Clearly Iowa has been harboring gay abortionists and the people hauling sandbags will be in big trouble come judgment day.

They’re building landing strips for gay Martians, I swear to God.

Mayhap I am not as evolved as I might be– I cannot help but wish that Reason and all his cohorts end thusly:

The wretch, concentred all in self,
Living, shall forfeit fair renown,
And, doubly dying, shall go down
To the vile dust from whence he sprung,
Unwept, unhonored, and unsung.”

…And while you were there, you retained your Habeas Corpus rights under UK law, like everyone else under UK jurisdiction, citizens and non-citizens alike.

I’m not sure what this means. Sure the modern innovation of the water closet allows for defecation while seated (i.e. shitting while sitting), the historical and classical method involved squatting. Perhaps this denigration is meant as ha ha ha, your abilities are so deficient that you have not the means to even afford toilets. If so, that is a stingingly harsh rebuke to those of us who are, in fact, toilet-less.

WINNER!

Fucking losers that squat feces

I’m not sure what this means. Sure the modern innovation of the water closet allows for defecation while seated (i.e. shitting while sitting), the historical and classical method involved squatting. Perhaps this denigration is meant as ha ha ha, your abilities are so deficient that you have not the means to even afford toilets. If so, that is a stingingly harsh rebuke to those of us who are, in fact, toilet-less.

Well, anyways I just wanted to register my opinion that reason is not arguing from any sort of moral grounds at all, high or low. He isn’t even attempting to fight injustice. He is, instead, a scared little baby, a paranoid and delusional basketcase, a coward so use to being frightened that if there is no credible threat to him, he must invent one. Simply flailing out in fear, hoping that his incoherent screams will keep the scary brown folks away. In short, he isn’t worthy of contempt. I know that gets said about a lot of people and it usually doesn’t apply. In this case, however, reason actually is not worthy of contempt. Just pity.

Fucking losers that squat feces

So ‘reason’ reveals his monstrous nature. We are ‘losers’ because we are brave enough not to give up freedoms for security and we are generous enough to extend our hard-won freedoms to those who would be our enemies.

The words ‘moral high ground’ do not figure in ‘reason’s’ vocabulary. He prefers the low ground. He is a brute who fights injustice with more injustice. He would destroy the village in order to save it.

The blame I’m assigning the USA is for their treatment of Omar Khadr after he was in their custody. Possibly some of the treatment before, as in the servicing of the target with airstrikes, then grenade attacks and then being shot in the back. The creation of Omar Khadr, child soldier, was not the fault of the USA, even though it is likely that the camp he was trained in was originally CIA funded. The creation of Omar Khadr, the ultimate in jihadist recruitment tools, I didn’t blame that on the USA in my previous post, but I will now.

Got it?

Kids caught on a battlefield can’t have POW rights because they’re terrorists. The fact that they ask for rights proves that rights are BS and liberals are whiners.

Because he was turned down for free medicine in Sweeden, he knows the truth about the UK’s medical system.

Saying the Supreme Court decision is settled law requires proof beyond the Supreme Court decision. Reason’s assertions are true because he cut and pasted talking points to support them. People who side with the Supreme Court without accepting Reason’s arguments are poor faith debaters with no understanding of the law.

Because the Constitution specifically mentions the United States, only Americans are humans with human rights.

Habeus Corpus is an American invention, never extended to, for instance, British people.

Best of all- Reason can’t understand why Sadly No! Isn’t a place where his oh-so-earnest and strident legal points can’t be taken seriously.

Bit lacking in teh funny, but Reason is satire incarnate.

reason, may you one day find yourself at the mercy of the beast you want loosed on others and may your only hope be the kind of people you deride here as “fucking losers that squat feces”.

Interestingly, if ‘reason’ came to the UK, the best the authorities could do to him under anti-terrorist legislation would be to lock him away for 28 days without charge. I regard this as somewhat illiberal, but still we could not have a Guantanamo-style situation even with this ferocious law. Of course, the government is trying to enact an extension from 28 days to 42, which I hope will be stalled or fail.

Interestingly, in this country it is the *Conservative* Party’s position (no liberals they!) that 42 days is immoral and undermines centuries of law and precedent. I find myself in the rare position of applauding their stance. Go Conservatives!

Now, the government is currently reviewing whether or not to change the rules on this, as this article notes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7123398.stm

Until the rules are changed, you could come here, even on a work visa, register with a GP and recieve treatment. This has been the experience of my wife, who is a Japanese national, all her Japanese friends who are here on a variety of short-term, student and long-stay visas, and my co-workers, who come from all over the world. I have just asked two US nationals in my office, one of whom is about to have a baby here, and they have told me they had almost no red tape to deal with in their dealings with the NHS.

In other words, Mister ‘reason’, you are talking bollocks.

Absolute bald face lie. I also lived in Sweden and you very much are turned away from the sjukhuset if not a naturalized citizen. In england, if I entered the emergency room, I would be granted treatment. As anyone would. However, what you are attempting to lie about is the fact that if I attempted to LIVE in england legally this would be a much more complicated process.

In the short term (ie. emrgency situations) people recieve treatment. It is a lie and nothing less for you to claim a non-english citizen waltes into your country, demands favour from the INS and is granted full english rights. You suck.

Sadly, no. As in your country (and the EU in general) reluctance to grant citizenry from emigration. You can delude the fucking losers that squat feces out here, but you cannot fool me.

There is no proof of residency check made on patients. No care is denied visitors or foreign residents.

I should add that there are conservatives in the United Kingdom who would happily deny medical care to foreign visitors and residents and who deplore ‘medical tourism’ as a drain on the service. We get an lot of Irish girls coming over for abortions, for example. And there have been periods where numbers of African and Indian residents have traveled here for good-quality free care. Fortunately, there are no stories of NHS trusts turning patients away. At least not yet.

But when it says that no person (or Perfon) shall be denied equal protection of the laws, it says “person”. Not “citizen”. Not “friendly”. Not “English-speaking male Protestant”. Not “person, as long as he doesn’t look foreign or guilty or weird”.

Thank you, Doctorb. You see, ‘reason’ would have a world in I would not enjoy such protections. He would have a America be a country where if someone in authority was sufficiently malicious I could be arrested and held in detention with no warrant issued, no charge made or right of trial offered. And the worst thing is that all it would take is for that authority to declare I was a bad man, with no proofs offered.

I would be in deep fear of such a power. In a land where habeas corpus prevailed I could expect protection against arbitrary treatment by authority. Specific charges would have to be made and if they were bogus they would soon be discovered and I would be freed. But ‘reason’ desires a country where men would have the power to lock ME away for no reason at all. Now, ‘reason’ may believe that only muslims may be targeted, but he could offer no guarantee whatsoever that a white anglo-saxon such as myself could walk in safety. None at all.

Thankfully, habeas corpus survives by a thin thread. Five supreme justices against four believe that times are not so extraordinary that it should be suspended. Which gives me hope that I am safe from those Americans, like ‘reason’, who see enemies everywhere and demand the Ultimate Power to incarcerate them.

I do not have the rights of free medicine in england, simply because I reside there.

Actually, you do. And indeed all the Americans I work alongside here use the health service without let or hindrance. There is no proof of residency check made on patients. No care is denied visitors or foreign residents. What you say is simply not true.

No Perfon fhall be a Reprefentative who fhall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been feven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who fhall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he fhall be chofen.

and

No Perfon except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Conftitution, fhall be eligible to the office of Prefident …

But when it says that no person (or Perfon) shall be denied equal protection of the laws, it says “person”. Not “citizen”. Not “friendly”. Not “English-speaking male Protestant”. Not “person, as long as he doesn’t look foreign or guilty or weird”.

Captured on the “battlefield?” Hell, some of these guys were dragged out of their homes.

OK, you win that one, reason.

Under what circumstances would you consider a non-citizen of this country, who was captured on the battlefield of Afghanistan (you know, where you were “with us”) can appeal to the court to throw out his case because he was not read his Miranda?

That is a waste of the courts time, a waist of money, and not required by any stretch of the imagination by the soldiers of the US army to read an unlawful enemy combatant a Miranda upon detention.

He doesn’t have the Miranda right because he doesn’t have the rights of a US citizen, no more than I am required to veil my wife because I have the rights of an Afghani citizen.

No, you don’t win this round. This will be thrown right out, and really is just a waste of money to even bring up.