Pre-crime imprisonment, Obama is making it happen!

jfgordon1 said:

Disagree. Obama is a brilliant man. he indeed knows he's doing wrong. The elite own him.. he does what they say. if not, he'll end up like Kennedy. plain and simple.

Click to expand...

No he doesn't. He's the one that was boasting about never befriending any one that would challenge his socialist ideals. He's a dumb ass.

TheBrutalTruth said:

No he doesn't. He's the one that was boasting about never befriending any one that would challenge his socialist ideals. He's a dumb ass.

Click to expand...

how about this... He knows he's doing wrong, but he doesn't care. He's wants best for him, not the people.?

jfgordon1 said:

how about this... He knows he's doing wrong, but he doesn't care. He's wants best for him, not the people.?

Click to expand...

Yeah, that probably explains it a lot better.

Umm, okay, since when is this new and since when is it something Obama did? The Patriot Act was signed by George W. Bush, not Barack Obama. We are already holding people who haven't been charged with ANY crime. Hello, Guantanamo Bay, anyone? Not all of those prisoners are actual terrorists, and not all of them have been criminally charged! So, essentially, these are "innocent" people who may not have done anything wrong at all, yet we're holding them in prison "indefinitely" (which really means, "until we can come up with something to charge them with".

Going to prison without having been convicted of a crime is also not new. Plenty of innocent people are held without bail, pending trial. There really is no "innocent until proven guilty" in our justice system. It's guilty until proven innocent, or until you pay off someone with sufficient power to get you out of jail.

doobnVA said:

Umm, okay, since when is this new and since when is it something Obama did? The Patriot Act was signed by George W. Bush, not Barack Obama. We are already holding people who haven't been charged with ANY crime. Hello, Guantanamo Bay, anyone? Not all of those prisoners are actual terrorists, and not all of them have been criminally charged! So, essentially, these are "innocent" people who may not have done anything wrong at all, yet we're holding them in prison "indefinitely" (which really means, "until we can come up with something to charge them with".

Going to prison without having been convicted of a crime is also not new. Plenty of innocent people are held without bail, pending trial. There really is no "innocent until proven guilty" in our justice system. It's guilty until proven innocent, or until you pay off someone with sufficient power to get you out of jail.

Click to expand...

Bush was aweful, don't get me wrong. however, i don't see obama trying to repeal the Patriot Act. Why would he want to take his own powers away?

here's a couple of his upcoming ideas...

[youtube]Wn5P8iY0Mho[/youtube]

^ "mandatory volunteerism"

[youtube]9P9zRBGPR8o[/youtube]

^ "prolonged Detention"

Damn Fascist

Why doesn't Obama repeal the Patriot Act? Well, because he can't. He's in the executive branch of the government, not the legislative branch. He can veto a bill that comes across his desk for a signature, but he can't repeal a law.

He could issue an executive order, but that would be crazy. The republicans and right-wing conspiracy theorists are already all over his ass. Can you imagine what they'd say if he shot down the Patriot Act? As far as most ring-wingers are concerned, Obama is a muslim, terrorist-loving reincarnation of Satan himself. Even though most Americans agree the Patriot Act is possibly the biggest F U to the US Constitution we've ever seen, there'd no doubt be some huge uprising if it was done away with and Obama would be touted as an "Anti-Patriot".

Is the Patriot Act permanent or does it have a sunset time-line?
It needs to be amended with a sunset provision if not.

The original text did include sunset provisions. I believe the act was supposed to expire in 2005, but Congress voted to make the act permanent (at least that's my understanding, anyway).

medicineman said:

I'm a little ticked off at Obama and his "prolonged detention", his lack of concern about rendition and Bagrahm prison, his lack of enthusiasm for getting rid of the Patriot act etc., But I think we have a better chance of changing things under Obama than we'd of had under McCain. It is the congress that needs to address these things, and they are deathly afraid of the right wing hacks, the war machine.

Click to expand...

Exactly! It's CONGRESS, not the President, who makes the laws. Granted, the President can try to influence the Congress's decision and he can veto a bill that passes through Congress - but he can't make laws and he can't repeal laws.

Everyone gets all up in arms when the president says "we should do things this way", like what he says is somehow written into stone. ANYTHING the president "proposes" still has to go through Congress to become a law. Every president has his own "policies" and beliefs on how things should be done. That doesn't mean Congress is going to do those things, or create any laws based on his policies.

Prime example, Obama's so-called "policy" on medical marijuana busts by the DEA. Is this a law? Nope, not even close. I'm fairly sure there is no legislation being introduced to address this policy and MAKE it law, either.

Same thing with Obama's health care plan. Just because he's calling for reform, doesn't mean it's going to happen.

medicineman said:

I'm a little ticked off at Obama and his "prolonged detention", his lack of concern about rendition and Bagrahm prison, his lack of enthusiasm for getting rid of the Patriot act etc., But I think we have a better chance of changing things under Obama than we'd of had under McCain. It is the congress that needs to address these things, and they are deathly afraid of the right wing hacks, the war machine.

Click to expand...

Well, we can see from their current actions that those asshat terrorists in Congress are not addressing these issues. In fact they are talking about adding even more restrictions, such as the PASS (National Drivers' License) act. (25 States have told the Federal Government to fuck itself, because they wont do it, however.)

Well, we can see from their current actions that those asshat terrorists in Congress are not addressing these issues. In fact they are talking about adding even more restrictions, such as the PASS (National Drivers' License) act. (25 States have told the Federal Government to fuck itself, because they wont do it, however.)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Now thats scary.....National drivers Lic???? Holy shit that get us all on one database....kinda like ummmm..fuckin russia!

NoDrama said:

I Guess if you believe only "terrorists" were involved.

Click to expand...

BINGO! Define 'terrorist' carefully because you may find Bush, Rove, and Cheney to be on the top of the list. They used the attacks to steal freedoms from the American people.

The situation could have been handled MUCH differently.

jrh72582 said:

BINGO! Define 'terrorist' carefully because you may find Bush, Rove, and Cheney to be on the top of the list. They used the attacks to steal freedoms from the American people.

The situation could have been handled MUCH differently.

Click to expand...

Now, actually Bush, Rove, Cheney and Obama fit into another bucket that can be labeled, "Power-mongering Jack Asses."

Of course you have to toss around another 500 into that same bucket.

Where's Microdizzey and his movie previews, I can think of a perfect use for the technology in Gamer or that other movie, Representatives, Senators and the Bureaucrats.

Dude, define terrorist. What constitutes a "terrorist"? The word terrorist was coined by the government so that people would associate it with 9/11. Thats the image the population has when it hears that word. Then, when the government stomps on a pot grower in a legal state (or anyone for that matter) over an ambiguity in the law and labels them terrorists, public opinion is already rehearsed, and in place. How can we be at war with such a nebulous enemy? What, are we at war with the world? Terrorist has no nationality, race creed or religion associated with the concept, so how do you go to war with a will o' the wisp? This is all smoke and mirrors. Our gov wants us scared to death, and willing to do anything to keep those nasty terrorists out of our homes and our CHILDREN safer. Funny nobody is worried about THAT? The propaganda machine spews on.

We are at war with an ideology, or several ideologies, and not a tangible enemy with a face because the threat of terrorism can be found anywhere from the bully on the playground, to the belligerent officer who searches your car anyway because he has cowed you into compliance. Our own government is a terrorist organization by it's own definition.

We are screwed as a country. ANYONE who says that the terrorists can't win is a turnip. They already have won. We did not have the PATRIOT act prior to 9/11 much less the ability to use it. Now, the Gov't not only uses that act AND FISA frequently, They have now justified applying them to US citizens. Drugs have already been talked about as the single most credible threat to our national security, it's only a matter of time before we start sending growers and potheads to Guantanamo (or the next secret equivalent) We are already targeting militias with it. Not saying that having a well regulated militia down the road wouldn't make me feel a bit edgy, however, as long as there are no plans for violent acts, they have the right to do thier thing. The gov't has no right to regulate them or thier ideology, only what they do in the furtherance of it. And the government certainly DIDN"T have the ability to eavesdrop/wiretap them without cause, well guess what? FISA and PATRIOT give them that power to fight national security threats. All that means is defining a threat to national security, and any rights go straight out the window.

Wanna have a political discussion? Read both FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act), and the PATRIOT act. Learn them enough to be able to defend a position, and I'll be more than happy to discuss your new attitude towards the government, because it WILL change the way you think about them.

We already have had conspiracy laws on the books where it is illegal to PLAN a crime. The RICO statutes were geared to combat organized crime, yet has had it's expanded LEO powers to prosecute many other "hard to prosecute" crimes. What they wanna do now is make it easier for them to discover those plots by intruding on all electronic communications, and expand already diluted search and seizure laws. That was NOT the intention of our founding fathers. The America they envisioned looked nothing like this whatsoever. OK, maybe we do live in a different world, and we now need this type of government intrusion (I do not think so at all, but just for the sake of argument). Fine, shit can the constitution and move on. Either way, we are now the USA in name only. The idea and dream came down. They did win.