GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   US Civilians Now Eligible for Military Trials -- Thx Bush! (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=696553)

fuzzylogic 01-16-2007 09:16 PM

US Civilians Now Eligible for Military Trials -- Thx Bush!
 
An amendment to a spending bill has made it possible for US civilians to be charged in a military court. The last minute addition to the bill was sponsored by Senator Lindsey Graham. The bill has been signed into law by the president.

Under the new arrangements civilian government employees and journalists can be prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Previously this could only be done during a declared war. The law is likely to face constitutional challenge.

Senator Graham said, "Right now, you have two different standards for people doing the same job. This will bring uniformity to the commander's ability to control the behavior of people representing our country."

THX BUSH!


source: http://www.newsdaily.com

tony286 01-16-2007 09:22 PM

thats crazy shit , wait where is Sticky to defend this lol

DaddyHalbucks 01-16-2007 09:39 PM

If civilians betray our country, why shouldn't they be held accountable?

JD 01-16-2007 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 11742388)
If civilians betray our country, why shouldn't they be held accountable?

um what? stfu. If a civilian is guilty of treason or similar then they're treated as a traitor already. This opens a whole can of some VERY ugly worms...

biftek 01-16-2007 09:49 PM

allows them to hold the "suspect" for years without a trial guilty until proven innocent

interracialtoons 01-16-2007 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 11742388)
If civilians betray our country, why shouldn't they be held accountable?

No problem. Hold them accountable to a civilian court with all rights granted to a citizen. They don't need to sit in Guatanimo bay for 3 years without a lawyer or a trial if there is proof they did something.

They only need to sit there if we don't have any proof and we'd like to punish them now hoping some proof will be discovered someday.

fuzzylogic 01-16-2007 10:01 PM

laws like this keep those in power in power!

directfiesta 01-16-2007 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404 (Post 11742324)
thats crazy shit , wait where is Sticky to defend this lol

He is sucking DaddyHallbucks and Splum cocks ...

pussyluver 01-16-2007 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by interracialtoons (Post 11742443)
No problem. Hold them accountable to a civilian court with all rights granted to a citizen. They don't need to sit in Guatanimo bay for 3 years without a lawyer or a trial if there is proof they did something.

They only need to sit there if we don't have any proof and we'd like to punish them now hoping some proof will be discovered someday.


It is past time for a strong third party. Perhaps the Libertarians? Clearly things are out of hand. We seem to be jumping from a representative republic, skipping over socialism and going head on into totalitarism.

The sky is falling again.

wyldworx 01-16-2007 10:22 PM

Buy a case of beer, a shovel, and take him for a drink in the bush, show that fucker just how disgruntel you are!

Scottish Guy 01-16-2007 10:32 PM

I suppose this is to tackle new terrorist threats? 9/11 seems to have given your country some bad ass super powers

interracialtoons 01-16-2007 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottish Guy (Post 11742567)
I suppose this is to tackle new terrorist threats? 9/11 seems to have given your country some bad ass super powers

Hey, we do have some "bad ass powers"...I mean, after all we turned Iraq into a chaotic wasteland, turned North Korea into a nuclear power and Iran will follow. Come one, who's got a more powerful record than that.:Oh crap

Webby 01-16-2007 11:17 PM

Damned insurgents on this thread creating a fuss :winkwink:

So... is this what they call democracy, "our freedoms" and values?? Hardly a surprise people in the Middle East are so jealous and the world looks on in awe :1orglaugh

Only rogue regimes bend laws and have citizens answerable to military courts - Young George is treating his title of "Commander-In-Chief" too seriously :1orglaugh Let's get real - he's a total asshole - buy him a military unform with lots of gold braid and he can pose in front of a mirror and get off on it...

What a pathetically sad government... that downwards spiral is gathering speed.

rowan 01-16-2007 11:22 PM

Am I misunderstanding or can the govt add anything they want to a bill with a specific focus?

Webby 01-16-2007 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowan (Post 11742706)
Am I misunderstanding or can the govt add anything they want to a bill with a specific focus?

It's a totally fucked scenario rowan... pass a law on healthcare and stuff a clause on the end to go to war with... well... anybody :winkwink:

Doubt they could stick to the point and write one clean piece of legislation without fucking it up...

pornguy 01-16-2007 11:29 PM

Hmm. well since congress gave Bush the war declaration a few years ago, I dont see why he needed that.

Good chance he did not even know it was in there

bareskin 01-16-2007 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyldworx (Post 11742537)
Buy a case of beer, a shovel, and take him for a drink in the bush, show that fucker just how disgruntel you are!

I would agree but the goverment might track my IP so no comment

SmokeyTheBear 01-16-2007 11:33 PM

they can also take you offshore try you without a lawyer , convict you and give you the death penalty without informing anybody..

DWB 01-16-2007 11:48 PM

It's a good thing I'm a lazy Mexican....

directfiesta 01-17-2007 07:48 AM

Nothing wrong ... it is just the program getting installed .... :)

Quote:

Gonzales: Judges unfit to rule on terror policy
Attorney general says federal jurists should defer to president's will

WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says federal judges are unqualified to make rulings affecting national security policy, ramping up his criticism of how they handle terrorism cases.

In remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday, Gonzales says judges generally should defer to the will of the president and Congress when deciding national security cases. He also raps jurists who ?apply an activist philosophy that stretches the law to suit policy preferences.?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16668110/
Makes sense .... Judges have no education, no experience, no balance, no culture ... but BUSH has ...

He proved afterall his competence since his election...

Long life to the IV Reich :thumbsup

Lazonby 01-17-2007 07:58 AM

Sweet. It's about time the US learned how to deal with it's traitors. I hope they deal with the New York Times first, then the Washington Post.

Webby 01-17-2007 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazonby (Post 11743915)
Sweet. It's about time the US learned how to deal with it's traitors. I hope they deal with the New York Times first, then the Washington Post.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

There are idiots - then there is Lazonby who never quite reaches the idiot level. You really have a severe mental deficiency don't you?? *LOL*

tranza 01-17-2007 09:53 AM

This thread is just too funny...

ElvisManson 01-17-2007 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyluver (Post 11742528)
It is past time for a strong third party. Perhaps the Libertarians? Clearly things are out of hand. We seem to be jumping from a representative republic, skipping over socialism and going head on into totalitarism.

The sky is falling again.


The Electoral College, and single member districts in Congress, help support a two-party system by making it less worth while for minor parties to run and making it less likely people will donate money to a party with little or no chance of winning anything.

Compare our system to any of the multi-member district system in Japan, Italy, France, etc. They end up with a multitude of parties making it hard to form a majority government. In the 20 or 30 years after World War II, Italy averaged a new government every year.

The few third parties that got started here (Populists in the 1890's and American Independent in the 1960s's and 1970s) ended when one of the major parties adopted their ideas. With this ability to influence the major parties' positions without destabilizing the government, it is not really an oligarchy. The leaders are not immune from the ideas and demands made by minor parties

directfiesta 01-17-2007 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisManson (Post 11744428)
The Electoral College, and single member districts in Congress, help support a two-party system by making it less worth while for minor parties to run and making it less likely people will donate money to a party with little or no chance of winning anything.

Compare our system to any of the multi-member district system in Japan, Italy, France, etc. They end up with a multitude of parties making it hard to form a majority government. In the 20 or 30 years after World War II, Italy averaged a new government every year.

The few third parties that got started here (Populists in the 1890's and American Independent in the 1960s's and 1970s) ended when one of the major parties adopted their ideas. With this ability to influence the major parties' positions without destabilizing the government, it is not really an oligarchy. The leaders are not immune from the ideas and demands made by minor parties

Also, today, starting a third party with a different ideology would most likely be considered treason and persecuted....

Opposing the war has got a bunch of groups under surveillance ....

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude 01-17-2007 10:25 AM

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rogers/seg.jpg

Pardon me, just passing through...

ADG Webmaster


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123