DCB wrote:I'm not the one who made the ridiculous comparison with the Japanese internment.
Since you beleive my comment was "ridiculous", you choose to blatantly lie about what was actually said?
I didn't lie. I thought it was obvious that my comments were just hyperbole, but let me clarify.
In this post
I quoted your statement word for word, and responded seriously to what you said, even though the context was indeed "ridiculous".
In this post
, I just made a facetious and indirect reference to your comment, but didn't quote you directly. That post was mocking what I saw as the inconsistencies and even incoherent view of civil rights coming from conservatives generally (but not you, specifically, per se, as it were).
My "serious" post is in the "second amendment" thread, which is a wide-ranging discussion of civil rights (much of which is stupid, but has moments of lucidity). As you no doubt recall, I said we should question the actions taken by the police in Boston. I think it would be healthy to have that debate, even if on balance we decide that (in this case) it was the right course of action. But we should have that debate without making outrageous and unfounded comparisons to other historical events. And please, no more comparisons to mid-20th century Europe, even in jest. My liver can't handle it.
My "mocking" post is in this "conspiracy" thread, in which anonymous, ignorant forons speculate about shit. I found it really hard to take anything here seriously, hence the mocking. I admit to feeling dirty just posting in this troll-filled thread. But I was appalled at some of the reactions in the media and in public discussion.
In particular, the idea of "enemy combatant" seems to be nothing more than a loaded term which magically deprives random individuals of any civil rights. I don't see any reason why Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (accused of killing three people and injuring many others) should be treated legally any differently than James Holmes (accused of killing 12 people and injuring many others).