PATRIOT act. Dictatorship to come. (1 Viewer)

[slim]

Hello,

As you can see from the title this is going to be a very uplifting and happy discussion about the PATRIOT act. It is something that affects the lives (directly and indirectly) of every american citizen.

It sets your freedoms and gives the governement (or any unhappy politician) the means to keep your phone tabbed, read your mail, keep track of you and ultimately spy on you.

I call this espionage of the governement against its own people. Spies get shot if they are caught by the surveilled. What are you going to do?

 

[Blackflagx]

The Patriot act is the most horrifically unconstitutional act ever put into place. The government now has the right to lock you up in solitary confinement, deny you the right to trial, never even let you have a phone call, and it can even hold you until the war on terrorism is over: forever. All without ever charging you with anything. It is sad to see that America has active secret police spying on and detaining its own citizens and innocent people around the world. It saddens me to see the country that has been my home all my life, turn corrupt. We need to repeal the Patriot act and end this unconstitutional government oppression.

 

[Squawker]

As you can see from the title this is going to be a very uplifting and happy discussion about the PATRIOT act. It is something that affects the lives (directly and indirectly) of every american citizen.

This has been very distorted by the press and left wing talking heads. Can you cite any legitimate violations, or cases of false imprisonment that have occurred?

 

[Fantasea]

This has been very distorted by the press and left wing talking heads. Can you cite any legitimate violations, or cases of false imprisonment that have occurred?

It's nearly four years now and the first one has yet to be seen.

However, the socialist-lib-dems and their apologists need something to rant and rave about, don't they?

 

[slim]

We do not know if injustice has occured. You do not know if injustice has occured. None of us know what is going on.

In fifty years time i can see this act being put down in history as similar to Hitler or Stalin's regime.

As for it being the raving of the leftists. All i can say is, why should a nation of people live in fear of an invisible terrorist threat (you have more chance of catching tb than being killed by a terrorist) and suffer from draconian measures from an authoritarian administration in Washington?

Open up your eyes. Condolliza Rice is a cold and cruel businesswoman and she is in a position that endangers peace. I fear that a Bush dynasty could be set up if Jeb takes the banner.

This act is an affront to the people. The government does not trust you, why stick up for it?

 

[Hornburger]

A dictatorship is an overstatement. But I do not like the Patriot Act for what it represents. It can open the door to more invasions of privacy and government power expansion. Bush needs to find constitutional ways of fighting terrrorism.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin

 

[RightinNYC]

We do not know if injustice has occured. You do not know if injustice has occured. None of us know what is going on.

You don't think the NYT would be the first to tell us?

As for it being the raving of the leftists. All i can say is, why should a nation of people live in fear of an invisible terrorist threat (you have more chance of catching tb than being killed by a terrorist) and suffer from draconian measures from an authoritarian administration in Washington?

How, exactly, have you suffered from the Patriot Act? Can you name anyone who has? And last I checked TB didn't do a trillion dollars worth of damage to our economy.

Open up your eyes. Condolliza Rice is a cold and cruel businesswoman and she is in a position that endangers peace. I fear that a Bush dynasty could be set up if Jeb takes the banner.

What does that have to do with anything in the post? Oh, wait, its just more ranting.

This act is an affront to the people. The government does not trust you, why stick up for it?

They trust me as much as I trust them.

 

[Blackflagx]

How, exactly, have you suffered from the Patriot Act? Can you name anyone who has?

I myself have not, but I can name someone who has.

Source: From the Documentary "Unconstitutional"

(Not exact words from the Source)

Nadaline Hamoui and Her Family: Imigrant Arab-Americans who applied for political assylum from Syria.

On February 22, 2001 at 7:00 am, herself and her entire family were arrested with no charges against them and with no legal representation. Law Enforcement also used discrimination, informing the mother that she could not put on her scarf. They were then driven to an INS detention center in Seattle where they were all put into solitary confinement and received no legal representation and no charges. They remained there for 10 months, still with no legal representation.

The Hamouis were victims of the "Hold Until Clear Policy" enacted after September 11, under the authority of the Patriot Act.

So, whatever happend to "Innocent until proven guilty"? The Patriot Act violates so many parts of the Constitution I cant ever get into it. Law Enforcement can arrest anyone the SUSPECT of being a "potential" terrorist. This means that any Arab-American can be arrested, detained with no legal representation, and held until the end of the War on Terrorism.

So, your right, no one has ever suffered from the Patriot Act. :roll:

 

[RightinNYC]

I myself have not, but I can name someone who has.

Source: From the Documentary "Unconstitutional"

(Not exact words from the Source)

Nadaline Hamoui and Her Family: Imigrant Arab-Americans who applied for political assylum from Syria.

On February 22, 2001 at 7:00 am, herself and her entire family were arrested with no charges against them and with no legal representation. Law Enforcement also used discrimination, informing the mother that she could not put on her scarf. They were then driven to an INS detention center in Seattle where they were all put into solitary confinement and received no legal representation and no charges. They remained there for 10 months, still with no legal representation.

The Hamouis were victims of the "Hold Until Clear Policy" enacted after September 11, under the authority of the Patriot Act.

So, whatever happend to "Innocent until proven guilty"? The Patriot Act violates so many parts of the Constitution I cant ever get into it. Law Enforcement can arrest anyone the SUSPECT of being a "potential" terrorist. This means that any Arab-American can be arrested, detained with no legal representation, and held until the end of the War on Terrorism.

So, your right, no one has ever suffered from the Patriot Act. :roll:

Ummm....what?

They were arrested Feb 22, 2001.

Unless I'm mistaken, the Patriot Act wasn't passed until October 25, 2001.

So whatever they were "persecuted" under, it wasn't the Patriot Act.

 

[Blackflagx]

Sorry, typo on my part. 2002.

 

[RightinNYC]

Sorry, typo on my part. 2002.

Alright.

So, assuming this story is true, which I have no reason to believe it is, and assuming its unembellished, which I'd bet money it's not, let's look at the facts.

Illegal immigrants were taken to an INS detention center and held there for 10 months? Rather than being sent back to Syria, a place that was so horrible they tried to apply for political asylum? You'd think they'd be thanking us.

Aside from that fact, your little "snippet" leaves out a few crucial facts, such as what was the given reason for their arrest/holding, who ordered it, what they did about it afterwards, or where they are now.

Also, "innocent until proven guilty" applies to American citizens, which these were not. So it didnt violate any part of the Constitution.

And sure, "any Arab American" could be picked up and arrested, just like any person could have been arrested BEFORE the patriot act. Nothings different. All the patriot act did was give the same powers to people tracking terrorism as was already allowed for racketeering or smuggling.

 

[slim]

So you would justify the giving of powers to a group of men that you have never seen? You are happy to trust them with your life without question and with the risk of death?

We dont know how much of this power is being used wrongly because no-one is there to question it. They could come after you next for just looking at them wrongly. If politicians are unhappy they could hold personal vendettas.

 

[RightinNYC]

So you would justify the giving of powers to a group of men that you have never seen? You are happy to trust them with your life without question and with the risk of death?

We dont know how much of this power is being used wrongly because no-one is there to question it.

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but giving the government the power to frisk me down at the airport or see if I'm looking up bomb plans on the internet isn't exactly placing my life in their hands. To the contrary, I'm glad they're doing it, so as to keep others from doing those very things.

Oh, there's plenty of people there to question it. I have faith in the ACLU and its ability to bitch and moan enough to keep the gov on the right path.

See, they're useful for something.

They could come after you next for just looking at them wrongly. If politicians are unhappy they could hold personal vendettas.

And that statement proves you have no idea what the Patriot Act is. Have you read it, or just the indymedia summary?

 

[slim]

I havent read it or the indymedia but i hear the smane things over and over. If its worse than the Anti-terror laws in Britain then it is a threat to the people.

They can detain you under terrorist charges for an indefinate time. This is a threat. Two words.

Guantanamo Bay.

 

[Fantasea]

We do not know if injustice has occured. You do not know if injustice has occured. None of us know what is going on.

In fifty years time i can see this act being put down in history as similar to Hitler or Stalin's regime.

As for it being the raving of the leftists. All i can say is, why should a nation of people live in fear of an invisible terrorist threat (you have more chance of catching tb than being killed by a terrorist) and suffer from draconian measures from an authoritarian administration in Washington?

Open up your eyes. Condolliza Rice is a cold and cruel businesswoman and she is in a position that endangers peace. I fear that a Bush dynasty could be set up if Jeb takes the banner.

This act is an affront to the people. The government does not trust you, why stick up for it?

There are quite a few folks in this country who are not trustworthy, wouldn't you agree?

In every wartime situation, the country must protect the people. Sometimes, the protection may seem a little harsh. However, the only ones who seem to feel any pain or inconvenience are those who, one way or another, manage to bring it on themselves.

That's OK by me.

Don't worry. In 2008, the winner will be whoever gets the most electoral votes. Just like always.

 

[Fantasea]

So you would justify the giving of powers to a group of men that you have never seen? You are happy to trust them with your life without question and with the risk of death?

We dont know how much of this power is being used wrongly because no-one is there to question it. They could come after you next for just looking at them wrongly. If politicians are unhappy they could hold personal vendettas.

If, if, if.

I have never seen a terrorist either. They seem like a greater risk.

 

[RightinNYC]

I havent read it or the indymedia but i hear the smane things over and over.

Okay, my mistake. I forgot that if you hear something over and over it becomes true.

 

[slim]

If you hear something the same from many different sources instead of trusting one source that may be bias then it is more accurate.

As for the terror threat being great. You have more chance of dying of flu than a terror attack unless your in Iraq. But we're not in Iraq so the rules should not apply. You dont see the govt. making radical (and costly) laws about flu.

It is a method of control that the government could be using to their advantage.

Knock knock. "Youre coming with us".

Thats all it takes if you let it happen.

 

[RightinNYC]

If you hear something the same from many different sources instead of trusting one source that may be bias then it is more accurate.

As for the terror threat being great. You have more chance of dying of flu than a terror attack unless your in Iraq. But we're not in Iraq so the rules should not apply. You dont see the govt. making radical (and costly) laws about flu.

It is a method of control that the government could be using to their advantage.

Knock knock. "Youre coming with us".

Thats all it takes if you let it happen.

No, if you hear something the same from many uninformed sources, you're still just as uninformed, except dangerously confident. READ THE PATRIOT ACT.

And you're right, the odds of dying in a terror attack are miniscule. Know what odds are even MORE miniscule? The odds of being affected unfaily by the Patriot Act. You're about 6 times as likely to DIE in a terror attack as you are to be imprisoned in Guantanamo.

Which is worse?

 

[swampkritter]

Even if the Patriot Act hasn't been abused to date, there is no guarantee that it won't be abused in the future either by the current administration or the next.

This is why the Patriot Act is a bad idea.

:hitsfan:

 

[Alex]

I read that the Patriot Act is being used to arrest animal rights activists. I believe it was in Boston(?). This means that it IS being abused and therefore should not be renewed. Also, if the Patriot Act is so legit and only being used to capture terrorist, then why can't a judge authorize the action before it happens? Why is that not needed like it is with all other arrests and searches?

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

I read that the Patriot Act is being used to arrest animal rights activists. I believe it was in Boston(?). This means that it IS being abused and therefore should not be renewed. Also, if the Patriot Act is so legit and only being used to capture terrorist, then why can't a judge authorize the action before it happens? Why is that not needed like it is with all other arrests and searches?

Diane Feinstein, who has been eyeballing this administration's use of the Patriot Act, has been quoted saying she has not seen any abuse in the use of the Patriot Act by this administration.

 

[Bluefire]

My first post on the forums! :2wave:

This is a letter I wrote in April of 2004 to the editor of the Daily Texan (The University of Texas at Austin's newspaper) in response to Congressman Lamar Smith's attempts at reassuring the public on the Patriot Act. I outlined some of the misuses of the act, which while not necessarily the Conspiracy Theorist Material that people are looking for, they are still misuses.

Congressman Lamar Smith conveniently provides myths about the Patriot Act that weren't the concern of the American people as a whole. While he talks about delayed search warrants and wiretaps, he fails to offer any explanation for the misuses of the act. Since its passage, a man accused of running a methamphetamine lab was prosecuted under the act, his lab labeled as a chemical weapon of mass destruction. Instead of getting the fair trial and sentencing which our founding fathers provided for, he is looking at possibly life in prison. Another man was charged with "terrorism using a weapon of mass destruction" after he built a pipe bomb and injured himself with it. Other people have had files created on them by local police chiefs for just protesting the war.

These charges are a blatant misuse of the act, but it goes further. He mentions that more than 300 persons in terrorism-related investigations have been used under the act, but he fails to mention that 250 of these cases were criminal charges under the law. He also doesn't mention how just six months after the act was passed the Justice Department held seminars on how to stretch the new wiretapping provisions beyond terror cases.

Finally, the most disturbing misuse of the law came after telemarketers ran a scam on the elderly, collecting $4.5 million dollars and placing it in banks in Jordan and Israel. Instead of working with these countries to obtain the money, the United States simply seized the assets under the act. These grave injustices done to other countries and our own people are the reason people don't like the Patriot Act. It begs the question, if our government is so willing to push other countries and unfairly prosecute our criminals, where will they stop expanding and stretching their power?

Chris Wilson
Computer sciences sophomore

 

[Fantasea]

Even if the Patriot Act hasn't been abused to date, there is no guarantee that it won't be abused in the future either by the current administration or the next.

This is why the Patriot Act is a bad idea.

:hitsfan:

I can't remember ever having read a rationalization in which anything resembling common sense was so obviously lacking.

What specific parts of the Patriot Act give you so much concern? The reason I ask is because the vast majority of those who complain about it have absolutely no idea of its contents.

I heard one newsman coment today that there have been about 400 arrests under the act and 200 convictions have resulted thus far. There have been no documented cases of abuse that have come before a judge.

Sounds to me as if it's working quite well.

 

[RightinNYC]

Even if the Patriot Act hasn't been abused to date, there is no guarantee that it won't be abused in the future either by the current administration or the next.

This is why the Patriot Act is a bad idea.

:hitsfan:

Let me give you some enlightenment about the powers of our government.

In the NYC charter, you'd be surprised what powers are reserved to the government. The Dept of Health can quarrantine any neighborhood it wants. The Transportation department can change ANY law it wants for 48 hours, effectively shutting down all transportation into or out of NYC. The Fire Department can order the immediate demolition of ANY building it so chooses. The Police department can choose to ignore the court orders of any judge short of the suprement court for as long as it likes.

All of these powers are incredibly dangerous, and are only meant for use in appropriate situations, just like the Patriot Act. Does that mean they shouldn't exist? Of course not.