- This topic has 425 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by Shadowfax.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 21, 2009 at 7:31 PM #386027April 21, 2009 at 8:33 PM #385390Chris Scoreboard JohnstonParticipant
I am with that as long as you agree to let us try Barry as a traitor at the same time the interrogators are tried, he certainly is equally guilty of that crime if not more so.
TG post right on again as usual
April 21, 2009 at 8:33 PM #385657Chris Scoreboard JohnstonParticipantI am with that as long as you agree to let us try Barry as a traitor at the same time the interrogators are tried, he certainly is equally guilty of that crime if not more so.
TG post right on again as usual
April 21, 2009 at 8:33 PM #385856Chris Scoreboard JohnstonParticipantI am with that as long as you agree to let us try Barry as a traitor at the same time the interrogators are tried, he certainly is equally guilty of that crime if not more so.
TG post right on again as usual
April 21, 2009 at 8:33 PM #385904Chris Scoreboard JohnstonParticipantI am with that as long as you agree to let us try Barry as a traitor at the same time the interrogators are tried, he certainly is equally guilty of that crime if not more so.
TG post right on again as usual
April 21, 2009 at 8:33 PM #386042Chris Scoreboard JohnstonParticipantI am with that as long as you agree to let us try Barry as a traitor at the same time the interrogators are tried, he certainly is equally guilty of that crime if not more so.
TG post right on again as usual
April 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM #385415ParabolicaParticipantWhat I’m trying to figure out reading this thread is where (and if) the realpolitiks/apologists (take your pick) draw the lines. If we are not a nation of laws, if we accept that the government does nasty things we would rather not hear about (but accept as being necessary for our own good), are there limits?
1800’s
Sure, maybe government troops get a little out of hand and kill Indian women and children, but this is war. It’s what the nation needs to grow. And these are savages.1940’s
We must round up Japanese citizens and put them in camps. This is war, after all. Proof? Are you joking, man?1950’s -1970’s
We had no choice except to overthrow a few third-rate governments. It’s the commies are or us. Democratic elections will mean nothing if commies are elected. Murders, disappearances, death squads? Get real. Our country will do what it has to.Is there anything that the US Gov’t might do in the name of protecting our security that you would rule out? Anything so vile, that you would not snort “Ah well, these things are done for us. Better to just accept or not think about them.”
Is there any law you think is so fundamental, so defining of what is American, that it cannot be broken without exposing our nation as a lie? Or do you think it is all just a show, a pretense we present to the world, so we can screw other people over who take us seriously.
If it is a matter of scale for you, where does the scale tip? If citizens have nothing to hide, they shouldn’t care if their phone calls and emails are intercepted by the government. A little torture is ok, but not targeted assassinations ? Are concentration camps totally out of the question in your view of the US, or would we be better just to not talk about them.
And those in charge, whom you trust to break our laws wisely, did the overwhelming, demonstrated competence of the Bush administration fill you with total assurance that everyone in Guantanamo (or our secret prisons) is guilty without a doubt? That no innocent person was tortured, that all evidence obtained was real and actionable, not the dreck pouring out of people who just wanted to make the pain stop?
Are you cool with Obama intercepting our emails and phone calls? You know, government does nasty thing, and it is for the good of the country.
See, I can understand those of you that think this country, its laws, and dreams are a sham. That we are no better than Russia or Burma. But I get the feeling that some of you actually believe in freedom and laws and the Constitution. Those are the people I am curious about. If there is a line for you, where do you draw it?
April 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM #385683ParabolicaParticipantWhat I’m trying to figure out reading this thread is where (and if) the realpolitiks/apologists (take your pick) draw the lines. If we are not a nation of laws, if we accept that the government does nasty things we would rather not hear about (but accept as being necessary for our own good), are there limits?
1800’s
Sure, maybe government troops get a little out of hand and kill Indian women and children, but this is war. It’s what the nation needs to grow. And these are savages.1940’s
We must round up Japanese citizens and put them in camps. This is war, after all. Proof? Are you joking, man?1950’s -1970’s
We had no choice except to overthrow a few third-rate governments. It’s the commies are or us. Democratic elections will mean nothing if commies are elected. Murders, disappearances, death squads? Get real. Our country will do what it has to.Is there anything that the US Gov’t might do in the name of protecting our security that you would rule out? Anything so vile, that you would not snort “Ah well, these things are done for us. Better to just accept or not think about them.”
Is there any law you think is so fundamental, so defining of what is American, that it cannot be broken without exposing our nation as a lie? Or do you think it is all just a show, a pretense we present to the world, so we can screw other people over who take us seriously.
If it is a matter of scale for you, where does the scale tip? If citizens have nothing to hide, they shouldn’t care if their phone calls and emails are intercepted by the government. A little torture is ok, but not targeted assassinations ? Are concentration camps totally out of the question in your view of the US, or would we be better just to not talk about them.
And those in charge, whom you trust to break our laws wisely, did the overwhelming, demonstrated competence of the Bush administration fill you with total assurance that everyone in Guantanamo (or our secret prisons) is guilty without a doubt? That no innocent person was tortured, that all evidence obtained was real and actionable, not the dreck pouring out of people who just wanted to make the pain stop?
Are you cool with Obama intercepting our emails and phone calls? You know, government does nasty thing, and it is for the good of the country.
See, I can understand those of you that think this country, its laws, and dreams are a sham. That we are no better than Russia or Burma. But I get the feeling that some of you actually believe in freedom and laws and the Constitution. Those are the people I am curious about. If there is a line for you, where do you draw it?
April 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM #385881ParabolicaParticipantWhat I’m trying to figure out reading this thread is where (and if) the realpolitiks/apologists (take your pick) draw the lines. If we are not a nation of laws, if we accept that the government does nasty things we would rather not hear about (but accept as being necessary for our own good), are there limits?
1800’s
Sure, maybe government troops get a little out of hand and kill Indian women and children, but this is war. It’s what the nation needs to grow. And these are savages.1940’s
We must round up Japanese citizens and put them in camps. This is war, after all. Proof? Are you joking, man?1950’s -1970’s
We had no choice except to overthrow a few third-rate governments. It’s the commies are or us. Democratic elections will mean nothing if commies are elected. Murders, disappearances, death squads? Get real. Our country will do what it has to.Is there anything that the US Gov’t might do in the name of protecting our security that you would rule out? Anything so vile, that you would not snort “Ah well, these things are done for us. Better to just accept or not think about them.”
Is there any law you think is so fundamental, so defining of what is American, that it cannot be broken without exposing our nation as a lie? Or do you think it is all just a show, a pretense we present to the world, so we can screw other people over who take us seriously.
If it is a matter of scale for you, where does the scale tip? If citizens have nothing to hide, they shouldn’t care if their phone calls and emails are intercepted by the government. A little torture is ok, but not targeted assassinations ? Are concentration camps totally out of the question in your view of the US, or would we be better just to not talk about them.
And those in charge, whom you trust to break our laws wisely, did the overwhelming, demonstrated competence of the Bush administration fill you with total assurance that everyone in Guantanamo (or our secret prisons) is guilty without a doubt? That no innocent person was tortured, that all evidence obtained was real and actionable, not the dreck pouring out of people who just wanted to make the pain stop?
Are you cool with Obama intercepting our emails and phone calls? You know, government does nasty thing, and it is for the good of the country.
See, I can understand those of you that think this country, its laws, and dreams are a sham. That we are no better than Russia or Burma. But I get the feeling that some of you actually believe in freedom and laws and the Constitution. Those are the people I am curious about. If there is a line for you, where do you draw it?
April 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM #385929ParabolicaParticipantWhat I’m trying to figure out reading this thread is where (and if) the realpolitiks/apologists (take your pick) draw the lines. If we are not a nation of laws, if we accept that the government does nasty things we would rather not hear about (but accept as being necessary for our own good), are there limits?
1800’s
Sure, maybe government troops get a little out of hand and kill Indian women and children, but this is war. It’s what the nation needs to grow. And these are savages.1940’s
We must round up Japanese citizens and put them in camps. This is war, after all. Proof? Are you joking, man?1950’s -1970’s
We had no choice except to overthrow a few third-rate governments. It’s the commies are or us. Democratic elections will mean nothing if commies are elected. Murders, disappearances, death squads? Get real. Our country will do what it has to.Is there anything that the US Gov’t might do in the name of protecting our security that you would rule out? Anything so vile, that you would not snort “Ah well, these things are done for us. Better to just accept or not think about them.”
Is there any law you think is so fundamental, so defining of what is American, that it cannot be broken without exposing our nation as a lie? Or do you think it is all just a show, a pretense we present to the world, so we can screw other people over who take us seriously.
If it is a matter of scale for you, where does the scale tip? If citizens have nothing to hide, they shouldn’t care if their phone calls and emails are intercepted by the government. A little torture is ok, but not targeted assassinations ? Are concentration camps totally out of the question in your view of the US, or would we be better just to not talk about them.
And those in charge, whom you trust to break our laws wisely, did the overwhelming, demonstrated competence of the Bush administration fill you with total assurance that everyone in Guantanamo (or our secret prisons) is guilty without a doubt? That no innocent person was tortured, that all evidence obtained was real and actionable, not the dreck pouring out of people who just wanted to make the pain stop?
Are you cool with Obama intercepting our emails and phone calls? You know, government does nasty thing, and it is for the good of the country.
See, I can understand those of you that think this country, its laws, and dreams are a sham. That we are no better than Russia or Burma. But I get the feeling that some of you actually believe in freedom and laws and the Constitution. Those are the people I am curious about. If there is a line for you, where do you draw it?
April 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM #386067ParabolicaParticipantWhat I’m trying to figure out reading this thread is where (and if) the realpolitiks/apologists (take your pick) draw the lines. If we are not a nation of laws, if we accept that the government does nasty things we would rather not hear about (but accept as being necessary for our own good), are there limits?
1800’s
Sure, maybe government troops get a little out of hand and kill Indian women and children, but this is war. It’s what the nation needs to grow. And these are savages.1940’s
We must round up Japanese citizens and put them in camps. This is war, after all. Proof? Are you joking, man?1950’s -1970’s
We had no choice except to overthrow a few third-rate governments. It’s the commies are or us. Democratic elections will mean nothing if commies are elected. Murders, disappearances, death squads? Get real. Our country will do what it has to.Is there anything that the US Gov’t might do in the name of protecting our security that you would rule out? Anything so vile, that you would not snort “Ah well, these things are done for us. Better to just accept or not think about them.”
Is there any law you think is so fundamental, so defining of what is American, that it cannot be broken without exposing our nation as a lie? Or do you think it is all just a show, a pretense we present to the world, so we can screw other people over who take us seriously.
If it is a matter of scale for you, where does the scale tip? If citizens have nothing to hide, they shouldn’t care if their phone calls and emails are intercepted by the government. A little torture is ok, but not targeted assassinations ? Are concentration camps totally out of the question in your view of the US, or would we be better just to not talk about them.
And those in charge, whom you trust to break our laws wisely, did the overwhelming, demonstrated competence of the Bush administration fill you with total assurance that everyone in Guantanamo (or our secret prisons) is guilty without a doubt? That no innocent person was tortured, that all evidence obtained was real and actionable, not the dreck pouring out of people who just wanted to make the pain stop?
Are you cool with Obama intercepting our emails and phone calls? You know, government does nasty thing, and it is for the good of the country.
See, I can understand those of you that think this country, its laws, and dreams are a sham. That we are no better than Russia or Burma. But I get the feeling that some of you actually believe in freedom and laws and the Constitution. Those are the people I am curious about. If there is a line for you, where do you draw it?
April 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM #385430blahblahblahParticipantCONCHO: Are you familiar with the term “carnography”?
Hahaha actually I wasn’t. That’s pretty interesting that they’ve actually coined a word for this stuff. The film westerns are interesting to think about — even though they didn’t have torture scenes, what they almost always had is the good guy that knows right from wrong and does what he has to do, even if it might involve bending a law or two. I guess the whole Jack Bauer “24” thing ties into the same mythology — these darned bureaucrats just don’t understand! A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do to keep this town safe!
Maybe this whole torture thing in the media is just a new twist on an old theme. Although Dirty Harry didn’t torture people, he was pretty nasty to the bad guy, and he didn’t bother himself with little details like due process or the courts. Of course in the movies, Eastwood’s judgement is always right, and when Charles Bronson goes off on the bad guys in one of his “Death Wish” movies, he never gets the wrong man. It’s too bad life isn’t always like the movies!
April 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM #385698blahblahblahParticipantCONCHO: Are you familiar with the term “carnography”?
Hahaha actually I wasn’t. That’s pretty interesting that they’ve actually coined a word for this stuff. The film westerns are interesting to think about — even though they didn’t have torture scenes, what they almost always had is the good guy that knows right from wrong and does what he has to do, even if it might involve bending a law or two. I guess the whole Jack Bauer “24” thing ties into the same mythology — these darned bureaucrats just don’t understand! A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do to keep this town safe!
Maybe this whole torture thing in the media is just a new twist on an old theme. Although Dirty Harry didn’t torture people, he was pretty nasty to the bad guy, and he didn’t bother himself with little details like due process or the courts. Of course in the movies, Eastwood’s judgement is always right, and when Charles Bronson goes off on the bad guys in one of his “Death Wish” movies, he never gets the wrong man. It’s too bad life isn’t always like the movies!
April 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM #385895blahblahblahParticipantCONCHO: Are you familiar with the term “carnography”?
Hahaha actually I wasn’t. That’s pretty interesting that they’ve actually coined a word for this stuff. The film westerns are interesting to think about — even though they didn’t have torture scenes, what they almost always had is the good guy that knows right from wrong and does what he has to do, even if it might involve bending a law or two. I guess the whole Jack Bauer “24” thing ties into the same mythology — these darned bureaucrats just don’t understand! A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do to keep this town safe!
Maybe this whole torture thing in the media is just a new twist on an old theme. Although Dirty Harry didn’t torture people, he was pretty nasty to the bad guy, and he didn’t bother himself with little details like due process or the courts. Of course in the movies, Eastwood’s judgement is always right, and when Charles Bronson goes off on the bad guys in one of his “Death Wish” movies, he never gets the wrong man. It’s too bad life isn’t always like the movies!
April 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM #385944blahblahblahParticipantCONCHO: Are you familiar with the term “carnography”?
Hahaha actually I wasn’t. That’s pretty interesting that they’ve actually coined a word for this stuff. The film westerns are interesting to think about — even though they didn’t have torture scenes, what they almost always had is the good guy that knows right from wrong and does what he has to do, even if it might involve bending a law or two. I guess the whole Jack Bauer “24” thing ties into the same mythology — these darned bureaucrats just don’t understand! A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do to keep this town safe!
Maybe this whole torture thing in the media is just a new twist on an old theme. Although Dirty Harry didn’t torture people, he was pretty nasty to the bad guy, and he didn’t bother himself with little details like due process or the courts. Of course in the movies, Eastwood’s judgement is always right, and when Charles Bronson goes off on the bad guys in one of his “Death Wish” movies, he never gets the wrong man. It’s too bad life isn’t always like the movies!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.