Democrats cut 'John Doe' provision - Page 2

PrimBabUB · 07-20-07, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doremus Jessup

"Thought Criminal!" or how about "Goldstein!"

I guess the only way to defeat terrorism is to be suspicious of everyone. Sh!t, your family pediatrician might be a TERRORIST. Oh snap, save us Rudy!

I guess you are referencing doctors because the failed attempt in Britan was perpretrated by doctors since they have found that their 'profession' seems to give them a pass. So much for the hypocritic oath, isn't it? I haven't heard anyone report on what type of medicine they practiced. Have you? Wonder if any of them were pediatrians?

Trajan Octavian Titus · 07-20-07, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatuey

People should be allowed to yell "terrorist" anytime they wish? At anyone? Even if their accusations have no merit? Without consequence?

---------

This is basically what this bill is trying to do.

No people should be able to report suspicous activity at anytime without fear of being sued, thankyou Democrats for knowingly aiding the enemy.

Trajan Octavian Titus · 07-20-07, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lachean

Lets all start spying on each other, and not trusting our neighbors. Let us be quick to jump to conclusions about suspected behavior. I mean why can't we label citizens "enemy combatants"?

Lets all act really scared, just like the terrorists want us to. Lets also stop being as free, so we don't piss em off

The average citizen is the first line of defense against terrorism, as was demonstrated by the vigilance of the circuit city employee who thwarted the fort Dixx attack, people should not have to fear being sued for reporting suspicious activity, the Democrat party has just knowingly aided the enemy.

PrimBabUB · 07-20-07, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lachean

Lets all start spying on each other, and not trusting our neighbors. Let us be quick to jump to conclusions about suspected behavior. I mean why can't we label citizens "enemy combatants"?

Lets all act really scared, just like the terrorists want us to. Lets also stop being as free, so we don't piss em off

Well, we sure can label some of our elected officials 'enemy combatants'.

If there had been vigilantism running rampant in the streets of America, I could agree with you. But that hasn't happened now, has it? Instead, we have the ignorant part of American crying "Woe is me" what have we done to make them hate us so!" "What can we do so that they will love us!!!!!!" "Whhhaaaaaaaaaa...........It's mean ole Bush's fault! Whaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Sergeant Stinger1 · 07-20-07, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrimBabUB

Democrats cut 'John Doe' provision*-*Nation/Politics*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper

Chalk one more up for the dhimmicrats aiding and abetting terrorists. They were the ones screaming how no one connected the dots and now they want the dots to be to scared of coming forward.

Here's a list of who voted:

Michelle Malkin » Don’t let the Dems kill the John Doe amendment Update: House Dems kill John Doe amendment…fight moves to the Senate Update: 8:55pm Senate Dems kill John Doe amendment…roll added

---
Aiding and abetting the TERRORISTS???

---
Tough when ya can't find anything good to say about Bush

, isn't it???

Trajan Octavian Titus · 07-20-07, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergeant Stinger1

---
Aiding and abetting the TERRORISTS???

---
Tough when ya can't find anything good to say about Bush

, isn't it???

Allowing the possibility for vigilante citizens to be sued for reporting supsicious activity is certainly going to aid the enemy,

PrimBabUB · 07-20-07, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lachean

So not buying into an "end's justify the means" foreign policy means you're helping the terrorists? You cannot be opposed to a policy without aiding our enemies?

Must every draconian and authoritarian law be passed without dissent?

You're position that dissent is unpatriotic, or that not doing everything imaginable against our enemies is the same as helping them, is utterly ridiculous and without logic or thought.

Do you know what a false dichotomy is? Supporting every mission this administration thinks up, and supporting the troops being dichotomous is a huge one. But its just funny to proclaim your logical fallacy in your signature every post.

With your line of thinking, after Japan attacked Pearl Harbour (of which during a time when they declared war on us they had the decency to attack a military base instead of what they knew was purely a civilian target) we should have just surrendered with the reasoning that it must have been our fault that they attacked us in the first place.

galenrox · 07-20-07, 07:10 PM

I'm really torn on this issue. For one, such a law would enable a lot of abuses of freedom, and would allow people to vindictively abuse government resources in order to screw with people for whatever reason. On the other hand, if such things aren't allowed we all know that some dickhead liberal lawyer will start suing good Americans who saw something that was legitimately suspicious, which will have the larger effect that it will disincentivise the sharing of information between the government and its citizens.

So yeah, ****ed if I know

Trajan Octavian Titus · 07-20-07, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus

Allowing the possibility for vigilante citizens to be sued for reporting supsicious activity is certainly going to aid the enemy,

edit: I meant "vigilant"

nikitas3.com · 07-20-07, 07:25 PM

The Flying Imams set up this whole thing intentionally (obviously), in order to bring it to this point, with the aid of the Democrat party, of course, those folks who do not believe there are even terrorists in the world. In fact what is happening is... racial profiling in reverse! Here is how it works: Grandma, in her wheelchair, is pulled out of airport line and strip-searched. This is to show that we are not "profiling" terrorists. But this act is the most balant form of racial profiling since 9/11. Liberals actually have devised a paranoid, paralell universe under which the least threatening among us (little old lady in a wheelchair) is profiled as the most, while the most threatening among us (Middle Eastern males in their 20s, imams muttering anti-American remarks) are given a wink and a nod and pro bono representation by anti-American trial lawyers. Now with the Flying Imam case possibly dragging suspicious passengers into court, these trial lawyers have found a new way to harass the good people of America by muzzling them (racially profiling them) while the Muttering Imams become the judges and prosecutors.
Please visit welcome to nikitas for more common sense.