U.S. Attorney Gets 28 months Prison For Aiding terrorist.

[_JS]

Do you suppose that a case could be made on the charges of blocking traffic?

Would it were that more people had such conviction.

[Michael Tee]

<<And this conversation came to this turn when I asked for the wording in the new law signed by Bush that eliminates habeas corpus. I have yet to see that quote presented here by those who purport it's existence.>>

See, that is exactly the kind of bogus argument the Right excels at.  THEY set the standard (in this case, "eliminating habeas corpus") and then "challenge" any critics of the Bush administration to prove that their new law "eliminates habeas corpus."  So unless Bush administration supporters were dumb enough to insert an actual clause in the legislation something like "This Act hereby nullifies and abolishes for all time the right of habeas corpus and any and all similar rights, privileges and immunities formerly blah blah blah," they will then go into collective orgasm over the fact that the person they "challenged" failed to find a law that actually eliminates habeas corpus.

The common sense accessible to any twelve-year-old should tell you that a law can severely restrict basic freedoms, deprive a citizen of all the basic protections of habeas corpus, and yet not explicitly say that habeas corpus has been abolished.  This is why idiotic challenges of this nature must be avoided.  It is sufficient to demonstrate to any fair minded person that the Bush administration strips basic rights from citizens and takes the country a giant step closer to a police state by referring specifically to specific legislation as it actually is, rather than set out on the quixotic mission (set by the very rightwing fascists who have attacked the basic Constitutional freedoms) to find a non-existent abolition of habeas corpus in so many words.

These demonstrations will of course NEVER convince the right wing of anything they don't want to be convinced of, but to anyone whose mind isn't set in concrete, they should be sufficient proof of the facts.

[Amianthus]

THEY set the standard (in this case, "eliminating habeas corpus") and then "challenge" any critics of the Bush administration to prove that their new law "eliminates habeas corpus."

Who set the standard?

I just asked Larry to show what part of the new law eliminates habeas corpus. The only response was a list of partisan blogs that also made the same claim, and as far as I can tell, made no attempt to back it up with anything other than their say-so.

Although, critical thinker that you are, I wouldn't mind seeing you attempt to demonstrate what part of the law eliminates habeas corpus.

[Michael Tee]

<<Naaa, the convincing part is when you actually claim a Bush lie, I'm able to torpedo it out of the water with the actual facts.  Done it many a time.  I have no problem doing it some more. >>

Actually, you haven't done it once.  But don't let a simple fact get in the way of your ranting bullshit.

<< I get great pleasure out of myself>>

sirs, I would not want to get into a debate with you about what gives you pleasure.  You're the sole acknowledged expert in that field.

I take a lot of time and  trouble to demolish bullshit from conservative sites, line by line if I have to.  

<<Oh, I concede you absolutely get very wordy in your warped OPINIONS of why you believe the facts are not actually the facts. >>

Thank you.  It is a somewhat different technique than dismissing a post as "boatload of lies" or making the unsupported claim that "I torpedoed it out of the water," and somewhat more difficult to learn.  It's called "debate."

<< Your perfection of moral relatavism and rationalization is perhaps unmatched>>

Oh no, it's overmatched by the Bush administration and its supporters.  I won't go back over the numerous examples of their moral relativism that I recently posted, but it's something that's been noted and commented upon in every corner of the globe.  Younger followers of the Bush administration might be forgiven for believing that they invented moral relativism.

<<ROFL, as opposed to finding 1 big nebulous Bush lied web site, and claim "taa daaaa"  >>

Maybe you should look up the definition of a big word such as "nebulous" before using it.  There was nothing at all nebulous about the "Bush Lies" website, in fact the reason I posted it was its specificity in identifying precisely, by actual words, date and context of each and every Bush lie.  And you know, credit where credit is due and all that - - there were so many Bush lies to be documented.        

<<But to placate the masses, by all means, initiate another thread....title it, Bush lie on Iraq #1.  Make it a goodie.  >>

Nah.  Bin there.  Done that.  Pretend all you like that it's "insubstantial" or "nebulous" or whatever your flavour of the month happens to be.  It has Bush nailed.  Your two-bit adjectives can't change the facts and logic of the site, but of course it's your choice whether you want to make an honest admission that they nailed Bush or continue to blather on about how meaningless and false the whole thing is and how many times you've "torpedoed it right out of the water."  Dream on, sirs.

<<Then when I have some time, either myself or any other rationally minded person, will yet again show it for the lie of an accusation that it is>>

Don't bother.  It would be easier for me to dredge through the archives and find all the bullshit you've previously posted in your frantic efforts to debunk known facts.

[Michael Tee]

<<Who set the standard?

<<I just asked Larry to show what part of the new law eliminates habeas corpus.>>

There ya go.  Wasn't such a hard question to answer after all, was it?

[sirs]

<<Naaa, the convincing part is when you actually claim a Bush lie, I'm able to torpedo it out of the water with the actual facts.  Done it many a time.  I have no problem doing it some more. >>

Actually, you haven't done it once.  But don't let a simple fact get in the way of your ranting bullshit.

Ignorance must be bliss in your universe

   

<<But to placate the masses, by all means, initiate another thread....title it, Bush lie on Iraq #1.  Make it a goodie.  >>

Nah.

<<Then when I have some time, either myself or any other rationally minded person, will yet again show it for the lie of an accusation that it is>>

Don't bother.  

Didn't think so.  Proabably a smart move

[Plane]

"It is sufficient to demonstrate to any fair minded person that the Bush administration strips basic rights from citizens..."

Yes it would be .

Go on ahead and do that.

[Amianthus]

There ya go.  Wasn't such a hard question to answer after all, was it?

Must be, because you still haven't shown who set the standard of "eliminating habeas corpus". It was, after all, not a phrase that I used initially. I believe it was introduced by Larry - hardly a rightist by any stretch. I'm just trying to get someone to show where in the law that is accomplished.

[sirs]

There ya go.  Wasn't such a hard question to answer after all, was it?

Must be, because you still haven't shown who set the standard of "eliminating habeas corpus". It was, after all, not a phrase that I used initially. I believe it was introduced by Larry - hardly a rightist by any stretch. I'm just trying to get someone to show where in the law that is accomplished.

It's "nuance" Ami.  It doesn't actually exist, and for apparent righties, we're claiming we need to see actual wording of its demise vs simply requesting examples of such

[Michael Tee]

<<Ignorance must be bliss in your universe>>

If it were, you'd be kicking down the door to get in.

<<Probably a smart move>> [my telling sirs not to bother gathering "proof" that Bush never lied]

Well, I was only trying to help you.  If a guy's toilet is clogged and his apartment fills up with shit, when he runs out the door with a shovel, screaming "Gotta get more shit!" you try to let him know, gently, that he doesn't really need more shit.  I tried, sirs.  God knows, I tried.

[sirs]

<<Probably a smart move>> [my telling sirs not to bother gathering "proof" that Bush never lied]
Well, I was only trying to help you.  If a guy's toilet is clogged and his apartment fills up with shit, when he runs out the door with a shovel, screaming "Gotta get more shit!" you try to let him know, gently, that he doesn't really need more shit.  I tried, sirs.  God knows, I tried.

No, actually the smart move was you not showing for everyone to see AGAIN, how feeble the Bush lied us into war lies are so easily debunked.  Your example of "tried" was again to point at some asanine completely unobjective Bushlied web site and claim victory.  Gave you a perfect forum to put me in my place, and the best you can do is hichschool insults and "nah".  That desperate blackhole "Bush lied" mantra simply got a bit blacker.  We do appreciate your efforts though

[Michael Tee]

<<No, actually the smart move was you not showing for everyone to see AGAIN, how feeble the Bush lied us into war lies are so easily debunked. >>

Well, that would all be very true except that (a) there's nothing "feeble" about Bush lying the country into a war because that is EXACTLY what happened, and (b) you can't "debunk" the statement that Bush lied America into a war any more than you can "debunk" the statement that Germany lost WWII.  Wow!  To think you were that close to the truth.

<<Your example of "tried" was again to point at some asanine completely unobjective Bushlied web site and claim victory. >>

Oh, now I see.  And the web site was "asinine" and "completely unobjective" because . . .?  Oh, yeah, of course:  because you say it is.

<<the best you can do is hichschool insults and "nah".  >>

Gee, I'm sorry.   I was only trying to be like you.

<<That desperate blackhole "Bush lied" mantra simply got a bit blacker.>>

Hey, not bad.  "Desperate blackhole" IS a bit more creative than "asinine" and "completely unobjective."  When your only argument against a fact-packed website is to call it names, you can't have too many different names at your disposal.

<<We do appreciate your efforts though>>

Somehow, I'm not entirely certain as to the sincerity of that last remark.  I'll take it at face value, though.  You're welcome.

[sirs]

<<No, actually the smart move was you not showing for everyone to see AGAIN, how feeble the Bush lied us into war lies are so easily debunked. >>

Well, that would all be very true except that (a) there's nothing "feeble" about Bush lying the country into a war because that is EXACTLY what happened, and (b) you can't "debunk" the statement that Bush lied America into a war any more than you can "debunk" the statement that Germany lost WWII.  Wow!  To think you were that close to the truth.....yada, rant, blather

And with all those neurons firing to produce such a diatribe, not one was used to produce a non refuted Bush lie.  Just more of Tee says so, and that's final.  At least your consistent Tee   

[Michael Tee]

<<And with all those neurons firing to produce such a diatribe, not one was used to produce a non refuted Bush lie.  Just more of Tee says so, and that's final.  At least your consistent Tee >>

No, actually, sirs, the "Bush Lied" web-site (one of many) which I gave you in fact DID have numerous well-documented lies told by Bush and members of his cabinet.  But you knew that.  I guess you must have forgotten, huh?   

[sirs]

<<And with all those neurons firing to produce such a diatribe, not one was used to produce a non refuted Bush lie.  Just more of Tee says so, and that's final.  At least your consistent Tee >>

No, actually, sirs, the "Bush Lied" web-site (one of many) which I gave you in fact DID have numerous well-documented lies told by Bush and members of his cabinet.  But you knew that.  I guess you must have forgotten, huh?   

And with just those few neurons firing this time around, again not one was used to produce a non refuted Bush lie, just another reference to the almighty, all powerful, all everything Bush-lied web site.  Apparently Tee does't even have the ability to copy & paste even 1 supposed Bush lied us into the war lie, that we could then blow out of the water.  Again, perhaps that's a smart move on his part as well.

You'd think, that this forum, that BT has so helped to maintain, and messers Js, Chicky, & Plane help manage, and used to exemplarary form by folks like Prince & the Professor, where we can post ideas, & debate the merits of allegations, is just too difficult a concept for some to adhere to, and instead simply belly-ache that such an accusations are to be taken at face value, because hey, they said so, and there's a web site that says so as well.