Posted on 06/14/2004 1:02:19 PM PDT by ellery
Edited on 06/29/2004 7:10:43 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
While activists and politicians work to repeal or change parts of the Patriot Act that they say violate constitutional rights, Patriot Act II legislation -- which caused a stir when it came to light last year -- is rearing its head again in a new bill making its way through Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at wired.com ...
Your abortion analogy only holds if the Patriot sneak-'n'-peek are fundamentally different in character than those already in existence. I do not see that other than your assertion.
The Patriot Act allows law enforcement to issue their own subpeona, without probable cause or specificity about the items they're searching for. So, law enforcement can go on a fishing expedition into anyone's life, without the probable cause and court oversight, checks and balances that underpin our justice system.
Here's where hyperbole comes into play. You make these assertions which, on their face, are ridiculous. If "law enforcement can go on a fishing expedition into anyone's life, without the probable cause and court oversight" then why bother having warrants at all anywhere? Obviously, if these are provisions of Patriot, they have to be spelled out very specifically, which would alter your characterization of them.
Part of the Patriot Act is a whole other money laundering bill- with many provisions NOT about terrorism- that was publically included by congress into the Patriot Act.
DOJ used those laws against money laundering exactly as congress intended.
They never said they wouldn't.
Some "tools" (like administrative subpoenas) were only for certain specific crimes, so of course DOJ couldn't use them for crimes that they were not authorized for!
That's obvious. That's why those "tools" had to be authorized in the Patriot Act to be used for terrorism investigations.
These are serious laws and people are rightfully concerned. It seems to me we're getting a pretty good public debate on these follow-on anti-terrorism proposals.
I hope that will improve the proposals, and we won't have the hyperbole and just plain lying about them like we had after the Patriot Act passed.
Such legistaltion will not prevent terrorism, but it will certainly help to eradicate the freedom.
We cannot tolerate any type of troublemakers.
Why to make any "tweaks" in patriotic laws? Much better is to jail all critics and throw the key away.
I see. So what was wrong with Stalin or Saddam Hussein?
Why not to criminalize the criticism of patriotic laws? Only traitors can be so anti-patriotic!
Thank you for proving my basic point.
You either are joking, or you are a Fascist.
Say what you will, if you say it often enough, you will believe it yourself. As for me and mine, we have better things to do.
If someone thinks like a Fascist, talks like a Fascist, acts like a Fascist ...
When you start to promote historical materialism, dialectic and dictatorship of proletariat then I will name you a Commie.
Not one.
And to think, we're actually paying money for this.
Might there be questions beyond the constitutionality of these laws? These laws, the original Patriot Act, and Patriot II laws do extend into the lives of natural born US citizens. I've yet to meet a single person that thinks these laws are not in response to the attacks of 9-11. I've yet to meet a single person that thinks anyone other then Islamic terrorists from Muslim nations perpetuated the attacks. There was not a single Christian, Buddhist, or Hindu in the batch. There was not a single European, Asian, or Hispanic present in the group. Most of all, there was not a single American citizen among the participants. Not a single Anglo-American, French-American, Irish-American, German-American, Italian-American, African-American, Mexican-American, Japanese-American, American Indian, nor any other native born American was involved in these murderous attacks.
Frankly, I have nothing to hide, and would cheerfully divulge any information about myself the government might hold suspect. But, this isn't about me. It's about us, the citizens of the United States of America.
Would anyone like to step-up and tell me why I should hold the government view that YOU personally pose an equal threat to the country as those known to have perpetuated the attacks? Do you harbor desires to murder my fellow citizens, destroy my country, inflict great harm upon innocent lives? Do you intend to frustrate government efforts to find and capture foreign national terrorists within our borders? When a government, any government begins to view its own citizenship with an eye of suspicion, what does it say of the government? I wish our forefathers were present to answer that last question?
Personally, I will do everything possible, and have done all possible to assist my country in efforts to protect our great nation. But, if ever I feel the government is looking at me with a contemptuous eye, I will view the government with an equal contempt.
Last I heard it was closer to three hundred.
I find it amusing that it was supposed to have sunset provisions, but now the feds decide they want to keep it around a while longer. I think the sunset provision was just tossed in there to appease the Conservatives, and all along they wanted to make it permanent, and knew once it was in place it'd be easier to do so, rather than up front.
Anyways, anybody else find it interesting that much of the PATRIOT Act and the DHS were thought up years ago (a very large part of it under the Clintons, in fact). That was the reason why it popped up so fast and was passed so rapidly, after 9/11. It was sitting on a shelf, waiting for the right moment.
Your example is self-defeating -- murder is not a federal issue, and therefore such a law at the federal level would clearly be a usurpation.
Yep. Nice to know who the feds consider "terrorists".
"Defenders of US constitution against the federal government or UN."
Yes, it sure was a very timely piece of legislation to have available for the fedgov to implement in the event of something like 911. I guess it's just one of those unexplained coincidences that we witness from time to time, sorta like the terrorism bill that was going nowhere in Congress until we had the OKC bombing....amazing timing.
Replace "Federal" with "State". Rinse. Repeat.
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.