bush Insists We Must Have Patriot Act

Constitution....Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Patriot Act..... The government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.

0 Replies

Constitution......Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Patriot Act...The government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.

0 Replies

Constitution.....Amendment VI: ... to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Patriot Act......The government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.

0 Replies

Now your turn, Brandon.

Specifically, and in detail, what do you think of the whole Guantanamo fiasco?

0 Replies

Your views and descriptions here are rather elementary LE. Thankfully, the law is not. There is much more to it than what you have so plainly laid out.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Your views and descriptions here are rather elementary LE. Thankfully, the law is not. There is much more to it than what you have so plainly laid out.

Your Constitution is rather elementary, McG?

What do you want me to do....hold a seance and get the spirit od Abe to explain it to you in wording that even you would understand?

There are none so blind, as those that will not see.

0 Replies

As you aptly demonstrate.

0 Replies

Lord Ellpus wrote:

Now your turn, Brandon.

Specifically, and in detail, what do you think of the whole Guantanamo fiasco?

I think it is sensible for us to detain these prisoners of war in a secure facility far from their friends. I certainly would not favor treating them like Americans who were on trial for a civil infraction. That would be inappropriate and self-destructive. If you have some specific so-called abuse in mind, please cite it and I will comment.

By the way, I doubt your characterizations of the Patriot Act. I would prefer that you provide links to the actual bill so I may know that you aren't just making it up. By the way, I can't help pointing out that in your post:

Lord Ellpus wrote:

Constitution.....Amendment VI: ... to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Patriot Act......The government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons....

the one thing has no relation to the other. Monitoring the conversations is always legal under circumstances in which the people have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

0 Replies

Section 215 is of particular interest Brandon.
Especially notable is the caveat that investigations must also not be performed on U.S. citizens who are carrying out activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
You can reference this with the America apying on Americans thread.

This section is in direct conflict with constitutional (5th and 14th amendments) and legal bounds (due process, habeas corpus), as information can be acquired ex parte, or, without all parties present.

That is one example that I ante on behalf of LE.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

By the way, I doubt your characterizations of the Patriot Act. I would prefer that you provide links to the actual bill so I may know that you aren't just making it up. By the way, I can't help pointing out that in your post:

Lord Ellpus wrote:
Constitution.....Amendment VI: ... to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Patriot Act......The government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons....

the one thing has no relation to the other. Monitoring the conversations is always legal under circumstances in which the people have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

If you didn't cut my quote off where it suited your purpose, you would see the relevance........i.e. "and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes".
Nice try, Brandon. Maybe you should apply for a job in the White House.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Lord Ellpus wrote:

By the way, I doubt your characterizations of the Patriot Act. I would prefer that you provide links to the actual bill so I may know that you aren't just making it up.

This, above everything else, shows your true colours, Brandon.

If, as a true American patriot, you don't know whether I am "just making it up" or not, you clearly demonstrate that you haven't a bloody clue as to what the Patriot Act contains.
By springing to it's defence, you again clearly demonstrate the fact that you will blindly follow the Bush Corporation without question........even to the point of boldly defending WHATEVER he chooses to do, without a single clue as to what he has doing.

This is not Patriotism, in any sense of the word.

You may as well save yourself the effort and only use two keys on your keyboard.

Baaaaaa Baaaaaa Baaaaaa

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

As you aptly demonstrate.

Quick with the put downs, but totally lacking input to further the debate, as usual.

Please enlighten me as to how my previous "Constitution" posts were incorrect.

Otherwise, I fear I will have to get Lassie to herd you into the same pen as Brandon.

0 Replies

Re: bush Insists We Must Have Patriot Act

Brandon9000 wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Why the big push? Obviously this ass_hole will just do what he wants whether it's legal or not........he's proven that with the wiretaps.....

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/03/bush.patriot.ap/index.html

Which part of the Patriot Act specifically is illegal?

Brandon:

You have completely missed the POINT of this thread.

BVT did not say the Patriot Act is illegal. He said the ass_hole (bush) will do whatever he wants regardless of whether the ass-hole's conduct is legal or not.

Example: Bush is engaging in domestic surveillance of the American people without FISA court approval required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The Patriot Act specifically amended FISA to make it easier for the government to obtain FISA court approval to conduct electronic surveillance of United States persons who have ties to international terrorism. However, Bush is intentionally violating this congressional enactment. Bush claims that he has inherent constitutional authority as the commander-in-chief to conduct domestic surveillance of United States persons without FISA court approval in violation of FISA.

Therefore, why does the ass_hole claim that he needs the Patriot Act to fight the war on terrorism? If Bush has inherent constitutional authority to protect the United States from terrorism at his own discretion without any statutory checks or balances, why does he need the Patriot Act?

0 Replies

Lord Ellpus wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

By the way, I doubt your characterizations of the Patriot Act. I would prefer that you provide links to the actual bill so I may know that you aren't just making it up. By the way, I can't help pointing out that in your post:

Lord Ellpus wrote:
Constitution.....Amendment VI: ... to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Patriot Act......The government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons....

the one thing has no relation to the other. Monitoring the conversations is always legal under circumstances in which the people have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

If you didn't cut my quote off where it suited your purpose, you would see the relevance........i.e. "and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes".
Nice try, Brandon. Maybe you should apply for a job in the White House.

Oh, the latter is relevant, but you also included the former, listening to conversations between defendant and lawyer, under certain circumstances, and that doesn't violate anything in the Constitution, if done only where the people can have no expectation of privacy.

0 Replies

Lord Ellpus wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

By the way, I doubt your characterizations of the Patriot Act. I would prefer that you provide links to the actual bill so I may know that you aren't just making it up.

This, above everything else, shows your true colours, Brandon.

If, as a true American patriot, you don't know whether I am "just making it up" or not, you clearly demonstrate that you haven't a bloody clue as to what the Patriot Act contains.
By springing to it's defence, you again clearly demonstrate the fact that you will blindly follow the Bush Corporation without question........even to the point of boldly defending WHATEVER he chooses to do, without a single clue as to what he has doing.

This is not Patriotism, in any sense of the word.

You may as well save yourself the effort and only use two keys on your keyboard.

Baaaaaa Baaaaaa Baaaaaa

No, if you wish to state that the Patriot Act is illegal or immoral, then it is your responsibility to make the case. I do not procatively scan every law on the books to determine if it is immoral or not. I will only question a law if someone makes a decent case that there is something wrong with it, which you have not done. This hardly makes me a sheep. You are beginning to approach a properly constructed objection to the Act, but you really need to use links to cite the thing so that we may know you are not acting on hearsay and rumor.

0 Replies

All mouth and no trousers, IMO.

0 Replies

"I will only question a law if someone makes a decent case that there is something wrong with it,..."

I don't read every law either, but I don't just follow along waiting for someone else to point out there is something wrong with it. So, if no one had ever pointed out to you that "All men are created equal" should include blacks, or that it wasn't right for women to be denied a vote, you wouldn't have ever thought of that on your own?

BAAAAAAA

0 Replies

Lord Ellpus wrote:

All mouth and no trousers, IMO.

I guess you must be correct, since this post of yours so precisely counters each of my points and disproves it logically.

0 Replies

Here's a link to the Patriot Act:

The Patriot Act

What in this do you object to?

0 Replies

Most of us here have read it, Brandon. Give it a try.

Meanwhile, the point AGAIN is that if Bush can do whatever he wants due to his authority as CIC, and because Congress gave him the okay to use any and all force necessary... Why does he need the Patriot Act?

0 Replies

bush Insists We Must Have Patriot Act

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know