Is the nation heading in the wrong direction?

Um, yes?

The patriot act supports all of it. I suggest you read it.

If someone is suspected of terrorism, under the patriot act, they can be detained without charges. Under the patriot act, they can be held for an undefined period of time without charges. There is no provision for informing anyone that you are doing so.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Did you know they could do that before the Patriot act as well? It's called an investigation.

Has this portion of the Patriot act EVER been used?

0 Replies

I would go one step further and suggest that we have arrived at a wrong destination.

The more important question is can we turn around and head the hell out?

0 Replies

just a thought here McG, but if the Patriot act is not a major change in investigatory proceedures (or even a minor one) it's reduced to being just another set of laws on the books without consequence of usefulness. Is this the idea of the new republican agenda "pass more laws that look and sound "patriotic" and are just sound bites of legislative activity?"

0 Replies

It doesn't matter if it has been used or not. The law is the law.

And, prior to the patriot act, the Gov't could, for no reason, hold you indefinately without charges, without lawyer access, and without informing anyone where you were held.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I think that in the war on terror it is a valuable tool, but I don't see it being used except on terrorists. The mistaken notion that the Patriot act is being used as a tool to spy on liberals is the pinnacle of idiocy. No one has given up any rights no matter how loud anyone screams they have.

0 Replies

Pure crap, McG. Just because you don't think it will be used inappropriately does not mean it won't be.

The law is the law, no matter how you choose to interpret it. The new laws state that the Gov't has the right to do the things I said, whereas previously they did not.

Therefore, your right to not have to worry about such things, regardless of whether or not you believe it will be used justly, has been removed.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Pure crap, McG. Just because you don't think it will be used inappropriately does not mean it won't be.

The law is the law, no matter how you choose to interpret it. The new laws state that the Gov't has the right to do the things I said, whereas previously they did not.

Therefore, your right to not have to worry about such things, regardless of whether or not you believe it will be used justly, has been removed.

Cycloptichorn

http://www.bitoffun.com/Stupid%20Laws.htm

You seem to think that just because it exists, it must be used.

0 Replies

if it isn't useful, why does it exist?

0 Replies

It's the LAW. The fact is that it CAN be used and therefore serious attention should be paid to it.

If the government passes legislation (the patriot act) which directly limits your rights, attention should be paid to it.

As I have said many times; the goal of the terrorists is not to blow up our whole country. It's to disrupt our way of lives, our freedoms. By removing American citizen's freedoms, you are doing exactly what the terrorists want. The admin is playing a dangerous game.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

The worst thing about it is its name.

0 Replies

Two points from the article:

Quote:

If the act marginally reduces peacetime liberties, this is a reasonable price to pay for a valuable weapon against al Qaeda, a resourceful and adaptable enemy that is skilled at escaping detection.

Um, according to them, it is, but according to me, it isn't.

But, much more important:

Quote:

What of the charge that the administration is using public fear to consolidate political power? History shows that new security policies usually last only as long as the war or emergency. The president and Congress usually voluntarily give up their emergency powers; when they do not, courts step in.

Except that the admin has no intention of ever relaxing the patriot act. Ever.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

We'll note that, a month or two past, the FBI made a statement that a main domestic target of their anti-terrorism concerns will be...environmentalists.

0 Replies

Yeah. Also, anti-war groups are 'potential terrorist breeding grounds.'

But no, we shouldn't worry about misuses, keep on walking, nothing to see here. It's the republican party line these days.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

and of course America's mot notorious terrorists 'unionized teachers who are women'

0 Replies

Enforcing unanimity of political ideas and speech and values. It's the only way. It's the American way.

0 Replies

a person held as a material witness can be held indefinately. probably old news, but easier to get away with under pa I.

perhaps the act is not in itself so bad. not my belief, but lets say it isn't.
it "only gives the agencies the same tools as they have for the war on drugs and gangsters/criminals"

we have a saying in los angeles. "if you want to get a law passed, just tell 'em it will keep kids out of gangs and off drugs."

imho, substitute "gangs" and "drugs" with "terrorist groups" and "acts of terror", and you pretty much are left with the sales pitch we get for this thing.

couple this with the repeated warnings to "watch what you say" and it makes me feel a little creepy, frankly.

especially coming from an administration that harps on and on about "securing the homeland" at the same time that they refuse to control the borders because much of their base really likes that cheap mojado labor.

"troubling..."

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Um, yes?

The patriot act supports all of it. I suggest you read it.

If someone is suspected of terrorism, under the patriot act, they can be detained without charges. Under the patriot act, they can be held for an undefined period of time without charges. There is no provision for informing anyone that you are doing so.

Cycloptichorn

You do know that they do some investigation into the person before they pick them up. How do you think they were able to get the Buffalo 6, or even those people in the northwest. We have been able to use the Patriot Act efficiently and with good results.

Would you have this same fear if a liberal were in charge? You should because Clinton had someone on his payroll that had removed over 900 personal FBI files without permission and these files happened to belong to people that were political enemies of Bill and Hillary. You should also know that they ordered IRS audits of political enemies such as the man that was the head of the White House travel office after he was fired. I have more fear of people who have been known to do these things then people that "might" do these things.

0 Replies

I would have the same concerns no matter who was in office.

0 Replies

Is the nation heading in the wrong direction?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know