Patriot Act Success....Failure?

heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
heheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheh
ahhhh . . .

comic relief . . .

okbye

0 Replies

I think it would have been appropriate to continue following constitutionally legitimate and valid protocols and not compromised the freedoms of Americans in the name of fighting for freedom.
The contradiction is glaringly obvious.

hys·ter·i·a
n.1. Behavior exhibiting excessive or uncontrollable emotion, such as fear or panic.

Hysteria is establishing a puppeteering mechanism for raising and lowering the frenzied level with one press release. Hysteria is widespread paranoia that "they will immediately strike again", when in fact, history has demonstrated the contrary. Hysteria is trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

0 Replies

More likely the real hysteria is the CLAIM that there has been a trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

The only people that need to fear their rights are being lost are those breaking the law.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

More likely the real hysteria is the CLAIM that there has been a trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

The only people that need to fear their rights are being lost are those breaking the law.

Oh my lord. I've heard about people like you, McG - and I think I've seen some on TV. "If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear from your government." Oh my God.

0 Replies

You must have been watching lifestyles of the rich and famous.

Please explain to me which rights any American citizen has lost since 9/11. Not which ones you THINK have been lost or which ones COULD be lost, but which rights you have ACTUALLY lost.

I won't hold my breath waiting for a response.

0 Replies

You listed some of them above McG.
...couple that with all that has been stated in the America spying on Americans thread.

That you regard these government actions permissible due to the utilitarian thesis of "protection" you subscribe to does not make it constitutionally permissible in any way, shape or form.
i find it frightening that your government may be reading your private emails to a friend overseas, monitoring how many porn sites you visit per month, listening in on private phone calls to loved ones etc.
Don't you?
...even if you've "done nothing wrong"?
In order to catch them pesky bad guys, you have to monitor some rather benign characters in the process.
I have a problem with that, and so should you....champion of American and Iraqi freedom.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
More likely the real hysteria is the CLAIM that there has been a trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

The only people that need to fear their rights are being lost are those breaking the law.

Oh my lord. I've heard about people like you, McG - and I think I've seen some on TV. "If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear from your government." Oh my God.

If you've done nothing wrong, then perhaps a microchip in one's ear would be a fitting resolve.
Why should one object to 24 hour surveillance if one is not guilty of a crime?

0 Replies

Simply because you believe taking the extreme position in this does not mean I have to or want to.

I believe in government bearocracy and red tape. I believe there is enough oversight, leaks and people in government that we do not need to worry about "big brother".

If the government feels it neccessary to follow my IP trail, then so be it. The internet is hardly a private domain. Someone already tracks all my credit card spending, when and where I drive on the thruway, when and where I cross the border, how much money I make, how much I pay in taxes, etc...

When the President says they are tracking people with links to Al Qaeda I not only applaud, I encourage it. They are not surveilling John Smith, the farmer in Arkansas trying to get by because they don't have the manpower or the need to.

You and others see an erosion of our rights in America. That's fine. I don't. I only see the erosion of common sense by some on this forum.

0 Replies

McGentrix - They won't answer your question because there is no answer.

Your question was: WHICH RIGHTS HAVE BEEN LOST DUE TO THE PATRIOT ACT?

I will follow up:

Please give an instance of a successful suit brought by anyone( the ACLU would be a usual suspect) which found that the Patriot Act did IN FACT violate the rights of a SPECIFIC person.

No such suit exists, Mc Gentrix and the partisans, who arfe looking for nothing more than political advantage and really care nothing about the "loss of basic rights"( nothing, as you have pointed out) has been lost.

But, McGentrix, there is indeed EVIDENCE to show that if Clinton had paid more attention to his job and less to Monica's fellations, there MAY have not been the catasthropic event of 9/11.

(the naysayers give no evidence, Mc Gentrix. Setanta has apparently gone off in a laughing fit as if that was some kind of a rebuttal.)

I don't think they will even attempt to rebut this evidence, McGentrix.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/21/terror/main607659.shtml

quote

" Six years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the CIA warned in a classified report that Islamic extremists likely would strike on US soil at landmarks in Washington or New York, or through the airline industry, according to intelligence officials."

Snood and Candidone "blah-blah" but give no evidence. They will not, of course, be able to rebut the evidence I gave. It implies that there MIGHT have been a chance to avoid 9/11 if Clinton has zippered his pants and paid attention to business.

He did, I assume, get the CIA intelligence reports.

0 Replies

I don't think Clinton could have done anything about 9/11 anymore than Bush could have. We didn't have proper security precautions in place to stop them.

The terrorists took advantage of the freedoms in America to perpetrate their attack. Things like the Patriot Act have hardened some the holes that were used in previous attacks. It's sad to see that people have forgotten 9/11 and find it easy to complain and dismiss the precautions we have taken as an erosion of rights...

0 Replies

McGentrix- There are few who do not admire the ability, scholarship and intellectual probity of Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the US Attorney who is now the lead attorney for the government in the LIbby case.

Mr. Fitzpatrick, in prepared remarks for the subcommittee on Crime, terrorism and homeland security given to the Committee on the Judiciary in the US House of Representatives April 28, 2005 said:

"I can tell you from personal experience that section 218( of the Patriot Act) has made a huge difference in the way we approach national security....the prosecutors in my office enjoy a good working relationship with the FBI agents in Chicago...it was not that way before the Patriot Act."

0 Replies

In case you haven't read the initial post in this thread...I was asking what successes has the PA had in countering terrorist activities. To demand that I defend the notion that rights have been trampled has been adequately accounted for, and is, for all intents and purposes, a moot point, as we are then discussing opinions and perspectives. That yours and my opinions on the matter of constitutional right infringement differ is the subject of another discussion altogether.

Obviously my definition of freedom and understanding of protection within legal and constitutionally guaranteed boundaries differs from your own.

Please contribute to the "tangible successes or failures of the PA" or be gone.
Even McGentrix has heeded to that end....and I thank you for your contribution. It was informative.

0 Replies

candidone1 wrote:

I think it would have been appropriate to continue following constitutionally legitimate and valid protocols and not compromised the freedoms of Americans in the name of fighting for freedom.
The contradiction is glaringly obvious.

That's quite a lot to expect from Americans as a whole. You know, I'm sure that's precisely what would have been the topic of discussion over breakfast the morning after terrorists flew two planes into downtown Toronto and killed 3,000 Canadians. "Let's not become hysterical Gordon, we need to follow constitutionally legitimate and valid protocols in going after the effin buggers."

hys·ter·i·a
n.1. Behavior exhibiting excessive or uncontrollable emotion, such as fear or panic.

What panic ensued after 9/11?

What fear was excessive?

Perhaps you don't appreciate it but charging the American people with a hysterical reaction to 9/11 is quite an insult to Americans. Perhaps you do.

Hysteria is establishing a puppeteering mechanism for raising and lowering the frenzied level with one press release. Hysteria is widespread paranoia that "they will immediately strike again", when in fact, history has demonstrated the contrary. Hysteria is trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

Maybe it is and maybe it aint, but none of this has actually happened, and those that claim it has are...hysterical?

0 Replies

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

That's quite a lot to expect from Americans as a whole. You know, I'm sure that's precisely what would have been the topic of discussion over breakfast the morning after terrorists flew two planes into downtown Toronto and killed 3,000 Canadians. "Let's not become hysterical Gordon, we need to follow constitutionally legitimate and valid protocols in going after the effin buggers."

Well, I certainly hope we would exercise caution and rationality. I also would hope that we would have gone straight after the perpetrator of 9/11--OBL/Taliban in Afghanistan.
Faulty intel or not, they have been made fools by deflecting blame on Hussein.

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
[quote="candidone1]
Hysteria is establishing a puppeteering mechanism for raising and lowering the frenzied level with one press release. Hysteria is widespread paranoia that "they will immediately strike again", when in fact, history has demonstrated the contrary. Hysteria is trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

Maybe it is and maybe it aint, but none of this has actually happened, and those that claim it has are...hysterical?

Noe of this happened?
There was no such thing as a color coded "terror alert"?
You haven't noticed in this community the paranoid righties worried about nuclear devices in suitcases and sneakers?
...and you wouldn't concur that individual pre-9/11 and post-9/11 freedoms have changed.

If you haven't noticed that these have all occurred, it's time to pull your head out of the sand.

0 Replies

candidone1 wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

That's quite a lot to expect from Americans as a whole. You know, I'm sure that's precisely what would have been the topic of discussion over breakfast the morning after terrorists flew two planes into downtown Toronto and killed 3,000 Canadians. "Let's not become hysterical Gordon, we need to follow constitutionally legitimate and valid protocols in going after the effin buggers."

Well, I certainly hope we would exercise caution and rationality. I also would hope that we would have gone straight after the perpetrator of 9/11--OBL/Taliban in Afghanistan.
Faulty intel or not, they have been made fools by deflecting blame on Hussein.

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
[quote="candidone1]
Hysteria is establishing a puppeteering mechanism for raising and lowering the frenzied level with one press release. Hysteria is widespread paranoia that "they will immediately strike again", when in fact, history has demonstrated the contrary. Hysteria is trampling the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of American citizens in the name of freedom itself.

Maybe it is and maybe it aint, but none of this has actually happened, and those that claim it has are...hysterical?

Noe of this happened?
There was no such thing as a color coded "terror alert"?

Yes, there was, but that is not the same as "...establishing a puppeteering mechanism for raising and lowering the frenzied level with one press release."

You haven't noticed in this community the paranoid righties worried about nuclear devices in suitcases and sneakers?

Whether or not such worries are justified, "paranoid righties" in A2K hardly represent America, and your comments were directed at Americans not "paranoid righties," in A2K. If you wish to scale your comments way, way, way back, please do so.

...and you wouldn't concur that individual pre-9/11 and post-9/11 freedoms have changed.

Yes they have, but it is the extent of the change that is in question. Please don't try and tell us that you were talking about incremental changes. You were not. You were alleging sweeping changes. Stick to your argument or move on.

If you haven't noticed that these have all occurred, it's time to pull your head out of the sand.

It's time to pull your head out of your ass -(God, I'm sorry but how could I have let that one go by? Talk about putting Barry Bonds in front of a T-Ball!)

But seriously folks....candidone1, it's time to pull your head out of your ass.

0 Replies

Finn- If I understand the Canadian Medical system properly, Candidone will have to get on a waiting list to have the cranial removal from colon procedure accomplished. I understand this normally takes a year. I do hope he will not be too uncomfortable

0 Replies

Patriot Act Success....Failure?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know