Mark
August 3rd 03, 01:52 AM
On July 28, 2003, Chris wrote:
>Subject: Re: [OT] What Is "Terrorism?"
>From: (Chris)
>Date: 7/28/2003 1:07 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
(TimePixDC) wrote:
>> >Subject: Re: [OT] What Is "Terrorism?"
>> >From: (Chris)
>> >Date: Fri, Jul 25, 2003 8:47 PM
>
[cut]
> How bitterly ironic that the forces on the
>domestic political stage most committed to trashing these traditional
>civil liberties in all but name are wrapping themselves in the stars
>and stripes and using "patriotism" as their cover; as if shredding the
>Bill of Rights were a patriotic act and anyone who challenges this
>must be "disloyal" and a "terrorist sympathizer."
>
> Of course, those Americans who loudly praise whatever international
>military aggression their country is currently pursuing need never
>need
>to worry about *their*
>civil liberties coming under attack. *They* will remain free to sing
>God Bless America in the key of their choice, and to engage in lively
>debate among themselves about how to best carry out the wise, glorious
>and correct proclamations of our Great Leader and Party. This is very
>much the same kind of so-called "freedom of speech" which was
>guaranteed in the Chinese Constitution and which prevailed in China
>under Mao, where civil liberties belonged to everyone except "enemies
>of the people." "Enemies of the people," of course, meant anyone who
>deviated from the Party Line. Under Mao, Chinese citizens were
>imprisoned for years on end without trial, without formal charges,
>without being able to confront their accusers, without habeus corpus
>rights, etc., simply because the government declared them suspected
>"enemies of the people" without the government needing to meet any
>minimum standard of evidence in doing so. Sound familiar? It should.
>
This is outright delirium. The mere fact that Chris is able to post such vile
and silly anti-government propaganda, and to do so freely and without
retribution, is clear proof that our Bill of Rights remains intact. He proves
daily that people are free to do much more than "sing God Bless America in the
key of their choice." As for the absurd claim that China under Mao should
"sound familiar", I'll believe that when I see Chris taken to Guantanamo Bay.
It won't happen.
For many weeks now, I have been trying in vain to discern Chris' motive for
this endless series of apparently purposeless off-topic posts. Perhaps this
is all a clever ruse he constructed to boost wartime patriotic fervor by
demonstrating to us just how free we are. How many countries are there in this
world that would permit such relentless anti-government tirades without any
effort at suppression or punishment? America is truly a great, diverse, and
tolerant country unlike any other. Chris, perhaps unintentionally, reminds us
of this daily by his continued existence.
Mark
>Subject: Re: [OT] What Is "Terrorism?"
>From: (Chris)
>Date: 7/28/2003 1:07 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
(TimePixDC) wrote:
>> >Subject: Re: [OT] What Is "Terrorism?"
>> >From: (Chris)
>> >Date: Fri, Jul 25, 2003 8:47 PM
>
[cut]
> How bitterly ironic that the forces on the
>domestic political stage most committed to trashing these traditional
>civil liberties in all but name are wrapping themselves in the stars
>and stripes and using "patriotism" as their cover; as if shredding the
>Bill of Rights were a patriotic act and anyone who challenges this
>must be "disloyal" and a "terrorist sympathizer."
>
> Of course, those Americans who loudly praise whatever international
>military aggression their country is currently pursuing need never
>need
>to worry about *their*
>civil liberties coming under attack. *They* will remain free to sing
>God Bless America in the key of their choice, and to engage in lively
>debate among themselves about how to best carry out the wise, glorious
>and correct proclamations of our Great Leader and Party. This is very
>much the same kind of so-called "freedom of speech" which was
>guaranteed in the Chinese Constitution and which prevailed in China
>under Mao, where civil liberties belonged to everyone except "enemies
>of the people." "Enemies of the people," of course, meant anyone who
>deviated from the Party Line. Under Mao, Chinese citizens were
>imprisoned for years on end without trial, without formal charges,
>without being able to confront their accusers, without habeus corpus
>rights, etc., simply because the government declared them suspected
>"enemies of the people" without the government needing to meet any
>minimum standard of evidence in doing so. Sound familiar? It should.
>
This is outright delirium. The mere fact that Chris is able to post such vile
and silly anti-government propaganda, and to do so freely and without
retribution, is clear proof that our Bill of Rights remains intact. He proves
daily that people are free to do much more than "sing God Bless America in the
key of their choice." As for the absurd claim that China under Mao should
"sound familiar", I'll believe that when I see Chris taken to Guantanamo Bay.
It won't happen.
For many weeks now, I have been trying in vain to discern Chris' motive for
this endless series of apparently purposeless off-topic posts. Perhaps this
is all a clever ruse he constructed to boost wartime patriotic fervor by
demonstrating to us just how free we are. How many countries are there in this
world that would permit such relentless anti-government tirades without any
effort at suppression or punishment? America is truly a great, diverse, and
tolerant country unlike any other. Chris, perhaps unintentionally, reminds us
of this daily by his continued existence.
Mark