Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Need help with a defense of the Patriot Act

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Mulliga, Oct 11, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mulliga

    Mulliga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,251
    Location:
    Gainesville, Florida
    Need some help for a debate - does anyone here have any links or pages with defenses of the USA PATRIOT Act? I've been assigned to argue in support of the Patriot Act.

    (NOTE: I posted this in APS but I figure more people read L&P here on THR.)

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. Derek Zeanah

    Derek Zeanah System Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    8,256
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    <shivers> No help here.

    I'd become a statist, assume the feds can do no wrong in the quest to Rid The World Of Terror and Make The World Safe For Our Children. "If you've got nothing to hide..." and all that.

    Breaking a "law" is evil, and exposing that evil is righteous. Make references to tin-foil hats and accuse your opponents of revisionist history if they try to impeach based on prior bad acts.

    <shivers>
     
  3. Stickjockey

    Stickjockey Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Happy Valley, Oregon
    Like APS, good luck finding much support for USAPATRIOT here. Not really well-liked. Sorry.
     
  4. R.H. Lee

    R.H. Lee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,377
    Location:
    CA
    If you do happen to come up with a credible defense, please let us know.
     
  5. CentralTexas

    CentralTexas Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,235
    Location:
    Austin Texas
    How about reading

    "1984" to the class?
    CT
     
  6. fourays2

    fourays2 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    378
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    there is no defense
     
  7. Nehemiah Scudder

    Nehemiah Scudder Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    391
    Just say that it's to get rid of the illegal aliens.
     
  8. Cellar Dweller

    Cellar Dweller Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Messages:
    327
    Location:
    Apparently not far enough outside Emperor Daley's
    1. The Shill method: anyone against the PATRIOT Act must have something to hide or at least be anti-American, anti-apple pie, anti-NASCAR, anti-Mom, etc.

    2. The Statist method: the ends justify the means...without the PATRIOT Act planes would be crashing into cities daily, all food and water would be poisoned, dirty bombs, plagues, Tower of Babel, locusts, etc.

    3. The Legislative/Mission Creep method: everything is already a law already on the books somewhere ; the PATRIOT Act ties them together on a Federal level so criminals can be charged with something related to terrorism/anti-USA no matter how tenuous...and allows new approaches to old problems (application of RICO, suspending Bill of Rights for certain "select" cases/individuals).

    4. The Esteemed Member of Congress method: "I haven't read the text, but it was important to give law enforcement the tools they need to fight terrorism."
     
  9. MasterPiece Arms.com

    MasterPiece Arms.com member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    s9.invisionfree.com/MasterPiece_Arms_MAC
    Cellar Dweller's ideas allow you to complete the assignment without becoming a tool of evil. Self respect is UNDERrated.

    The "patriot" act is based on so many evil principles and lies that it would not be hard AT ALL to "argue in favor" of it in some debate class, and still be able to TRUTHFULLY claim that you're representing the "pro patriot act" side. Hey, it's not you're fault that the american public is so stupid that it bought the world's WEAKEST (and contradictory) arguments sold to it by a den of thieves.

    Most days, I honestly just cannot believe that Bush and his water carriers (who freaking knew better when Klinton proposed the same sh#t after OKC, but have turned their brains off in the name of loyalty to an evil president, and an even MORE evil control system) actually say the things they do to justify that ungodly abomination.

    My senator (Orrin-water carrier-principleLESS-closet leftist-closet statist-Hatch) sends me letters telling me how concerned he is about protecting liberties :barf: . He crossed the line years ago from stupid naivete to knowing conspirator. I was at a republican BBQ a month or so ago, and gagged at all the sheep who were wearing his button :cuss: , but I digress.
     
  10. Mulliga

    Mulliga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,251
    Location:
    Gainesville, Florida
    I'm aware most everyone here either abhors it or at the very least has serious issues with it. I count myself in that camp, too.

    However, if you really felt that strongly about it, you'd basically have to call for an impeachment of President Bush as well as the entire federal government.

    There must be some legitimate reasons why people support it, otherwise there wouldn't be much of an argument.
     
  11. Dean C

    Dean C Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Messages:
    151
    Location:
    20 mi. NE of Seattle
    Mulliga,

    Is your instructor punishing you?

    Seriously, as you try to come up with a good defense, you will soon find yourself using double talk, contradictions and misleading statements. If your successful, your audience will spot the flaws and you might even win a few over to our side. In any event you'll get a decent grade for trying.

    dean
     
  12. rick_reno

    rick_reno member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,027
    Do a search on Senate and House speeches, also dig up what Ashcroft might have said. Very little of it is true - but it should provide you the material you're looking for.
     
  13. Augustwest

    Augustwest Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Southern New England
    I'd be the first one on that bandwagon, 'cept that just as I didn't think lying in court about gropin' interns was a high crime or misdemeanor, I don't think GW's lying in his oath to preserve and protect the Constitution meets that test either.

    Doesn't mean they aren't all a buncha vile statist piggies tho...

    There is no defensible argument in support of the Act, IMO. So if I had to defend it, I'd use the same tired, deceitful arguments the Bush admin has about keeping us all "safe."
     
  14. MasterPiece Arms.com

    MasterPiece Arms.com member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    s9.invisionfree.com/MasterPiece_Arms_MAC
    Talk about throwing red meat in my cage. Are we talking about the SAME federal government that has systematically perverted every inch of the constitution, ESPECIALLY the interstate commerce clause, so as to gain every illegal power in the book?

    Could you please tell me what arm, tentacle, shred, or dropping of that federal tyranny is constitutional? Of COURSE the entire federal government should be impeached (I prefer the phrase shut down)! Not to MENTION the script reader in chief, who, is clearly the third most evil and destructive president (only behind F.D.R. and L.B.J.). My first act as president after closing 99% of fedgov, would be to order remaining employees (who would no longer be employed for life with annual cost of living raises) to wipe all databases and records of "social security" numbers. The assets of the so called "federal reserve" would be seized, and U.S. marines would be escorting every creature at the UN building out of the country. Iraqi oil would pay back every dime we've blown over there, then we'd leave. Control of education would become local again.

    Granted, I'm so hard core that I have the courage to admit that the ANTI federalists were clearly correct and the federalist founders were awesome but incredibly naive (if we're too scared to use hindsight and tell the truth then what good are we).

    :what: :what: :what: Where, (besides government school, I know from experience) did you learn to give the benefit of the doubt to the mob, especially in this case, a public that has been heavily dumbed down and manipulated since F.D.R.? After almost a century of specialized conditioning, the american public supports things every day (in the name of patriotism) that have no legitimacy whatsoever.
     
  15. RealGun

    RealGun Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,257
    Location:
    Upstate SC
  16. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    I'm not sure "more government" counts as a legitimate reason, but...
     
  17. bg

    bg Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    When you find out, let me know..
    However if you should ever decide to run for office, at least the big one,
    you'll see this tactic has gotten more than one politico from out behind
    the eight ball on different campaign runs. ;)
     
  18. Crom

    Crom Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2003
    Messages:
    81
    Location:
    Western Missouri
    Can't defend the indefensible.
     
  19. ZenMasterJG

    ZenMasterJG Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    237
    Location:
    Hiding between server racks, quietly sobbing.
    I wouldn't do it. I've never outright refused to do a debate, but i've been told to write papers arguing one side of somthing and found it just so abhorrent and wrong that i just wrote the other side. (I've also played up arguments to the point of aburdity, to show how dumb they really were, effectivly arguing the opposite of what it seemed like i was writing. Thats a SURE way to really P.O a professor though ;) )
     
  20. pax

    pax Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,762
    Location:
    Washington state
    I've done that, and would do that in this case.

    It's a fine art, though, and you can take it as a given that no matter how overstated, overblown, obviously sarcastic, and downright stupid your argument is, there will be at least one fool in the room who will buy it hook, line, and sinker ... and will come up to you afterwards, enthusiastic and grateful, to thank you for your insights!

    (That's almost worse than just holding your nose and playing it straight.)

    pax
     
  21. Mulliga

    Mulliga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,251
    Location:
    Gainesville, Florida
    Found some stuff, mostly the Pres and Gonzalez/Ashcroft talking it up. I'm going to play it straight - since I want to be a lawyer, I'd better learn how to "defend the indefensible." ;)
     
  22. ZenMasterJG

    ZenMasterJG Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    237
    Location:
    Hiding between server racks, quietly sobbing.
    Oh no! We have a lawer in our midst! RUN!

    :D
     
  23. pax

    pax Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,762
    Location:
    Washington state
    Wow.

    I'm glad you added a wink-smiley to that.

    But see my sig.

    pax

    Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you. -- Nietzsche
     
  24. Derby FALs

    Derby FALs Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
    Messages:
    978
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
  25. Crom

    Crom Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2003
    Messages:
    81
    Location:
    Western Missouri
    Defending the indefensible - Lesson 1: You expand the subject and make it really complicated. Then you argue pedantically about the expansions, betting that your audience will soon get bored and lose interest. ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page