Fairenheit 9/11 review

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Suppose I went over to Iraq and starting making speeches saying I supported Al Qaeda and hoped they brought America to her knees and I started rallying Iraqis to join Al Qaeda and fight against America because we were infidels and I thought all Americans should be murdered in the name of Allah. Would you support my right of freee speech?

I'm not positive, but I think that that might be considered treason (absolutely not covered by the First Amendment). Perhaps someone in the know can clarify.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Luv2Fall 0]

Yeah, I might have to see it as his politcal philosophy is so far removed from reality, it's gotta be morally pure.

[wmw999 2,452]

Quote

Saying that we deserved to be attacked does. Many have said that directly and indirectly. ***

Jerry Falwell among others. Is he anti-American?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

It's funny,
Of the two people who disagree with me, one tells me to go do traffic, the other implies a lack of brain matter and tells me to read a book...........Hmmmm.........those are well thought out points. Thanks!!!!!

I even gave Mr. Moore credit for being clever. I laughed out loud several times during the movie. Some parts were funny, both the way it was presented and in content. But I guess I'm too under educated to understand.

It could show a lack of flexibility and lack of research if one was to vote a straight ticket. I very seldom EVER vote a straight ticket. I look at issues, that determines my vote, not party affiliation.
Hmmmmm.....not bad for un unread, uninformed slob huh?

Actually I think you are OVER educated - you are not the downtrodden minorities, homeless and umemployed. Of course you will be bashed by the left.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Nightingale 0]

many lefties saw that movie last weekend...

somehow I don't think most of them were "homeless and unemployed".

[turtlespeed 221]

Still waiting on my ticket.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Nightingale 0]

see my reply in other thread.

[stuffit 0]

It is funny how you guys are all on here arguing about some bullshit act. Who CARES!! The fact stands (and no you didnt have to see the movie to realize this) that the US public was lied to and we went to war for no valid reason. There is no denying that.

Whether you want to believe some of Micheal Moore's stretches of the imagination is up to you.

[billvon 2,998]

>But the fact is, there are many, many on the far right who accuse those
> who oppose GWB or the incursion into Iraq as being "un-American". And
>this I find very disturbing.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president.. is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public." - Teddy Roosevelt, 1918

"Too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think it will give some comfort to the enemy... if that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments they are welcome to it.. because the maintenance of the right to criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a good deal more good than it will do the enemy." - Senator Robert A. Taft, 1942

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

>But the fact is, there are many, many on the far right who accuse those
> who oppose GWB or the incursion into Iraq as being "un-American". And
>this I find very disturbing.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president.. is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public." - Teddy Roosevelt, 1918

"Too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think it will give some comfort to the enemy... if that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments they are welcome to it.. because the maintenance of the right to criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a good deal more good than it will do the enemy." - Senator Robert A. Taft, 1942

'You are either with us or against us' - George W. Bush, 6 November 2001

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

'You are either with us or against us' - George W. Bush, 6 November 2001

Use it in its proper context, Professor.

From cnn.com

Quote

"A coalition partner must do more than just express sympathy, a coalition partner must perform," Bush said. "That means different things for different nations. Some nations don't want to contribute troops and we understand that. Other nations can contribute intelligence-sharing. ... But all nations, if they want to fight terror, must do something."

Bush said he would not point out any specific countries in his speech.

"Over time it's going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity," he said. "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror." (Full story)

I don't think that's so bad, do you?


-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[billvon 2,998]

>I don't think that's so bad, do you?

You really think Sweden is an enemy of the US?

[Zennie 0]

Trent, GM, the Bush administration's attempts to erode civil liberties is real. I haven't been arm-waving over hypotheticals, the Hamdi & Padilla cases are real-world examples.

Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court shares my concerns...

"We have long since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the Nation's citizens." - Sandra Day O'Connor (Reagan appointee)

The text of the opinion is here.

I'll read it more closely, but they seem to have done a pretty good job of balancing security concerns with fundamental individual rights.

- Z
"Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

>I don't think that's so bad, do you?

You really think Sweden is an enemy of the US?

Sure, all those bakeries are just fronts for a Swedish terrorist group planning to overthrow the USA. They've infiltrated every major city.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DrunkMonkey 0]

Quote

Quote

>I don't think that's so bad, do you?

You really think Sweden is an enemy of the US?

Sure, all those bakeries are just fronts for a Swedish terrorist group planning to overthrow the USA. They've infiltrated every major city.

He's Coming right at us!!! RUN!!!

[Trent 0]

I don't think the current administration is really "out to steal our liberties". I think that some people may have a problem with giving authorities some tools they could use to help fight a battle. Remember, the patriot act is not permanent and must be renewed by congress.

To your point, I read that opinion this morning. You don't see the judges signing orders to release those 2 fuckers do you? As we've said before the patriot act isn't a blank check, read it closely.

Oh, hello again!

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

>But the fact is, there are many, many on the far right who accuse those
> who oppose GWB or the incursion into Iraq as being "un-American". And
>this I find very disturbing.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president.. is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public." - Teddy Roosevelt, 1918

"Too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think it will give some comfort to the enemy... if that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments they are welcome to it.. because the maintenance of the right to criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a good deal more good than it will do the enemy." - Senator Robert A. Taft, 1942

DAMN! You took my quote from Teddy and the idea behind my next reply! You sharp guy!

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[Zennie 0]

Quote

You don't see the judges signing orders to release those 2 fuckers do you? As we've said before the patriot act isn't a blank check, read it closely.

No and I'm not advocating releasing them and never have. I just have a hangup with the notion of being locked up indefinitely in military brig, charged with nothing, given no access to an attorney and being told I have no right to challenge the detention in a court of law merely because a politician decides I'm an "enemy combatant".... whatever that means.

We can lock them up. That's fine. They can challenge their detention, the Government can explain why national security requires they be detained, and the courts can decide if the reason is valid.

We have two discussions going here. One is over the Patriot Act specifically and the other is the Bush Administration's general disdain for fundamental human rights.

The Padilla and Hamdi cases address my more general concern and have nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

If it's specific provisions of the Patriot Act that you're looking for, I'll dig them up and post them for you.

- Z
"Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

[billvon 2,998]

>Remember, the patriot act is not permanent and must be renewed by congress.

I remember reading exactly the same thing about the income tax. A temporary measure, to be used to finance a war, then discontinued. Do you really think politicians are in the business of giving up power or money?

[mardigrasbob 0]

Quote

>Remember, the patriot act is not permanent and must be renewed by congress.

I remember reading exactly the same thing about the income tax. A temporary measure, to be used to finance a war, then discontinued. Do you really think politicians are in the business of giving up power or money?

Yeah, and your S.S.A.N. was only supposed to be only used for your retirement account.
Never invite the government in, cause they never know when to leave.

---------

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

I don't think the current administration is really "out to steal our liberties".

Neither do I, at least I hope not. But I don't think they have much concern for protecting our liberties in the face of the problems we are facing. And neither do most of the administrations supporters. Personally I see that as vastly more important that protecting us from terrorists. What's the point of being safe if we are not free?

[Trent 0]

Quote

We have two discussions going here. One is over the Patriot Act specifically and the other is the Bush Administration's general disdain for fundamental human rights.

The Padilla and Hamdi cases address my more general concern and have nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Actually it is the patriot act that is allowing the government to keep these guys right now. The judges are responding to the parts of the patriot act that allow it. I agree with them that these dudes should have rights to a lawyer, and should eventually be charged publicly. BUT, as long as the government is providing a good reason to the judges who haven't ordered their release, hold em till we're ready.

From BillVon:

Quote

I remember reading exactly the same thing about the income tax. A temporary measure, to be used to finance a war, then discontinued. Do you really think politicians are in the business of giving up power or money?

I don't think they're in the business of dominating our lives and the world, no. As far as taxes being temporary... well, what elected congress passed that? It'd take the same to make the Patriot Act permanent. Write your congressman.

From Kev:

Quote

And neither do most of the administrations supporters. Personally I see that as vastly more important that protecting us from terrorists. What's the point of being safe if we are not free?

I take my liberties seriously, but then again I'm not doing anything to get the government mad at me. I'd still like someone to directly point out parts of the Patriot Act (quote it) and tell how it REALLY tramples on our rights. I'm not if favor of releasing people who have a high probability of being a terrorist because we're still making a case against them.

Oh, hello again!

[PhillyKev 0]

This quotes the parts of the Patriot Act in question. Feel free to read them.

The Patriot Act increases the governments surveillance powers in four areas:

Records searches. It expands the government's ability to look at records on an individual's activity being held by a third parties. (Section 215)
Secret searches. It expands the government's ability to search private property without notice to the owner. (Section 213)
Intelligence searches. It expands a narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment that had been created for the collection of foreign intelligence information (Section 218).
"Trap and trace" searches. It expands another Fourth Amendment exception for spying that collects "addressing" information about the origin and destination of communications, as opposed to the content (Section 214).

And the problems with it:

Violates the Fourth Amendment, which says the government cannot conduct a search without obtaining a warrant and showing probable cause to believe that the person has committed or will commit a crime.
Violates the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech by prohibiting the recipients of search orders from telling others about those orders, even where there is no real need for secrecy.
Violates the First Amendment by effectively authorizing the FBI to launch investigations of American citizens in part for exercising their freedom of speech.
Violates the Fourth Amendmentby failing to provide notice - even after the fact - to persons whose privacy has been compromised. Notice is also a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.

[billvon 2,998]

>I don't think they're in the business of dominating our lives and the world, no.

The founders of this country disagree with you. They thought that the power of government was so seductive that we needed a truly formidable series of barriers to prevent any part of government from becoming too powerful.
-----------------------------------
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry

"The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing."
John Adams

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams

"Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature.... If the next centennial does not find us a great nation ... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces."
James Garfield, 1877

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them."
Patrick Henry, American colonial revolutionary

"We the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts--not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
Abraham Lincoln

"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
James Madison

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government."
Thomas Paine

-------------------------------------

>As far as taxes being temporary... well, what elected congress passed
> that? It'd take the same to make the Patriot Act permanent.

It will take no more than fear. When rulers can whip up enough fear in their subjects, they will aquiesce to nearly anything in the name of perceived safety.

[PhillyKev 0]

sigh

I wish those guys were around now so they could be called unpatriotic, terrorist aiding, liberals. Oh wait, many of them were in their time by the patriotic, god-fearing populace who said that standing behind your country is a moral imperative during times of war, no matter what. Long live King George.