Senators join forces to roll back parts of Patriot Act.

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | 16 Oct 03 | By Audrey Hudson

[Viva Le Dissention]

Ok, so following that definition, we are at "war" with drug dealers, since we have armed agents shooting at them and killing them?

Or we are at "war" with criminals since criminals are a party that we are in open and armed conflict with over an extended period of time--after all, we read almost everyday about a criminal shooting at a policeman or a policeman shooting at a criminal (or, really, just some guy reaching for his wallet--but that's an aside). While this may be a seemingly outlandish statement, I don't see why it could fit into the reading of the definition you give.

I think that's an ok definition of war, but you are reading it far too broadly.

Seriously, if you take that approach, Bush can get on tv and say we are at "war" with crime because it is an open armed conflict with a party--namely the criminals. And so all constitutional rights are suspended for suspected criminals and we have military tribunals and summary executions for those found guilty in a secret hearing.

When you start to manipulate these meaning of definitions, bad things can happen. I don't like it at all.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Gee, gibberish from Protagonist how unusual.

[Brian S]

Thank you for initiating this thread.

I attempt to post any PA articles I can find in attempts to shine light on this "puppy"...

[steve-b]

we are now debating at this hour of night, with only two copies of the bill that we are being asked to vote on available to Members on this side of the aisle

Thank you for admitting that the overwhelming majority of Representatives had no opportunity to read the bill.

[JohnnyZ]

When you start to manipulate these meaning of definitions, bad things can happen. I don't like it at all.

Actually, you're the only one manipulating. All that al-Qaida lacks is ground to call their own. They have declared war on us. They are trying to destroy America with every means at their disposal. You can't argue al-Qaida so you have to resort to talking about shoplifting to change the subject.

[steve-b]

How long would it have taken to make copies for every single member? 1,000 of the finest copy machines in the world... 5 minutes?

The fact that this was not done -- you have already cited the evidence that this was not done, so don't bother trying to dodge the point -- is damning.

[Protagoras]

I said what I wanted to say, if you don't like it I offer my condolences.

I'm surprised you could read it with your head up your A$$.

[usapatriot28]

Sorry, that doesn't seem to be the bill.
S. 1695 just changes the sunset provision to include more items. Apparently, from the article, they have now offered a bill with language to replace those items.

It's actually bill S.1709

[William McKinley]

Call your Congressman and insist that they learn how to use one of these.

[freeeee]

There was a time when this forum mostly consisted of rational intelligent debate. The level of discourse was high and one could learn a great deal from intelligent posters about all types of topics. FR's potential to be learning recourse thereby undercutting the liberal news media was being recognized, and thus could effect real political change.

For some time I've noticed a trend away from that, in favor of mindless braying, personal attacks, smears and basic mental flagulence worth of some of the posters from DU.

I ask you to rise above that and genuinely contribute to the thread instead of lowering yourself to scatelogical insults and personal attacks.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

So many self described "experts" and spirit channelers proclaim their knowledge of the document to be infallible, meanwhile, the very organs established to govern under the instrument are deemed to be worthless in its construction and interpretation.

I've seen some of the silliest, stupidest crap on this board regarding these issues - its as if there weren't any branches of government set up under its provisions, and anarchy reigned.

A couple of points on this - John Marshall, frequently ripped for agglomerating power to the SC, was a contemporary of the original drafters, and knew a number of them personally. He was a helluva lot closer to knowing "original intent" thn some drunk, camo clad, trailer dwelling militia member.

George Washington (that jackbooted thug) used the power of the Federal Government to put down the Whiskey Rebellion.

Therefore, and in pursuance of the proviso above recited, I. George Washington, President of the United States, do hereby command all persons, being insurgents, as aforesaid, and all others whom it may concern, on or before the 1st day of September next to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes. And I do moreover warn all persons whomsoever against aiding, abetting, or comforting the perpetrators of the aforesaid treasonable acts; and do require all officers and other citizens, according to their respective duties and the laws of the land, to exert their utmost endeavors to prevent and suppress such dangerous proceedings.

Thomas Jefferson (RINO statist that he was) used the US Treasury to buy up the Louisiana Purchase, a move that brought howls of outrage about unconstitutionality from your ideological forebears.

Keeping in mind that they had already tried the weak federation route, it is no wonder they took the sort of decisive actions they did.

[William McKinley]

Conyers could have taken the two copies he was given and made 400 copies without any difficulty.

He didn't; instead he chose to bray about not having copies.

This tells me that clearly he wanted to have a talking point. He wanted his side to not have copies.

[Viva Le Dissention]

They've blown up two buildings, both at the same time. It's essentially what McVeigh did, but no one called McVeigh a "war criminal." You know why? Because it was absurd--the same way it's absurd to say that these people are at "war" with the United States.

I think the administration's classification of the Taliban is interesting as far as this subject goes. In order to refuse the Taliban their constitutional rights, they have to be declared military warriors. But the problem is that Afghanistan is a party to the Geneva convention, so then the administration states that it was carrying out military operations not in custom with the laws of war, so they don't have to give them POW status. The administration is trying to have its cake and eat it, too.

I'm not manipulating at all. Terrorists are criminals. The only reason you like to think that they are war criminals is because they have really big crimes.

But anyhow, I do need to get going, so I'm sure we'll continue this at a later date.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

There was a time when this forum mostly consisted of rational intelligent debate.

ROFLMAO - it wasn't so much "rational, intelligent debate" as it was mental self abuse, as lonely cranks spewed forth their dreams of whackjob utopias - and fellow cranks patted them on the back and said "yeah, yeah, you're so smart, this is what I always believed, too". The fun part about it for the cranks has been the notion that they could do it here, and then shout down or have banned anyone who had the temertity to point out the stupidity inherent in so many ideas that pass for "deep thought" around here. Of course, it hasn't worked out quite so well lately - cranks can't take a lot of criticism without lashing out in profanity and threats, and if they don't do that, they'll leave with hurt feelings.

Bottom line? There are a number of people around who aren't impressed with your thoughts, and who are now of the opinion that Ron Paul is an impractical, incredibly thick dunce.

[mrsmith]

"basic mental flagulence worth of some of the posters from DU. "

Like: "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is"?

Doesn't it make you sad to see FR full of people making the same kinds of excuses for their hero's lying?

It would be easy for you to stop one person here from acting like a DUer.

[WoofDog123]

"It was passed to soon after 9-11 to really be well thought out."

Though I would bet it had been prepared in nearly complete form some time before waiting for something like that attack to push it through with minimal debate.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

temertity=temerity

[freeeee]

The Constitution is written in plain language. It is a document by and for the people. We need to aristocratic class of government masters to tell us what it means.

Washington and Jefferson were indispesible in winning independence. However they were not perfect and some of their actions, particularly the ones you mentioned planted the seeds that unraveled the Republic they had just finished creating.

Today's government is nothing like the one set up originally. The anti-federalists were correct in their predictions. The Republic is dead, replaced by an empire. I understand you like what has happened so you'll likely defend it, but at least have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that what we have today is not the Republic we were given.

[cookcounty]

Finally the stupid Senate realized THEY passed the law that John Ashcroft is legally obligated to enforce.

My Senator Durbin is so-o-o-o slow of mind it's pathetic.