The Diminishment of Freedom

USA Patriot Act. Not being told why you've been arrested, having no access to legal representation and being incarcerated indefnitely without trial seems to be a loss of freedom to me.

People on the right of politics are constantly talking about our freedom being diminished. This seems to be nothing more than paranoia, phobia, and distortion of facts. I still eat what I want to eat, drink what I want to drink, watch what I want to watch, say what I want to say, and have sex with who I want to have sex with without government persecution. Can someone please give me an example of a freedom that has been taken away from me, because I'm clearly not aware of one?

I am aware of the patriot act, but that has not affected me and the general population. There are rare cases where the wrong person was accused of being a terrorist, but more often than not, the person accused is involved with terrorist networks. The ironic thing is that this bill was pushed by a republican president.

Is this all that you can give me?

Of course. The freedom to use my money as I please, rather than it being confiscated by the government to give to those I may not choose to give it to. It is called "the redistribution of income".

Well, I live in the UK so I'm not the best person to challenge you on what you say. But it is the erosion of liberties that everyone should be afraid of. The Patriot Act is just one example of where freedoms are taken away which only effect a very small number of people. But once the door is open, it is very rarely closed. Perhaps your freedoms will not be further eroded in your life, but that's not to say future governments won't build on these initial steps and oppress your children.

Some degree of suspicion of the state is healthy, but it must be kept in a rational perspective. With or without the Patriot Act, we are always under some level of threat from state tyranny and authoritarianism as long as the state exists.

So you're okay with the fact that potentially you could be detained and held indefinitely without trial? Is this the kind of rational perspective you're talking about?

No I'm not OK with the fact that I could potentially be detained and held indefinitely without trial . . . lol. I'm also not OK with the fact that I could be arrested and thrown in jail for the rest of my life for committing a felony crime. However, I don't foresee myself becoming a terrorist or committing felony crimes, so I don't worry about it.

Can you give an example where this power has been abused. It has been amended and there is limit to the time any one can be held. You are exaggerating the effectiveness of this law. The law still protects the potential terrorist in many aspects of the law. Our free press can and does protect the individual.

It's not about whether the power is abused, the power is an abuse in itself. How about the numerous inmates in Gitmo that are held and yet to have a free trial in a court of law? USA used to be a country where everyone is innocent until proven guilty. The abuse is that now you can be deemed guilty without even a chance to clear your name in a court of law. I'm not exaggerating anything, that's what the Act allows.

People on the right of politics are constantly talking about our freedom being diminished. This seems to be nothing more than paranoia, phobia, and distortion of facts. I still eat what I want to eat, drink what I want to drink, watch what I want to watch, say what I want to say, and have sex with who I want to have sex with without government persecution.

Can someone please give me an example of a freedom that has been taken away from me, because I'm clearly not aware of one?

Gitmo people were caught on the battlefield, and are presumed dangerous, and, for the most part, are dangerous. Their status is as POWs. No POWs have ever been brought to trial. No one ever heard of such a thing until now.

Oh well, because you have not experienced any reduced freedom, then of course it must mean that nobody has? This is a fallacy of generalization. And by the way, it's not just people on the 'right' talking about freedom, it's everybody.



Aside from numerous documented abuses of the Patriot Act, you've apparently forgotten about Bush's domestic surveillance program, which resulted in the illegal, unwarranted wiretapping of many US citizens. Recent reports have also been coming out that show this program involved much more than just wire tapping without warrants, it was a sophisticated domestic spying program, ordered by Bush in 2001, and basically kept secret until parts of it were leaked in the NY Times a few years ago.



Yes, they are prisoners of war, and as such, are entitled to certain rights, which have clearly been violated by the United States. The Third Geneva Convention, which the US did ratify, deals with the treatment of POWs, and specifically forbids physical or mental torture. Documented abuses of prisoners at places such as Abu Ghraib, as well as the public policy of waterboarding prisoners, clearly demonstrates a violation of the third convention, which is considered to be a grave breach, also known as a war crime.

Also, the US is holding plenty of prisoners who are NOT POWs, but noncombatants. These people are protected under the fourth Geneva Convention, and may not be held hostage or deported. Yet, again, the US has been in violation of these rules by keeping civilians as hostages who are not actual POWs, deporting noncombatants to foreign prisons where they have no rights, or contracting out the torture of these people to third parties.

Oh well, because you have not experienced any reduced freedom, then of course it must mean that nobody has? This is a fallacy of generalization. And by the way, it's not just people on the 'right' talking about freedom, it's everybody.

Aside from numerous documented abuses of the Patriot Act, you've apparently forgotten about Bush's domestic surveillance program, which resulted in the illegal, unwarranted wiretapping of many US citizens. Recent reports have also been coming out that show this program involved much more than just wire tapping without warrants, it was a sophisticated domestic spying program, ordered by Bush in 2001, and basically kept secret until parts of it were leaked in the NY Times a few years ago.

It's not about whether the power is abused, the power is an abuse in itself. How about the numerous inmates in Gitmo that are held and yet to have a free trial in a court of law? USA used to be a country where everyone is innocent until proven guilty. The abuse is that now you can be deemed guilty without even a chance to clear your name in a court of law. I'm not exaggerating anything, that's what the Act allows.

You cant point to one abuse to try proving another. These laws are a contingency plan, not to be abused on a whim. There are many laws that are never used.

As I said, it doesn't matter if they are not to be abused, the Act itself and what it entails is an abuse. This is clearly a case of diminishing freedoms. It probably doesn't bother you because you don't fit the profile of someone who may suffer from this Act. But it's wrong to say freedoms have not diminished because clearly they have.

Fit the profile, I have been sanctioned for being a union activist and have been considered a security risk by MI5. I agree having a certain appearance can be a disadvantage but its more than a disadvantage when your appearance is of no consequence to a terrorist. I apologize if by your appearance you are considered a terrorist but thats life im afraid, just ask an Irishman. We live in difficult times and we do understand certain members of our community are viewed with suspicion, is it our fault or those who perpetrate the atrocities. If you had two white skin heads sit opposite you on an empty train would you feel threatened, would you have certain feelings that could be considered prejudiced?