Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to Imaginary violations

re: Imaginary violations
azstrummer — (archived)

Never did I say Tom that any incident has happened so far. Erosions of rights happen slowly, almost imperceptibly. Your argument seems to be that since no violations have occurred, it's somehow alright to create legislation that would allow it to occur if the power structure desired it. You're right that family members, lawyers, and the like would be up in arms but it wouldn't eliminate the terror the alleged combatant would have to face.

Tom, what if a President Clinton (Hillary) decided, after reading the Habitable Zone posts, that our own TB fit the definition of an enemy combatant and ordered Homeland Security to detain you without evidence other than a simple hunch? From what I can read of this new set of regulations, the government would be completely within legal requirements to do so. Your relatives wouldn't have to be notified. You'd have no access to counsel. If you were picked up somewhere away from any witnesses, none of your loved ones would have any clue as to where you went.

As unlikely as the scenario is, why in the fuck do we need to create a law that allows this possibility and why in the world can't you see the peril in the precedent? You're under some false illusion that, because your political party still controls the White House, you're somehow immune from abuse of the policy. You often profess a libertarian streak but any libertarian I know is shocked at the implications of such legislation. It smacks of exactly the the kind of overreach of government that normally conservatives and libertarians despise. Your true colors are exposed more and more each day.

Art

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (69 posts)