getting away from your ridiculous strawmans....

i found this

Quote :

"In litigation regarding the availability of fundamental rights to those imprisoned at the base, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that the detainees "have been imprisoned in territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction and control."[9] Therefore, the detainees have the fundamental right to due process of law under the Fifth Amendment."

6/30/2006 1:24:11 PM

but, as prisoners of the "war" on terror, they don't have to be charged with anything. they can just be held indefinitely because they are a "threat."

i don't see why it's so hard to see how this power could be horribly abused. We could easily put someone who we suspect of wrongdoing in gitmo and never have to bother with troubles of proving his guilt. we just have to say that he's a terrorist because he checked out some anarchist books at a library or went to the middle east for a while.

6/30/2006 1:28:53 PM

lets give our enemies the benefit of the doubt instead of our president

hey jwb is all you do accuse people of using strawmen? seems like your only contribution to soap box

6/30/2006 1:34:11 PM

no, just you

6/30/2006 1:35:53 PM

oh thats right, i dont hate bush as much as i hate our enemies so i therefore just use strawmen

thanks for the dickriding though...flattering, really

6/30/2006 1:37:11 PM

From this point on, i declare this to be the official treetwister Strawman pic. Feel free to use it at will.

6/30/2006 1:37:56 PM

i like to post pictures when i dont have the capacity to use words that actually debate content

its so easy

oh wait what happened?

6/30/2006 1:38:33 PM

its so easy to throw up endless strawmans and instead of actually researching an issue and posting intelligent points.

6/30/2006 1:43:12 PM

its so easy to dismiss anything i say by calling it a strawman or by posting a picture instead of debating what i say

btw when i use strawmen as you say, how come you cant easily refute my arguments?

arent strawmen supposed to be setup to easily refute?

6/30/2006 1:45:09 PM

nm,

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:47 PM. Reason : nm]

6/30/2006 1:47:03 PM

look i edited my post

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:48 PM. Reason : oh wow edit]

6/30/2006 1:47:43 PM

phish doesnt exist anymore. again, you talk without knowing.

6/30/2006 1:48:21 PM

dude lets go throw some frisbees at bonaroo and take some rolls, woah dude awesome

6/30/2006 1:48:48 PM

Quote :

"i guess if you forget 9/11 because you hate the president..."

Quote :

"^^right because every single prisoner in Gitmo is innocent"

Quote :

"i guess osama is innocent too since he hasnt been proven guilty"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_argument
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_argument
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_argument
No joke, If you want to be taken seriously learn that shit.
Check this too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
Without at least a minor understanding of those, people will just laugh at you.


oh, and i like many love your constant use of --></ on nearly every post.

6/30/2006 1:51:28 PM

Quote :

"btw when i use strawmen as you say, how come you cant easily refute my arguments?"

actually you've already done the work for me. its flawed from the start.

Quote :

"the term logical fallacy properly refers to a formal fallacy: a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid."

no joke man, read that shit.

6/30/2006 1:52:23 PM

thanks for posting links about strawmen instead of you actually using your brain to debate what i say...its a lot easier to just say "strawman!" and post a link than for you to use your brain

and sorry when 5 people attack me at once if i would rather edit a post cleanly than triple post to defend myself

6/30/2006 1:53:27 PM

The great thing about logical fallacies is you don't argue with them, you point them out and move on.

6/30/2006 1:54:28 PM

if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.....

6/30/2006 1:55:05 PM

the great thing about tww is bush is the devil and all gitmo prisoners are innocent

HEY GUYS DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT DECISION?

IM GONNA MAKE A THREAD TO SHOVE IT IN BUSH'S FACE HAHA THAT'LL TEACH HIM

6/30/2006 1:55:16 PM

help i'm being bombarded by liberal hippies who dont address what i say!!

6/30/2006 1:55:47 PM

yeah, its like that pic of the fat guy covered in mustard. everyone laughs at the guy who fucked up, and moves on. we don't debate the manner in which he spilled a gallon of mustard on himself.
we laugh and move on.

6/30/2006 1:55:53 PM

Quote :

"we don't debate"

and that is your problem

6/30/2006 1:56:37 PM

yours too

...which is why people get annoyed with you. most of the time, when you enter a debate, it dissolves into shit.

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 1:58 PM. Reason : df]

6/30/2006 1:57:18 PM

wow what a snappy comeback

i'd expect a snappy comeback instead of anything with any intellect and thought involved

6/30/2006 1:58:15 PM

when the liberal rhetoric i regurgitate from the media gets shot down by someone who thinks for themselves, i like to claim that person turns threads to shit also

why dont all people on this site hate bush as much as me?

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 2:02 PM. Reason : look i didnt do a phantom edit because phantom edits are bad]

not that a thread "reminding bush about checks and balances" was a shitty thread to begin with

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 2:03 PM. Reason : look another edit! hey its not phantom so its better!]

6/30/2006 2:00:59 PM

Quote :

"the great thing about tww is bush is the devil and all gitmo prisoners are innocent HEY GUYS DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT DECISION? IM GONNA MAKE A THREAD TO SHOVE IT IN BUSH'S FACE HAHA THAT'LL TEACH HIM"

Haha so I tried to explain the fact that you commit a straw man in every single post of yours, and you respond with a straw man.

Priceless.

6/30/2006 2:04:25 PM

you are kind of slow arent you

6/30/2006 2:05:52 PM

Haha -- you're either blatantly trolling or you seriously don't care.

6/30/2006 2:06:41 PM

its nice to see the system work every once and a while.

the executive branch has gotten much more powerful than ever intended by the framers.

its nice to see its power (whatever party happens to be in control) curtailed every now and then by another branch.

6/30/2006 2:07:19 PM

i'll let you get back on topic

all it takes to get back on topic is a serious reply from someone instead of a bunch of personal bashing

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 2:09 PM. Reason : .]

6/30/2006 2:07:54 PM

Quote :

"Haha so I tried to explain the fact that you commit a straw man in every single post of yours, and you respond with a straw man. Priceless."

Quote :

"Haha -- you're either blatantly trolling or you seriously don't care."

i decided on trolling long ago. i can only hope thats his aim...if its not then i'm very afraid.

6/30/2006 2:08:50 PM

maybe i'm just not a pussy liberal

maybe as an american i dont give a shit about enemy prisoners

maybe i dont use all my power to bash bush and defend people who hate you and me and all of our families and friends who are american

6/30/2006 2:10:57 PM

I'm very afraid.

Either way that type of shrill behavior shouldn't be permitted here.

6/30/2006 2:11:03 PM

Quote :

"and 1CYPHER i'm waiting to see what you would call the war on terror since you dont think its a war"

Sorry, was watching the game.

I don't call it a war at all but I would guess the modern definitions of "war" are probably non-specific enough that you could title damn near anything a war. It doesn't really matter to me if it is called a war or not except for calling it a war specifically so 1 person can attempt to supplant their own needs above the checks and balances that sustain any democracy is a sham.

Quote :

"would you consider Usama Bin Ladin's bodyguard as innocent?"

Yes he is. How about this. You're also an osama body guard, I think they should throw you in gitmo so we don't have to deal with your mindless drivel.

Put the guy on trial or if we are afraid we don't have enough real evidence (which makes me wonder how someone wound up there in the first place?) at the very least, give him a decent environment to live.

Quote :

"if there are still violent conflicts going on that are part of the war on terror"

Why does it matter if it is violent or not?

Quote :

"maybe i should hate our president and feel sympathy for our enemies"

Did we actually prove someone was an enemy? I still think you are a terrorist. Why are you still here?

6/30/2006 2:11:41 PM

Quote :

"would you consider Usama Bin Ladin's bodyguard as innocent?" Yes he is. How about this. You're also an osama body guard, I think they should throw you in gitmo so we don't have to deal with your mindless drivel. Put the guy on trial or if we are afraid we don't have enough real evidence (which makes me wonder how someone wound up there in the first place?) at the very least, give him a decent environment to live"

at the very least, did his boys give 3000+ americans a decent environment to live on 9/11/01?

6/30/2006 2:12:46 PM

Quote :

"Either way that type of shrill behavior shouldn't be permitted here."

PEOPLE WHO THINK DIFFERENT THAN ME...BAD...SHOULD BE CENSORED

6/30/2006 2:13:17 PM

It's not about thinking differently than me

It's about having no concept of how to argue rationally

6/30/2006 2:17:18 PM

now correct me if i'm wrong -- but none of the people at gitmo actively attacked us on 9/11

if they conspired with the people who did carry out those attacks (or other attacks) then why not bring them up on those charges.

and if that isn't possible at least make the system more transparent so that the country can know what we're holding these 400 or so people in gitmo for.

i think the people who are charged with crimes should definitely be afforded due process, but that's not what i'm most concerned about. I'm more concerned about the people who haven't been charged at all. If even one of them is innocent, then we should (and probably will) have hell to pay for it. If the problem is that the countries where they committed the crimes won't take them back (as Bush has suggested) then give us a list. If these people are prisoners of war from afghanistan or iraq, then give us a list of those people.

But to me -- if there's so much secrecy about the identities and charges of these people who are imprisoned, then I am going to be naturally skeptical. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" and all that.

6/30/2006 2:20:19 PM

Quote :

"at the very least, did his boys give 3000+ americans a decent environment to live on 9/11/01?"

So, you're upset that a group of people took the power of life and death into their own hands but clearly not upset when the U.S. of A. does the same? Is the state of our technology and the great modern marvel that is the US really so lacking that we can't figure this shit out on our own and/or building up appropriate defensive "walls" so that we don't have to resort to torture and the removal of anothers liberties.

Yea, I hate the fucks too. Maybe if I had my mom or dad killed I would feel differently, I'm not sure. But what I am sure of, is that it pisses me off nearly as much to live under such a god damned arrogant culture that instead of being "clean" with the defense of ourself, we resort to medieval age tactics to extract information.

What you are basically saying is, it's impossible to minimize threats through

Cutting off funds
Cutting off and or eliminating communications channels
Building strong systems for ensuring the people that we let into our country aren't terrorist sympathizers
etc etc etc

such that we honestly think some guy that is willing to die for his cause is going to just give us freely the information we want to know???


It's pretty sad a bunch of camel jockeys in the desert with a little bit of cash were able to fly below the radar on our own soil and do this too us. If it happens this way once, shame on them, if it happens this way twice, shame on us. What other threats are you scared of?

[Edited on June 30, 2006 at 2:25 PM. Reason : asdasd]

6/30/2006 2:23:14 PM

Quote :

"maybe i'm just not a pussy liberal"

name calling isn't going to make people take you seriously either. in fact, it has quite the opposite effect.

6/30/2006 2:23:56 PM

cue the strawman...

6/30/2006 2:24:19 PM

strawman, you're up....

6/30/2006 2:24:57 PM

what the fuck, a smoke break?!?!?!

6/30/2006 2:25:24 PM

TreeTwista10,

You're right: Al-Queda, insurrgents, terrorists, et. al. are a despicable group of people. They do not follow the Geneva Conventions or any other generally acceptable rules of conduct. They have killed every single one of their military prisoners and the majority of their civilian prisoners. However, the fact that they do not follow the law does NOT release the US from any obligation to follow the law. If someone kills a relative of yours, that does not give you the right to retaliate in kind. If some old white lady calls some old black lady a nigger, that doesn't give the black lady the right to push the white lady down.

You're probably also right in that the Geneva Convention does not technically apply to Al-Queda. However, there is the letter of the law and there is the spirit of the law. The spirit of the Geneva Convention--and the Constitution of the United States--being that government not use under-handed tactics, treat people humanely, and grant everyone due process. When these ideals are circumvented by classifying people as 'enemy combatants' vice POWs, or by attempting to squirrel people away somewhere, that accomplishes nothing but to cheapen the very values that form the basis of the Geneva Convention and the Constitution. I reject your argument that such laws do not apply to terrorists, not because I believe that they are neccessarily legally entitled to such protections, but rather, because I believe in the principles upon which our government is based.

If you truely believe in these things as well, you should have zero problem with trying these people in a court of law. What better way to illustrate the strength of the Constitution, and what better way to convince others of its strength and validity, than to apply its values to those who would not return the favor?

6/30/2006 2:31:23 PM

damn

if you just came up with that shit, bravo.

6/30/2006 2:33:37 PM

for the last 50 years at least, any prisoners of war were tried in military tribunes

why should this war be any different? they're prisoners of war, they'll still get trials, just in military tribunes

Quote :

"i decided on trolling long ago. i can only hope thats his aim...if its not then i'm very afraid"

what you should really be afraid of is that more people agree with my side than your side

and if you dont understand that, well you probably still dont understand how kerry lost in 04

6/30/2006 2:39:03 PM

liberal this

kerry that

clinton there


give it a rest man

6/30/2006 2:40:03 PM

Quote :

"why should this war be any different? they're prisoners of war, they'll still get trials, just in military tribunes "

dead wrong. all but ten of them have not been charged with anything and i've heard people from the bush administration suggest that they'll just stay locked up that way until "the conflict is over" (whatever hell that means with a war on an idea).

6/30/2006 2:42:16 PM

Stop touting the "more people agreed" thing you do all the time. We aren't discussing an entire platform here. If we had referendum voting at the constituent level, it would be different. Come up with new material.

6/30/2006 2:42:49 PM

^^^you're the one who doesnt understand that your viewpoint is NOT the majority

maybe the majority of a mainly liberal, mainly college aged message board

but not the United States of America

^^in other wars have had many many many more POWs...when the war ended, many of them were set free...they werent going to try thousands and thousands of people at separate trials...it would take too long, and we would have to pay for it

^you dont get it either i guess

6/30/2006 2:43:12 PM