Isn't congress basically in place to "police" our president so to speak? To prevent a president from making bad knee jerk decisions in some cases? Congress' approval ratings have for the most part only been poor during this administration. Which is likely the result of people of this country seeing the lack of communication and stubbornness on both sides. This country needs a 3rd party now more then ever because right now these 2 parties are an embarrassment. Voting over the last decade has been trying to pick the lesser of 2 evils. There needs to be a balance! Not far left and not far right but somewhere in between. Bill Clinton had that balance.
... Actually... Congress has historically gotten poor approval ratings. They didn't just start being do-nothing pieces of shit on 20January2009. There were lobbyists buying our politicians before 2009... I'm pretty sure of that. They have been do nothing pieces of shit throughout our history. And America doesn't need a Third Party... Americans just need to quit being partisan political puppets and quit voting for and supporting people and agendas based upon the letters, (D) and (R). Americans hold Term Limits in their hands, but are too dumb to use them. All Americans need to do is look at the ballots... look for the word, 'Incumbant' next to the person's name... and DON'T CHECK THAT BOX. ... For example... how many times have you heard someone say, "Vote them all out"... then, express their support for Rand Paul? They will come up with all kinds of rationale and justification... but, in the end... it's just excuses. Because for every person willing to vote them all out, except Paul... there is a person who will say, 'except Pelosi' or 'except Reid' or 'except Chambliss'. People only want everyone else's guy voted out... not theirs. Politicians love how fucking stupid we are. Politicians will hate us if we were collectively intelligent... something they know... we will never become.
I would tend to disagree. I don't think approval rating should mean we bypass congress and let one person make an "executive decision" outside of the laws of our land. The whole reason we have the electoral vote for president and districts for congress is to ensure the American people don't "drink the kook aide" and there is a checks and balances system. It's like parents, of course if they allowed you to do everything you wanted as a kid they would have been the most approved parents ever. But would that have been in your best interest? Probably not.
I don't like the President (regardless if I voted for him or not) being able to bypass congress and people saying that it's okay. That is a scary government to have. And that basic action, regardless if you think it was right or wrong, is completely wrong to do in our government. And if you think that's okay, America is becoming a scarier place than I thought it could ever be.
... I am also a supporter of the 'Checks And Balances' part of our government. But, there are procedures, such as Executive Orders that allow for bypasses. ... I am saying that our Congress is shit. And I don't know how informing shit to decide on something is somehow going to magically make it all better. It's shit. Bringing Congress into the the mix is basically, smearing shit all over it. If someone wants to support our Congress... please, enlighten me so that I might see value in shit.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Executive orders that legislate are unconstitutional.
Executive orders that legislate are unconstitutional.
The prisoner swap was not a law... was it? I mean, I know the Executive Branch cannot write laws and are supposed to enforce the laws... not bypass them. But, things such as Executive Orders allow that loophole... because Executive Orders are written into Law... by the Legislature.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Funny how you guys screaming about your rights being trampled on are the first ones to toss them aside when something happens that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions of what democracy is. So much for Bergdalh's constitutional rights, huh?
Peace.
Actually, when you are an active service member you waiv your constitutional rights.
You fall under the UCMJ. What due processes or processes are you asking about? I don't have the UCMJ memorized, but I'm sure if you stated something specific we could look it up and find out?
Bergdahl has the right to a trial by a military commission or judge and to be represented by counsel, correct? To be charged with a violation of the UCMJ and either found innocent or guilty, right? Isn't that a form of due process enshrined in our Constitution, Article 1, Section 8?
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me as I'm not in the military.
Funny how you guys screaming about your rights being trampled on are the first ones to toss them aside when something happens that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions of what democracy is. So much for Bergdalh's constitutional rights, huh?
Peace.
Actually, when you are an active service member you waiv your constitutional rights.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Bergdahl has the right to a trial by a military commission or judge and to be represented by counsel, correct? To be charged with a violation of the UCMJ and either found innocent or guilty, right? Isn't that a form of due process enshrined in our Constitution, Article 1, Section 8?
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me as I'm not in the military.
Peace.
Halifax, yes he does have that right, but it would be in a military court. He will have representation. I'm not sure what you are getting at?
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me neither. Good to know?
Mickeyrat,
"I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
That is an exert from the oath you take when you join the military.
Obviously you have many of the basic rights, but many are limited and or differently regulated by the UCMJ.
Bergdahl has the right to a trial by a military commission or judge and to be represented by counsel, correct? To be charged with a violation of the UCMJ and either found innocent or guilty, right? Isn't that a form of due process enshrined in our Constitution, Article 1, Section 8?
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me as I'm not in the military.
Peace.
Halifax, yes he does have that right, but it would be in a military court. He will have representation. I'm not sure what you are getting at?
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me neither. Good to know?
Mickeyrat,
"I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
That is an exert from the oath you take when you join the military.
Obviously you have many of the basic rights, but many are limited and or differently regulated by the UCMJ.
I took that oath.twice. Also signed a contract before taking that oath, subjecting myself to such things. doesnt negate the basic civil rights like due process, being appointed or securing your own attorney. having the right to confront your accusers etc....... In this instance, the governing body (i.e. JAG Corps) has yet to determine if in fact a crime was commited OR wether they can prove that fact. Stood before two NJP's, which I grant is different in scope but still had due process. If memory serves , up until 30 days gone, he could still come back with disciplinary action for AWOL or UA. AT past 30 days or as otherwise stated in the UCMJ would he be legally considered a deserter.
Fuck all what his fellow troopers say or label him as. They have issue, take it up the chain.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I was an officer for in the navy for 5 years. There are different levels of going before an accused crime, ie Ucmj can dictate 3 days on bread and water, which I'm sure many would say is a violation of rights and extreme punishment. I'd love to hear the outcry if a civilian judge gave that out as a punishment.
I mentioned AWOL vs desertion in a post earlier in this thread.
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Also thanks for serving, whether you agreed or disagreed. We all had our reasonings.
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Jeez, Matts1983, this thread started out with the accusation that Bergdahl is a deserter and you yourself claimed on page 4 of this thread that you can claim he's guilty of leaving his post but we can't or shouldn't assume he's innocent. Other people on here would have "left him to rot", meaning Bergdahl, and others want to hear his side of the story. You also claimed in one of your posts that Bergdahl forfeited his constitutional rights when he enlisted and when it was pointed out to you that that is not the case, you questioned what "due process" I might have been referring to. Me thinks you knew full well what "due process" I was referring to, so yea, why argue about something that hasn't happened?
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Mike Spann died at the Qala-i-Jangi compound near Mazari Sharit in northern Afghanistan, where he was interrogating detainees captured during the early weeks of the war. Fazi, according to his Guantanamo case file, had been deputy defense minister and commander of all Taliban troops in the northern Afghanistan region at the time of the September 11 attacks. Before that, he was accused by Human Rights organizations of personally supervising the murders of thousands of Shiite and Tajik Sunni Muslims.
Although Secretary of State John Kerry has called concerns that Fazi and the other four freed Taliban leaders will return to the battlefield "baloney," Alison Spann considers it only a matter of time.
This thing kind of made everyone forget that whole VA mess, didn't it?
oh no, kneejerk legislation crafted right now. Back in the house for the senate changes. While I think some in there is worthy, hastily made laws are rife with error.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
... Thanx for posting that... but, I do have some questions. Here is an except from that report: "1. Fazl, for example, was the Taliban’s former deputy defense minister and is wanted by the United Nations for his role in massacres targeting Afghan’s Shi’ite Muslim population.
According to the 2008 Pentagon’s dossier on Fazl disclosed by Wikileaks, 2. Noori also was a senior Taliban military figure and, according to his Pentagon dossier, was asked personally in 1995 by Osama bin Laden to participate in an offensive against northern alliance warlord Rashid Dostum.
3. Wasiq, a former deputy minister of intelligence, at one point tried to cooperate with U.S. forces in Afghanistan and asked for a GPS system as well as a special radio to communicate with the U.S. military after the U.S. invasion in 2001. His dossier says that he was a crucial liaison between the Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalist groups while he was deputy intelligence minister. But the 2008 report also said he was holding out information he had on other top al Qaeda and Taliban leaders during interrogations.
4. Khairkhwa, a former Taliban governor of Herat, was considered by the Pentagon’s 2008 dossier to be a likely heroin trafficker. That dossier also says he likely participated in meetings with Iranian officials after 9-11 to help plot attacks on U.S. forces following the invasion. Iran has worked in some cases with the government that has replaced the Taliban in Afghanistan, but also has been accused by the U.S. military of supplying the Taliban and other insurgent groups with roadside bombs known as improvised explosive devices of IEDs.
5. Nabi held several military leadership posts for the Taliban and helped organize the al Qaeda/Taliban militias that fought against U.S. and coalition troops in the first year of the war, according to his Pentagon dossier. " ... So, what are these guys? Are they Taliban government and military officials or prisoners of war or are they terrorists? Fazl sounds like he was a government official who authorized and executed the 1995 massacres of Shi'ite Muslims in Afghanistan. Sounds like a shitty guy... but, since when do Americans give a shit about what happens to Muslims in the Middle East? The SAME Americans that talk about Muslims building Mosques at Ground Zero are now... concerned about the welfare of Muslims in Afghanistan? Really?
Noori sound like a military leader that was captured during a military battle against the Northern Alliance (a.k.a. Opium Warlords that hated the Taliban and wanted (and got) the seat of power in Afghanistan).
Wasiq sounds like another government official who tried to inflitrate the U.S. Military and turn double agent spy on them and was caught. Terroist or spy?
Khairkhwa was a govenor/heroin trafficker... in other words, a typical politician. He may have talked to Iran to plot attacks aginst U.S. forces after the invasion.
Nabi was a military leader that helped to orgainze militias to fight against the invading U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Gosh, imagine that... armed militias fighting foriegn invaders from across the oceans. What's wrong with them? ... Are we afraid of these guys because of what they are accused of... or are we afraid of them because we have turned them in America haters by holding them captive for 13 years? I mean, by the tone of the conversations... i though maybe Fazl was able to conjure up warrior ghosts from past... or Noori can shoot lightning from his fingertips... or that Nabi turned into an unstoppable green, tank tossing monster when he got pissed off. They sound like government dolts and military officers. ... I'm not defending them... i'm just saying we have to quit being such pussies about them. Seriously. It seems more likely you will be shot and killed by another American with mental problems and a Glock 38 than killed by one of these political assholes. Me... personally... I suppose I have more faith in the extreme prejudice of our C.I.A. towards these guys than other people do. I thnk i'd rather have Taliban government lackey dufuses after my ass than the C.I.A. The difference being, the Taliban may find and kill me... the C.I.A. WILL find and kill me.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Jeez, Matts1983, this thread started out with the accusation that Bergdahl is a deserter and you yourself claimed on page 4 of this thread that you can claim he's guilty of leaving his post but we can't or shouldn't assume he's innocent. Other people on here would have "left him to rot", meaning Bergdahl, and others want to hear his side of the story. You also claimed in one of your posts that Bergdahl forfeited his constitutional rights when he enlisted and when it was pointed out to you that that is not the case, you questioned what "due process" I might have been referring to. Me thinks you knew full well what "due process" I was referring to, so yea, why argue about something that hasn't happened?
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Peace.
Geez Halifax, last time I checked I wasn't in any position of authority that effects Bowe. Do I have my opinions, yes. Am I taking any of his liberties away? Nope. Geez... Let's think before we try and make a point?
Yes I asked you about what due process you were talking about. Will he get the same rights of a civilian court? Nope. Will he go before a military court? Yes.
So I stand by it, why are you trying to argue something that hasn't even happened yet? I guess me expressing my opinion is in violation of his rights, but you expressing yours isn't? That makes sense...
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Jeez, Matts1983, this thread started out with the accusation that Bergdahl is a deserter and you yourself claimed on page 4 of this thread that you can claim he's guilty of leaving his post but we can't or shouldn't assume he's innocent. Other people on here would have "left him to rot", meaning Bergdahl, and others want to hear his side of the story. You also claimed in one of your posts that Bergdahl forfeited his constitutional rights when he enlisted and when it was pointed out to you that that is not the case, you questioned what "due process" I might have been referring to. Me thinks you knew full well what "due process" I was referring to, so yea, why argue about something that hasn't happened?
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Peace.
Geez Halifax, last time I checked I wasn't in any position of authority that effects Bowe. Do I have my opinions, yes. Am I taking any of his liberties away? Nope. Geez... Let's think before we try and make a point?
Yes I asked you about what due process you were talking about. Will he get the same rights of a civilian court? Nope. Will he go before a military court? Yes.
So I stand by it, why are you trying to argue something that hasn't even happened yet? I guess me expressing my opinion is in violation of his rights, but you expressing yours isn't? That makes sense...
It's your persistence stating of your opinion as fact that I have a problem with. Why don't you trying thinking about the difference?
or better yet lets discuss why it was that in two unfunded wars with changing objectives as to why we were in them we relaxed enlistment standards to fight these wars.
Does being at war against a tactic make make any sense at all?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Jeez, Matts1983, this thread started out with the accusation that Bergdahl is a deserter and you yourself claimed on page 4 of this thread that you can claim he's guilty of leaving his post but we can't or shouldn't assume he's innocent. Other people on here would have "left him to rot", meaning Bergdahl, and others want to hear his side of the story. You also claimed in one of your posts that Bergdahl forfeited his constitutional rights when he enlisted and when it was pointed out to you that that is not the case, you questioned what "due process" I might have been referring to. Me thinks you knew full well what "due process" I was referring to, so yea, why argue about something that hasn't happened?
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Peace.
Geez Halifax, last time I checked I wasn't in any position of authority that effects Bowe. Do I have my opinions, yes. Am I taking any of his liberties away? Nope. Geez... Let's think before we try and make a point?
Yes I asked you about what due process you were talking about. Will he get the same rights of a civilian court? Nope. Will he go before a military court? Yes.
So I stand by it, why are you trying to argue something that hasn't even happened yet? I guess me expressing my opinion is in violation of his rights, but you expressing yours isn't? That makes sense...
It's your persistence stating of your opinion as fact that I have a problem with. Why don't you trying thinking about the difference?
Peace,
Difference in what? Because from all accounts he sounds like he is guilty of at the least AWOL? I believe he is. If you know want to take this stance of no speculation and no opinions and only solid facts, I welcome you to take your own advice. You post multiple times on your opinions to different issues. You should no longer do that. You are actually using your own speculation in this thread assuming he did nothing wrong. Funny how that works huh?
or better yet lets discuss why it was that in two unfunded wars with changing objectives as to why we were in them we relaxed enlistment standards to fight these wars.
Does being at war against a tactic make make any sense at all?
hubris mickeyrat, it is called hubris.
our overly excessive pride and self confidence and arrogance made us believe that we could win a war on something that is a tactic. terror is not a country, it is a tactic that is used by a group of people to advance their agenda. the goal of war is to gain and occupy territory. last i checked, "terror" is not a place, it is not a country, it has no land, it is an ideal and a tactic.
hubris always leads to tragedy. that is why we have what we have today. our own national hubris...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Jeez, Matts1983, this thread started out with the accusation that Bergdahl is a deserter and you yourself claimed on page 4 of this thread that you can claim he's guilty of leaving his post but we can't or shouldn't assume he's innocent. Other people on here would have "left him to rot", meaning Bergdahl, and others want to hear his side of the story. You also claimed in one of your posts that Bergdahl forfeited his constitutional rights when he enlisted and when it was pointed out to you that that is not the case, you questioned what "due process" I might have been referring to. Me thinks you knew full well what "due process" I was referring to, so yea, why argue about something that hasn't happened?
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Peace.
Geez Halifax, last time I checked I wasn't in any position of authority that effects Bowe. Do I have my opinions, yes. Am I taking any of his liberties away? Nope. Geez... Let's think before we try and make a point?
Yes I asked you about what due process you were talking about. Will he get the same rights of a civilian court? Nope. Will he go before a military court? Yes.
So I stand by it, why are you trying to argue something that hasn't even happened yet? I guess me expressing my opinion is in violation of his rights, but you expressing yours isn't? That makes sense...
It's your persistence stating of your opinion as fact that I have a problem with. Why don't you trying thinking about the difference?
Peace,
Difference in what? Because from all accounts he sounds like he is guilty of at the least AWOL? I believe he is. If you know want to take this stance of no speculation and no opinions and only solid facts, I welcome you to take your own advice. You post multiple times on your opinions to different issues. You should no longer do that. You are actually using your own speculation in this thread assuming he did nothing wrong. Funny how that works huh?
Please point out to me where in this thread I said I was assuming "he did nothing wrong." And you say, "because from all accounts he SOUNDS like he is guilty of at least AWOL." Wow, SOUNDS like he's guilty, prior to any form of due process! I haven't declared whether I think he's guilty, of anything, or innocent of anything. And I sure as hell haven't made any patently false statements and tried to present them as facts in this thread like your statement, "Actually, when you are an active service member you waiv your constitutional rights." My opinion is just that, my opinion.
Hey Jethro. What's that? Sounds like that fella up the road killed that family down the road. Yea, I heard that too. Sounds like he's guilty to me. Yup. He go to court yet? Nope, but I reckon he's guilty cuz it sure SOUNDS like he is and his housemates said so.
I stand by my opinion, "Funny how you guys screaming about your rights being trampled on are the first ones to toss them aside when something happens that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions of what democracy is. So much for Bergdalh's constitutional rights, huh?"
Is anyone else watching the House subcommittee hearing on Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl prisoner exchange on CSPAN? Anyone? Watching it now.
Tune in before you hear the spin on the no spin zone! Pay particular attention to the answers given to the questions asked by the esteemed committee members.
And if you missed the reading of everyone's prepared statements, find them or a repeat of the hearing and watch and listen. Then comprehend the questions asked and the answers given. Take the blinders off and listen. Peace.
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Jeez, Matts1983, this thread started out with the accusation that Bergdahl is a deserter and you yourself claimed on page 4 of this thread that you can claim he's guilty of leaving his post but we can't or shouldn't assume he's innocent. Other people on here would have "left him to rot", meaning Bergdahl, and others want to hear his side of the story. You also claimed in one of your posts that Bergdahl forfeited his constitutional rights when he enlisted and when it was pointed out to you that that is not the case, you questioned what "due process" I might have been referring to. Me thinks you knew full well what "due process" I was referring to, so yea, why argue about something that hasn't happened?
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Peace.
Geez Halifax, last time I checked I wasn't in any position of authority that effects Bowe. Do I have my opinions, yes. Am I taking any of his liberties away? Nope. Geez... Let's think before we try and make a point?
Yes I asked you about what due process you were talking about. Will he get the same rights of a civilian court? Nope. Will he go before a military court? Yes.
So I stand by it, why are you trying to argue something that hasn't even happened yet? I guess me expressing my opinion is in violation of his rights, but you expressing yours isn't? That makes sense...
It's your persistence stating of your opinion as fact that I have a problem with. Why don't you trying thinking about the difference?
Peace,
Difference in what? Because from all accounts he sounds like he is guilty of at the least AWOL? I believe he is. If you know want to take this stance of no speculation and no opinions and only solid facts, I welcome you to take your own advice. You post multiple times on your opinions to different issues. You should no longer do that. You are actually using your own speculation in this thread assuming he did nothing wrong. Funny how that works huh?
Please point out to me where in this thread I said I was assuming "he did nothing wrong." And you say, "because from all accounts he SOUNDS like he is guilty of at least AWOL." Wow, SOUNDS like he's guilty, prior to any form of due process! I haven't declared whether I think he's guilty, of anything, or innocent of anything. And I sure as hell haven't made any patently false statements and tried to present them as facts in this thread like your statement, "Actually, when you are an active service member you waiv your constitutional rights." My opinion is just that, my opinion.
Hey Jethro. What's that? Sounds like that fella up the road killed that family down the road. Yea, I heard that too. Sounds like he's guilty to me. Yup. He go to court yet? Nope, but I reckon he's guilty cuz it sure SOUNDS like he is and his housemates said so.
I stand by my opinion, "Funny how you guys screaming about your rights being trampled on are the first ones to toss them aside when something happens that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions of what democracy is. So much for Bergdalh's constitutional rights, huh?"
Peace.
I still don't understand your whole "so much for his constitutional rights". Who has taken anything away from him? Speculation, media, talks? Seriously, you do realize that none of that is legal and it's okay to have an opinion?
I like Jethro Tull, but seriously, hey man, what's that sound, you are hypocritical with the ideas that it's okay for you to form an opinion, but defend yours when it differs from someone else's and try and sound like "you know". Let's stop acting like if we disagree about something, obviously one person is smarter than the other mentality.
So yes I stand by my points. 1) the president did not notify congress which he is supposed to be legally responsible to do. 2) it appears he went at least AWOL.
Your point of his rights not being recognized or disregarded? Sounds like a big ol opinion, based on nothing more than what you think.
"you are hypocritical with the ideas that it's okay for you to form an opinion, but defend yours when it differs from someone else's and try and sound like "you know". Let's stop acting like if we disagree about something, obviously one person is smarter than the other mentality."
Comments
I am also a supporter of the 'Checks And Balances' part of our government. But, there are procedures, such as Executive Orders that allow for bypasses.
...
I am saying that our Congress is shit. And I don't know how informing shit to decide on something is somehow going to magically make it all better. It's shit. Bringing Congress into the the mix is basically, smearing shit all over it.
If someone wants to support our Congress... please, enlighten me so that I might see value in shit.
Hail, Hail!!!
I mean, I know the Executive Branch cannot write laws and are supposed to enforce the laws... not bypass them. But, things such as Executive Orders allow that loophole... because Executive Orders are written into Law... by the Legislature.
Hail, Hail!!!
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
counsel, correct? To be charged with a violation of the UCMJ and either found innocent or guilty, right? Isn't that a form of due process enshrined in our Constitution, Article 1, Section 8?
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me as I'm not in the military.
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
For the record, the UCMJ doesn't apply to me neither. Good to know?
Mickeyrat,
"I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
That is an exert from the oath you take when you join the military.
Obviously you have many of the basic rights, but many are limited and or differently regulated by the UCMJ.
If memory serves , up until 30 days gone, he could still come back with disciplinary action for AWOL or UA. AT past 30 days or as otherwise stated in the UCMJ would he be legally considered a deserter.
Fuck all what his fellow troopers say or label him as. They have issue, take it up the chain.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I mentioned AWOL vs desertion in a post earlier in this thread.
Last I checked no one has violated any of his civil rights or military rights yet. So why argue about something that hadn't even happened?
Also thanks for serving, whether you agreed or disagreed. We all had our reasonings.
And thank you for your service. I admire anyone who voluntarily signs up to serve our nation, even if I may disagree with our government's policies that put our service members in harms way.
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/13/family-first-american-killed-in-afghanistan-learns-freed-taliban-leader-was/
Mike Spann died at the Qala-i-Jangi compound near Mazari Sharit in northern Afghanistan, where he was interrogating detainees captured during the early weeks of the war. Fazi, according to his Guantanamo case file, had been deputy defense minister and commander of all Taliban troops in the northern Afghanistan region at the time of the September 11 attacks. Before that, he was accused by Human Rights organizations of personally supervising the murders of thousands of Shiite and Tajik Sunni Muslims.
Although Secretary of State John Kerry has called concerns that Fazi and the other four freed Taliban leaders will return to the battlefield "baloney," Alison Spann considers it only a matter of time.
Missoula 6/20/98
Alpine Valley 6/26/98 & 6/27/98
Alpine Valley 10/8/00
Champaign 4/23/03
Alpine Valley 6/21/03
Missoula 8/29/05
Chicago 5/16 & 17/06
Grand Rapids 5/19/06
Summerfest 6/29/06 & 6/30/06
Tampa 6/12/08
Chicago 8/23/09
Indy 5/7/10
Alpine Valley x2 2011
Wrigley 2013
Milwaukee 14
Telluride 16
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Thanx for posting that... but, I do have some questions. Here is an except from that report:
"1. Fazl, for example, was the Taliban’s former deputy defense minister and is wanted by the United Nations for his role in massacres targeting Afghan’s Shi’ite Muslim population.
According to the 2008 Pentagon’s dossier on Fazl disclosed by Wikileaks,
2. Noori also was a senior Taliban military figure and, according to his Pentagon dossier, was asked personally in 1995 by Osama bin Laden to participate in an offensive against northern alliance warlord Rashid Dostum.
3. Wasiq, a former deputy minister of intelligence, at one point tried to cooperate with U.S. forces in Afghanistan and asked for a GPS system as well as a special radio to communicate with the U.S. military after the U.S. invasion in 2001. His dossier says that he was a crucial liaison between the Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalist groups while he was deputy intelligence minister. But the 2008 report also said he was holding out information he had on other top al Qaeda and Taliban leaders during interrogations.
4. Khairkhwa, a former Taliban governor of Herat, was considered by the Pentagon’s 2008 dossier to be a likely heroin trafficker. That dossier also says he likely participated in meetings with Iranian officials after 9-11 to help plot attacks on U.S. forces following the invasion.
Iran has worked in some cases with the government that has replaced the Taliban in Afghanistan, but also has been accused by the U.S. military of supplying the Taliban and other insurgent groups with roadside bombs known as improvised explosive devices of IEDs.
5. Nabi held several military leadership posts for the Taliban and helped organize the al Qaeda/Taliban militias that fought against U.S. and coalition troops in the first year of the war, according to his Pentagon dossier. "
...
So, what are these guys? Are they Taliban government and military officials or prisoners of war or are they terrorists?
Fazl sounds like he was a government official who authorized and executed the 1995 massacres of Shi'ite Muslims in Afghanistan. Sounds like a shitty guy... but, since when do Americans give a shit about what happens to Muslims in the Middle East? The SAME Americans that talk about Muslims building Mosques at Ground Zero are now... concerned about the welfare of Muslims in Afghanistan? Really?
Noori sound like a military leader that was captured during a military battle against the Northern Alliance (a.k.a. Opium Warlords that hated the Taliban and wanted (and got) the seat of power in Afghanistan).
Wasiq sounds like another government official who tried to inflitrate the U.S. Military and turn double agent spy on them and was caught. Terroist or spy?
Khairkhwa was a govenor/heroin trafficker... in other words, a typical politician. He may have talked to Iran to plot attacks aginst U.S. forces after the invasion.
Nabi was a military leader that helped to orgainze militias to fight against the invading U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Gosh, imagine that... armed militias fighting foriegn invaders from across the oceans. What's wrong with them?
...
Are we afraid of these guys because of what they are accused of... or are we afraid of them because we have turned them in America haters by holding them captive for 13 years?
I mean, by the tone of the conversations... i though maybe Fazl was able to conjure up warrior ghosts from past... or Noori can shoot lightning from his fingertips... or that Nabi turned into an unstoppable green, tank tossing monster when he got pissed off. They sound like government dolts and military officers.
...
I'm not defending them... i'm just saying we have to quit being such pussies about them. Seriously. It seems more likely you will be shot and killed by another American with mental problems and a Glock 38 than killed by one of these political assholes.
Me... personally... I suppose I have more faith in the extreme prejudice of our C.I.A. towards these guys than other people do. I thnk i'd rather have Taliban government lackey dufuses after my ass than the C.I.A. The difference being, the Taliban may find and kill me... the C.I.A. WILL find and kill me.
Hail, Hail!!!
Yes I asked you about what due process you were talking about. Will he get the same rights of a civilian court? Nope. Will he go before a military court? Yes.
So I stand by it, why are you trying to argue something that hasn't even happened yet? I guess me expressing my opinion is in violation of his rights, but you expressing yours isn't? That makes sense...
Peace,
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Does being at war against a tactic make make any sense at all?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
:fp:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
our overly excessive pride and self confidence and arrogance made us believe that we could win a war on something that is a tactic. terror is not a country, it is a tactic that is used by a group of people to advance their agenda. the goal of war is to gain and occupy territory. last i checked, "terror" is not a place, it is not a country, it has no land, it is an ideal and a tactic.
hubris always leads to tragedy. that is why we have what we have today. our own national hubris...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Hey Jethro. What's that? Sounds like that fella up the road killed that family down the road. Yea, I heard that too. Sounds like he's guilty to me. Yup. He go to court yet? Nope, but I reckon he's guilty cuz it sure SOUNDS like he is and his housemates said so.
I stand by my opinion, "Funny how you guys screaming about your rights being trampled on are the first ones to toss them aside when something happens that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions of what democracy is. So much for Bergdalh's constitutional rights, huh?"
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Tune in before you hear the spin on the no spin zone! Pay particular attention to the answers given to the questions asked by the esteemed committee members.
Thoughts?
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I like Jethro Tull, but seriously, hey man, what's that sound, you are hypocritical with the ideas that it's okay for you to form an opinion, but defend yours when it differs from someone else's and try and sound like "you know". Let's stop acting like if we disagree about something, obviously one person is smarter than the other mentality.
Your point of his rights not being recognized or disregarded? Sounds like a big ol opinion, based on nothing more than what you think.
Pot meet kettle.
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©