Comments on: Con Logic 101 http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/ Like Kryptonite To Stupid Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:42:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Bill L. http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20356 Bill L. Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:01:29 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20356 <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp109&sid=cp109WvwUu&refer=&r_n=hr333.109&item=&sel=TOC_208072&" rel="nofollow">the actual text of the act</a> Yeah, I know it's Roberts, but the majority of what he says is pretty much straight out of the Patriot Act, and frankly, just the words "federal police force under the control of the Department of Homeland Security" should make everyone crap their pants. The Fed isn't supposed to have a police force, that's the state's job, and we also have the National Guard and the Secret Service to round things out. <a href="http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=180" rel="nofollow">Another article</a> This all appears to be Sensenbrenner's idea. I think that says it all. the actual text of the act

Yeah, I know it’s Roberts, but the majority of what he says is pretty much straight out of the Patriot Act, and frankly, just the words “federal police force under the control of the Department of Homeland Security” should make everyone crap their pants.

The Fed isn’t supposed to have a police force, that’s the state’s job, and we also have the National Guard and the Secret Service to round things out.

Another article

This all appears to be Sensenbrenner’s idea. I think that says it all.

]]> By: Quaker in a Basement http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20355 Quaker in a Basement Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:01:43 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20355 Bill, it's Paul Craig Roberts posting on antiwar.com. (The cognitive dissonance of that alone should trouble you.) Neither is what I'd call a reliable source. Doesn't mean what you post isn't true. But given the track record of the writer and the site, I'd look for corroboration before getting worked up. Bill, it’s Paul Craig Roberts posting on antiwar.com. (The cognitive dissonance of that alone should trouble you.) Neither is what I’d call a reliable source.

Doesn’t mean what you post isn’t true. But given the track record of the writer and the site, I’d look for corroboration before getting worked up.

]]> By: Dugger http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20354 Dugger Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:01:56 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20354 "If that doesn t sound like the beginnings of a Gestapo, I don t know what does." On that we agree. Dugger “If that doesn t sound like the beginnings of a Gestapo, I don t know what does.”

On that we agree.

Dugger

]]> By: Bill L. http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20353 Bill L. Thu, 26 Jan 2006 02:01:33 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20353 Since no one seems to have clicked the link I provided, here's a few choice bits about our new Gestapo from said article: <i><b>-This new federal police force is "subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security." -The new police are empowered to "make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony." -Once a SENS (special event of national significance) designation is placed on an event, the new federal police are empowered to keep out and arrest people at their discretion. -A "special event of national significance" is neither defined nor does it require the presence of a "protected person" such as the president in order to trigger it. -The language conveys enormous discretionary and arbitrary powers. What is "an offense against the United States"? What are "reasonable grounds"?</b></i> If that doesn't sound like the beginnings of a Gestapo, I don't know what does. So ultimately, just as Murtha was right about Iraq (not that the Left needed convincing), so too does it seem that Harry Belafonte's little bit of rhetorical flourish was omininously on target. I'm going to design some Bill of Rights toilet paper so Bush can ACTUALLY wipe his ass with it instead of just metaphorically. So long 1st amendment, it was nice knowin' ya. Since no one seems to have clicked the link I provided, here’s a few choice bits about our new Gestapo from said article:

-This new federal police force is “subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security.”

-The new police are empowered to “make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony.”

-Once a SENS (special event of national significance) designation is placed on an event, the new federal police are empowered to keep out and arrest people at their discretion.

-A “special event of national significance” is neither defined nor does it require the presence of a “protected person” such as the president in order to trigger it.

-The language conveys enormous discretionary and arbitrary powers. What is “an offense against the United States”? What are “reasonable grounds”?

If that doesn’t sound like the beginnings of a Gestapo, I don’t know what does. So ultimately, just as Murtha was right about Iraq (not that the Left needed convincing), so too does it seem that Harry Belafonte’s little bit of rhetorical flourish was omininously on target.

I’m going to design some Bill of Rights toilet paper so Bush can ACTUALLY wipe his ass with it instead of just metaphorically.

So long 1st amendment, it was nice knowin’ ya.

]]> By: Quaker in a Basement http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20352 Quaker in a Basement Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:01:59 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20352 <blockquote>in the last paragraph you cite, the Nobel is implicitly laying out that opposition to Bush </blockquote> You know, a guilty conscience can make you think people are talking about you (or the Republican president you support) when they're really not.

in the last paragraph you cite, the Nobel is implicitly laying out that opposition to Bush

You know, a guilty conscience can make you think people are talking about you (or the Republican president you support) when they’re really not.

]]> By: Dugger http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20351 Dugger Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:01:33 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20351 Well Bryan, it was 1992, but he is or was certainly as mainstream on our side as Cynthia McKinney is on yours. And he did effectively accuse Bubba of being a traitor. So, you were right and I was wrong. Dugger (Glad you have a life) Well Bryan, it was 1992, but he is or was certainly as mainstream on our side as Cynthia McKinney is on yours. And he did effectively accuse Bubba of being a traitor. So,

you were right and I was wrong.

Dugger (Glad you have a life)

]]> By: SaveFarris http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20350 SaveFarris Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:01:26 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20350 Quaker, in the last paragraph you cite, the Nobel is implicitly laying out that opposition to Bush (and the Iraq War) was one of the qualifications. Thanks for proving my point! Quaker, in the last paragraph you cite, the Nobel is implicitly laying out that opposition to Bush (and the Iraq War) was one of the qualifications.

Thanks for proving my point!

]]> By: Bill L. http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20349 Bill L. Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:01:19 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20349 <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=8434" rel="nofollow">Now is "Gestapo" the right word?</a> Now is “Gestapo” the right word?

]]> By: bryan http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20348 bryan Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:01:02 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20348 Sorry Dugger, I have a life away from my keyboard, and I live in a different timezone (and mindset). You know that guy who represented the Republican Party, Mr Cunningham? (I think he's had to quit or something?), well, he called Clinton a traitor. I got that from a 2 minute Google search. Try the same with Carter; you seem to have more time than I do. Is Cunningham, an elected person, mainstream enough for you, or would you like to move the goalposts some more? Sorry Dugger, I have a life away from my keyboard, and I live in a different timezone (and mindset).
You know that guy who represented the Republican Party, Mr Cunningham? (I think he’s had to quit or something?), well, he called Clinton a traitor. I got that from a 2 minute Google search. Try the same with Carter; you seem to have more time than I do.
Is Cunningham, an elected person, mainstream enough for you, or would you like to move the goalposts some more?

]]> By: burtonator http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20347 burtonator Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:01:22 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20347 It's not meant to make sense. There are a few strategies here. One is always attack the attacker. Never engage in debate. Once you engage in debate you've lost. Liberals and Libertarians (being rational people) will engage in debate. "My actions are justfied because... " you'd say. A neocon will just say "... you're a rapist"... Kevin It’s not meant to make sense. There are a few strategies here. One is always attack the attacker. Never engage in debate. Once you engage in debate you’ve lost.

Liberals and Libertarians (being rational people) will engage in debate. “My actions are justfied because… ” you’d say.

A neocon will just say “… you’re a rapist”…

Kevin

]]> By: Quaker in a Basement http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20346 Quaker in a Basement Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:01:38 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20346 Oh come on, fact. I know that. I was just amusing myself by contemplating whether Farris runs from knowledge or knowledge runs from him. Oh come on, fact. I know that. I was just amusing myself by contemplating whether Farris runs from knowledge or knowledge runs from him.

]]> By: factcheck http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20345 factcheck Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:01:02 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20345 Quaker, there is no such thing as knowledge. Only spin. Where has you been the last few years? Quaker, there is no such thing as knowledge. Only spin. Where has you been the last few years?

]]> By: Quaker in a Basement http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20344 Quaker in a Basement Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:01:44 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20344 Do you actively <i>avoid</i> knowledge? Or does it simply elude you? <blockquote>During his presidency (1977-1981), Carter's mediation was a vital contribution to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, in itself a great enough achievement to qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize. At a time when the cold war between East and West was still predominant, he placed renewed emphasis on the place of human rights in international politics. Through his Carter Center, which celebrates its 20th anniversary in 2002, Carter has since his presidency undertaken very extensive and persevering conflict resolution on several continents. He has shown outstanding commitment to human rights, and has served as an observer at countless elections all over the world. He has worked hard on many fronts to fight tropical diseases and to bring about growth and progress in developing countries. Carter has thus been active in several of the problem areas that have figured prominently in the over one hundred years of Peace Prize history. In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Carter has stood by the principles that conflicts must as far as possible be resolved through mediation and international co-operation based on international law, respect for human rights, and economic development. </blockquote> Do you actively avoid knowledge? Or does it simply elude you?

During his presidency (1977-1981), Carter’s mediation was a vital contribution to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, in itself a great enough achievement to qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize. At a time when the cold war between East and West was still predominant, he placed renewed emphasis on the place of human rights in international politics.

Through his Carter Center, which celebrates its 20th anniversary in 2002, Carter has since his presidency undertaken very extensive and persevering conflict resolution on several continents. He has shown outstanding commitment to human rights, and has served as an observer at countless elections all over the world. He has worked hard on many fronts to fight tropical diseases and to bring about growth and progress in developing countries. Carter has thus been active in several of the problem areas that have figured prominently in the over one hundred years of Peace Prize history.

In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Carter has stood by the principles that conflicts must as far as possible be resolved through mediation and international co-operation based on international law, respect for human rights, and economic development.

]]> By: SaveFarris http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20343 SaveFarris Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:01:30 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20343 I guess I was wrong. Maybe the Nobel committee gave him the prize for brokering the deal that gave North Korea the bomb. Cause that REALLY helped world peace. Smart move there, Jimmah. I guess I was wrong. Maybe the Nobel committee gave him the prize for brokering the deal that gave North Korea the bomb. Cause that REALLY helped world peace.

Smart move there, Jimmah.

]]> By: VRWC drone http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20342 VRWC drone Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:01:25 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20342 <i>Ah, yes. Jimmy Carter. Other than bad-mouth George Bush, what the hell has he ever done? </i> He IS "History's Greatest Monster". Isn't that enough? Ah, yes. Jimmy Carter. Other than bad-mouth George Bush, what the hell has he ever done?

He IS “History’s Greatest Monster”. Isn’t that enough?

]]> By: SaveFarris http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20341 SaveFarris Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:01:58 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20341 <blockquote>Are people people only given such honors in proportion to their hatred of George Bush?</blockquote> The Nobel Prize Committee said as much when they bestowed their Peace prize upon Jimmy Carter.

Are people people only given such honors in proportion to their hatred of George Bush?

The Nobel Prize Committee said as much when they bestowed their Peace prize upon Jimmy Carter.

]]> By: Quaker in a Basement http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20340 Quaker in a Basement Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:01:44 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20340 Ah, yes. Jimmy Carter. Other than bad-mouth George Bush, what the hell has <i>he</i> ever done? Ah, yes. Jimmy Carter. Other than bad-mouth George Bush, what the hell has he ever done?

]]> By: Quaker in a Basement http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20339 Quaker in a Basement Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:01:44 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20339 <blockquote>But then I wonder why he is a featured honorary speaker at a major university like Duke. Wonder why he was a 2006 AARP Impact Award honoree. Why he won an MLK peace prize a Mandela Courage award. Why he was invited to speak at Emory.</blockquote> I wonder where you're headed with this. Are Duke, the AARP, Emory, and whoever hands out the MLK and Mandela prizes now part of the Democratic party? Are people people only given such honors in proportion to their hatred of George Bush? There are some things in the world that can be measured without referencing where one stands on the continuum of domestic politics. Maybe Harry got some of those honors for something <i>besides</i> what he thinks about George Bush.

But then I wonder why he is a featured honorary speaker at a major university like Duke. Wonder why he was a 2006 AARP Impact Award honoree. Why he won an MLK peace prize a Mandela Courage award. Why he was invited to speak at Emory.

I wonder where you’re headed with this.

Are Duke, the AARP, Emory, and whoever hands out the MLK and Mandela prizes now part of the Democratic party? Are people people only given such honors in proportion to their hatred of George Bush?

There are some things in the world that can be measured without referencing where one stands on the continuum of domestic politics. Maybe Harry got some of those honors for something besides what he thinks about George Bush.

]]> By: Dugger http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20338 Dugger Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:01:38 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20338 Quaker, If you concede Belafonte is a wacko - I'm OK. I too think he is wacko. But then I wonder why he is a featured honorary speaker at a major university like Duke. Wonder why he was a 2006 AARP Impact Award honoree. Why he won an MLK peace prize a Mandela Courage award. Why he was invited to speak at Emory. Do these univeristies not agree with your wacko award? Dugger, Bryan still waiting for those who called Carter and Kerry "traitors" Quaker,

If you concede Belafonte is a wacko – I’m OK. I too think he is wacko. But then I wonder why he is a featured honorary speaker at a major university like Duke. Wonder why he was a 2006 AARP Impact Award honoree. Why he won an MLK peace prize a Mandela Courage award. Why he was invited to speak at Emory. Do these univeristies not agree with your wacko award?

Dugger, Bryan still waiting for those who called Carter and Kerry “traitors”

]]> By: SaveFarris http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/01/23/con-logic-101/#comment-20337 SaveFarris Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:01:49 +0000 http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=1274#comment-20337 Probably because Belafonte is treated by other Dems as a member of the mainstream (getting invited to the same events as HRC, speaking at MoveOn.org functions, etc.) Probably because Belafonte is treated by other Dems as a member of the mainstream (getting invited to the same events as HRC, speaking at MoveOn.org functions, etc.)

]]>