Patriot Act Redux

*Mo Noyz* · 11-18-2005, 2:52 PM

Has anybody else here been keeping up with this?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...yKMXs&refer=us

nedro · 11-18-2005, 3:02 PM

The "Kingdom" act needs to be killed completely and forever!
Those F@cking Joe McCarthy want-to-bes need to die now! Every one of them!

Scout · 11-18-2005, 3:12 PM

Well, I don't feel that strongly about it, but it does raise some red flags with me.

I wouldn't mind a re-evaluation or a whole new bill going forward, versus an extension, or permanent vote, on the basis we can now evaluate what has worked, what hasn't worked, and what's needed and what's not, since 9-11. You know what they say about hind-sight...

*Mo Noyz* · 11-18-2005, 3:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scout

Well, I don't feel that strongly about it, but it does raise some red flags with me.

I wouldn't mind a re-evaluation or a whole new bill going forward, versus an extension, or permanent vote, on the basis we can now evaluate what has worked, what hasn't worked, and what's needed and what's not, since 9-11. You know what they say about hind-sight...

Oddly enough, you have said almost word for word what I said about this on another website yesterday. This was my post:

"I agree with you to a certain extent, Al. I think this incarnation should die. When it was written, battling terrorism within our own borders was concept that hadn't been thought through quite as much as it had to be post September 11th.

I think they really need to look at what has worked, and what has not. The rules need to be fluid. I'm not sure what kind of a study has been done on the effectiveness of the Patriot Act, or even if there has been one done. But it would be interesting. The PA was hastily thrown together while the shock and horror of September 11th was still fresh in everyone's mind. In that type of atmosphere it would have been far too easy to go overboard with it.

And though nobody has forgotten the tragedy that took place that day, there has been enough time for more sober reflection.

The PA should be studied, restructured, pared down, etc.... But, it should not stay the same. Because if it does, it just shows that no further thought has been given to fighting terrorism."

Oh, and Nedro. Very eloquent and well thought out post.

nedro · 11-18-2005, 3:29 PM

Actually, it was. And thank you for noticing.

*Mo Noyz* · 11-18-2005, 3:43 PM

Alright, then. At least you were impressed.

Perhaps you wouldn't mind using more of your awesome finger driven oratory skills to let the rest of us know how nedro would go about trying to prevent terrorism in our country.

jaim · 11-19-2005, 2:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nedro

The "Kingdom" act needs to be killed completely and forever!
Those F@cking Joe McCarthy want-to-bes need to die now! Every one of them!

Have to agree with this. The patriot act is a very bad idea. The 9-11 attacks were used as an excuse to give our federal government carte blanche to spy on Americans. In this country citizens are innocent until proven guilty. I am glad the senate is now taking a harder look at the patriot act. But that doesn't absolve them from the fact that they almost unanimously voted for it in the first place without even seeing what it said. The provisions in the act should never be made permanent. And most if not all of the patriot act's provisions should be killed.

Mojave954 · 11-19-2005, 6:12 PM

The only reason this Act should bother anyone, is if they have something to hide.

*Mo Noyz* · 11-19-2005, 6:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaim

Have to agree with this. The patriot act is a very bad idea. The 9-11 attacks were used as an excuse to give our federal government carte blanche to spy on Americans. In this country citizens are innocent until proven guilty. I am glad the senate is now taking a harder look at the patriot act. But that doesn't absolve them from the fact that they almost unanimously voted for it in the first place without even seeing what it said. The provisions in the act should never be made permanent. And most if not all of the patriot act's provisions should be killed.

So maybe you'd like to answer my question that I posed to nedro?

It's not that I disagree with what you're saying 100%, I'd just like to hear what your ideas are for safeguarding this country against future attacks.

You and nedro seem to think that your fellow Democrat, Joe Lieberman, completely ****ed up when he penned the Patriot Act.

So let's hear what you would change.

jaim · 11-20-2005, 4:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

So maybe you'd like to answer my question that I posed to nedro?

It's not that I disagree with what you're saying 100%, I'd just like to hear what your ideas are for safeguarding this country against future attacks.

You and nedro seem to think that your fellow Democrat, Joe Lieberman, completely ****ed up when he penned the Patriot Act.

So let's hear what you would change.

How about posting the whole patriot act so we can discuss individual points?
Maybe start a new thread. That way everyone responding can refer to same document.

Off the top of my head one thing that really bothers me about the patriot act is the clause about holding someone indefinitely without charging them if they are suspected terrorist. And said "terrorist" can't even discuss the charges with anyone except maybe a lawyer who again can't discuss the charges wth anyone. Or maybe I am mistaken and that really isn't in the act. But if it is in there that seems to go against the constitutional amendment number 6.

Oh, and Lieberman is no friend of the people. I wonder why he even calls himself a democrat. He seems to vote for the republican agenda a lot more than against it.

luvtolean · 11-20-2005, 9:53 AM

The Patriot Act, in all forms, disgusts me by it's very name. It soils the word "patriot". Our forefathers are rolling in their graves.

No need to discuss anything but killing this legislation.

*Mo Noyz* · 11-20-2005, 12:21 PM

Interesting attitudes.

So, in other words, protect us at all costs, just don't ask us to change anything in our lives.

Let's return to pre-September 11th government functionality and role the dice, eh?

Sorry folks, I disagree. But, as I said, the current incarnation of the PA should be laid to rest. Though that doesn't mean advanced and possibly inconvenient measures shouldn't be re-instituted.

Jaim, perhaps your idea of a new thread is a good one. Maybe I'll find a .pdf of the PA and do just that.

luvtolean · 11-20-2005, 12:58 PM

You're not safe Mo, and giving up what freedoms you have left will not make you safer. Get over it.

*Mo Noyz* · 11-20-2005, 9:31 PM

Sweetness!! We can save a whole BUNDLE of tax dollars using your outlook. No more military, no more police force, etc..........

Maybe we should start a thread on that!!

luvtolean · 11-20-2005, 10:03 PM

We could and should.

*Mo Noyz* · 11-20-2005, 11:27 PM

Good lord.............

*Mo Noyz* · 11-20-2005, 11:29 PM

And there we have it. Back to back to back to back cop outs.

I thought I was only supposed to have conversations like this with jaim.

luvtolean · 11-21-2005, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

And there we have it. Back to back to back to back cop outs.

I thought I was only supposed to have conversations like this with jaim.

Absolutely not.

I think our military and police forces are too big. We could save billions and not reduce the ability one bit. Hell, a couple of bases and there you have it.

Legalize, tax, and control marijuana. Our prison population would fall by like 1/3. I think it's one in 30 American males are in prison, the majority being drug related crimes. That is too high.

*Mo Noyz* · 11-21-2005, 1:44 AM

Having done time I don't think that stat is correct.

jaim · 11-21-2005, 4:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvtolean

Absolutely not.

I think our military and police forces are too big. We could save billions and not reduce the ability one bit. Hell, a couple of bases and there you have it.

Legalize, tax, and control marijuana. Our prison population would fall by like 1/3. I think it's one in 30 American males are in prison, the majority being drug related crimes. That is too high.

Usually your arguments are incoherent and lack substance but this time I agree with you.

At least on the marijuana. But I would extend that to all drugs.

I haven't thought too much about the size of our military. It is a good civil servant job for those without the skills to get other work. And since the population keeps growing we have to find work for folks some how. But I guess that man power could be used to rebuild this country's infrastructure. I guess the key with the military is how you use them. I am of the belief that if you fight a war (and only should be done as an absolute last resort) the fighting should be hand to hand, face to face. This remote fighting **** makes things too impersonal and allows killing without letting the people doing the killing to actually experiencing the horror that is war.

Scout · 11-22-2005, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaim

I am of the belief that if you fight a war (and only should be done as an absolute last resort) the fighting should be hand to hand, face to face. This remote fighting **** makes things too impersonal and allows killing without letting the people doing the killing to actually experiencing the horror that is war.

Jaim, can you expand on this a little, it could be taken a few different ways, and before I comment I want to make sure what group we are talking about as far as "people doing the killing" - nations, politicians, oil companies, high echelon Military supervisors, or soldiers?

luvtolean · 11-22-2005, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaim

Usually your arguments are incoherent and lack substance but this time I agree with you.

Yeah, I get that from lots of people.

Quote:

I am of the belief that if you fight a war (and only should be done as an absolute last resort) the fighting should be hand to hand, face to face.

Much of the fighting currently happening in Iraq is much like that. Door-door city fighting. Room clearing. We can't use our big missiles and planes as we care about the civilians our troops are fighting among. (unlike the people we fight) That's pretty personal.

luvtolean · 11-22-2005, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojave954

The only reason this Act should bother anyone, is if they have something to hide.

You're right. This country was founded by a bunch of paranoid delusionals who were all criminals, therefore, they wrote in these freedoms, some Americans still hold dear, to continue to perpetrate their crimes without government interference.

jaim · 11-22-2005, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scout

Jaim, can you expand on this a little, it could be taken a few different ways, and before I comment I want to make sure what group we are talking about as far as "people doing the killing" - nations, politicians, oil companies, high echelon Military supervisors, or soldiers?

War is probably the most horrible thing any sane individual can participate in. To fight or not to fight is ultimately the soldier's choice when you get right down to it. And I am hoping beyond hope that the soldiers will be the one's who say enough is enough. Removing the soldiers from the battlefield and having battles fought only by proxy remove the horrific nature of war. And hence make war as a remote a concept as playing video games. Which will make the decision to go to war all to easy. And making the decision to go to war should be almost as horrific as actually fighting in one.

FantasyGod · 12-12-2005, 4:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvtolean

Absolutely not.

I think our military and police forces are too big. We could save billions and not reduce the ability one bit. Hell, a couple of bases and there you have it.

Legalize, tax, and control marijuana. Our prison population would fall by like 1/3. I think it's one in 30 American males are in prison, the majority being drug related crimes. That is too high.

Heck, why not legalize prostitution while we're at it? Window shopping in Amsterdam seems pretty cool.