US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

From politics to poetry, if it isn't covered in one of the other forums and you want to share it with us, put it here.

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby VectorAWX3 » Thu Sep 28, 2006 8:00 am

Ken, laws aren't great. They're not terrible. They are what they are. Why does anyone say I can't fuck chickens? I'm not hurting anyone (except for the chicken, which would likely be turned into McNuggets had I not fusked it.) And you know what? Law or no law, if I'm so inclined, I'll fuck chickens anyway. Ain't much anyone can do to stop me.

Yes, I like laws. They work for me and you walking down the street and collecting a paycheck. I'm not convinced they hold much weight when it comes to what the CIA wants to do to guys they catch overseas.

Bleh. You go with your bad political self! Fight the power. I wish you luck. Meanwhile, I'll fuck chickens and the CIA will rip off fingernails. And nobody will do anything to stop us, law or no law.
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby Bauhaus » Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:11 pm

Despite all, I'm a huge fan of the Constitution. Its not "democracy" that we should be trying to spread (but not force on people) but individual rights

As much as our system of laws does fail occasionally, for the most part (and this may be less true today, thanks to the current environment) we still believe that it's better to let a guilty person go free than to let an innocent man go to jail.

Look at the crazy guy associated with the Ramsey case. He might be released on child porn charges in Calif because the police lost his computer that had all the evidence on it. They may try to charge him with something else if the case is dismissed based on what they still have, but knowing hes guilty and actually convicting him of a crime, without evidence, is still pretty tough.

Anyway, we have a judicial system that tries (in theory at least) to make sure we dont get to carried away with our laws or our attacks on individual freedom.

Its still pretty much one person at a time in this country. Our Constitution (and Bill of Rights) is pretty much what its all about.

Now we have new bills being passed that basically say that if youre labeled a terrorist you dont have any protection under the Constitution. I cant think of anything worse for us to do (other than stop following the intent of the Geneva Convention.)
Blood for the Blood God!
User avatar
Bauhaus
 
Posts: 2826
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:30 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby VectorAWX3 » Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:15 pm

Hang on.. you pass a bill. You catch a guy. You label him a terrorist (thanks to a new bill). He gets no constitutional protection... but wait! Some lawyer (I'm sure many would drool at the chance) takes his case to the supreme court. Checks and balances, right? Bills don't override the constitution, last I checked.
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby -The Fabulous Orcboy » Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:31 pm

Nidal: ideally, yes.

But two provisos.

(1) There's legal precedence for upholding ArtI, Sec9. The reasons are actually stated in the Constitution -- rebellion or invasion. Guess who gets to DETERMINE if its a "rebellion" or "invasion"? Congress.

So if this goes to the Supreme Court, the Court is 99% likely to overturn it, at which point Bush will just go to Congress again and ask them to declare the current "War against Terror" to be either a "Rebellion" or "Invasion" (probably the latter). Then it will be Constitutional again.

So actually, no. The way to stop him is for his party of enablers to no longer be in power. Or else this is exactly the scenario that will play out in 2007.

(2) Bush has been stacking the Supreme Court. Reagan already put Scalia in there. Bush Sr put in Clarence Thomas. For years they were the far, far, far, FAR right of the court. Now they've been joined by Roberts and Alito, and Bush Jr made sure to pick young, young fellas.

The youngest members are Alito, Roberts, and Thomas. The far far far far right wing of the court is, barring accident, going to be there for a long, long time. More importantly, all three of these guys (and occasionally Scalia) are huge, huge fans of executive power.

In other words, those three (occasionally four) all think that crippling the power of the Legislative and Judicial, and enhancing the power of the PRESIDENT, is a really nifty idea.

The OLDEST members of the court are liberal moderates who DON'T think that unlimited presidential authority is a good idea.

Three guesses as to what Bush will do when they kick the bucket, and the first two don't count.

Then you'll have a Supreme Court who is perfectly happy to rubber-stamp anything Bush wants to do, just like the GOP Congress is perfectly happy to rubber-stamp anything Bush wants to do.

That's the trifecta. And who approves Supreme Court appointments? Why, Congress does. Currently a bunch of Bush ass-kissing rubber-stamps.

What impresses me is that you've spent the last five years telling me that it can't POSSIBLY be as bad as I think, that I'm making stuff up, and that nobody is that bad, and after 2004 that anyway it doesn't matter because Bush isn't up for re-election, and what happens? Five years of continuing erosion of the Constitution, of governmental oversight, five years of continuing executive expansion, continued atrocities now being codified into law (ie: formerly unthinkably illegal things being made legal).

Actually, I finally understand you. No wonder you're so staunchly apathetic. Now that I think about it, once upon a time you cared more, much more, about politics. Your current apathy is a rather rational way to cope with the fact that THINKING THROUGH what's going on would expose the essential contradiction of your support of a party that is more and more obviously bankrupt.

Shoot, I knew I liked you, Nidal. The conclusion is pretty inevitable. Just don't wait too long, huh? The longer you wait, the fewer and fewer the options available...
-The Fabulous Orcboy
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:18 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby VectorAWX3 » Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:44 pm

Quote:
So if this goes to the Supreme Court, the Court is 99% likely to overturn it, at which point Bush will just go to Congress again and ask them to declare the current "War against Terror" to be either a "Rebellion" or "Invasion" (probably the latter). Then it will be Constitutional again.
That's what fillibusters are for. Unless the repubs pick up 20 some seats in the senate (seems unlikely, don't you think?), that bill would never get through.

I'll keep my head in the sand. You tell me when the men-in-black come to pick me up. ;)
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby -Papa Gino » Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:24 pm

Because the party of the opposition is so inevitably set on filibustering things like the Scalito confirmation or the New And Improved Torture/Tribunal bill. And cannot be deterred from doing this by any political considerations whatsoever.
-Papa Gino
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:51 pm

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby VectorAWX3 » Sat Sep 30, 2006 12:34 am

Alito is a losing battle. Stop Myers (was that her name?) and you get WORSE! You eventually HAVE To approve someone. This bill is something entirely different. Plenty of bills have dies a fiery death. If it's so bad, I'm sure there's a Kennedy or a Pelosi out there with a phone book ready to read.
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby -The Fabulous Orcboy » Sun Oct 01, 2006 1:22 am

No.

The *usual* calculus is: if you filibuster a BAD candidate, the Prez picks one that is more palatable.

THIS prez is the prez of pure partisan politics. You filibuster a BAD candidate, he just picks one twice as bad.

Unfortunately, political appointments are always hard to filibuster. Particularly when the status quo is to let appointees pretend that they don't have any personal politics, and that it wouldn't at all affect their rulings
-The Fabulous Orcboy
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:18 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby VectorAWX3 » Sun Oct 01, 2006 9:35 am

Right. But what does that have to do with fillibusteriung a bill? Kill it once and it's dead. Dead bills are generally not resubmitted without major revisions to make them more palatable to the opposition party.

As far as candidates, it's US politics, baby. Stop one candidate.. it's aiight. Stop two, and you're being an obstructionist.
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: US first major world nation to break Geneva Conventions

Postby -Dresnar » Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:53 am

Ohh just had to add this, I mean how often will you get to say such a thing

Nidal I'd stop you from fucking chickens. I'd blow your chicken fucking head off in mid fuck! Beware a lawless society all you chicken fuckers!
-Dresnar
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:41 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 2 guests

cron