• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I am seeking examples...

Agreed. But you can't just give up this freedom voluntarily and stay credible. And not always do the ends justify the means.

So now we have prison camps to "defend freedom". What's next? Which crime is too big to be justified with the claim of "defending freedom"?

Sure you can. You are defending the wrong people.
 
Sure you can. You are defending the wrong people.

I find it telling that now, a German has to explain to an American what freedom is, because this American doesn't even know the first thing about it. Times change, eh?

I am defending the right of suspects. Suspects have to be considered innocent until their guilt has been proven. Only a fair trial can do that. That's because a suspicion is nothing more than that, and the according suspect may very well be innocent. When you give the government the right to play accuser, judge and hangman in one person, that's called tyranny.

By considering mere suspects guilty, as you do, although no fair trial has presented according evidence and ruled accordingly, with all due respect, you show a dangerous lack of respect for the constitutional state and basic law standards. It's the same kind of reasoning the common Nazi used when he broad-brushed all people in labor camps as guilty (they must have done something, else they wouldn't be in prison, right?), or the same kind of reasoning socialist technocrats used in communist East Germany when they sold Stasi detentions to the people -- suspicion equals guilt, equals conviction. No need to bother with such liberal pinko crap as fair trials.

We'd all be much safer if everybody who is accused of a crime gets hanged, without further questions, right? Would be much cheaper anyway.

We Germans had to learn this the hard way. I thank America for that. But it seems that today, some Americans have forgotten what they once told my people.
 
Last edited:
I find it telling that now, a German has to explain to an American what freedom is, because this American doesn't even know the first thing about it. Times change, eh?

I am defending the right of suspects. Suspects have to be considered innocent until their guilt has been proven. Only a fair trial can do that. That's because a suspicion is nothing more than that, and the according suspect may very well be innocent. When you give the government the right to play accuser, judge and hangman in one person, that's called tyranny.

By considering mere suspects guilty, as you do, although no fair trial has presented according evidence and ruled accordingly, with all due respect, you show a dangerous lack of respect for the constitutional state and basic law standards. It's the same kind of reasoning the common Nazi used when he broad-brushed all people in labor camps as guilty (they must have done something, else they wouldn't be in prison, right?), or the same kind of reasoning socialist technocrats used in communist East Germany when they sold Stasi detentions to the people -- suspicion equals guilt, equals conviction. No need to bother with such liberal pinko crap as fair trials.

We'd all be much safer if everybody who is accused of a crime gets hanged, without further questions, right? Would be much cheaper anyway.

We Germans had to learn this the hard way. I thank America for that. But it seems that today, some Americans have forgotten what they once told my people.

People arrested inside the US reserve the right of fair trail. This is not reserved for someone captured outside the US. The freedoms for Americans and their guests is preserved.
 
People arrested inside the US reserve the right of fair trail. This is not reserved for someone captured outside the US. The freedoms for Americans and their guests is preserved.

Ah, so legal standards only apply to people inside the US. That's an interesting view on basic legal standards and human rights you have there.

Next time when you meet someone who hates America, maybe you shouldn't blame him. Look into your own garden first and show a little modesty. Maybe the reason isn't just that all non-Americans are just ignorant, hate freedom and don't know what freedom is, but maybe it has at least a tiny little bit to do with how you behave, and that there is a stark contrast between what your government does and the values it pays lip service to.
 
Oh, and just for the record: I do not hate America. I think Americans are spot on on quite a few things. But I'd love even more to see an America that does not skip basic legal standards and human rights, than one that does, despite all other things that it does well. I think that would be in the interest of all Americans who want to be really proud of their country, for good reasons.
 
Ah, so legal standards only apply to people inside the US. That's an interesting view on basic legal standards and human rights you have there.

Next time when you meet someone who hates America, maybe you shouldn't blame him. Look into your own garden first and show a little modesty. Maybe the reason isn't just that all non-Americans are just ignorant, hate freedom and don't know what freedom is, but maybe it has at least a tiny little bit to do with how you behave, and that there is a stark contrast between what your government does and the values it pays lip service to.

There is nothing in our law that requires us to follow the all international law. We did not violate any international law we are signatory to. America preserves its place as the power who started democracy in the modern era.
 
People arrested inside the US reserve the right of fair trail. This is not reserved for someone captured outside the US. The freedoms for Americans and their guests is preserved.

Come on, Jib, you can do better than this. GG is presenting a well-argued, thoughtful argument taking you to task for certain aspects of authoritarian behaviour within your country. Why not debate the guy rather than tossing off one-liners? Your approach is coming over as lazy or certainly lacking the courage of your beliefs.
 
There is nothing in our law that requires us to follow the all international law. We did not violate any international law we are signatory to. America preserves its place as the power who started democracy in the modern era.

Except that you kidnap innocent people from the streets of free, allied democracies and violate all laws in those countries, and the basic human rights of the suspects in question. No matter how American shysters twist words, this is a blatant violation of the most basic human rights and of human decency. And everybody in the world sees it this way, except rabid American right-wingers who love big words about "freedom" and nationalistic myths, but don't have the slightest clue what freedom even is.

If that's what you want, go ahead. The rest of the world sees this for what it is.
 
Come on, Jib, you can do better than this. GG is presenting a well-argued, thoughtful argument taking you to task for certain aspects of authoritarian behaviour within your country. Why not debate the guy rather than tossing off one-liners? Your approach is coming over as lazy or certainly lacking the courage of your beliefs.

No, GG is hurling accusations of being right-winger at me. His argument is empty.
 
Except that you kidnap innocent people from the streets of free, allied democracies and violate all laws in those countries, and the basic human rights of the suspects in question. No matter how American shysters twist words, this is a blatant violation of the most basic human rights and of human decency. And everybody in the world sees it this way, except rabid American right-wingers who love big words about "freedom" and nationalistic myths, but don't have the slightest clue what freedom even is.

If that's what you want, go ahead. The rest of the world sees this for what it is.

What human right does this violate?
 
There is nothing in our law that requires us to follow the all international law.

Nope, but not following shows total arrogance.

We did not violate any international law we are signatory to.

Not true.

Mexican Nationals & Texas Death Penalty - J.S. Medina - Foreign Nationals - the International Justice Project

In each case, Texas police failed to inform them of their right to contact the Mexican consulate for assistance, as required under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

Plus there is a brewing scandal in Norway and Denmark, where the US has had teams of people doing surveillance on said nations nationals without knowledge of the State.

And then there are the kidnappings of nationals world wide, often without the approval of the governments of the countries where those kidnappings were done.

The US cant claim it does not break international agreements... it does.

America preserves its place as the power who started democracy in the modern era.

Well... you might have started it in the modern era, but that does not mean you perfected it, nor kept under those principles since your foundation. You have broken human rights, and principles of democracy since day one. So the only thing your comment (and that of Obama said in India yesterday) does, is to further prove that the US is arrogant and in denial of its own past and actions.
 
They are enemy combatants. They are not soldiers, caught as POWs. They are not citizens or illegal aliens. As such they have no "right to trial', there is no problem detaining them, "harsh interrogation" can be used. Simple. No loss of freedoms for Americans.

This isn't a stab against you, so don't take it this way, but the U.S. government has conducted programs where they have kidnapped innocent people.

People they knew were innocent before hand.
 
The American Civil Liberties Union!? Oh brother.

These CIA agents broke no US law.

Oh yeah, I forgot, Americans hate civil liberties these days. Human rights and civil liberties are just socialist concepts that keep the true American Übermensch from liberating the world.

It's really sad what America has become. Pathetic. Words don't even begin to cover the contempt I have for this criminal arrogance and self-righteousness.
 
I mean America and the American governments, regardless if the President is named Clinton, Bush or Obama. Clinton has set the first precedents for this official policy, Bush extremely expanded it and Obama failed to end it entirely. I mean the policy of extralegal detention, denial of fair trials for mere suspects, "harsh interrogations" that everybody in the world except of American Republicans consider torture.

Don't get me wrong, I like America. America has made great historical achievements, and also thanks to America among others, I can live in freedom today. But these policies are just wrong, and they fly in the face of every claim that was ever made from American side to defend freedom and human rights. You can't just give up your most basic values, even if that's just limited and temporary, just because you are afraid and they have become inconvenient. The little extra security is not worth it, either you respect these values or you aren't free. Risk is the price of freedom.

Because of these policies that were excessively expanded in the Patriot Act, I think Bush is not a President that deserves any credit, he has played away any moral credit he ever had, and severely damaged America in the process. I hoped for a change under Obama, but except for a few cosmetic changes, this "change" did not take place. And the hypocrites who now go on the streets against Obama are just too greedy to pay taxes, they don't even care about these blatant human right violations, they don't even know what "big government" really is. It's sad, really.

Many people in my country have very recent vivid first-hand memories of a "big government" that is not just a little inconvenient, because taxes are too high -- no, they remember a government so big that it would imprison people at free will, deny them fair trials and torture them. That's what socialism is, that's what tyranny is, that's what "big government" is.

If you want to know why especially Bush and the Republicans are so unpopular in Europe, look at this. That's why. They remind us too much of our experience with socialism.
Thanks for clarifying. I don't really know what to say because I don't have a defense or excuse for America's extralegal detention or extraordinal rendition policies. I think Obama signed some bill at the beginning of his term that was supposed to close Gitmo, but nothing seems to have come of it. Personally, I wasn't even aware of the US's extralegal detention or extraordinal rendition policies until after the invasion of Iraq. Which of course, is probably another point of contention against the US. To be honest, I can see that what is happening in the US is starting to have all the symptoms of pre-WW2 fascism. But the very people who are contriving to bring the worst of socialism as you describe it to the US, are blaming socialists. So what is socialism, is it right wing or left wing policies? Because if you don't clarify what you mean by socialist as it pertains here in the US, then someone like Wade who is looking for someone to scapegoat will define it for you and as it stands, you are helping to give him the ammo he needs to scapegoat liberals as socialists.
 
Here's an example of one of the programs.

Project MKULTRA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The director of the CIA ordered the evidence to be destroyed, but some of it was accidentally sent to the wrong place, that is the only reason we know anything about it.

Thank you very much. I am glad there are Americans who don't let cheap nationalism get in the way of upholding the values of your great country. I may not always agree with libertarians, but on that field, many of them are really strong.
 
This isn't a stab against you, so don't take it this way, but the U.S. government has conducted programs where they have kidnapped innocent people.

People they knew were innocent before hand.

I would not be surprised, but I have no knowledge on it. It is important that these are foreign nationals and not American citizens or our guests. Internationalists have a problem with the US conducting ops in foreign countries. They are free to downgrade their relationship with the US if they feel that strongly about it.
 
Thank you very much. I am glad there are Americans who don't let cheap nationalism get in the way of upholding the values of your great country. I may not always agree with libertarians, but on that field, many of them are really strong.

To be fair most people don't know about this stuff, it isn't taught in school and rarely if ever mentioned on TV or anything like that.

What I find more disturbing is that this is the stuff we know about.
I'm almost positive that there are a great many things, that are worse, that we don't know.
 
I would not be surprised, but I have no knowledge on it. It is important that these are foreign nationals and not American citizens or our guests. Internationalists have a problem with the US conducting ops in foreign countries. They are free to downgrade their relationship with the US if they feel that strongly about it.

Largely most of the worst stuff has happened to American citizens, that I know of.
It started with the Manhattan project, where they injected people in hospitals with radioactive material, without disclosing it to them.
 
Thanks for clarifying. I don't really know what to say because I don't have a defense or excuse for America's extralegal detention or extraordinal rendition policies. I think Obama signed some bill at the beginning of his term that was supposed to close Gitmo, but nothing seems to have come of it. Personally, I wasn't even aware of the US's extralegal detention or extraordinal rendition policies until after the invasion of Iraq. Which of course, is probably another point of contention against the US. To be honest, I can see that what is happening in the US is starting to have all the symptoms of pre-WW2 fascism. But the very people who are contriving to bring the worst of socialism as you describe it to the US, are blaming socialists. So what is socialism, is it right wing or left wing policies? Because if you don't clarify what you mean by socialist as it pertains here in the US, then someone like Wade who is looking for someone to scapegoat will define it for you and as it stands, you are helping to give him the ammo he needs to scapegoat liberals as socialists.

Maybe I should be more precize then: It's wrong to label all kinds of different ideologies with the broad brush label "socialism". Europe today isn't socialist. IIRC, the only remaining socialist countries are North Korea and Cuba. Socialism in Europe ended in 1990.

A completely different kind of animal is social democracy or social liberalism. Sweden, for example, is a social democracy. That's completely different from "socialism" and certainly has nothing at all to do with the former Soviet brand of socialism. Most important, social democrats and social liberals don't advocate a nationalization of the entire economy. They want free markets. They just want to regulate them and redistribute some wealth. But that's really just a fig leaf on their free market capitalism. You may disagree with that, but it's not socialism à la Soviet Union.

Also, social democrats and social liberals strongly believe in freedom: They respect Constitution, civil liberties and a democratic political system. In European history, they were often the most bitter enemies of communists and revolutionary socialists just because of that. The German Social Democrats, for example, were the one party that established the free Weimar Republic in 1918/19 and defended it against both communist socialism from the left and fascism and Nazism from the right. The German Social Democrats were the only party voting against Hitler's Enabling Act in 1933.

What Americans call "socialist" these days are very different political concepts and ideologies. "Communist" socialists advocate tyranny and hate freedom, social democrats and social liberals love freedom and bitterly defend it if necessary.
 
Back
Top Bottom