Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on January 17, 2006, 08:42:23 PM
-
I check the mail today and found a letter from the Texas DPS. Since I have a CDL (Commercial Driver License) with a HazMat endorsement the provisions of the Patriot Act directly affect me and my wallet.
Seems I might be a terrorist and must undergo a background check by DHS. Normally this wouldn't bother me since I'm not a terrorist. The problem is I have to pay $73 for the background check or they will revoke my license. None of the money is for the actual license, just the background check.
What a crock. Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York? Or will they simply steal a truck and turn it into a truckbomb? :noid
-
Originally posted by rpm
I check the mail today and found a letter from the Texas DPS. Since I have a CDL (Commercial Driver License) with a HazMat endorsement the provisions of the Patriot Act directly affect me and my wallet.
Seems I might be a terrorist and must undergo a background check by DHS. Normally this wouldn't bother me since I'm not a terrorist. The problem is I have to pay $73 for the background check or they will revoke my license. None of the money is for the actual license, just the background check.
What a crock. Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York? Or will they simply steal a truck and turn it into a truckbomb? :noid
We have a word for that around here.
That word is "Extortion"
-
They want the $73.00
shamus
-
What's the deal, dredlock, you some sort of terrorist lover?
I think the word here is 'unfunded mandate'.
Of course, it's sad that people aren't outraged at the Patriot Act until it affects them directly.
-
(http://www.the-sundbergs.net/holiday_cd_02/images/ryder-truck-24.jpg) Why buy a truck when you can rent
-
Originally posted by rpm
I check the mail today and found a letter from the Texas DPS. Since I have a CDL (Commercial Driver License) with a HazMat endorsement the provisions of the Patriot Act directly affect me and my wallet.
Seems I might be a terrorist and must undergo a background check by DHS. Normally this wouldn't bother me since I'm not a terrorist. The problem is I have to pay $73 for the background check or they will revoke my license. None of the money is for the actual license, just the background check.
What a crock. Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York? Or will they simply steal a truck and turn it into a truckbomb? :noid
Can you write it off ?
-
Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York?
====
Would seem to me the best way to get in and do an attack. Just need a virgin suicider.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York?
====
Would seem to me the best way to get in and do an attack. Just need a virgin suicider.
yes.
-
Damnit RPM, you friggin' commie. Just pay your money and thank the government for not taking more.
-
Originally posted by SOB
Damnit RPM, you friggin' commie. Just pay your money and thank the government for not taking more.
That's what she said....at the picnic.
-
is there some place you can pay in person?
..then you can insist on a kiss...
demand yer american right to be kissed while yer being ****ed!
-
Mark your calendar... 9/12 was the day that a great country got overrun by a bunch of chicken*** s.
It's just a question now if anyone's got the 'nads to take it back.
As a country, you've faced far worse. FAR worse. You have stood up to it and have always prevailed. You didn't need any encroachment on your freedoms in order to prevail.
Your government is turning you into a bunch of frightened girls. It's pathetic. Don't buy it.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Your government is turning you into a bunch of frightened girls. It's pathetic. Don't buy it.
Wow maybe now our government can have a slumber party with your government.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Mark your calendar... 9/12 was the day that a great country got overrun by a bunch of chicken*** s.
Was that the day a bunch of Canadians crossed the border? Were you their leader?
-
"Just pay your money and thank the government for not taking more."
That's very unpatriotic. Your kind of thinking gives comfort to the enemy and stinks of "pinko-commie-rugheaded_terrorist_loving" sedition.
If he truly loved America, the Republican party, Mom and apple pie he'd write out a nice phatt campaign donation check to "The Party" at the same time.
-
oddly... I agree with nash. I don't think he has a clue as to what he is saying but he is saying the right words.
if the government ever tries to help you then you can count on it removing some of your freedom and costing you money and making itself a lot bigger and stronger.
Like I said... rather have a few blue areas vaporized or just messed with that lose any freedoms.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
What's the deal, dredlock, you some sort of terrorist lover?
I think the word here is 'unfunded mandate'.
Of course, it's sad that people aren't outraged at the Patriot Act until it affects them directly.
yea yea thats it. Im a terrorist lover lmao
No
But I have always been against the Patriot Act.
I am not willing to give up not one single one of my rights. Even if I dont use them (right to keep and bear arms) for any reason whatsoever.
Including and especially for the dillussion of security.
Good people gave their lives and died so that we may have and keep those rights.
And now Im supposed to just give them up just to save my sorry arse?
Particularly in the unlikely event I or my family become a victim of another attack?
I dont think so.
BTW I still call it extortion
-
Originally posted by Nash
Mark your calendar... 9/12 was the day that a great country got overrun by a bunch of chicken*** s.
It's just a question now if anyone's got the 'nads to take it back.
As a country, you've faced far worse. FAR worse. You have stood up to it and have always prevailed. You didn't need any encroachment on your freedoms in order to prevail.
Your government is turning you into a bunch of frightened girls. It's pathetic. Don't buy it.
My GOD!!
Wait. Somethings wrong here!
Nash and I are on the same page and of the same opinion.
::shudders at the thought::
See Nash I told em you werent as dumb as they say;)
-
is nash turning into a right wing american gunnut? i blame global warming.
-
I don't really think that nash knows what he is saying but in this case... he got it right.
dred.. I agree with you.
lazs
-
Hi RPM,
Originally posted by rpm
What a crock. Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York? Or will they simply steal a truck and turn it into a truckbomb? :noid
Actually it already happpened. Lyman Faris, a Muslim born in Kashmir who became a naturalized American citizen, had a CDL and drove a truck for a living. Faris entered into a conspiracy with Al Qaeda to attempt to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge using a truck. The plot was exposed by an NSA wiretap.
In a sense RPM your having to pay for a background check on your CDL is for all the same reasons an Anglo-Saxon Pastor, a little Korean lady, and a grandmother got picked out of the passengers waiting to board a flight for a random search. Passengers on a commercial flight have already used weapons concealed on their persons to hijack an airplane and use it as a weapon to destroy high value targets in the USA. Now since we are forbidden to act on what we know about the likely religious and ethnic profile of potential Islamic terrorists, we are forced to screen every passenger. Now because the same terrorists have attempted to use trucks, you get screened and checked instead of just the likely terrorists.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Nash
Mark your calendar... 9/12 was the day that a great country got overrun by a bunch of chicken*** s.
It's just a question now if anyone's got the 'nads to take it back.
As a country, you've faced far worse. FAR worse. You have stood up to it and have always prevailed. You didn't need any encroachment on your freedoms in order to prevail.
Your government is turning you into a bunch of frightened girls. It's pathetic. Don't buy it.
Nash, this is not a new thought for you. If I had the time, I could probably find the same quote two or three years ago. What is truly amazing is that some here think that you've made a shift to the right by making this observation. The Bush admin has been playing the fear card since day one at ground zero. They used it to get the Patriot Act and they used it to invade Iraq.
:aok
-
I wonder what a $73 background investigation would have turned up for Lyman Faris? Or Timothy McVeigh? Or about the people who will murder over 15,000 people across the US this year?
Are you saying that this single incident has brought about the background investigation of all truck drivers in the United States? That would be insane paranoia, so there must be hundreds of incidents of thwarted terrorist truck drivers.
My God, only someone like Stalin could think of investigating all truck drivers in a nation of over 270,000,000 people.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Mark your calendar... 9/12 was the day that a great country got overrun by a bunch of chicken*** s.
It's just a question now if anyone's got the 'nads to take it back.
As a country, you've faced far worse. FAR worse. You have stood up to it and have always prevailed. You didn't need any encroachment on your freedoms in order to prevail.
Your government is turning you into a bunch of frightened girls. It's pathetic. Don't buy it.
let us know when we are half as pitiful as Canada
then we will start worrying :)
-
Does anyone pity Canada?
-
Originally posted by rpm
I check the mail today and found a letter from the Texas DPS. Since I have a CDL (Commercial Driver License) with a HazMat endorsement the provisions of the Patriot Act directly affect me and my wallet.
Seems I might be a terrorist and must undergo a background check by DHS. Normally this wouldn't bother me since I'm not a terrorist. The problem is I have to pay $73 for the background check or they will revoke my license. None of the money is for the actual license, just the background check.
What a crock. Does anyone think a terrorist will actually take the time to have his fingerprints taken, get a CDL and drive a truckbomb into New York? Or will they simply steal a truck and turn it into a truckbomb? :noid
Actually it's not your money, it belongs to the government. What they allow you to keep is called a "Tax Expenditure".
-
Dear Rolex,
As amazing as it may seem, millions of Americans are greatly inconvenienced every day, and billions of dollars are spent, because 12 men boarded four jumbo jets, took them over and flew them into major buildings, killing over 3000 people and destroying NYCs most prominent landmark. Since that time, the inconveniences and infringements we have been forced to submit to have uncovered well over a dozen similar plots.
We do have a choice you know, we can go back to the freer society we had pre-9/11 but the inevitable result will be that we have to deal with a few successful attacks every year. Of course, the moment the catastrophe occurs the public will go into a frenzy demanding more and more restrictions. "Why wasn't this prevented? Why wasn't his background checked?" Nothing though, not even surrender, as the Spaniards have learned, will cause the men who are plotting those attacks to stop doing so.
What many Westerners have failed to grasp is that Jihad is a forever war, it keeps going until the Dar-El-Islam extends throughout the world and all men everywhere submit to Sharia. There is no acceptable "stopping point" short of that objective.
Anyway, Rolex, RPM, et al you find the current administration's response to Jihad to be unacceptable. Fair enough. But tell me, what would you do differently, how would you respond to the situation as it currently stands? Lets say you were elected tomorrow, what would you do vis a vis the American response to the international Jihad? I am genuinely curious.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Does anyone pity Canada?
Canada is a country that has
1> American Culture
2> French Technology
3> British Food
I'd pity any country like that.... Heh!
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hi RPM,
. Now since we are forbidden to act on what we know about the likely religious and ethnic profile
- SEAGOON
Actually, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, which we all agree is what makes this a great country, say exactly that. That we are forbidden to act based on religious or ethnic preferences and profiles.
-
Well, Seagoon, first thing would be to recognize that there is not an international Jihad as you have conjured in your mind. There are terrorists, and they should be investigated and brought before courts of law using cooperative efforts between governments.
Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden's followers should be pursued with vigor, instead of having another few thousand Americans killed and ten thousand injured pursuing... whatever it is being pursued in Iraq. Especially since no one in Iraq, or connected to Iraq, has ever commited a terrorist act against the US. But instead, terrorists are being created daily from the family and friends of the (insert a number: 10,000? 20,000? 30,000? 40,000?) Iraqis killed during the past two years.
How about fixing the intelligence services of the US? There's a good a start. The CIA and FBI directors and the next 2 levels below should have been fired for cause - gross dereliction of duty by not sharing information and acting in the interests of their bosses (the American people), instead, acting in the childish interest of their little empires and themselves.
All the tools and laws are available. Only finding the right people to do the jobs with renewed purpose is necessary.
-
Hi Rolex,
Originally posted by Rolex
Well, Seagoon, first thing would be to recognize that there is not an international Jihad as you have conjured in your mind. There are terrorists, and they should be investigated and brought before courts of law using cooperative efforts between governments.
Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden's followers should be pursued with vigor, instead of having another few thousand Americans killed and ten thousand injured pursuing... whatever it is being pursued in Iraq. Especially since no one in Iraq, or connected to Iraq, has ever commited a terrorist act against the US. But instead, terrorists are being created daily from the family and friends of the (insert a number: 10,000? 20,000? 30,000? 40,000?) Iraqis killed during the past two years.
How about fixing the intelligence services of the US? There's a good a start. The CIA and FBI directors and the next 2 levels below should have been fired for cause - gross dereliction of duty by not sharing information and acting in the interests of their bosses (the American people), instead, acting in the childish interest of their little empires and themselves.
All the tools and laws are available. Only finding the right people to do the jobs with renewed purpose is necessary.
Thanks, before I respond to this, I want to make sure I understand exactly what you are saying rather than simply respond to a strawman. So would the following assessment be accurate?
In terms of philosophy: The US must understand that there is no underlying connection between the terrorists operating under the Muslim brotherhood umbrella and no real connection between the people who call themselves Jihadis and Islam. There is also no connection between the Saudis exporting Wahhabi Islam and funding Mosques and study centers worldwide, what the Imams preach, and the surge in the number of terror cells in areas where these mosques are established.
If we leave Iraq and X (insert other middle eastern countries here) and then catch the existing terrorists and put them on trial the war will be over. Operations in Europe and the USA will cease once we have done that. Also, contrary to current reports, and what European intel services have gleaned, Zarqawi is not planning operations in Europe and America from Iraq.
Current security measures are excessive and must be returned to pre-9/11 levels as soon as possible.
In Terms of Application:
1) America must withdraw from Iraq immediately
2) The pursuit of terrorists must be demilitarized and turned over to law enforcement officials
3) The Patriot Act and all similar post 9/11 provisions must be repealed immediately
4) Actions based on the assumption of a connection between Islamic terrorism and Islam must cease immediately
5) The current intel and law enforcement agency heads must be fired
6) Agencies should be encouraged to work together, unless sharing information would violate the laws that existed prior to 9/11
Have I left anything out?
Basically then, you are saying we must return to the situation that prevailed in the 1990s?
- SEAGOON
-
No, Seagoon. You embellished too much on your own. Put that coffee cup down! :)
It's 2:30 a.m. here, so I'll be brief. And I do not engage in strawmen. I'm allergic to straw. By the way, you forgot to answer the question about how many plotting truck drivers were uncovered. Was it one? Two? A hundred? What was the catalyst or trigger number?
The plots that were uncovered were all before the new rules requiring all truck drivers to have background investigations. The NSA did its job, using the tools at its disposal, to uncover Lyman Faris. Is this starting to make sense now?
Too tired; going to sleep.
-
I think Seagoon is onto something with this profiling thing.
According to his strawman, Christians should be profiled and searched for pipe bombs since they are the ones that bomb clinics. And are responsible for terror attacks on our OWN soil against American Citizens, which have resulted in the deaths of AMERICAN CITIZENS!
We'll start with your congregation, Seagoon. I mean, it's not a problem for your congregation to give up some of it's liberties to make American Citizens safer from pipe bomb attacks, which have happened with more frequency than Islamic attacks on our soil.
BTW, I'm a christian, so don't waste your time thinking I'm not a believer in God.
I like your strawman now.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
let us know when we are half as pitiful as Canada
then we will start worrying :)
Why dont you throw in a "your Mother wears combat boots" as well, that would be a real good one :aok
shamus
-
dumped the hazmat endorsment to. could'nt afford the 5 million insurance and to keep track of the paper work for 5 years what a crock. and hauling that s*** doesnt pay a premium rate. so when your driving down the road and see the placards on JB or Swift just remember that driver has at least 6 months experience. oh and about the brooklyn bridge big trucks dont fit low clearance.
-
Hi Stringer,
Alright, I'll play that game.
Originally posted by Stringer
I think Seagoon is onto something with this profiling thing.
According to his strawman, Christians should be profiled and searched for pipe bombs since they are the ones that bomb clinics. And are responsible for terror attacks on our OWN soil against American Citizens, which have resulted in the deaths of AMERICAN CITIZENS!
We'll start with your congregation, Seagoon. I mean, it's not a problem for your congregation to give up some of it's liberties to make American Citizens safer from pipe bomb attacks, which have happened with more frequency than Islamic attacks on our soil.
BTW, I'm a christian, so don't waste your time thinking I'm not a believer in God.
I like your strawman now.
Since 2001 there have been zero murders at abortion clinics, and a grand total of 8 attempted bombings or arsons. Also clinic "Blockades" dropped from a high of 201 in 1989 to 4 in 2004 (the last year for which data was available). Apparently the draconian laws muzzling free speech, bringing in federal protection, and the threat and occasional application of harsh fines and prison sentences had the desired effect. Direct action against clinics has almost disappeared. All of this is not exactly an argument against using new laws against "terrorism."
If we were to view this as a "Christian insurgency" apparently either the forces were defeated, they got bored (that's so early 90s), or they were actually pacified by regime change. However, this is one example of violence in pursuit of a goal that has definitely fizzled.
By comparison the total number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam since 9/11/2001 currently stands at 4007 with thousands and thousands killed all over the world including USA, Great Britain, Spain, Indonesia, Holland, Italy, etc.
So, we aren't actually talking rocket science here. Combing my congregation, or the other evangelical congregations of America is going to be a fruitless endeavor, we manifestly aren't making pipe bombs. However, as British authorities found to their horror following the London bombings, a disproportionately high number of Mosques in the west have active terror cells in their midst. Additionally, a 2005 Freedom House Report (http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/publications/Saudi%20Report/FINAL%20FINAL.pdf) entitled "SAUDI PUBLICATIONS ON HATE IDEOLOGY FILL AMERICAN MOSQUES" found that as the title suggests American mosques are literally filled with literature preaching Jihad, Anti-Americanism, and unmitigated hatred towards all infidels. Freedom House is a non-partisan, non-sectarian civil rights org, so they have no "secret agenda" here. So where would your resources be better spent, chasing phantoms founded on faulty presuppositions, or dealing with the people actually doing the killing?
I know, I know, evidence shmevidence, all religions are equally bad you must be a terrorist because you're a fundamentalist, the crusades, the KKK, etc.
- SEAGOON
-
Seagoon, the moment we declare war on a religion, ANY religion; we lose.
But if we must, then it should be war against ALL organized religions.
Itsa lose, lose deal; creates a self fullfilling prophecy of 'apocolypse'.
Yes?
-
Fizzled or just waiting? Who's to know unless we surveil the congregations, especially congregations where the pulpit is used to preach against abortion.
4007 seperate terror attacks by Muslims on US soil since 2001?
-
Seagoon
you are wasting your breath... seems some don't know the good guys from the bad guys..
I just hope the world continues on in such a manner that they can continue to live in their dream worlds .. a world where they can actually compare abortion clinic bombings to 911 ...
(http://www.iranpressnews.com/english/images/00/ahmadi.jpg)
but I fear this guy has other plans...
-
Eagler,
There are good bombers and bad bombers of innocent civilians?
Do you approve of bombing clinics?
I know I don't approve of terror acts, period. I didn't know there was a sliding scale according to which religion the bomber claimed to be representing.
According to Seagoon, any additional terror bombing is one too many. I agree. I just won't forfiet any of my freedoms to reactionary impulses.
The only difference to clinic bombings and 9/11 was scale. Each proposed to force their agenda by means of terror. Each used terror to bring attention to their agenda. And each used religion as the excuse for carrying out terror acts on innocent lives.
I find both appalling and unacceptable. I also find it odd that both kill innoncent people in the name of religion.
-
Seagoon, the moment we declare war on a religion, ANY religion; we lose.
But if we must, then it should be war against ALL organized religions.
Itsa lose, lose deal; creates a self fullfilling prophecy of 'apocolypse'.
Yes?
Wow, if I had not been floating around these boards for those many years, I'd begin to think that you were french. Or at least of french descent.
It is not an exhaggeration what Seagoon has said. This is a holy war. Muslims have declared war on christians and other religions many years ago. The thought that you refuse to admit it, does not change the fact that it is so.
The holy war is on every continent. A war that size has never been seen before. The mere idea that there are people world wide refusing to acknowledge the war is breathtaking.
In the past, the only way for us to get involved was a direct attack on us. The attack on fort sumter, merchant ships, pearl harbor...
The real problem here is that we are trying to take a pair of clean white gloves through the world instead of a brutal blunt hammer.
Total war has been declared on all Non-muslims. How long and how many more lives will it take before we declare it back?
-
oh yes. That's a great reason to repeal the patriot act. Lets go back to pre-9/11 where intel agencies couldnt talk to eachother and several walls where in place that won't allow us to "connect the dots" because RPM has to pay for a backround check.
Personally I think you should still have to do it but the cost should come out of DHS budget
-
But how many of those uncovered plots could have still been uncovered using laws already in place?
9/11 itself would not have happened had the goverment simply just did its job and actually enforced the laws that were already IN place.
I dont have a problem with profiling. Thats only been an issue over the last 20 years or so. Untill then nobody had a problem with profiling.
why? because it makes sense.
If male Arab militants are known or beleived to be wanting to hijack planes then I sure as hell dont see any reason to stop and detain and search a red headed pasty white Irishman, Or an 80 year old woman.
It does however make sense to detain and search an Arab looking individual.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
oh yes. That's a great reason to repeal the patriot act. Lets go back to pre-9/11 where intel agencies couldnt talk to eachother and several walls where in place that won't allow us to "connect the dots" because RPM has to pay for a backround check.
Personally I think you should still have to do it but the cost should come out of DHS budget
Its not that that they couldnt talk to each other, its that they wouldnt talk to each other.
There was more than enough information available to law enforcement in this country as to who may have been ploting somthing like this, they dropped the ball!!.
I know its true because I have heard many on this board state the fact that it's Clintons fault..he knew about it in the 90's.
We need folks who want to do the job rather than those who point out why its not possible because of those pesky constitutional road blocks.
The FBI used to be of the mindset that if they didnt develop the lead, it was not worth considering, hopefully that has changed, but you dont have to trash the entire constitution to get those guys to do thier jobs.
shamus
-
damn lag
-
Originally posted by Shamus
Its not that that they couldnt talk to each other, its that they wouldnt talk to each other.
There was more than enough information available to law enforcement in this country as to who may have been ploting somthing like this, they dropped the ball!!.
I know its true because I have heard many on this board state the fact that it's Clintons fault..he knew about it in the 90's.
We need folks who want to do the job rather than those who point out why its not possible because of those pesky constitutional road blocks.
The FBI used to be of the mindset that if they didnt develop the lead, it was not worth considering, hopefully that has changed, but you dont have to trash the entire constitution to get those guys to do thier jobs.
shamus
no by law the CIA could not share information with the FBI and so forth. Even the 9/11 commission pointed this out.
-
You'd be onto something, Gun, IF it was a CIA agent that raised the flag on the 9/11 hijackers, but it wasn't. It was a FBI agent in Arizona (IIRC).
-
Originally posted by Stringer
You'd be onto something, Gun, IF it was a CIA agent that raised the flag on the 9/11 hijackers, but it wasn't. It was a FBI agent in Arizona (IIRC).
True but combined resources between various departments and required cooperations COULD have HELPED connect the dots. (again i'm sourcing alot of this on the 9/11 commission report) Having said this I did not and still do not agree with yet another layer of govt that we love and enjoy called the DHS.
My point is that the patriot act while flawed in some areas is well needed in others. If this had been a clinton law (signed under clintons watch) we probably wouldn't be having this conversation, not to say 9/11 wouldnt have happend, but that it wouldn't get the chicken little response it gets today.
Trim it down and revise some areas and let the act stand for good.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
oh yes. That's a great reason to repeal the patriot act. Lets go back to pre-9/11 where intel agencies couldnt talk to eachother and several walls where in place that won't allow us to "connect the dots" because RPM has to pay for a backround check.
Personally I think you should still have to do it but the cost should come out of DHS budget
They are not talking to each other now. They already have fingerprints of CDL drivers. It was one of the requirements when when CDL's were created to prevent multiple licenses issued to the same driver in different states. All they have to do is connect the databases and let a computer scan them. I don't think it will cost $73 a piece to do it. I agree it should come from the DHS budget.
The Patriot Act is a flawed piece of kneejerk legislation.
-
Gun,
You work in the government. When do combined resources ever cooperate?
Plus COULD have HELPED is a stretch.
What's not a stretch is that 1 agency did have the information, and it was passed up among that agency, which has the power to act on it, and it didn't.
It's ostrich thinking to believe that different agencies would somehow perform better together when it's tough enough to get something moving within a SINGLE agency.
It's just creating more layered red-tape.
-
OTOH, things are working as they are supposed to work.
The Patriot is being reviewed before being renewed and the Senate has stopped renewal until several areas are revised.
Salazar expects compromise on Patriot Act (http://www.chieftain.com/metro/1136538450/3)
..."We're trying to strike a balance between protecting our privacy rights under the Fourth Amendment and protecting the nation from terrorism," Salazar said Thursday. "We are not a police state and people have a constitutional right to be secure in their privacy, their homes and their businesses."...
...Salazar, one of a bipartisan group of nine senators who led the Senate opposition to renewing the version of the Patriot Act that was passed by the House last month, said the key issues involve a few sections of the law, dealing primarily with what evidence federal agents must disclose in getting court approval to conduct secret searches and surveillance. "All of us want the Patriot Act renewed," he said. "I'm confident we'll come to some compromise over the sections we disagree on."...
It surely wasn't perfect when it passed. But it's being reviewed and revised by your elected leaders.
It's up to us if we don't like the results.
You all know how to e-mail and 2006 is a mid-term election in the Senate too.
-
Originally posted by Toad
It surely wasn't perfect when it passed. But it's being reviewed and revised by your elected leaders.
It's up to us if we don't like the results.
You all know how to e-mail and 2006 is a mid-term election in the Senate too.
I agree with you on most of that. It is flawed, it is being reviewed (altho Bush wanted to make it permanent) and the mid-terms are coming. From the buzz on Capitol Hill, the Republicans are facing losing their majority.
Toad, you're a pilot, let me ask you this. Did DHS run a background check on every commercial pilot after the PA? How about train engineers, ship captains, chemical plant workers and every other worker that could possibly cause a terrorist attack in any line of work and did they make those workers pay for it?
-
Oh, there was a lot of cra ppola after 9/11. I was only around for a few short months of it though and I don't remember any full background checks. Lots of fingerprinting and security badge stuff though.