Senators Putting Nation in Harms Way

[Tomcat1066]

If Padilla isn't being held under the Patriot Act, then what law is being used to keep him locked up without legal council? If it's not the Patriot Act, then I REALLY want to know so I can fight that garbage too.

Tom

 

[Warbow]

If Padilla isn't being held under the Patriot Act, then what law is being used to keep him locked up without legal council? If it's not the Patriot Act, then I REALLY want to know so I can fight that garbage too.

He's being held as an enemy combatant under authority granted to President Bush in the Military Joint Force Resolution passed by Congress shortly after 9/11.

 

[CAnnoneer]

Are you a dark-skinned Middle Eastern with jihadi tendancies that studied under a Mr. bin Laden? if you answer in the affirmative I can almost guarantee that a 'sneak and peak' is warranted... otherwise I suggest you ask your doctor for paranoid pills.

That basic argument has been around forever: "If you are okay, you have nothing to hide and thus should have no problem with liberty violations against others."

You and everyone who argues stuff like that should really read "The GULag Archipelago" by Solzhenitsin. For you, it will be an eye-opening experience.

And, by the way,

"Tyi arrestovan, gad!"

 

[Harve Curry]

To those that believe that the so called Patriot Act is justified or acceptable, I of

...I offer these qoutes:

I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ~James Madison, speech, Virginia Convention, 1788

Patriotism is easy to understand in America - it means looking out for yourself by looking out for your country. ~Calvin Coolidge

Here in America we are descended in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine.
~Dwight D. Eisenhower, address, Columbia University, 31 May 1954

A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. ~Dwight D. Eisenhower, first inaugural address, 20 January 1953

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. ~Thomas Jefferson

In matters of principle, stand like a rock; in matters of taste, swim with the current. ~Thomas Jefferson

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. ~Abraham Lincoln

It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong. ~Voltaire

Every actual state is corrupt. Good men must not obey laws too well. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

We cannot, by total reliance on law, escape the duty to judge right and wrong.... There are good laws and there are occasionally bad laws, and it conforms to the highest traditions of a free society to offer resistance to bad laws, and to disobey them. ~Alexander Bickel

Liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have. ~Harry Emerson Fosdick

Where liberty dwells, there is my country. ~Benjamin Franklin

Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.
~Abraham Lincoln

and then this sarcasm :
Benjamin Franklin: "I believe that if we are to form a new country, we cannot be a country that appears war-hungry and violent to the rest of the world. However, we also cannot be a country that appears weak and unwilling to fight, to the rest of the world. So, what if we form a country that appears to want both."
Thomas Jefferson: "Yes, yes of course, we go to war and protest going to war at the same time...."
Benjamin Franklin: "And that means that as a nation, we could go to war with whomever we wished, but at the same time act like we didn't want to. If we allow the people to protest what the government does, then the country will be forever blameless."
John Adams: "It's like having your cake and eating it too."
Anonymous Hick Redneck Founding Father: "Think of it: an entire nation founded on saying one thing and doing another."
John Hancock: "And we will call that country the United States of America."
~"I'm a Little Bit Country," original airdate 2 April 2003, written by Trey Parker

From reading about our Founding Fathers they would not approve of what we have become, and I don't think they would have put up with what we refer to as freedom today.

 

[Camp David]

...I offer these qoutes...

Harve=> How about this one:

"Die infidel"
Unamed jihadi terrorist in Iraq just before slicing the head off civilan held hostage.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I suggest it would be difficult to impossible to find one (1) person in America (those outside Guantanamo) adversely impacted by the Patriot Act! But go ahead and keep the embers of that Democrat Propaganda fanned!

How about that lawyer in Washington (or was it Oregon) who was incarcerated for several months without being charged, and ultimately released because he hadn't done anything?

Oh, yeah ... he's a Muslim, so he MUST have done something bad, or be planning to.

 

[Harve Curry]

Camp David,
You still don't get it.
My Grandparents on Mom's side were Italian. Grandpa fought in WWI, the Lightning Division in France, wounded several times in the Argonne Offensive. All this he did after being turned down at Ellis Island and sent back to Italy because he was to young.
His cousins in El Cajon California had a grape vineyard that was confiscated for a runway in WWII, they were not compensated. The runway is now an airport there.
Anyone of them would rise from their graves to fight for this country even though their livelyhood and rights were trampled on.

A rancher nearby here had part of their place taken for the H bomb tests during WWII, they never got all of it back either.

All of this goverment abuse of it's citizens didn't have any effect on war atrocities, heads being chopped off then, or negligence when warnings of attack went ignored.

Try walking around repeating to yourself:
Constitution Bill of Rights, Constitution Bill of Rights, Constitution Bill of Rights, Constitution Bill of Rights, they are the 1st Law of the land.(repeat.)

 

[72Rover]

Bill of Rights

Camp David,

Try walking around repeating to yourself:
Constitution Bill of Rights, Constitution Bill of Rights, Constitution Bill of Rights, Constitution Bill of Rights, they are the 1st Law of the land.(repeat.)

Indeed. And lets not forget that today, December 15, is Bill of Rights Day. I find it ironic that the House voted only yesterday to overide the Bill of Rights by passing the current version of the Patriot Act. Again, more irony even in the name of this ill-conceived and -executed piece of legislation. Any true patriot should be opposed to it.

A few more quotes:

H. L. Mencken, the humorist, social critic and long-time editor of the Baltimore Sun, best summed it up over a half-century ago: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence, clamorous to be led to safety - by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." Unfortunately, some of these hobgoblins have now become real.

In a classic example of a self-fulfilling prophecy, the world is now an infinitely more dangerous place because of this administration's manifest bunglings and wrong-headed policies. Groucho Marx said that, "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." I don't know of a better, more concise way to describe Bush's policies both domestically and in the Middle-East.

Happy Bill of Rights day, y'all....

 

[benEzra]

Harve=> How about this one:

"Die infidel"
Unamed jihadi terrorist in Iraq just before slicing the head off civilan held hostage.

Camp David, I've got one for you:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The supreme law of the United States says that if you want to browse through my financial papers, you have to have probable cause, and a warrant. Requiring the FBI to obey the supreme law of the land does not mean they can't fight terrorism; it means they have to fight terrorism in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.

Granting the government the unlimited power to browse through the library books you and I have read, in perpetuity, in order to enforce copyright violations, emissions violations, gun control laws, drug laws, etc. has absolutely nothing to do with fighting terrorism. If the Patriot Act were about terrorism, it would have a clause saying evidence gathered under the "emergency anti-terrorism powers" in the Act may not be used to prosecute crimes not related to terrorism. Guess what, there is no such provision, and the FBI is in fact touting the prosecution of mundane crimes unrelated whatsoever to terrorism as a reason to make those 4th-Amendment-violating powers permanent.

Do you honestly think that we can't deal with foreign terrorists and obey the Constitution at the same time? It's not an either-or question; let's do both, shall we?

 

[Harve Curry]

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[Camp David]

It's not an either-or question; let's do both, shall we?

Apparently it is an either-or question, as the 3,000+ fatalities of 09/11/01 know well... you pontificate about perceived rights denied while they lie in their graves...wonder how much accomdation they would have been willing to conceed? A lot... for their lives. But go ahead and pontificate....

 

[Biker]

Apparently it is an either-or question, as the 3,000+ fatalities of 09/11/01 know well... you pontificate about perceived rights denied while they lie in their graves...wonder how much accomdation they would have been willing to conceed? A lot... for their lives. But go ahead and pontificate....

Well, since they're not around to answer that question, I'm sure that they would truly appreciate you speaking for them. The Govt could strip us of most of our rights and it wouldn't make us one bit safer from terrorist attacks.
Less so, most likely.
For example, the T seems to be doing just fine in Chechnya(sp).
Biker

 

[Tomcat1066]

Apparently it is an either-or question, as the 3,000+ fatalities of 09/11/01 know well... you pontificate about perceived rights denied while they lie in their graves...wonder how much accomdation they would have been willing to conceed? A lot... for their lives. But go ahead and pontificate....

What's so apparent about it being either/or? Most of us see how they can do it within the confines of the Constitution. It's only a small handful like yourself that either can't or don't see how.

Also, if you can speak with the dead, please let me know. I need some messages passed along

Seriously though, you seem to speak with authority on what the deceased would think or feel. Perhaps those 3,000+ victims of 9-11 would prefer to see their nation take on the evils of the world without compromising the thing that made this nation great. Freedom.

Tom

 

[benEzra]

Apparently it is an either-or question, as the 3,000+ fatalities of 09/11/01 know well... you pontificate about perceived rights denied while they lie in their graves...wonder how much accomdation they would have been willing to conceed? A lot... for their lives. But go ahead and pontificate....

And just what library books did the 9/11 conspirators read that would have told the FBI what they were up to, hmmm?

Several of the 9/11 hijackers had been previously identified WITHOUT THE PATRIOT ACT, but the threat was simply not taken seriously, and the agencies were all fighting for their "own" turf.

Every minute the FBI spends looking through the library books you and I have read in the last five years is one less minute the FBI could be devoting toward actually catching terrorists.

As I said, if the Patriot Act were primarily about terrorism, its sponsors would not object to prohibiting its use in NON-terrorism-related cases. Yet they are all gung-ho about its use against common criminals; it's just a convenient way to get around that pesky 4th Amendment.

Justifying powers by talking about nuclear terrorism, and then using those powers primarily against people NOT suspected of terrorism, should be deeply troubling.

BTW, it was only ten years ago that President Clinton attempted to define any violation (or potential violation) of gun laws other than armed robbery as "terrorism." Put a scope on your 1957 Yugoslavian SKS, and you could be a "terrorist" under that definition. I gather you are a Republican; would you have trusted Janet Reno with the power to secretly pry into your personal life, readings, beliefs, and political views for any reason she deemed appropriate?

 

[Camp David]

Justifying powers by talking about nuclear terrorism, and then using those powers primarily against people NOT suspected of terrorism, should be deeply troubling.

Gee... and I find planes slamming into buildings troubling! Guess that doesn't seem to bother you!

 

[Tomcat1066]

I think it's obvious that Camp David has his opinion set in stone. If he thinks that the Constitution is irrelevant when trying to hunt down badguys, then that's his right.

However, most of us here think that preserving the Constitution is vital since without that, the nation we love will not be the same place without it. That's still our right too....for now at least.

Tom

 

[tube_ee]

Camp David -

Here's a question for you to ponder:

If it were Hillary Clinton sitting in the White House, claiming such extraordinary power, would you still support it?

If you wouldn't give power to the oher side, you probably shouldn't give it to yours. Even if your guys are everything you think they are, pendulums swing, and eventually, those powers will pass to someone you can't stand. The time to make these decisions is before you give the government power, not afterwards. It's much easier to not give the power in the first place than to take it away later.

--Shannon

 

[Camp David]

If he thinks that the Constitution is irrelevant when trying to hunt down badguys, then that's his right...

No... the U.S. Constitution is not "irrelevant" and I did not imply that it was; I did, however, say that foreign wars, particular the one ongoing now, may require some federal efforts which may encroach on some small personal liberties.

Soldiers in Iraq are giving their lives for this war, while a few herein seem to find strong objection that...heavens... their library books or federal tax forms might be observed by another federal agency! Bear in mind that the Patriot Act may indeed have saved numerous lives this far, but some see that as too much to accept.

I see objection to the Patriot Act as ungreatful and petty, but you are well within your rights to be so.

I recall my parents talk about life during WWII; Dad in Europe while Mom served as Nurse; many things limited in quantity by Federal Government to support war effort, coupons given out for food, severe lines for everything, limits on electricity as most of it went to factories, some cities had lights out and curfews due to no law enforcement personnel... Now, with the current War on Terror, a few folks protest that perhaps... perhaps... they may be denied some perceived liberty!

 

[Camp David]

If it were Hillary Clinton sitting in the White House, claiming such extraordinary power, would you still support it?

We asked the President to prevent another 09/11/01 whoever sits in the Oval Office...George Bush, Hillary Clinton, or whoever. Denying them the tools to do that makes the request invalid.

 

[Biker]

No... the U.S. Constitution is not "irrelevant" and I did not imply that it was; I did, however, say that foreign wars, particular the one ongoing now, may require some federal efforts which may encroach on some small personal liberties.

Soldiers in Iraq are giving their lives for this war, while a few herein seem to find strong objection that...heavens... their library books or federal tax forms might be observed by another federal agency! Bear in mind that the Patriot Act may indeed have saved numerous lives this far, but some see that as too much to accept.

I see objection to the Patriot Act as ungreatful and petty, but you are well within your rights to be so.

So, kindly enumerate, if you will, which liberties you deem to be "small" and "personal".
Biker

 

[middy]

And the 9/11 people were mostly Saudi nationals, but the bin Laden family was flown out and home the next day at taxpayer expense, without being questioned, because they and the Saudi royals are our frrrrriends...right?

myth

You should take a look at your own sig before spreading that kind of trash around.

 

[roo_ster]

Tooling, Schmooling

We asked the President to prevent another 09/11/01 whoever sits in the Oval Office...George Bush, Hillary Clinton, or whoever. Denying them the tools to do that makes the request invalid.
...
Now, with the current War on Terror, a few folks protest that perhaps... perhaps... they may be denied some perceived liberty!

Here's a revelation for you, CD: The Feebs, CIA, etc., had the tools necessary to ID the terrorists who committed 9/11*. A goodly number were ID'd as bad guys*. It wasn't a matter of proper "tooling." It was a matter of political correctness run wild, lack of coordination, and the CIA being opposed to tackling the problem (they still are, BTW).

Selling our liberties for a mess of pottage won't make catching terrorists easier, it just makes it easier to crack down on the rest of us when it is decided that we are the enemy.

You ask, "Who has been effected?" Well, did you know that, under the PATRIOT ACT:
1. If I were under suspicion that the Feebs could go to any business with which I had/may have had business and obtain their records without having to get a warrant signed off by a judge.**
2. The business owner is prevented, under threat of incarceration, from telling anybody about it, to include legal counsel.

Now, to answer your question, if I were effected, I could not tell you about it. My lawyer could not tell you about it. If I did, I would go to jail.

This is not a loss of perceived liberty. This is a loss of concrete, US Constitutional, Bill of RIghts, black & white, 4th and 1st Amendment loss of liberties.

* This is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of record. They knew the punks' names & activities before the PATRIOT ACT was even a twinkle in our home-grown authoritarians' beady little eyes.

** This might be of use, since you have apparently forgotten it (or have recently matriculated form public school):

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[Justin]

• begging the question
• argumentum ad naseum
• ad hominem
• appeal to fear
• straw man
• false dichotomy
• hasty generalization

All from one person.

 

[benEzra]

Gee... and I find planes slamming into buildings troubling! Guess that doesn't seem to bother you!

Actually, it does bother me. But it should be a no-brainer that allowing illegal surveillance of people NOT IN ANY WAY CONNECTED TO TERRORISM is not going to stop planes from flying into buildings, and in fact distracts from the mission of catching actual terrorists.

As I said, the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act are IRRELEVANT to 9/11 or the fight against terrorists; they are merely powers that some agencies have wanted for a long time (darn that pesky 4th Amendment), and 9/11 provided a convenient excuse.

It is NOT necessary to make the 4th Amendment null and void to effectively fight terrorism.

 

[Zundfolge]

I say again, is there a HighRoad member that has been personally impacted by the Patriot Act? Assumed impacts don't count! Anybody at all?

I'm white so Jim Crow laws never impacted me directly (especially since I was born long after they went away) ... that doesn't make them right and just.

Just because none of us here have been directly effected by the Patriot Act yet doesn't mean we won't be sometime down the road and it doesn't mean that if the negative effect is only limited to some guy who lives across town then thats okay.

Unconstitutional laws are okay as long as they don't inconvenience me directly.
Wow ... what a screwed up attitude
Sounds like those German Catholics who looked the other way (if you'll forgive the Godwin).