Post #19,510
11/27/01 10:28:03 AM
|
Just to play devil's advocate...
What would you think of the following:
1. Ashcroft releases the names of everybody being held.
2. The ACLU screams for their release due to lack of hard evidence.
3. American servicemen and agents are murdered by Osama because of knowledge gained from the released names.
4. Ashcroft releases the people.
5. These people (possibly including innocents among them) are then murdered by several nutcases "avenging Sept 11th".
Numbers 3 and 5 make it not so simple a question.
Brian Bronson
|
Post #19,514
11/27/01 11:47:35 AM
|
Nobody would >ever< resort to #5, right?
Just like guys in pickup trucks won't shoot up gas stations in Arizona.
Damnitall...why can't we have the list? I want to know EVERY NAME...preferably with pictures...that way the freelance "Protectors of the American Way" can be sure of their targets.
At a minimum, I guess, we could relive the McCarthy era...and we'd have the list of our first 1000 "commie pinko...err Arab" scum that we could ensure "never worked in this town again".
If I was innocent of these acts...and being detained...I would be very happy to not have my name on a public list...thank you very much...that would just be one more violation of my rights added to the list...my right to privacy. Which one is more important...your right to know...or my right to not let you?
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #19,525
11/27/01 1:31:04 PM
|
Beep, have you no shame?
Are you implying that the Murican Peepul would harass *unindicted* individuals merely because of their appearance? Despite their reverence for God (let him who is without sin cast..) and .. The Constitution ?
It's Pinko Librul carping like this, which feeds the scabrous claims of those who mean to tear down the Murican Dream, destroy our faith in Corporate Rule and otherwise make trouble at the Mall.
This is not the time to be asking questions which undermine our Resolve. Why can't you join the National Unity and support our President 100% - like a real Patriot?
I don't like to suggest such a thing but, duty and honor require that I see about having a suitable Authority er.. keep a bit of a watch on your activities. (No, I'll decline any reward .. well, unless it's pretty big - then I can donate it to those folks who make us more secure. And all.)
A Concerned Murican.
Acting on the Courage of my Convictions
(indictments will do)
This is your brain on bad interior design. Any questions?
IWETHEY's Terrible Horde of Epenthetic Yammerers.
|
Post #19,535
11/27/01 2:59:20 PM
|
None at all...
Are you implying that the Murican Peepul would harass *unindicted* individuals merely because of their appearance? Why...if you add to the above..."because of their appearance on a list?"...why that would have indeed been my implication. Of course...I would imply your statement as well...in context...which is another matter. Aside from that...your "patriotic" diatribe has no place here. What is at stake here is a battle between "rights". The right of the public to know the activities of law enforcment. In order for this "public" (you know...the ones calling him Asscroft..etc) to be satisified...they are demanding that Mr Ashcroft violate the detainees right to privacy...and quite possibly subject them to harm based on the "public"'s assumption of guilt. So, while crying that these people's right to due process is being violated...they are slamming DOJ for at least protecting some of these detainee's rights and quite possibly keeping innocent people from harm. <sarcasm>What an evil man</sarcasm> I see the man in pretty much of a "double-damned" scenario...do or don't. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #19,539
11/27/01 3:18:21 PM
|
Umm OK. I forgot the :-\ufffd
'Twas just my orthogonal synonym for: Right on!
(Besides.. whatever it is that Ashcroft really *means* and will next try to do (?) I see him as being a worthwhile catalyst for reminding all those attention-span deprived Muricans of A Big Thing)
Eternal vigilance IS the price of (freedom, truth, Mom and all the rest). That is - if his wholesale repeal of so much we have taken for Granted to date, leads to no more than ovine acceptance *indefinitely* (??) then we shall have deserved Him.
(Well.. maybe not 'we' - but 'they'.. and not 'I'.)
A.
|
Post #19,547
11/27/01 4:42:29 PM
|
Knew that...
and ranted anyway :)
Not at you particularly...just the more I think about "those who wanteth the list"...the more I wonder about motive...and thoughtfulness.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #19,526
11/27/01 1:40:34 PM
|
Sure it's simple...
Because #3 is such a non-sequitir so as to be ludicrous on its face.
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #19,528
11/27/01 2:22:44 PM
|
I disagree re: #3, but what about #5?
#5 is not dependent on #3, so even if #3 is thrown out, #5 can still be valid.
Brian Bronson
|
Post #19,532
11/27/01 2:47:42 PM
|
And #5 is the problem.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #19,533
11/27/01 2:54:49 PM
|
Depends upon how they were "released".
If neither the DoJ nor the defense send the names to the media, how will people find out who they are?
Now, if the DoJ doesn't do it, what purpose would the defense have to it?
Unless............
The detainment goes on and so forth.
Then the defense starts talking to the media about problems in the judicial system.
BTW, shouldn't there be a ruling or something about law enforcement releasing names of SUSPECTS to the media PRIOR to any trials?
|
Post #19,541
11/27/01 3:57:05 PM
|
That last antecedes the Ashcroft Covenant.
The UK folk have much stricter (and enforced) rules about pretrial via paparazzi. The norm here has been Condit Cuntumely, since I can recall.
I'd think that, to change this attitude is likely impossible; we prefer gossip -and immediately!- much more than we care about the plight of the mere person (less'n it's *Me*) and his/her next chances - trying to survive here.
And if little kids don't explore these consequences first-hand in school: like say, experience that whispering campaign amongst the clique s/he's not a member of?
Well then.. we get Columbines (for the early pissed-off) and we get Condits and (the guy with the satchel, at the Olympics bombing: destroyed and only quite belatedly ... ... apologized to. Remember?)
Guess I conclude that, only a tiny minority of Muricans understand and revere (?) the wisdom within and between the lines of the Constitution. Most just periodically wave it like The Flag, for dramatic effect. Ashcroft, Condit, OJ, the Bill C. 'Impeachment' Show - all demonstrate what Muricans really 'believe' in - simplistic EZ slogans and infotainment, not er Principles.
My hope is that Ashcroft runs with it.. so far and so fast that, even the Mall Shoppers will pause -in mid-CC-retrieval- and look around at the Disappeared* and the disappearing personal Rights. [??]
* we can learn something from Argentina, Chile et al about The Disappeared. (At least the few Muricans who know shit about - even where those countries are located?)
Ashcroft: litmus test for (any) remaining Consciousness.
Ashton
|
Post #19,555
11/27/01 6:42:46 PM
|
#5 may be a lesser evil...
than the possible abuses of not having the government accountable at all. But surely there are other possibilities. At least give detailed records to, and allow inspection by, the Judicial branch, and probably Congress as well. Also, make sure that law enforcement agencies everywhere have the names, so they can deal with missing persons reports in a fully informed fashion.
We need all the above in order to be able to enforce the rules: no US citizens are to be detained, and if a foreigner from a democratic country is detained, we don't stonewall that country's embassy. I don't much care about the civil rights of other groups, because they themselves are perfectly accustomed to not having rights. Which is in itself a bad thing, but that's a whole `nuther debate.
I guess I'd feel a lot better about the witholding of names if Abraham Lincoln were in the White House, but he's not. It's hard for me to give Dubya the benefit of that kind of doubt, and impossible to give it to Ashcroft.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things.
|
