Dude, where's my civil liberties?

It's all in the name of security. You don't support the terrorists, do you?

eddyatwork: It's all in the name of security. You don't support the terrorists, do you?

Materially, or just spiritually?

I feel safer. Now I just need my wubby.

pooter: wubby.

Your what?

What do you have to hide, submitter? The same Bush Administration that claims Executive Privilege on every request Congress makes says that you would only hide something if you are a terrorist. Are you a terrorist, smitty?

Teh Decider has decided. No civil liberties for you!

/can you call him a civil liberties nazi without godwinning it all?

Many of my Republican friends just roll their eyes and say "do me a favor. Call me when they throw you in a detention camp."

They go on to inform me that if anyone's civil liberties were actually curtailed, we'd've heard about it by now.

(I know, I know). But these folks are not really representative of most Republicans I hope.

intentionally left blank: Teh Decider has decided. No civil liberties for you!

/can you call him a civil liberties nazi without godwinning it all?

Call him the Genghis Khan of civil liberties!

muninsfire: Your what?

My wubby. My blanky. Need mah blanky. Feel safe.

quick1: What do you have to hide, submitter? The same Bush Administration that claims Executive Privilege on every request Congress makes says that you would only hide something if you are a terrorist. Are you a terrorist, smitty?

20 bonus bucks if you can identify the headliner.

I really wish we could limit the amount of treason that circuits the webs. This is outrageous. Your civil liberties are not being jeopardized and the government is making sure those who do not engage in terrorist activities have nothing to fear. Giving up some of your freedoms for the safety of America is a good thing. Isn't this what dems are all about? the collective good? give me break and play me a sad symphony on your Stradivarius'.
We are safer now then we ever have been thanks to the quick thinking of the Republicans. Bush may not be as intelligent as Clinton, But he is a crisis hero. If we can't preserve our collective freedoms from terrorism what's the whole point of trying to fix other things like health care? You won't be worried about your annual commie vitamins shots when they ram planes into our buildings.

[image hidden]

And yet here we are on Bannination, saying any dumb thing we want. Any of us been carted away yet?

farkmeblind: Call him the Genghis Khan of civil liberties!

Nah, I always view Genghis as kinda a hippy. I mean, dude had an active outdoor lifestyle, and he was always trying to talk people into leaving the cities and getting back in touch with nature.

mrtoast: And yet here we are on Bannination, saying any dumb thing we want. Any of us been carted away yet?

No. We're not dead yet.

moderator: I really wish we could limit the amount of treason that circuits the webs. This is outrageous. Your civil liberties are not being jeopardized and the government is making sure those who do not engage in terrorist activities have nothing to fear. Giving up some of your freedoms for the safety of America is a good thing. Isn't this what dems are all about? the collective good? give me break and play me a sad symphony on your Stradivarius'.
We are safer now then we ever have been thanks to the quick thinking of the Republicans. Bush may not be as intelligent as Clinton, But he is a crisis hero. If we can't preserve our collective freedoms from terrorism what's the whole point of trying to fix other things like health care? You won't be worried about your annual commie vitamins shots when they ram planes into our buildings.

Too obvious. Tone it down a bit. You're not quite skookum quality yet.

I admit, the commie vitamins shots gave me chuckle.

moderator: I really wish we could limit the amount of treason that circuits the webs. This is outrageous. Your civil liberties are not being jeopardized and the government is making sure those who do not engage in terrorist activities have nothing to fear. Giving up some of your freedoms for the safety of America is a good thing. Isn't this what dems are all about? the collective good? give me break and play me a sad symphony on your Stradivarius'.
We are safer now then we ever have been thanks to the quick thinking of the Republicans. Bush may not be as intelligent as Clinton, But he is a crisis hero. If we can't preserve our collective freedoms from terrorism what's the whole point of trying to fix other things like health care? You won't be worried about your annual commie vitamins shots when they ram planes into our buildings.

[image hidden]

farkmeblind: Call him the Genghis Khan of civil liberties!

Nonono... you misunderstand. He's not the Soup Nazi... he could be the pretzel Nazi, but civil liberties Nazi fits him so well.

moderator: I really wish we could limit the amount of treason that circuits the webs. This is outrageous. Your civil liberties are not being jeopardized and the government is making sure those who do not engage in terrorist activities have nothing to fear. Giving up some of your freedoms for the safety of America is a good thing. Isn't this what dems are all about? the collective good? give me break and play me a sad symphony on your Stradivarius'.
We are safer now then we ever have been thanks to the quick thinking of the Republicans. Bush may not be as intelligent as Clinton, But he is a crisis hero. If we can't preserve our collective freedoms from terrorism what's the whole point of trying to fix other things like health care? You won't be worried about your annual commie vitamins shots when they ram planes into our buildings.

I don't feel safer. I feel paranoid that someone is watching every move I make, every breath I take, every cake I bake.
\maybe I should cut down on my meth intake, verdad?

clifton: Too obvious. Tone it down a bit. You're not quite skookum quality yet.

I admit, the commie vitamins shots gave me chuckle.

ass.

That's all you can do.

Some people have different strategies than you.

Look at Lieberman, people think he's 'hawkish?' does that make him a troll? Just because an opinion is politically different than yours you attack it. How decent.

Thanks for adding nothing to the conversation.

I think one of these a day is enough, don't you guys think?

I have the same civil liberties I had in '00. The terrorists made it so a few things needed to be changed.

If you think you are less free, how?

pooter: I feel safer. Now I just need my wubby.

I needed a wubby so I stole yours.

The worst thing is that it's happening all over the western world. Civil liberties are being encroached upon in most countries with the turrists as an excuse.

A majority in my own country actually support CCTV cameras all over the place, saying that it would make them feel 'safer'. Could we please stop catering to people's unfounded fears?

sloth: Nah, I always view Genghis as kinda a hippy. I mean, dude had an active outdoor lifestyle, and he was always trying to talk people into leaving the cities and getting back in touch with nature.

Okay, the Marquis de Sade of civil liberties.

spongegirl circleskirt: I don't feel safer. I feel paranoid that someone is watching every move I make, every breath I take, every cake I bake.
\maybe I should cut down on my meth intake, verdad?

Every step you take, every bond you break?

moderator: ass.

That's all you can do.

Some people have different strategies than you.

Look at Lieberman, people think he's 'hawkish?' does that make him a troll? Just because an opinion is politically different than yours you attack it. How decent.

Thanks for adding nothing to the conversation.

Ah yes, the Troll Auto-defenders. Hi, Tommy-boy.

farkmeblind: Okay, the Marquis de Sade of civil liberties.

Dammit, now I'm gonna get a chubby every time I see him on TV. Thanks a lot.

sloth: Every step you take, every bond you break?

Exactomundo!

I wuz searched at the aeroport! MY civil liberties are GONE!!!

flashlv: I wuz searched at the aeroport! MY civil liberties are GONE!!!

Warrantless wiretaps are a serious infringement.

untrustworthy: Warrantless wiretaps are a serious infringement.

Yes they are, I was targeted, my mother was targeted, heck my aunt Bessy was targeted!!!


Yeah !!!

untrustworthy: Warrantless wiretaps are a serious infringement.

I'de rather have some terrorists overseas wiretapped than be attacked again.

Also I thought in times of war we could do things like that, I guess not anymore because a Repub is in office!

flashlv: I'de rather have some terrorists overseas wiretapped than be attacked again.

I would too. But there should be a warrant issued first.

flashlv: Also I thought in times of war we could do things like that, I guess not anymore because a Repub is in office!

We're not at war.

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0091-4169%28198321%2974%3A1%3C1%3ATSCATI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W&size=LARGE&origin=JSTOR-enlargePage

I'de like to read that.

untrustworthy: I would too. But there should be a warrant issued first.



We're not at war.

How about a warrant after the fact, because you know that makes sense.

We're not at war? We weren't attacked? WOW, is this bizarro world?

When I was younger, I ended up in a Turkmenistan prison. Silly reason. At any rate, we lost our sponsor and had to take whatever sponsor we could get. It turns out that our new sponsor, Emir, was a taliban supporter and hypermilitant Muslim. He lectured daily about how America was about Chaos and Islam was about order. The Taliban created blessed order. He didn't prioritize civil liberties or individual freedom at all. Order.

I think about him when I look at the result of Sept 11. This country got more religious, more theocratic, more homophobic, more governmentally controlled, less committed to individual freedom, more power hungry, more hawkish, more manichean, Less committed to science and reason, etc. It because more like the taliban. By leaps and bounds. I think about how Emir would say that it is natural that people go there- that this is what is right. To me, it looks like the terrorists won.

untrustworthy: Warrantless wiretaps are a serious infringement.

flashlv: I'de rather have some terrorists overseas wiretapped than be attacked again.

flashlv: Also I thought in times of war we could do things like that, I guess not anymore because a Repub is in office!

1) The wiretaps in question are not "some dude overseas," they are domestic calls.
2) Yes, we can do that in times of war, and in times of peace. In times of war, the warrant must be applied for within 30 days.
3) Alternatively, we used to just have the British do our domestic spying.

How about a warrant after the fact, because you know that makes sense.

They can get a warrant after the fact. If they don't get the warrant, then they have to throw out anything they found. Pretty straight forward, no?

We're not at war? We weren't attacked? WOW, is this bizarro world?

Did Congress declare war? No? Hrm...

praises, there are other like flashlv who think like me.

Can I see your Id please? HALP my civil liberties!!! when I am not even preforming any civil duties1!! 5th amendment!!!

No other war was there so much contempt for the President doing his job against a foe that has attacked us on our soil.

The only other attack was by the Japanese using weather balloons.

If this was just a normal time, a time where we weren't attcked by terrorists it would not be okay. But since the people who attacked us are being targeted I see no fucking problem!

untrustworthy: I would too. But there should be a warrant issued first.

We're not at war.

Technically, we are at war. And there has never been a requirement to get the warrant first - it's either within a few days, or within thirty days, depending on the war/peace status. Neither deadline has been observed in the current issue.

sloth: 1) The wiretaps in question are not "some dude overseas," they are domestic calls.
2) Yes, we can do that in times of war, and in times of peace. In times of war, the warrant must be applied for within 30 days.
3) Alternatively, we used to just have the British do our domestic spying.


Show me who was tapped befor eyou spout it was people here.

Applying a warrant after 30 fucking days is just like putting drugs on the drug dealer and charging him.

flashlv: No other war was there so much contempt for the President doing his job against a foe that has attacked us on our soil.

Maybe that says something about the standing president?

The only other attack was by the Japanese using weather balloons. If this was just a normal time, a time where we weren't attcked by terrorists it would not be okay. But since the people who attacked us are being targeted I see no fucking problem!

The people who attacked us died on 9/11. The people who masterminded it haven't been properly addressed. Neither should allow infringement of rights, however.

untrustworthy: How about a warrant after the fact, because you know that makes sense.

They can get a warrant after the fact. If they don't get the warrant, then they have to throw out anything they found. Pretty straight forward, no?

We're not at war? We weren't attacked? WOW, is this bizarro world?

Did Congress declare war? No? Hrm...

LOL technicalities. They are at war with us, and you know that. You don't have to declare war for someone to be at war with us!

flashlv: No other war was there so much contempt for the President doing his job against a foe that has attacked us on our soil.

The only other attack was by the Japanese using weather balloons.

If this was just a normal time, a time where we weren't attcked by terrorists it would not be okay. But since the people who attacked us are being targeted I see no fucking problem!

The Iraqis did not attack us, the Taliban did. Most of them are from the surrounding countries.

untrustworthy: Maybe that says something about the standing president?

The only other attack was by the Japanese using weather balloons. If this was just a normal time, a time where we weren't attcked by terrorists it would not be okay. But since the people who attacked us are being targeted I see no fucking problem!

The people who attacked us died on 9/11. The people who masterminded it haven't been properly addressed. Neither should allow infringement of rights, however.

It has to do with whiny bitches is all! No other president had any moron with a blog saying anything they wanted.

spongegirl circleskirt: The Iraqis did not attack us, the Taliban did. Most of them are from the surrounding countries.


Did I say different?

flashlv: Show me who was tapped befor eyou spout it was people here.

Everybody involved has agreed that it involves tapping calls which either originate or terminate in the US. This isn't even a debated point.

flashlv: Applying a warrant after 30 f**king days is just like putting drugs on the drug dealer and charging him.

Huh? Did that make sense in your head?

How is a warrant after the fact any good? It goes against what a warrant IS!


Warrant: authorization, sanction, or justification.

How can you have justification after you did something?

flashlv: No other war was there so much contempt for the President doing his job against a foe that has attacked us on our soil.

Well, actually, Lincoln and FDR both got at least as much crap thrown at them as Bush has. And for much the same reason, too - all three viewed the Constitution as an impediment to what they considered their true mission.

Warrant: a writing or document certifying or authorizing something, as a receipt, license, or commission.

That ones is even better.

Is there such thing as authorizing after the fact?

sloth: Well, actually, Lincoln and FDR both got at least as much crap thrown at them as Bush has. And for much the same reason, too - all three viewed the Constitution as an impediment to what they considered their true mission.

Just like the 2nd amendment.....

flashlv: Did I say different?

Maybe I misunderstood. I thought you were speaking of our presence in Iraq.

\See people, you can have opposing views and be rational, or admit to misunderstanding what is being said.

I would happily burn to death along with my entire family in a terrorist attack than allow the civil liberties which I consider sacred to be infringed upon in the name of safety.

I would happily watch a busload of children die in a terrorist attack than allow the civil liberties which I consider sacred to be infringed upon in the name of safety.

I would happily watch an entire metropolitan area go up in a mushroom cloud than allow the civil liberties which I consider sacred to be infringed upon in the name of safety.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a gutless, spineless, selfish fucking coward who has no concept of what a patriot truly is.

flashlv: Warrant: authorization, sanction, or justification.

How can you have justification after you did something?

It's called justification after the fact. It's actually a very common concept used to cover cases where action *must* be taken without being able to wait for justification. Justification must still, however, be obtained after the fact.

Since retroactive warrants make so much sense.

I guess we should bash down everyones door, search their house, and if we find something, then we get a warrant to make it legal!

Makes perfect sense, since you guys think 30 days later makes sense.

sunofsam: I would happily burn to death along with my entire family in a terrorist attack than allow the civil liberties which I consider sacred to be infringed upon in the name of safety.

I would happily watch a busload of children die in a terrorist attack than allow the civil liberties which I consider sacred to be infringed upon in the name of safety.

I would happily watch an entire metropolitan area go up in a mushroom cloud than allow the civil liberties which I consider sacred to be infringed upon in the name of safety.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a gutless, spineless, selfish fucking coward who has no concept of what a patriot truly is.

Good for you. I don't feel they have been infringed upon otherwise there would be no debate.

Liberty in an intangible false perception of limitlessness enjoyed by those who believe they can at some point in life excel to utopia beyond a norm or their capacity.

Some dream world you libs live in.

sloth: Dammit, now I'm gonna get a chubby every time I see him on TV. Thanks a lot.

Any way I can help.

/btw, have you read the sci fi story about the guy who takes de Sade's name, throws a party and it doesn't go so well?

Why is there a debate if the Liberals know they are sooo right on this?

flashlv: Good for you. I don't feel they have been infringed upon otherwise there would be no debate.

That's because you are a compromising coward.

sloth: Nah, I always view Genghis as kinda a hippy. I mean, dude had an active outdoor lifestyle, and he was always trying to talk people into leaving the cities and getting back in touch with nature.

You mean like the Circle of Life thing? Where Genghis Khan runs you out of the city, slaughters you on the open plain, and feeds you to the vultures getting in touch with nature? As for the active outdoor lifestyle, you're talking about the raping and pillaging stuff right??

Just teasing.

sunofsam: That's because you are a compromising coward.

Not at all, I'm a realist!

2nd amendment anyone?

flashlv: Why is there a debate if the Liberals know they are sooo right on this?

Why does everyone with opinions contrary to yours get labeled "Liberal"?

sunofsam: Why does everyone with opinions contrary to yours get labeled "Liberal"?

because they are the only irrational ones I see who think they are the only right ones around.

flashlv: Since retroactive warrants make so much sense.

I guess we should bash down everyones door, search their house, and if we find something, then we get a warrant to make it legal!

Makes perfect sense, since you guys think 30 days later makes sense.

Weren't you just arguing in favor of searches with no warrant at all?

And, fwiw, the whole retroactive thing *cannot take into account the information gathered*. In other words, they still have to get the warrant on the information available before the search. It's *only* meant to cover those cases where the search has to be conducted immediately.

farkmeblind: Any way I can help.

/btw, have you read the sci fi story about the guy who takes de Sade's name, throws a party and it doesn't go so well?

Not that I can remember. Author/title?

sloth: Weren't you just arguing in favor of searches with no warrant at all?

And, fwiw, the whole retroactive thing *cannot take into account the information gathered*. In other words, they still have to get the warrant on the information available before the search. It's *only* meant to cover those cases where the search has to be conducted immediately.

No my point is that you have a warrant FIRST or not at all. Don't bitch that 'they could have gotten a warrant' when you know it doesn't fly in the real world.

You can't have it both ways. You guys think a rubber stamp approve anything warrant is good. it's sad.

jin verde: You mean like the Circle of Life thing? Where Genghis Khan runs you out of the city, slaughters you on the open plain, and feeds you to the vultures getting in touch with nature? As for the active outdoor lifestyle, you're talking about the raping and pillaging stuff right??

Just teasing.

You forgot burning.
There's a strict order here: Pillage, burn, then rape. You don't want to burn the place before you pillage it, and the rape is much more romantic by firelight. Besides, when you pillage first, you can impress your rape partner with all your new bling.

flashlv: because they are the only irrational ones I see who think they are the only right ones around.

AKA it's a worthless dog-whistle ad hominem.

How is that oversite?

flashlv: You can't have it both ways. You guys think a rubber stamp approve anything warrant is good. it's sad.

I do? Dude, you should know better than that - I'm firmly opposed to no-knock warrants, and of the opinion that they give out far too many warrants in the first place.

flashlv: Don't b***h that 'they could have gotten a warrant' when you know it doesn't fly in the real world.

I'm not bitching that 'they could have gotten a warrant,' I'm pointing out that "they were legally obligated to get a warrant as soon as possible, and no later than 30 days from the commencement of any particular wiretap."

How is a court that gives a warrant 30 days later oversite?

Who is it protecting after the fact?

sloth: I do? Dude, you should know better than that - I'm firmly opposed to no-knock warrants, and of the opinion that they give out far too many warrants in the first place.



I'm not bitching that 'they could have gotten a warrant,' I'm pointing out that "they were legally obligated to get a warrant as soon as possible, and no later than 30 days from the commencement of any particular wiretap."


How is that oversite, if you get it after the fact?

The main complain is about oversite, right? How can you oversee something that has already happened?

sloth: You forgot burning.
There's a strict order here: Pillage, burn, then rape. You don't want to burn the place before you pillage it, and the rape is much more romantic by firelight. Besides, when you pillage first, you can impress your rape partner with all your new bling.

Damn. I knew I was missing something. Too bad he wasn't a riever. Then we could add sewing human skins into clothes onto that list.

flashlv: How is a court that gives a warrant 30 days later oversite?

Who is it protecting after the fact?

Are you this ignorant? They can't use the evidence gathered if the court decides the evidence gathered previous to the warrant doesn't add up to legal PC.

sunofsam: Are you this ignorant? They can't use the evidence gathered if the court decides the evidence gathered previous to the warrant doesn't add up to legal PC.

s/warrant/wiretap

sloth: I do? Dude, you should know better than that - I'm firmly opposed to no-knock warrants, and of the opinion that they give out far too many warrants in the first place.



Why are you against 'no-knock' warrants?

if you go into a dangerous drug house where everyone has guns, you think it's a good idea to announce yourself?

sloth: Not that I can remember. Author/title?

I can't remember. I'll have to look through my bathroom Asimov's to find it. IIRC circa 2004, may have been Grey Rollins.

sloth: You forgot burning.
There's a strict order here: Pillage, burn, then rape. You don't want to burn the place before you pillage it, and the rape is much more romantic by firelight. Besides, when you pillage first, you can impress your rape partner with all your new bling.

That was pure gold, my friend.

flashlv: Why are you against 'no-knock' warrants?

if you go into a dangerous drug house where everyone has guns, you think it's a good idea to announce yourself?

You're acting like a fucking threadshitter, and now you're changing the subject. You're nothing but a troll, just like you were on fark.

sunofsam: You're acting like a fucking threadshitter, and now you're changing the subject. You're nothing but a troll, just like you were on fark.

Who brought up 'no-knock' warrants? you or me?

flashlv: Who brought up 'no-knock' warrants? you or me?

Who's running with it as opposed to conceding ignorance of the legal issues in question?

Remember you're a threadshitter if someone else says something and you respond to it. The original person who says it has their hands clean. Just becasue they say so!

sunofsam: Who's running with it as opposed to conceding ignorance of the legal issues in question?

you? Didn't you bring it up?

flashlv: Remember you're a threadshitter if someone else says something and you respond to it. The original person who says it has their hands clean. Just becasue they say so!

How about you admit you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, or that you are feigning ignorance in the name of mayhem. Only two options here, buddy.

sunofsam: How about you admit you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, or that you are feigning ignorance in the name of mayhem. Only two options here, buddy.

Or maybe you're just an intollerant asshole?

flashlv: Or maybe you're just an intollerant asshole?

No, you're an ignorant threadshitter, and I am an educated asshole:

flashlv: How is a warrant after the fact any good? It goes against what a warrant IS!


Warrant: authorization, sanction, or justification.

How can you have justification after you did something?

sunofsam: Are you this ignorant? They can't use the evidence gathered if the court decides the evidence gathered previous to the warrant doesn't add up to legal PC.


From my point of view, I come out on top.

sunofsam: You're acting like a fucking threadshitter, and now you're changing the subject. You're nothing but a troll, just like you were on fark.

Hehehe, why do you think you're the only person feeding him? Good job, though, it allows others to see what a total tool he still is without having to have a conversation like this, themselves.

farkmeblind: Hehehe, why do you think you're the only person feeding him? Good job, though, it allows others to see what a total tool he still is without having to have a conversation like this, themselves.

I love how he's calling me intolerant of ignorance. Like that's a bad thing or something.

sunofsam: No, you're an ignorant threadshitter, and I am an educated asshole:
From my point of view, I come out on top.

Always. That's how it goes. Someone disagrees with you and you're athreadshitter, troll, idiot, moron or whatever.

Yeh nice job calling everyone on the right a troll. Are you guy going gather in a circle and jerkoff to how awesome Che was now?

sunofsam: I love how he's calling me intolerant of ignorance. Like that's a bad thing or something.

no no no, there you go again being an asshole.

I say you are being intolerant because you think my side is 100% wrong by calling me a threadshitter and I shouldn't be allowed to have my say.

flashlv: How is a court that gives a warrant 30 days later oversite?

Who is it protecting after the fact?

hey flash. how do you feel about the congressional investigations into wrongdoings by the administration? what do you guys call democratic oversight into executive lawbreaking?

moderator: Yeh nice job calling everyone on the right a troll. Are you guy going gather in a circle and jerkoff to how awesome Che was now?

No doubt.

Who created threadshitter? A lefty.
Who calls who trolls more? Lefties.
Who attacks people more because they disagree? That's right folks a lefty!