You’re absolutely right. But milroyj asked about personal liberties, not constitutional rights. Even though I have no “right to fly”, I’d be pissed as hell if I was suddenly told I could not, and would not be told why, wouldn’t you?
Please ignore this - posted in the wrong fora…
Sorry
C
Yes, it would make me quite angry. I depend on flying for my work, as I travel a lot and the other means of travelling are not available to me (I live in England and must frequently fly to the US for business).
[hijack] I thought the airlines were required to inform someone who has been placed on the no-fly list when they get the booking? Not just that they are on the list, but also why? I thought I read that in the United Airlines web site… [/hijack]
But that is not my point - I am simply asserting that whilst there is a right to council and a right to free speech, both of which are being trampled as in the examples you posted from the ACLU web site, there is no right to fly on a commercial aircraft or even to drive. Hence my objection.
Others have addressed this, but from the article in the OP:
Essentially, the US government has decided it can detain anyone, worldwide, for what they think might be terrorist activities, detain them without appeal, access to consel or without the ability to review the evidence against them. I think that pretty much covers the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments to the US constitution. Granted, the government is talking about foreigners, but it does concern me that the US government would even presume to give itself such powers. That is the erosion of personal liberties I was speaking of, the assumption of power that is clearly outside of the government’s domain.
No, I understand your point, and I’m really not arguing with you (see, I’m smiling ----> 
)
But, I don’t think the ACLU is arguing there exists a Constitutional right to fly, but rather that the Government is overstepping it’s consitutional authority by denying the ability to fly to people it deems potentially dangerous for any reason without due process, recourse, or even notification.
Regarding the grandstanding from MilroyJ and RyanLiam, it is all too frequent an occurrence at SDMB that people who are not satisfied with answers they are given, recklessly charge that they have not been answered. Quite obviously, it is simply that they are determined to hear no answer: if you enumerate a given liberty such as the freedom to exist without being terrorized by nosy foreign governments, the response is either “Why won’t you answer me?”, “That is a petty liberty”, “You’re just paranoid,” or something equally inane. These people have their teeth clamped pit-bull tight on the teat of their dictators. Freedom is worse than worthless to them; it scares them to death because freedom would mean that they have to think for themselves.
Well the fact Labour has done better successively in its two terms of office than the Tories ever did in their three says alot.
And yes, I am amazing, nice to be appreciated.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes: Does this apply to Blair (oh sorry in your words Bliar) in his support for President Bush?
lets get rid of the should, and put your money where your mouth is. But anyway, please answer my question. If the Patriot act is so terribly horrible as you are putting it, then tell me how its personally affected you.
:rolleyes: Yeah quit trying to evoke emotional responses out of Dopers to have some sort of moral justification. Asshole.
Thanks
let me try
You know Ryan, I really hope that your father’s as big an arsehole as you are. It would upset me terribly to think that somewhere out there a decent man is wondering how the fuck he got parenthood so wrong as to end up with you.
If one of our federal politicians can have his liberty deprived then something is very wrong. Or have you forgotton about Ted Kennedy’s name being confused with a suspected terrorist?
What I don’t get is why is it being asked by milroyj and ryan_idiot what freedoms you’ve personally lost or had compromised. Why does that matter? If anyone’s freedoms are compromised, mine could be next. It is both disingenuous and highly selfish to regard the question that way. It is not a matter of whether I have had my freedoms attacked, it is a matter of whether or not such an attack has occured, anywhere and anytime against anyone.
I also highly object to the brutishly ignorant assertion that Sadam, Osama et al have no rights. The moment you devalue one individual enough to remove their rights, you open yourself up to devaluing anyone. Those men may be bad, may deserve punishment, but treating them as less than human, and thus heirs to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is thoroughly despicable.
Those are not my words, you feckless hack. If you intend to quote me, have someone help you get it right.
I have said nothing about the Patriot [sic] act until this post. You are a blithering idiot.
There is only one Doper named Ryan_Liam, and I addressed my response to it.
I would like to see a list of agreements of all countries on this globe, giving the US government the right to undertake such actions on their territory = Agreements of all governments of all nations that the US government can sent the US Heros entering unhindered every sovereign nation as the US pleases, in order to arrest citizens of sovereign nations inside their own nation, because the US likes to drag them out of their nation into indefinite custody.
Up to now I have no information that GW Bush rules the world.
That idea only lives in his vivid imagination and is entertained by his dull repetitive arrogance, calling himself “leader of the free world”.
Salaam. A
Aldebaran, I have three words for you: Central Intelligence Agency.
Man, Liberal is slinging some **serious ** hash here. If it gets any better than this I’m not sure I want to know about it. Ryan, just admit you’ve been bitchslapped like a two dollar crack whore and go peddle your wares elsewhere, OK?
Nope he’s been acting like a blubbering Vagina all because his arch nemisis President Bush implemented an act to protect the population at least from some serious terrorist attacks, you know once something like September 11th happens it kinda shapes your judgement and outlook and makes you think you have to act to ensure it doesn’t happen again, thats why the US has the Patriot act and thats why we got Liberal blubbering about it.
P.S.
However, Liberal, wouldn’t you be not lobbing those pearls into a herd of swine, rather than a swineherd, or have I missed an ironic interpretation of a proverb. it’s just the image of lobbing into the swineherd that throws me a little.
Don’t worry, I’m thinking the milkmans thought the same about you.
LK,
Sorry but I don’t talk about the terrorist activities of the State trained, sponsored and entertained US terrorist organisation commonly named the CIA.
I ask for agreements = international treaties
signed between the USA and every government of every sovereign nation in the world,
giving the USA the rigth to act inside every sovereign nation in the world,
overuling the laws of every nation of the world replacing them with the US jurisdiction, be they in line with the laws of said nations of the world or not.
Hence agreements that the USA can act as if the USA is the Law, police and law enforcement in and for every nation of the world
hence stating that the USA is it is the Law, the police force and law enforcement authority inside every sovereign nation in the world,
and therefore can enter every nation of the world unhindered by the laws of said sovereign nations,
in order to arrest and abduct every citizen of every nation and in every nation of the world,
in order to bring these citizens of sovereign nations into US custody outside the sovereign nation where the arrested is a citizen of,
subjecting the citizens of every nation in the world to whatever the US likes to do with every citizen of every nation of the world.
Salaam. A
But you did mean that, the Labour party is headed by Blair, who has aligned himself and his party with some of President Bushes policies, henceforth you attack my stance and question my views because I support Labour, in some hope of trying to catch me out.
doesn’t matter, you’re accusing president Bush of trampling on Human freedoms, I’d like to know how he’s done any worse than any other president in Americas history.
And what I want to know is why you are getting hysterical over nothing, just some legislation designed and proposed to protect and preserve our freedoms and rights in the long term. What I see in this thread is just another fucking useless attack on the Presidents administration. What I don’t see is the money where the mouth is, like for instance, if this bothers you all so much, wheres the protest? Wheres the actual protesting outside city hall, making people aware of whats going on? How about at least a campaign against such ‘erosion’ of civil liberties?
Hypocrisy at the highest amount, you all whine on about losing your rights, but none of you are actually prepared to put the neccessary effort into preserving them.
Don’t worry, I’m sure plenty in the administration are thinking the same thing about your hero Arafat, God rest his soul.
That may well be true, but when the people don’t want these monsters to have any more right to try and resist and explain away their terrible crimes, them being regarded as human beings goes out of the window.