Skip to comments.
Democrats decry 'abuse' of civil rights [Dems condemn Treatment of al-Qaeda at Gitmo]
Washington Times ^
| Tuesday, November 11, 2003
| By Stephen Dinan
Posted on 11/10/2003 10:31:03 PM PST by JohnHuang2
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:10:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
To: JohnHuang2
Civil rights are only possessed by citizens. They are not at all the same thing as
human rights. Typical democrat ignorance and misuse of terms.
2
posted on
11/10/2003 10:35:19 PM PST
by
Eärendil
To: JohnHuang2
These people have NOTHING to run on. It's getting funny.
3
posted on
11/10/2003 10:37:20 PM PST
by
shteebo
To: shteebo
These people have NOTHING to run on. Even the recession is gone. Poor Dems...hehe
To: JohnHuang2
These are foreign born enemy combatants.
The only time in US history when US Citizens were deprived of civil rights and civil liberties was during the liberal administration of FDR. A democrat.
See executive 0rder 9066 which intered 120,000 People in concentration camps many of whom were US Citizens.
It was the single largest forced migration in US History.
5
posted on
11/10/2003 10:45:21 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
('Tis safer in the Suni triangle than in liberally controlled Los Angeles.)
To: JohnHuang2
Good. Everytime they speak on this issue they lose more votes.
To: JohnHuang2
The Democrats want to defend Al Qaeda terrorists' civil rights? I think a 9-11 commercial cut - a tasteful 30 seconds would be a fitting response to their ignorance.
7
posted on
11/10/2003 10:47:16 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: ETERNAL WARMING
Everytime they speak on this issue they lose more votes. Bingo. With this kind of rhetoric, Dems are driving swing voters away in droves.
To: goldstategop
Bump!
To: Eärendil
An **excellent** point, and very well made!
Too bad the 'Rats refuse to acknowledge the difference, eh?
10
posted on
11/10/2003 10:57:52 PM PST
by
SAJ
To: Kay Soze
Er, not quite. Mr. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and a number of other Constitutional civil rights during the War of Northern Aggression.
11
posted on
11/10/2003 10:59:20 PM PST
by
SAJ
To: JohnHuang2
Not a gotdarn freekin peep out of these Aholes after Waco, Ruby Ridge, Richard Jewel and Bombing the S*it out of the Yugoslavia but they want to protect terrorists who want to blow us up!
12
posted on
11/10/2003 11:07:29 PM PST
by
america-rules
(It's US or THEM so what part don't you understand ?)
To: SAJ
Were they US or Confedrate citizens whose rights were removed?
13
posted on
11/10/2003 11:16:46 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
('Tis safer in the Suni triangle than in liberally controlled Los Angeles.)
To: Eärendil
PURPOSEFUL misuse of terms. And .. all the while they are yelling and screeming that the President "misled" the American people .. and what's actually happening is the dems are "misleading" the American people.
Pretty much explains how the "projection" technique works.
This won't work. Diane Feinstein has already exposed the FACT the ACLU doesn't have any "actual" civil rights abuses to complain about. This thing is dead before it even gets started.
And .. if the dems continue to SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE TERRORISTS .. they are going to lose BIGGER than I thought in 2004.
14
posted on
11/10/2003 11:49:54 PM PST
by
CyberAnt
To: Kay Soze
Well, during the War, Mr. Lincoln's directives were hardly binding on the Confederacy, were they? Yep, it was U.S. citizens who had their civil rights suspended.
15
posted on
11/10/2003 11:53:20 PM PST
by
SAJ
To: JohnHuang2
[Dems condemn Treatment of al-Qaeda at Gitmo] Why should this surprise anyone? Sometimes I think they are on the same side
16
posted on
11/10/2003 11:56:32 PM PST
by
Mark17
To: JohnHuang2
Dems condemn Treatment of al-Qaeda at Gitmo
Put some ice on it.
17
posted on
11/11/2003 7:02:27 AM PST
by
Valin
(We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.)
To: JohnHuang2
"They attack the economy, they attack the war in Iraq, they attack the Patriot Act. In lieu of any positive agenda of their own, they're forced to attack. And apparently, this is the week they all come out and receive their talking points on the Patriot Act," she said. You got it , Miss!
To: JohnHuang2
Mr. Daschle, South Dakota Democrat, said yesterday on NBC's "Today" that Republicans are pursuing a campaign against civil liberties "to bolster their standing in the polls, to bolster their political support around the country." God, what an idiot!!! Yea, "pursuing a campaign against civil liberties" would be an enormousely popular way to get re-elected! Do these dip$hits even listen to themselves?
To: shteebo
The problems is we are SUPPOSED to have two major parties, what we have now is 1 1/2 major parties(at best) and this is not a good thing. The democrats will either get their act together and get some adults in charge or they will go the way of the whigs. What they haven't figured out yet is it's not 1973 and there are only 3.5 networks and one newspaper per town, with the raise of the internet, talk radio there monoply of information is smashed and people are starting to see that the emperor is buck naked.
20
posted on
11/11/2003 7:10:55 AM PST
by
Valin
(We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson