil rights leaders in mind; they were also not penned under the premise that 200+ years later people from other countries would be crashing planes into towers or trying to blow them apart in midair.

Indeed. Or under the premise that people would be able to own rapid firing and much more deadly guns either, but apparently ...

Thanks for that.

I appreciate your effort to consult wikipedia this time. This post was more cogent than usual, even if I utterly disagree with most of it.

I love this country, and think it's the best one on Earth. The only reason I feel that I can say that is because of the principles upon which it was founded and the system of government we have.

If we can’t stand up for human rights while defending ourselves, we don’t deserve our liberty or our lives, as good ol’ Ben Franklin rightly observed back in the day. I reject the argument that because Ben Franklin never saw a plane flown into a building that he didn’t know what he was talking about.

Character is who you are in the dark. It’s easy to have principles and believe in something when there’s nothing riding on it. When it’s “our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor” on the line, that’s when you prove who you are as a person or a nation. People always argue in times of war or hardship that we can’t afford the luxury of upholding our principles. Those people are weak and cowardly, in my opinion.

Rapid fire?

I don't own a Bolter or a lasgun.

Besides, I've seen men shoot revolvers faster than some can shoot a semi-auto so the rapid-fire statement is kind of broad blanket statement.

Much like the concept and worth of rights then.

Fateweaver wrote:The darn problem is us kissing the ass of foreign nationals and foreign countries and the resultant ass kissing is making terrorists nations bolder.

What terrorist nations? There aren't any. I mean, you could count Iran as a terrorist supporter, but there aren't any nations that are composed of terrorists.

Fateweaver wrote:
We aren't the bully country lots of other countries pen us as. We are the skinny nerd weakling shoved into lockers and pushed down onto the ground because the ones doing the bullying know they can get away with it because we won't fight back.

We're fighting two war right now.

Fateweaver wrote:
I'm done. Self-serving liberals will continue to pat their own backs and congratulate themselves on making wrongs right totally forgetting that had these extremists who hate the West and want to exterminate us (big news flash for some people on here I know) had NOT attacked us or engineered attacks on the US would NOT be getting tortured and would not be sitting in prison.

No one is defending terrorists, or pretending that what they do is right. The only argument here is over how we should process suspected terrorists.

Fateweaver wrote:
You break the goddamn law (and terrorism is an illegal act as well) you suffer the goddamn consequences.

Yes, and we're debating how to best process people who are alleged to have broken the law.

Fateweaver wrote:
I tire of humanitarian and libertarian bs. The same lot of you defending terrorists defend child molesters and rapists. I don't agree with that line of thought.

Defending a person alleged of a crime is not the same defending someone who has been convicted of a crime, and even that is not a certain standard.

Fateweaver wrote:
Had I been on that plane to Detroit that underwear bomber would have gotten stomped with a size 13 boot until his brain ceased to function. See, that is me doing my part to ensure fair justice in the US.

No it isn't, its you behaving as a vigilante.

I'm not going to argue with 2 mods even if I'm partly right. That just leads to bad things happening.

You believe what you will, I believe what I will. I don't believe that non-citizens, regardless of what any piece of paper says, should have equal rights as citizens; just like red and other anti-gun people feel the 2nd Amendment doesn't mean what it means or it should be amended to mean something differently.

You won't change my mind. My idea of justice for terrorists and rapists and child molesters is a .45 to the back of the skull where the spinal cord meets the brain stem; not white collar resorts.

I'm not going to argue with 2 mods even if I'm partly right.

So what will you do currently, when you are not only wrong, but mind-bendingly misinformed? If thats what you do under optimal circumstances I'm interested to see how you'll react during the current, less than ideal ones.

Fateweaver wrote:The darn problem is us kissing the ass of foreign nationals and foreign countries and the resultant ass kissing is making terrorists nations bolder.

YES! It's the fault of those damn furriners!

Fateweaver wrote:I'm not going to argue with 2 mods even if I'm partly right. That just leads to bad things happening.

You believe what you will, I believe what I will. I don't believe that non-citizens, regardless of what any piece of paper says, should have equal rights as citizens; just like red and other anti-gun people feel the 2nd Amendment doesn't mean what it means or it should be amended to mean something differently.

You won't change my mind. My idea of justice for terrorists and rapists and child molesters is a .45 to the back of the skull where the spinal cord meets the brain stem; not white collar resorts.

Red's not a Mod, he just plays one on TV.
When we're not in offical mod mode we can arguie and be argued with like everyone else. Except Alpharius, he's just scary. Lorek sounds scary but he's just drunk (again).
now that i think about it...

Frazzled- Crystal meth and hershey bars
Mannahin- sock puppets
Lorek-booze or failing that, sterno
Redsyn- binder clips (small size only SMALL SIZE ONLYYY!!!)
Alpharius-world domination one horseradish at a time
Insaniak-cute kittens and cheese whiz. occasionally electricity.
malfred-socks
Killkrazy-Japanese lacquer (sniffing it that is)
Jin/Ketara-insider trading.

and of course yakface/legoburner-restoring the the greater glory of Cthulu.
there's more but I would just be talking out of school.

Fateweaver wrote:The darn problem is us kissing the ass of foreign nationals and foreign countries and the resultant ass kissing is making terrorists nations bolder.

What, bolder than flying two planes into The World Trade Center, and one into The Pentagon? That's pretty bold, mate. Just saying.

Something along the lines of nuking DC could be bolder, especially if they stick it up their rectums in order to sneak it in.

That's a very large rectum.

Or a very small snuke.

Frazzled wrote:Really? how is that again?

Carnation Revolution in Portugal
People Power Revolution in the Phillipines
Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia
Bulgarian Revolution
The Singing Revolution in the Balkans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fateweaver wrote:Frazz, I think you and I missed the memo stating that terrorists who blow up buildings over here and crash planes into skyscrapers have the same rights that you and I do.

So who decides who gets any rights at all, who gets some, and who gets none?

Well so far Obamanation is deciding everyone is on equal footing.

That the underwear bomber has as many and equal rights as a man that holds up a liquor store or a gas station.

Sure the obvious outcome will be vastly different, maybe, but that doesn't excuse the fact that this country is kissing the underwear bombers ass to make itself look good to the rest of the world.

Lets not fear though. According to the moron who is our SoD we had the situation under control and the system works. Explain how the system worked to let a foreigner buy a one way ticket with cash who happened to have not a single piece of luggage and he wasn't looked at twice or questioned?

Oh yeah. Forgot. To question a person twice about their purposes for doing such a thing as he did would be profiling and we can't allow that to happen.