Author Topic: House Votes To Curb Patriot Act  (Read 1240 times)

Offline JB88

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10980
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #15 on: June 16, 2005, 10:57:37 AM »
i couldnt disagree more sandman, though i think that you may be being sarcastic.

the problem isnt soley the transparancy aspect,  its how it is or could be used and what recourse one has against it.

as of now, there are rules, lists and procedures that have been enacted which the public cannot even know.  there are secret lists and secret hearings which are essectially the potential death dagger to habius corpus.  lets not forget that our society was also forged upon the notion of innocent until proven guilty.  though it is an imperfect philosophy, i strongly believe that it beats the alternative.  so far it has worked wonders and americans have always prided themselves on a nieve, but justifiable sense of justice for all.

so, why is it that the government can hide things but people cannot?  

there is a difference between national security and national paranoia.  i feel that many aspects of the so called "patriot act" are the former.  

our government, our ambassadors and representatives essentially turned inward and began to fear its own people.  seperated itself from the populous rather than embrasing them.

to me it is the difference between running a town or a prison.  ill take the town thanks.

if my name were on a no fly list, i could not ask why or even have confirmation that it is on the list because the list is secret.  

the fbi has recently been given the power to bypass the judiciary by being able to order supeonas without a hearing...is this what we really want?

the government is not the united states...the people that make it up are.  the government is really just and ambassador and a representative to those people rather than what has quickly become a babysitter, a father figure and most recently a moral fist.

americas government was formed upon very basic spirited principles which stemmed from ancient greece and roman, age of reason and the enlightenment which sought to offer fairness and the power for all people to participate evenly.

a democracy.

the patriot act is, in my opion, dangerously close to being the furthest thing possible from patriotism.

while i can appreciate the need to protect ourselves from foreign attacks, there is little, if any need to be secretive about our motives, our methods or our right to habius corpus and the laws mapped out in the constitution.

what the government has essentially done is bypass amending that document to serve its own aims and has grown increasingly seperate in the process.

a government of the people and for the people.

as americans we would be best served if we never forgot that.

we have not captured osama, we have established a shadow government which preaches transparency but refuses to be transparent or questionable.  

without due process we are no longer within the reasonable frame of our endeavor and the terrorists really have won.

our freedoms and our traditions have built a great nation that is envied by our enemies....so why in the heck should we take a page from thier book to combat them?  dont we in essence become them?

yes, war changes things...but we arent even fighting the war that was wrought upon us.  (al queda)

who even asks of osama these days?

i am glad to see roll back.  i would like to see more of it.
this thread is doomed.
www.augustbach.com  

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. -Ulysses.

word.

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2005, 10:59:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by JB88
i couldnt disagree more sandman, though i think that you may be being sarcastic.
 


Oh, that was sarcasm for certain. ;)
sand

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2005, 11:01:44 AM »
takes that guy forever to simply say...

It is allways best to limit the powers of government.

he should probly just admit that he started smoking again.   easier on the rest of us.

lazs

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2005, 11:09:30 AM »
Too much big brother BS in the Act. The thing reeks.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2005, 11:10:10 AM »
Quote
Bush has threatened to veto any measure that weakens those powers.

Now, think about those judges Bush wants in place and how he wants the Supreme Court to look. There is a reason the Founding Fathers wanted checks and balances.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #20 on: June 16, 2005, 11:11:11 AM »
Even better, think about how the Founders provided a way to override a Presidential veto.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline SirLoin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5708
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #21 on: June 16, 2005, 11:15:00 AM »
How is that Toad?
**JOKER'S JOKERS**

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #22 on: June 16, 2005, 11:41:32 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SirLoin
How is that Toad?


To override a presidential veto, the bill requires a 2/3 majority in both the House and the Senate.
sand

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #23 on: June 16, 2005, 11:51:44 AM »
Very true Toad. My point was he is all in favor of this kneejerk legislation and wants a likeminded judiciary. It takes a lot longer to replace those judges and justices than it does to override a veto.

We are starting to realise after 4 years that The Patriot Act is not such a great idea and is bad for America. Those judiciary seats are for a lifetime. It could be an ugly 20 - 30 years before a balance could be re-established.

Do we really want a kneejerk, ultra-conservative Federal court system and SCOTUS? They could do a lot of damage. I would not be in favor of a completely liberal judiciary system, either. A balance is what's needed and nessessary for the good of the country.

Just look at Bush's so-called "town meetings". He fills them with only those that agree with him. Dissenting opinion is not allowed. It is very similar to the way the Soviet Union and even Iraq was. History proved that it does not work. I'm not saying Bush is Stalin or Saddam, but that absolute power corrupts absolutely. We must have a balance of opinion.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #24 on: June 16, 2005, 11:53:17 AM »
Quote
conservative Republicans, worried about government intrusion, joined with liberal Democrats who are concerned about personal privacy.


Don't they realize these are the same thing?

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2005, 11:58:24 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
Don't they realize these are the same thing?


Dood... Journalists are paid by the word. The trick is to get as many words in their without sounding redundant. ;)
sand

Offline Momus--

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 651
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #26 on: June 16, 2005, 11:58:27 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Not sure, but here are a couple of news stories:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/08/terror/main700284.shtml

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/03/1046540117608.html?oneclick=true


2nd Link no worky, needs registration. My original question was semi-rhetorical; according to my reckoning, there have been very few if any at all such convictions either in the US or here in the UK (where Patriot Act type legislation has also been adopted). It will be interesting to see how the case in your first link works out; previous such cases that I've heard of have generally been announced to a certain amount of fanfare only to fizzle out with the cases being dropped or the charges being dismissed in court.

Anyway, 'tis nice to see some legislators on at least one side of the Atlantic developing some nuts on the issue.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #27 on: June 16, 2005, 12:11:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm
My point was he is all in favor of this kneejerk legislation and wants a likeminded judiciary.
[/b]

Sorry, I can't go that far with the evidence at hand.

The idea that all potential Bush jurists mirror Bush's Patriot Act-type beliefs isn't a credible threat to me.

I think what he's looking for rather and has nominated are "strict constructionist" judges, which I view as antithetical to the Patriot Act.

In short, I think the judges he's nominated are more likely to limit PA-type powers than to encourage them.

Quote
We are starting to realise after 4 years that The Patriot Act is not such a great idea and is bad for America.


I'm not prepared to condemn it all. There may be parts that we acutally need in this world situation. I'm certain there are parts we don't need and I feel confident the legislators will remove those.

Quote
Do we really want a kneejerk, ultra-conservative Federal court system and SCOTUS?


Obviously not. However, there's no proof that there's any danger of that. In fact, given "strict constructionism" the opposite may well be true. The threatening future you warn of borders on a strawman, IMO.

Quote
Just look at Bush's so-called "town meetings". He fills them with only those that agree with him. Dissenting opinion is not allowed.


So? What is a "town meeting" other than a political ad? Please don't pretend the the other side of the aisle solicits, promotes and features opposition speakers at their rallies. Can you give me an example of a town meeting for say Kerry or Clinton where an "opposition" speaker was courteously given the floor for a few minutes while he made his point with respectful silence from the crowd?

Yeah, the Bushies "rig" their audiences. It's hardly the Soviet Union as we have a myriad of newsies to dissect every line, tell us what he meant, where he was right, where he was wrong, ad nauseaum. You can't believe that Bush's town meetings are protected from challenge; point/counterpoint is immediately available on TV, Radio and after a short delay, Print.

If he only wants his friends actually at the meeting.... blah. Who cares. What he said is still subjected to intense scrutiny and rebuttal, just as it should be.

Quote
I'm not saying Bush is Stalin or Saddam, but that absolute power corrupts absolutely. We must have a balance of opinion. [/B]


What you have to prove to validate that statement is that Bush has anything approaching absolute power. If he did, his legislation would all sail right through wouldn't it? Social Security reform/private accounts would already be a done deal.

We do have balance of opinion. We also have balance of power, with checks.

Sorry, I can't panic yet.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #28 on: June 16, 2005, 12:12:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Momus--
2nd Link no worky, needs registration. My original question was semi-rhetorical; according to my reckoning, there have been very few if any at all such convictions either in the US or here in the UK (where Patriot Act type legislation has also been adopted). It will be interesting to see how the case in your first link works out; previous such cases that I've heard of have generally been announced to a certain amount of fanfare only to fizzle out with the cases being dropped or the charges being dismissed in court.

Anyway, 'tis nice to see some legislators on at least one side of the Atlantic developing some nuts on the issue.



here is one they're are hunting in the UK and US:
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/19/walq19.xml

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
House Votes To Curb Patriot Act
« Reply #29 on: June 16, 2005, 12:14:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Momus--
2nd Link no worky, needs registration. .


Suspect caught with sleeper cells details
March 3 2003



 
An FBI file photo of terrorist mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
 
Washington: The captured terrorist mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was carrying the names and phone numbers of members of al-Qaeda sleeper cells in North America when he was apprehended, according to intelligence officials.

His arrest could disrupt acts of terror in the planning stages, authorities said. Vincent Cannistraro, a former counter-terrorism chief for the CIA, said Mohammed likely would be interrogated "with some urgency" about al-Qaeda attacks that might be imminent.

Western intelligence officials said Mohammed actively recruited terrorists for a new wave of attacks against Americans at home and abroad, and is alleged to have worked to develop radioactive "dirty" bombs.

US officials are expected to keep the whereabouts of the detained terror suspect a closely-guarded secret, just as they have with other captured operatives.

Observers believe it is highly unlikely Mohammed will be put through the civilian justice system, since federal criminal defendants in the United States are allowed detailed access to the government's evidence against them.

"It'll be a lot better if we can interrogate him for a year and a half without having to worry about telling him (in court papers) everything we know about him," the official said.

The Washington Post reported Sunday that within hours of him being detained in Pakistan, the country's president, General Pervez Musharraf, authorised the transfer of Mohammed and an Arab suspect held with him to a US detention center at an undisclosed location outside the country.

US government officials and private security analysts have called Mohammed's detention the most significant arrest thus far in the war against terrorism. Only Osama bin Laden and his chief deputy, Ayman al Zawahri, rank higher on the list of al-Qaeda operatives sought by US authorities.

"He is probably the only man who knows all the pieces of the puzzle," French terrorism expert Roland Jacquard said.

Jacquard said French judicial documents show that Mohammed had more meetings with bin Laden than anyone else after the al-Qaeda leader moved from Sudan to Afghanistan.

Mohammed succeeded in giving Western intelligence agents the slip on a half-dozen occasions. He narrowly escaped capture in Pakistan last September.

Officials said he was able to elude capture so long in part because of his ability to easily traverse not just geographic, but cultural boundaries. US authorities said Mohammed was partially educated in the southern US state of North Carolina, where he learned flawless English as a student at Chowan College, a Baptist school.

He also studied at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University in the town of Greensboro, where he earned an engineering degree in 1986, according to US authorities.

Intelligence officials said Mohammed had particularly strong ties to Kuwait and Qatar -- two of the main staging areas for US forces massing for a possible invasion of Iraq.

He is also said to have extensive connections in the Philippines and elsewhere in Southeast Asia, according to intelligence officials.

AFP