Watch Out For Ron Paul - Page 17

RedBean · #**161** 10-09-2007, 05:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It is my understanding that habeas corpus may be denied to immigrants, including lawful permanent residents, at the government's whim.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be true, but my point is that it is NOT the case for american citizens.

RedBean · #**162** 10-09-2007, 05:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It is a mistake to assert something that you can't back up with hard facts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then it looks like those asserting that we've lost several rights due to post-9/11 legilsation have made a mistake....considering it can't be supported by hard facts!

[ QUOTE ]
May I ask, whom do you support?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm an individualist. I support whatever is best for me. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Chips Ahoy · #**163** 10-09-2007, 05:39 AM

RedBean:
[ QUOTE ]

I actually don't know that much about him.....but it really wasn't that hard, if you look at the name of the image, it was "jose-padilla.jpg". A quick google query tells me he was tried and convicted for being a terrorist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's look at what he was convicted of:

<ul type="square">[*]One count of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim overseas[*]one count of conspiracy to provide material support for terrorists [*]one count of material support for terrorists[/list]
Who exactly did he conspire to murder, kidnap, and maim? Nobody knows because no evidence was presented for this charge.

How did he provide material support for terrorists? The government's evidence showed he attended an al-Qaeda camp in Afghanistan in July of 2000.

RedBean:[ QUOTE ]
That he spent 3 years locked up awaiting a trial makes it understandable that some folks would mistakenly believe he was never afforded one....but in the end, habeas corpus prevailed, and I don't really have much sympathy for a terrorist in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

He spent the 3 years in complete isolation, which obviously means no lawyer and no protection against self-incrimination. The government's interrogation techniques left Padilla insane, and quite unable to aid in his own defense, and since they knew insanity was a likely result, it's cruel and unusual punishment. It took the supreme court to get Padilla access to a laywer and a trial. (link to legal history). Once he got his trial, the goverment had no problem destroying evidence.

Do you have to commit, or conspire to commit a particular act of terrorism to be a terrorist?

[ QUOTE ]
A prosecution witness said that he attended the same training camp as Padilla -- to help defend Muslims in places where they might be under attack, not to become a terrorist.

[/ QUOTE ]

RedBean:
[ QUOTE ]
In short, I don't think he was "just anyone", nor did he get innocently plucked from the streets while going about his business and then wrongfully detained.

And more to the original point, he was most certainly provided a trial. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

He wasn't just anyone. He was an American citizen, a muslim, and he went to the Al Qaeda camp in 2000. For this he was tortured by the US government and will spend the rest of his life in prison.

He was provided a trial.

What he did not get was something resembling justice.

RedBean · #**164** 10-09-2007, 05:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

These rights are very much still in effect, thanks to the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments, to name a few.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that just because a law is on the books, that doesn't mean it gets enforced, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that just because someone throws out unfounded rhetoric claiming that these rights have been "taken away", that doesn't make it so.

If you're seriously asserting that we no longer have the right to free speech, nor the right to fair trial, nor protection from unreasonable search and siezure....then please, by all means, let's see some evidence.

xorbie · #**165** 10-09-2007, 06:20 AM

"Free speech zones"

Civil rights violations under Patriot Act

Honestly a quick google search is all that is needed here.

RedBean · #**166** 10-09-2007, 06:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Civil rights violations under Patriot Act

Honestly a quick google search is all that is needed here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Allegations of civil rights violations.

Sweet...

How is it that rights are being violated.....if they've been "taken away"?

Again, which rights have been taken away?

I was told "a bunch", but no one seems to be able to tell me which ones.....

xorbie · #**167** 10-09-2007, 07:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Civil rights violations under Patriot Act

Honestly a quick google search is all that is needed here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Allegations of civil rights violations.

Sweet...

How is it that rights are being violated.....if they've been "taken away"?

Again, which rights have been taken away?

I was told "a bunch", but no one seems to be able to tell me which ones.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, let me get this straight. Do you really think "rights being taken away" and "rights being violated" are different? Also please actually read link, thx.

BeatUp · #**168** 10-09-2007, 09:00 AM

Look up the military commissions act of 2006 that denies habeas corpus rights to anyone deemed an enemy combatant, enemy of the state, etc.

There is now a separate military justice system for these people who can be anyone, even american citizens.

This is exactly what hitler did after the reichstag in order to properly punish the terrorists that set the fire.

Nazi Germany wasn't built in a day either. Interestingly enough, the vast majority of Germans were also too stupid to figure out what was going on around them even though it was, in retrospect, obvious. The few that did notice were of course ridiculed, and worse.

Then again, you're an individualist so as long as they don't lock you up I guess you don't give a f#%@.

Here's a tip: spend less time asking questions you don't want to know the answers to and do some reading. This is afterall, the interweb. It has wonderful features such as The Google.

Taso · #**169** 10-09-2007, 09:15 AM

Since theres a little Ron Paul discussion still going on here, quick question for you guys, just to clarify something for me so I don't give people wrong info about Ron Paul.

Does he favor legalizing all drugs? Just marijuana? Or no drugs at all?

BeatUp · #**170** 10-09-2007, 09:25 AM

He favors ending the War on Drugs. He favors neutering the DEA, if not abolishing it as well as other federal agencies like the ATF, IRS, etc. He is in favor of medical marijuana because he does not believe that sick people should be denied the right to use ANY medicine that might help them.

It isn't because he thinks people should do drugs, it's because the federal government does not have the power under the Constitution to regulate these matters and the states do.

He has sense enough to look at history and current events and realize that a government created war on X always means more X:

War on Poverty -> more poverty
War on Drugs -> more drugs
War on Terror -> more terrorists