[w4rma]

Ex-Vice President Gore Accuses Bush of Using War on Terror As Pretext to Consolidate Power

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON Nov. 9 — Former Vice President Al Gore accused President Bush on Sunday of failing to make the country safer after the Sept. 11 attacks and using the war against terrorism as a pretext to consolidate power.

"They have taken us much farther down the road toward an intrusive, 'big brother'-style government toward the dangers prophesied by George Orwell in his book '1984' than anyone ever thought would be possible in the United States of America," Gore charged.

Gore, who lost the disputed 2000 presidential election to Bush, said terrorism-fighting tools granted after Sept. 11 amount to a partisan power grab that have led to the erosion of the civil liberties of all Americans.

He was especially critical of the Patriot Act, which expanded government's surveillance and detention power following the terrorist attacks.

Gore chided the administration for what he said was its "implicit assumption" that Americans must give up traditional freedoms in order to be safe from terrorists.

"In my opinion, it makes no more sense to launch an assault on our civil liberties as the best way to get at terrorists than it did to launch an invasion of Iraq as the best way to get at Osama bin Laden," Gore said.

His speech before a crowd of about 3,000 people was sponsored by the liberal activist group Moveon.org, which earlier this year held an online presidential primary in which Howard Dean finished first.

The second sponsor, the American Constitution Society, is a national organization of law students, professors, lawyers and others that says it seek to counter what it characterizes as the dominant, narrow conservative vision of American law today.
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20031109_969.html Streaming video of the speech. (http://play.rbn.com/?url=moveon/moveon/demand/algore110903.rm&proto=rtsp) (RealPlayer (http://www.real.com/)) Text of the speech as prepared. (http://www.moveon.org/gore/speech2.html)http://www.moveon.org/gore/webcast.html

[Don Galt]

First intelligent thing he's said in awhile.

Just wait, someone will come up with a crack about how he claimed to invent the internet (which he didn't) to try and undermine his credibility.

But the PATRIOT act is real. It really was passed, and anyone who has any respect for the constitution should be calling for Bush's impeachment.

[glocksman]

Given the Clinton administration's support for the Clipper chip and the predecessors to the USA PATRIOT act, my reaction is Pot, Kettle, Black.

In other words, Gore is correct, but he's hypocritical as Hell.

[Tamara]

"...there are a lot of provisions of the PATRIOT Act that the Clinton administration had asked for." -William Wechsler, head of a Clinton White House working group on terrorist financing. Said without the slightest trace of irony. If you think the Demicans or the Republicrats are on the side of freedom, I've got this bridge you may be interested in... :rolleyes:

[Standing Wolf]

"They have taken us much farther down the road toward an intrusive, 'big brother'-style government toward the dangers prophesied by George Orwell in his book '1984' than anyone ever thought would be possible in the United States of America," Gore charged.

Strange comment from the Liar Gore of 2000 who wanted to disarm every last law-abiding American citizen.

[Justin]

Wow. Al Gore accuses Shrub of instituting Orwellian Big Brother policies?

Hello, Kettle. Meet Pot.

[Zundfolge]

The Patriot Act is approx. 65500 words long ... and it passed only about a month and a half after 9/11.

Its clear this thing was written long before 9/11/01 and someone sat on it ... I figure it was written during the Clinton administration and Bush didn't even read it before he pushed for its passage (neither did anyone in Congress).

Not that it lets Bush off the hook, but to say that he desired everything that's in it is a stretch (so I guess I'm accusing him of incompetence ... not malice :neener: ).

BTW, I encourage everyone to download a copy and read it ... I don't speak lawyer, but even the parts I can understand scare the poo out of me!

http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

or in handy dandy PDF format http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.pdf

[twoblink]

<armchair QB>

I'm waiting for Clinton to accuse Bush of womanizing.. You just wait..

</armchair QB>

[Don Galt]

Tamara sets me straight-- the PATRIOT act is just a big mis-mash of policies the republicans and democrats both had been trying to get enacted during the 90s. Both wings of our one party system deserive bla.. er credit.

[w4rma]

… Viet Dinh (http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm), the former assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Policy at the Justice Department. He helped draft the Patriot Act …
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/july-dec03/patriot_8-19.html

…
In May 2001, with the appointment of Assistant Attorney General Viet D. Dinh (http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/vietdinh.htm), Attorney General John Ashcroft restored the name of the office as the Office of Legal Policy and confirmed its principal policy role within the Department.
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/history.htm

A Chilly Response to 'Patriot II'
Feb. 12, 2003

Unlike its hastily passed predecessor, the Justice Department's wide-ranging follow-up to the Patriot Act of 2001 is already facing intense scrutiny, just days after a civil rights group posted a leaked version of the legislation on its website.

The legislation, nicknamed Patriot II, would broadly expand the government's surveillance and detention powers. Among other measures, it calls for the creation of a terrorist DNA database and allows the attorney general to revoke citizenship of those who provide “material support” to terrorist groups.

Privacy advocates said the bill “gutted the Fourth Amendment,” while prominent Democratic senators, including Patrick Leahy, ranking Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, immediately chastised the administration for its secrecy.
…
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57636,00.html

Patriot Act II Resurrected?
Aug. 21, 2003

Congress may consider a bill that not only expands the government's wiretapping and investigative powers but also would link low-level drug dealing to terrorism and ban a traditional form of Middle Eastern banking.

The draft legislation -- titled the Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations Act of 2003, or Victory Act -- includes significant portions of the so-called Patriot Act II, which faced broad opposition from conservatives and liberals alike and embarrassed the Justice Department when it was leaked to the press in February.

The Victory Act also seems to be an attempt to merge the war on terrorism and the war on drugs into a single campaign. It includes a raft of provisions increasing the government's ability to investigate, wiretap, prosecute and incarcerate money launderers, fugitives, "narco-terrorists" and nonviolent drug dealers. The bill also outlaws hawalas, the informal and documentless money transferring systems widely used in the Middle East, India and parts of Asia.

A June 27 draft of the bill, authored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (http://www.senate.gov/~hatch/) (R-Utah) and co-sponsored by four fellow Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, has been circulating in Washington, D.C.
…
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60129,00.html

… link to a draft of the Victory Act (http://www.libertythink.com/VICTORYAct.pdf) (89 pages, pdf) …
http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/003693.html

[stevelyn]

Glocksman and Justin beat me to it. But if I may to quote an Archie Bunkerism: "If it ain't the black calling the kettle pot." Or words to that effect. :rolleyes:

[Mark Tyson]

Call me a cynic, but I'm not confident that Gore would have turned this country into a civil libertarian paradise.

[Kharn]

Gore's just annoyed that we only have "big brother" and not "big brother, big sister, nosey old lady next door and crusty old guy down the street"

Kharn

[Malone LaVeigh]

Gore is correct, but he's hypocritical as Hell.This seems to be my day to just quote others and say "amen."

In the little I read here of Gore's statement, he seems to be jealous over the amount that Bush's been able to accomplish.

[Obiwan]

Yeah...I love the Dems new "spin" on the Patriot Act....

Well yeah... I voted for it...but I hadn't actually read it you know....

[Zundfolge]

Go read Gore's book Earth In The Balance

its clear he hates liberty as much as Mao, Castro and Hillary

I still contend that if Gore where in the whitehouse on 9/11/01 he would have declared Martial Law ... suspended the constitution ... declared himself El Presidente Para la Vida and many of us in this forum would have died in the subsequent uprising (please note the absnence of winking or grinning smilies).

[Bill Hook]

Funnny how a man who wanted to register gunowners would be accusing anyone of "Big Brother"-like policies. :rolleyes:

[Don Galt]

He may not be much better, but he's right.

Since Bush opposes liberty, why does he continue to get your support?

Whenever this question is brought up the responses is "Look at the democrats!"

[ny32182]

Scary stuff.

Gore chided the administration for what he said was its "implicit assumption" that Americans must give up traditional freedoms in order to be safe from terrorists.

He doesn't like freedom any more than the next politician, obviously. I wonder if he would like the above statement reworded to apply to gun control:

Gore chided the administration for what he said was its "implicit assumption" that Americans must give up traditional freedoms in order to be safe from criminals.

He doesn't have a problem giving up Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms for percieved safety with respect to gun crime. But if Bush does the same with respect to terrorism, its an impeachable offence, right?

:rolleyes:

[MarkDido]

Al Gore would never dream of giving away our liberties...

But he will sell them!

[fallingblock]

FAR, far worse than "Dubya":scrutiny:

That he remains a hypocritical know-nothing is no suprize.:D

[Tamara]

Gore chided the administration for what he said was its "implicit assumption" that Americans must give up traditional freedoms in order to be safe from terrorists.

Odd, he kept his mouth shut when his last boss said that we can't be so fixated on the rights of ordinary Americans. :confused:

[Waitone]

You simply don't put together complicated legislation in a hurry. AG's and presidents stretching back to Carter have pushed PA style provisions. The ACT was boxed and ready to go when 911 occurred. Congress opened the box dusted it off, inserted the proper flag-waving title and voila. . . the Patriots Act.

Most outrageous to me is the fact that congress passed it without reading it. Congress had no clue what it contained.

Maybe that's why congress inserted a sunset provision.

Sunset Laws: the future of a democratically electied republican form of gov't.

[Obiwan]

"Congress had no clue what it contained."

While I firmly believe that few, if any , members of congress read it.

That statement is nothing more than a copout.

They don't read any of the bills in their entirety...some staffer reads them and then presents the readers digest version.

All this concern is unwarranted (IMHO)

Although a little paranoia is healthy...too much and you start to marginalize yourself AND your views...it is a fine line.

So far, all the SPECIFIC gripes that I have heard concern the treatment of those in this country illegally or on some type of Visa.

I am afraid that I have a hard time getting worked up over guests , both invited an uninvited, that suddenly have to suffer some scrutiny.

I think citizens get plenty of scrutiny, law or no law...why should people that want to visit (or sneak into) this country be treated any better?

The law targets bad guys.....if it is found that good guys are suffering it can be amended/changed.

[cuchulainn]

I don't know what I like less: Al Gore or the PATRIOT Act.

[Don Galt]

Actually, he gets more respect from me. He's standing up and calling the president on his actions.

The PATRIOT act wasn't passed by Clinton. So, if Clinton gets the plame for the AWB, why doesn't Bush get it for the PATRIOT act?

OR for nationalizing the airline security with the TSA?

Or for letting his administration block guns in cockpits for these ex-military pilots we have?! (There, this is gun related!)

I find it interesting that this thread is about Gore-- when all Gore did was SAY something.

The crime here was committed by the president. (and congress) How many times does he have to do it before he looses the popular support around here?

[greyhound]

While I certainly don't like the Patriot Act, and am dismayed to hear that some Congressmen didn't even READ the durn thing, remember what the national mood was in the fall of 2001 - we thought suicide bombers were poised to assault shopping malls any day (and the anthrax scare didn't help).

Two years later (and no major attacks) its easy to snipe at those who voted for the act. But thats applying 2003 relevance to 2001 reality.

It was wrong then and its wrong now, and thank goodness there is a sunset provision.

But the opinions of this small community of gun owners/libertarians/small government folk (myself included) were by no means the opinions of the majority of people in fall 2001, when simply getting on a plane was considered an act of courage. And we know how likely career politicians are to go against overwhelming public opinion (just look at how fast that
"No Call" legislation was on an [eager to sign] Pres. Bush's desk).

Doesn't make the Patriot Act 1 or 2 em right (grumble, grumble).....

[Don Galt]

It is exactly those actions in such a time of crisis that tells you the nature of your government. A trustworth government would not abuse us in the time of a crisis-- they would protect us. Our government failed this test.

[Bill Hook]

I find it interesting that this thread is about Gore-- when all Gore did was SAY something.

Problem is is that it's hypocrisy; his boss and Janet reno were all for many of the invasive provisions that got recycled into the "Patriot" Act. Where was he back then?