Originally Posted by stevenb

I can think of a couple....

Loss of Habeus Corpus via the Military Act - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...06#Application

Loss of right to not be unfairly searched / seized via the Patriot Act. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PAT...ecord_seizures

And various other constitutional rights both of those Acts violate.

Originally Posted by Stealthmode

I lost the right to gamble on the internet. Not that I ever did, but if I wanted to, I should be able to. Especially with all these government gambling programs called lotteries going around. I guess they make too much money to ban those.

Originally Posted by john_anderson_ii

I just registered with the sole purpose of refuting a couple of points.

The above statements contradict each other. Someone with "in-depth world knowledge" would know a few key facts.

1.) Osama Bin Laden may in fact be a Saudi, but that doesn't mean he's friendly toward Saudi Arabia. He wants to overthrow the Saudi oligarchy because he sees the government of Saudi as oppresive to muslims, and is thus an enemy of Saudi Arabia. The U.S. isn't even the main target of Osama & AQ. The governments we protect are. Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are the targets of Osama, the U.S. is between Osama and his goals, which is why he fights us.

2.) The more we show military force in our efforts to protect the enemies of Al Queda, the bigger Al Queda gets and the more recruiting propaganda they have.

3.) If Osama hated us because he wants us all to convert to Islam, and he hates women in the workplace, why did he allow our CIA to arm him, equip him, and push him into a fight with the USSR? Why was he our ally until the 90's? We didn't go from allies to enemies on the merits of religion. That's just ridiculous.

Seriously, if you are going to tout yourself to be an expert on Middle Eastern affairs, you would be wise to learn the recent history of the Middle East, and the conflicts therein. Once the American people realize we are not at war with a nation, nor a government, they will realize that our military has really no political goal or "flag to capture". We are playing whack-a-mole, international referee, and peacekeeper with our own soldiers, sailors and Marines. We are also going bankrupt in the process. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Wouldn't it be better to let the Arabs have their civil wars, and their revolutions, which is what the Arabs really want? If we let them do that, then we can deal with the "last man standing" when the dust settles as we see fit.



Also, for those who said Ron Paul can't do anything because congress won't let him? Uh, yeah, he can. He can slash executive orders. He can eliminate or reorganize executive departments (IRS, Dept. Of Education, Homeland Security, etc) without the approval of congress. He can deregulate industry (FAA,FCC) without congressional approval. And the biggest thing? His "one vote" in congress becomes a very powerful tool called a VETO!

The worst thing America can do right now is elect Guilianni. Americans know this, and that is why a Guilianni/Hillary race becomes a liberal win. He's been caught, by Ron Paul, in a televised debate saying he hasn't heard about the blowback resulting from U.S. Foreign Policy. That means he wants to keep us safe, and fight international terrorism, when he is completely clueless about how it works! It's like asking a mechanic to run a dairy farm! It doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by random-strike

you didn't think of those, you read it off wikipedia where at the top it says this:

the military commissions only apply to non-citizens, and you do realize that you resend your citizenship when you join a foreign army or actively fight against the US. you are no longer a citizen if you join al aqaeda.

So you lost your right to be in a forgein country and be a terrorist and call into the US without the government getting a warrent to listen to your call... once again, the constitution does not apply to non-citizens and citizens of another country.

the government has already been doing this, the act modernized the bill to include other forms of electronic communication other than over a phone line.

you did not lose any rights because of the "patriot act".

lol that may be true, but you can still gamble on the internet through a site based in another country, but this has nothing to do with the patriot act :P

Originally Posted by random-strike

lol that may be true, but you can still gamble on the internet through a site based in another country, but this has nothing to do with the patriot act :P

Originally Posted by random-strike

and because there is no flag to capture we should just do nothing... maybe throw flowers at them? maybe hold signs that say gun free zone? hmm? will that work?

Originally Posted by random-strke

you'll be the first to get your head lopped off.

Originally Posted by stevenb

It doesn't matter if I "thought" of those or looked them up. The fact of the matter is they are actively destroying our constitutional rights.

Furthermore, run your mouth about our constitutional rights and how they're not being destroyed to those who are in guantanemo bay, and other "secret prisons"...

Oh wait.. noone knows who is being persecuted /charged under these acts... because they can't hire a lawyer or have legal representation of any kind, and the white house is blocking any and all requests for their usage reports.

Once again, who makes the decision on whether or not you're an enemy combatant? The President? We all know his judgement and intelligence are far superior to anyone currently living here.

The patriot act gives our government free reign over warrantless wiretaps. Before they were allowed to be held accountable for their actions. I'd say that's probably a very good breach of our constitutional rights.

Originally Posted by john_anderson_ii

How about we do nothing but allow our companies to sell them goods and services and buy their oil? Is there something wrong with free trade without political ties? If the Muslim factions want to dispute their ideas on a battle field rather than on a senate floor, then who the hell are we to say they can't. If you think doing absolutely nothing to promote, destroy or protect Middle Eastern politics is the same as "throwing flowers at it", you are completely insane and cannot be reasoned with.

I don't know why you brought up the reference to "gun free zones". FYI, I've been fighting these stupid laws and standing up for the rights of gun owners for the last 6 years. Prior to that I was in Iraq with the 6th Engineer Support Battalion when President Bush said, "Mission Accomplished". We've already won, we've already kicked Iraq's ***. Why are we still there telling them how to build their government on our dime? If they want three different countries, then they can spill their own blood and spend their money disputing where the borders lie. We have no need to force them to stop fighting each other, or force them to stay one nation. If they want us to act as a political consultant, then they should going to a private firm, and coughing up the dough. If they want us to be their police force, then they better go private for that as well. We can't use our soldiers to protect the security of another nation. It's not what they signed up for. The fact is, our policy makers want to build an Iraq in the American image. They are playing god with another country, and it's costing us middle class types a fortune in lives and money.
Nothing we do in Iraq, besides staying out of it, will promote the security of the United States, I would love to know how it would come to pass that I found myself in a position where my head could get chopped off. A terrorist invasion of the U.S. perhaps? An invasion not backed by a government or state, with no military productive capability? That would be biggest upset of all time wouldn't it? To bad they'd meet 80,000,000 angry gun owners. Me included. That is, unless the next version of the PAT RIOT act disarms the people and abridges their freedom of speech. One must be very gullible and non-thinking indeed to conclude that the actions in Iraq and the PAT RIOT act bring any sort of safety to the people of this country.

"A healthy dose of the 2nd Amendment and respect for private property would have prevented 9/11" -- Ron Paul

Originally Posted by random-strike

the people in guantanimo bay ARE NOT CITIZENS OF THE US. THEY HAVE NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS DUMBASS.

people who are not us-citizens HAVE NO US CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

how hard is that to understand?

Originally Posted by stevenb

How do you know, that 100% of the people in guantanemo bay are not citizens of the united states?

You don't, noone does... because the records of what they're doing are being held by the whitehouse without respect to oversight committees that are designed to protect us from them.

Just because you don't hear any evil, or see any evil doesn't mean that evil isn't happening man.