Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ashcroft thinks Patriot Act will stand
Mercury News ^ | 1/29/04 | Curt Anderson - AP

Posted on 01/29/2004 11:16:53 AM PST by NormsRevenge

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:49:30 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration issued a veto threat Thursday against legislation introduced in Congress that would scale back key parts of the anti-terrorism Patriot Act.

In a letter to Senate leaders, Attorney General John Ashcroft said the changes contemplated by the Security and Freedom Ensured Act, or SAFE, would "undermine our ongoing campaign to detect and prevent catastrophic terrorist attacks."


(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: ashcroft; patriotact; safeact; sneakandpeek

1 posted on 01/29/2004 11:16:54 AM PST by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
And it should.
2 posted on 01/29/2004 11:24:06 AM PST by petercooper (We did not have to prove Saddam had WMD, he had to prove he didn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Ahh, they said the same thing about CFR. A veto of PA reform should be just about the last nail in the GOP's coffin. It has as much opposition by republicans as liberals.
3 posted on 01/29/2004 11:25:29 AM PST by steve50 ("There is Tranquility in Ignorance, but Servitude is its Partner.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

In a letter to Senate leaders, Attorney General John Ashcroft said the changes contemplated by the Security and Freedom Ensured Act, or SAFE, would "undermine our ongoing campaign to detect and prevent catastrophic terrorist attacks."

Ashcroft has proven he's not a good steward of the Patriot Act.

If the Patriot Act was meant to "prevent catastrophic terrorist attacks," then why is the Patriot Act used to investigate and prosecute strip joint owners?

Touching a woman's breast might be immoral, even sinful, but it's a terrorist activity.

In my humble opinion, we have plenty of laws against local corruption; no need to use the Patriot Act to prosecute strip joint owners.

4 posted on 01/29/2004 11:30:26 AM PST by george wythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: george wythe
Touching a woman's breast might be immoral, even sinful, but it's a terrorist activity

Correction: Touching a woman's breast might be immoral, even sinful, but it's not a terrorist activity

5 posted on 01/29/2004 11:31:48 AM PST by george wythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"Ashcroft thinks Patriot Act will stand" 2004

Hitler thinks Reich to last 1,000 years 1945



6 posted on 01/29/2004 12:20:44 PM PST by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The cynically names "Patriot Act" is the 9-11 terrorist greatest triumph!

It is far more devastating to the foundations of America than the murder of a few thousand citizens and the destruction of a few buildings.

The terrorist never really thought that they could destroy America with their violent plots, they know that only congress can rip the American constitution to shreds.

Their hope was that congress would react exactly as they did, seizing the same excuse the Nazi's used, that the situation was now so desperate that ANY means is justifiable in pursuit of the critical desired result.

This "The end justifies the means" hysteria is the antitheses of what was intended by the founders of the great American experiment.

Terrorism must not be rewarded with weakening of the constitutional protections that made America the pinnacle of freedom.
7 posted on 01/29/2004 12:24:01 PM PST by Richard-SIA (Nuke the U.N!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"Ashcroft... said the legislation would "make it even more difficult to mount an effective anti-terror campaign than it was before the Patriot Act was passed."


Now I don't want to say Ashcroft is a lying POS, or whatever, so let's leave that to one side, for another day perhaps.

Rather, just read what he said and explain if it is sane, specifically:
How could provisions which he says weaken or sunset some provisions of the Patriot Act "make it even more difficult to mount an effective anti-terror campaign than it was before the Patriot Act was passed."

8 posted on 01/29/2004 12:45:15 PM PST by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
I'm laughing here. Bush is less than a year from being lame duck.

He's being forced to lobby Congress to keep spending high and they're nervous about us voters already.

And many Dims and GOP legislators were always uncomfortable with some of the provisions of Patriot.

If he vetos, they'll override him. They'll tell him in advance. Therefore, no veto.

Ashcroft is blowing smoke. His time would be better spent washing someone's feet.
9 posted on 01/29/2004 12:49:40 PM PST by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george wythe
Ashcroft has proven he's not a good steward of the Patriot Act.
True, but the really scary part is that many people want such a unconstitutional law, trusting anyone in government to be a good steward of a bad law is foolish. That is how we are going to loose our Republic.
10 posted on 01/29/2004 12:52:06 PM PST by GrandEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
If the bill reaches President Bush's desk in its current form, Ashcroft said, "the president's senior advisers will recommend that it be vetoed."

Where the hell was his veto pen when Congress voted to give away ever-increasing portions of our income and that of our posterity unto the fourth generation?!?

11 posted on 01/29/2004 12:54:00 PM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
There are no even theoretical conditions for the "Patriot" Act to expire.

If further terrorist attacks occur, this is proof the PA should be kept and more laws are needed.

If no terrorist attacks occur, this is proof the PA is doing a good job, and should be renewed.

After 50 or so years of that, most living people will not remember a time when there was no PA, and repealing it will be as unrealistic as repealing the income tax today.

PA's expiration date was nothing but a smoke and mirrors show designed to placate those who didn't like the PA but could stomach it for a limited time. Its sponsors knew it would be permanent.

It's painfully obvious, to all but the most naive.

12 posted on 01/29/2004 12:59:30 PM PST by freeeee ("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Good. I hope he does exercise his veto power, finally. The security of the nation is not anything to ignore.
13 posted on 01/29/2004 1:03:08 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
I find your fears to be paranoid on the Oliver Stone level.
14 posted on 01/29/2004 1:04:08 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
How often does Bush threaten to veto something?
15 posted on 01/29/2004 1:05:32 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: templar
How often does Bush threaten to veto something?

Never if it involves increased spending of my money.

16 posted on 01/29/2004 1:09:48 PM PST by Sir Gawain (Pimptastically ghetto fantabulous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Maybe you could describe how the PA could ever expire?

Paint a scenerio, I'd like to hear it.

BTW, fear of a real danger is not paranoia. OTOH, ignoring real danger is naivity.

17 posted on 01/29/2004 1:16:31 PM PST by freeeee ("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The Patriot Act is a bag of Balloon Stuffing.

If this Administration were so dedicated in securing America, the US Borders would be so tight a starving mouse would have a hard time getting in. Instead, we've 8-12 million "undocumented" felons within our borders and no guts to expell them nor to enforce current laws.

Attorney General John Ashcroft has the authority to require immigration code enforcement - why doesn't he use the tools he already has?
18 posted on 01/29/2004 1:39:29 PM PST by azhenfud ("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: azhenfud
why doesn't he use the tools he already has?

Ashcroft & Co. remind me of a man-child who insists on buying all sorts of shiny new tools while his house falls apart from lack of maintenance and his credit card debt rises to the statosphere.

19 posted on 01/29/2004 1:45:28 PM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Maybe you could describe how the PA could ever expire?

I've been through this argument before, so let me just give the Readers' Digest version: the war against terror is won. Measures within the PA deemed appropriate for continued law enforcement and national security are kept, others are allowed to expire.

If you're really interested in an opinion and argument that is an alternative to the fear-mongering of the PA opponents, I invite you to find other threads about the subject and note the curious lack of evidence that the PA has been or is being used in an unconstitutional manner.

20 posted on 01/29/2004 1:46:11 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: azhenfud
If the bill reaches President Bush's desk in its current form, Ashcroft said, "the president's senior advisers will recommend that it be vetoed."

It's becoming quite evident that:

A)the President's 'advisors' could give a dern less about the Constitution or the citizens of the respective states if it gets in the way of their power trip and
B)they're no more conservative than the man they're 'advising'

21 posted on 01/29/2004 1:48:42 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Yep, so very similar to the NFA-34 act, the belief that we need a "license" in order to drive, the Fed. income tax, the death tax........

Incremental erosion of liberty, how to destroy a republic!
22 posted on 01/29/2004 1:51:08 PM PST by Richard-SIA (Nuke the U.N!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
The actual application of the act is irrelevant -- just because someone has a loaded weapon pointed at your head "but hasn't fired YET" is no reason to feel at ease.

The PA, pure and simple, is a whittling away of constitutional protections...the FBI being allowed to have a "free look" into your home without your knowledge and without a warrant is just one example.

The PA is a governmental power grab. As another poster mentioned, our borders are like Swiss cheese yet the Depts of Homeland Security and Justice feel no need to address that. That in itself gives the lie to the motivation behind the PA.
23 posted on 01/29/2004 1:55:04 PM PST by LN2Campy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
the war against terror is won

An essential condition. Name the theoretical conditions for a declared victory in the WoT.

I submit that there are none. The WoT is the typical 'perpetual war' described in '1984': Low intensity conflict at home, shifting opponents, infiltrators and sabateurs under every stone. It's got it all.

Measures within the PA deemed appropriate for continued law enforcement and national security are kept

The PA is going to expire, but they're going to keep parts???

You have an odd notion of 'expire'.

24 posted on 01/29/2004 1:55:30 PM PST by freeeee ("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: billbears
I'm weighing closely which would be better; 1) an unimpeded administration whose every action is to enlarge government beyond its necessary measure and to destroy an entire segment of society, or 2) a political quagmire where the status is quo, where politicians can do nothing but quibble, and where absolutely nothing of significance gets done.
25 posted on 01/29/2004 1:57:10 PM PST by azhenfud ("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Since I haven't the time or inclination to currently address the concerns raised, I refer the right honorable FREEPer to the aforementioned threads. :)
26 posted on 01/29/2004 2:02:02 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: LN2Campy
All of this has been previously addressed. See my post #26.
27 posted on 01/29/2004 2:02:52 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Do you have a link?
28 posted on 01/29/2004 2:04:29 PM PST by freeeee ("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: george wythe
According to Ashcroft, you were right the first time
29 posted on 01/29/2004 2:33:16 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (It is always tempting to impute unlikely virtues to the cute)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: george wythe
If the Patriot Act was meant to "prevent catastrophic terrorist attacks," then why is the Patriot Act used to investigate and prosecute strip joint owners?

For the same reason why RICO meant to fight organised crime is being used agaist pro-life activists.

"People who are willing to give up freedom for the sake of short term security, deserve neither freedom nor security." -Benjamin Franklin

30 posted on 01/29/2004 5:33:00 PM PST by A. Pole (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain , the hand of free market must be invisible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Richard-SIA
It is far more devastating to the foundations of America than the murder of a few thousand citizens and the destruction of a few buildings.

Few more buildings, few thousand more deaths and freedom is gone.

31 posted on 01/29/2004 5:35:35 PM PST by A. Pole (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain , the hand of free market must be invisible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: george wythe
Touching a woman's breast might be immoral, even sinful, but it's not a terrorist activity

So protesting abortion does not equal mafia activity (RICO).

32 posted on 01/29/2004 5:37:58 PM PST by A. Pole (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain , the hand of free market must be invisible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
>Few more buildings, few thousand more deaths and freedom is gone.

True freedom went down for the count when property and income taxes became accepted facts of life. It's been downhill ever since. But your point is valid. That would be the final nails in the coffin.

33 posted on 01/29/2004 5:59:17 PM PST by u-89 (war is peace, slavery is freedom, shut up and salute)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
....at which point the terrorist will have won!
34 posted on 01/29/2004 6:53:00 PM PST by Richard-SIA (Nuke the U.N!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson