Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay
Where do I come up with this stuff? What kind of question is that? They are from the websites right in front of you. I find this stuff in all the popular magazines and news articles as the websites suggest...New York Times (Best one), USA Today,...etc. I would much rather read the news than watch it on TV, although I do both. I don't want to limit myself. Most are legitimate unbiased websites that argue both sides and present the facts. There is one on the Padilla case that is biased, but there is also truth in what they say.
If you read those articles carefully about the protesters Rupert, you would have noticed that the lawmakers set up those laws specifically against those protesters. They had protested a year before, so they made up some BS law, so that when they protested in the same spot the next year, they got arrested.
Also, what about the two women (you were schoolteachers) that were taken to jail, strip searched, and not charged? What about the people who were charged and the charges were dropped? Again, you are not acknowledging the facts that our government is infringing on citizen's constitutional rights. You are so biased to your opinion that you cannot see that.
About Padilla, it may just be a cover up as to why they didn't charge him with that. From reading all of the articles that I have, it does sound awfully suspicious. They are all just allegations anyway, although they are probably correct allegations. Nothing is set in stone yet. I have not seen any evidence about exactly what he was doing and how he was found to be plotting a dirty bomb. If you can find some concrete evidence that he to the contrary, please post it.
I don't agree with abrupt radical change, but I would at least like the government to follow the U.S. Constitution. That is all I want. Follow the U.S. Constitution. If they aren't following the U.S. Constitution in every aspect, then they are infringing on citizen's rights. I guess that asking the Bush administration and Congress to follow the great U.S. Constitution, the very thing that defines us as a country, is just too much...The government is changing way too many things.
Miami Herald
"Those charges do not mention the ''dirty bomb'' allegations and one of them -- that Padilla and his codefendants conspired to ``murder, kidnap and maim persons in a foreign country''-- was thrown out in August by Cooke because it duplicated allegations made in other charges."
|
When I said, "Where do you come up with this stuff?", I was meaning where do you come up with this stuff about "people being arrested unconsitutionally." They were not arrested unconstitutionally and the articles don't say they were. You say that brand new laws were passed to stop protesters. That may be the case. New laws are passed all the time.
I'll give my opinion on what is unconstitutional. They wanted to open a Wal-Mart in Los Angeles but I believe it was the County Board of Supervisors who wouldn't allow it because the unions were against it. Now that goes against everything this country is all about. To tell someone that they can't open a business? To me that is unconstiutional. How could someone not be allowed to open a business? The "Founding Fathers" would be turning in thier graves over that.
The Founding Fathers would have no problem with the Patriot Act. The government's most important role above anything is to keep us safe from attack. If you look at the pros and the cons of the Patriot Act, the pros far outweigh the cons. You talked about our rights being infringed upon. If you have terrorists blowing up buidings and airplanes all the time, that is a far greater infringement on our liberty than anything that the government has done through the Patriot Act. If we are not safe to get on an airplane, if it is not safe to go to New York city, if it is not safe to go on a train, then we have no freedom at all. If there was no Patriot Act, there would have probably been a few more 9/11 type attacks. People would be scared to death to travel in their own country. Now that would be a great infringement on our civi liberties. When it is too dangerous to even go to a sporting event because of the fear of a terrorist attack, then we have no freedom at all. Thankfully it hasn't gotten to that point. Because of the Patriot Act, we haven't had any more terrorist attacks and people feel relatively safe. You can ask anyone in law enforcement and they will tell you that the Patriot Act is directly responsible for foiling numerous terrorist attacks.
The Constitution is the means to an end. It is not an end in itself. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. Do you have any common sense? Even the Forefathers recognized this and allowed Congress to make ammendments to the Constitution if neccessary. Congress also has the authority to make laws. They passed the Patriot Act and it has not been overturned. If it was unconsitutional, the Supreme Court would have overturned it. It is lucky that you are not in charge because you appear to have no common sense. Luckily for us, the vast majority of our Senators and Congressmen on both sides of the aisle agree with me and that is why the Patriot Act has overwhelming bipartisan support. Just in the last year, it passed the Senate by a vote of 89-11 or something like that. Do you know something that the US Senate doesn't know? What are they missing? They're not missing anything. They get it. You clearly don't get it.