Growing rebellion against Patriot Act

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by MagiK: ________________________________ The first part seems logical and reasonable to me. simply put. Don't support illegal actions and you are safe from prosecution. The State Department actually has a fairly liberal view as to who and what constitutes a terror group so I think there is no danger there. Deporting members of groups antithetical to civilized legal societies is no sad thing either. Don't want to get deported? Don't be a member of an illegal terror group. I have no sympathy for charitable organizations that do good works AND at the same time cause the death and dismemberment of others by funding terror groups. __________________________________ Planning a defense with the opposing side snooping? You're asking a lot. BTW, is the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine), a registered charity, a terrorist organization? What about the Federalist Society -- which advocates a strong removal of federal power to the states? Is that treason? _____________________________________ Holding the attourneys who represent the evil scum who commit the terror acts is no big deal..teaches the lawyers to be a little choosey who they associate with and represent. _____________________________________ You are guilty of the same crime the Act commits -- presuming guilt before it is legally established. It is impermissible to do that. _____________________________________ Americans captured on foreign soil and thought to have been involved in terrorist activities abroad may be held indefinitely in a military prison and denied access to lawyers or family members. No federal court can review the reason for the detention. Align yourself with foreign powers..you take the risk. If you want to commit treason..be prepared to pay the price. Again all this concern for people who have strong cases of treason against them just doesn't get a lot of ire out of me. ______________________________________ Again, you assume treason was committed before it's been determined judicially -- naughty naughty. It does not require a "strong" case of treason -- just a vague allegation. You implicitly assume benevolence on the part of the officials as well. That's not always the case. Scoundrels get elected, and scoundrels get appointed. I knew a girl whose fairly-wealth family in Thailand lost EVERYTHING when an angry neighbor made an allegation they were selling opium. The government burned their house down. This is clearly the first step down a similar path in the US. _________________________________________ Foreign citizens charged with a terrorist-related act may be denied access to an attorney and their right to question witnesses and otherwise prepare for a defense may be severely curtailed if the Department of Justice says that's necessary to protect national security. Jose Padilla, the American Muslim fingered by Ashcroft last year as a would-be "dirty bomb" builder, is a case in point. And this is bad because? The bill of rights pertains to Citizens, not foreign nationals. Natioanl Security contrary to some Liberals is in fact a Legitimate reason for not making some things public. _______________________________________________ Parts of the Bill of Rights pertains to non-citizens, parts do not. As old as our first founding documents is the notion of habeas corpus which is clearly infringed by this Act. __________________________________________ The government can conduct surveillance on the Internet and e-mail use of American citizens without any notice, upon order to the Internet service provider. Internet service providers may not move to quash such subpoenas. Internet service providers have no business seeking this action in the first place. As for monitoring things...too late, already being done. ___________________________________________ Internet service providers move to quash such subpoenas because you and I will patronize the ISP's that respect our privacy. It is a business decision to challenge subscriber info subpoenas, and they have every right. I would post NO thoughts here WHATSOEVER if every one of you great folks I pissed off could call an 800 number and get my personal and financial info. You are advocating a breakdown of the freedom that the internet has helped return to us. The gov't has been seeking to break this freedom for years, but we citizens won't have it. But speak the magic word "Bin Laden" and *poof* we all roll over. _____________________________________________ The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) can search any car at any airport without a showing of any suspicion of criminal activity. This is just the authors opinion and not an actual provision of the act. ______________________________________________ No, it's true. And, it's why I have to remember to take my crack cocaine out of the dash everytime I go to the airport. ALL SEARCHES SHOULD BE REASONABLE. Today we pass a law saying any search at an airport is reasonable, based on security concerns. Tomorrow we pass a law saying any search on a highway is reasonable, based on security concerns. The next day, we have no 4th Amendment protection. _________________________________________ The TSA distributes a "no-fly" list to airport security personnel and airlines that require refusal of boarding and detention of persons deemed to be terrorism or air piracy risks or to pose a threat to airline or passenger safety. This is an expansion of a regulation that since 1990 has looked out for threats to civil aviation. Names are added daily based upon secret criteria. Several lawsuits that challenge these regulations are now pending, some from irate passengers who were mistaken for people on the list. So do nothing instead because a mistake was made? Nope, I think passengers that survive to their destination will be happy and I have no sympathy for criminals who have their freedom of movement hampered. _____________________________________________ Boy, will you disagree when some British chap named Ray Engle who has connections to a guy named Ahmad flies to the country, gets put on a no-fly list, and then gets YOU popped because the bureacracy spit out your name as a red flag. _____________________________________________ American citizens and aliens can be held indefinitely in federal custody as "material witnesses," a ploy sometimes used as a punitive measure when the government does not have sufficient basis to charge the individual with a terror-related crime. The 1984 material witness law allows the government to detain citizens at will for an arbitrary period of time to give testimony that might be useful in the prosecutions of others. A Jordanian man picked up a few days after September 11 was held more than nine months before being released. And last week a federal judge in Oregon ordered that Mike Hawash, a software engineer and long-time naturalized American citizen who has been held in solitary confinement in a federal prison for more than a month, be questioned by April 29, 2003. It is notable, however, that the judge has already conducted a secret hearing that determined Hawash's detention to be lawful. I think the last line pretty much summs it up...they told the judge what they had on the guy and he changed his mind...pretty sweet that one more bad guy got stopped. _________________________________________________ But, you must admit it is bullying at its finest. Coercion of a foul nature. ____________________________________________ American colleges and universities with foreign students must report extensive information about their students to the BCIS. BCIS in turn may revoke student visas for missteps as minor as a student's failure to get an advisor's signature on a form that adds or drops classes. College personnel cannot notify students to correct the lapse in order to save them from deportation. To a very large extent, campus police and security personnel have become agents of the immigration authorities. This is LOOOONG overdue. Campuses have been breeding grounds for some serious anti-nonmuslim sedition in recent years. Bout darn time things got looked at. As for foreign nationals..it is their RESPONSIBILITY to make sure they stay on top of their Visa requirements and abide by the laws that govern their stay here. ______________________________________ Yeah, those horrible schools harboring free thinkers -- glad they closed THAT loophole. I have a friend who is the Immigration lawyer for a college. It is all she does. She is on the payroll at 60K+ to perform this one service full-time. The INS issues on campuses go up there with the worst of your education spending waste you love to cite. Adding more fuel, and more bureons, to the fire will not help. _______________________________________ Accused terrorists labeled "unlawful combatants" can be tried in military tribunals here or abroad, under rules of procedure developed by the Pentagon and the Department of Justice. All it takes to be named an unlawful combatant is the affidavit of a Pentagon employee, who is not required to provide the rationale for his or her decision, even to a federal judge. (In the case of Yaser Hamdi, the federal appellate court ruled that it has no authority to look behind this affidavit and question the determination.) Unlawful combatants are also denied counsel and contact with family members. In fact, hundreds of "unlawful combatants" are still being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without attorneys, without family contact, and under conditions said by some to be tantamount to physical and psychological torture. A federal court ruled in March that these persons had no access to the federal courts since they were on Cuban, not American, soil. Not real concerned here either (big surprise eh?) The Prof, from his ivory tower doesnt realize that said "Pentagon Employee" being a civil servant would never bother to do any paperwork without serious reason to actually end his or her coffee break. ______________________________________________ Look, it's simple. There are two categories: POW and civilians. "Enemy combatant" is a pure BS term that even someone with GWB's dim wits should not have let be coined. _________________________________________________ There my honest reactions to the points. I do see that there MAY be possibilities for abuse, but I have faith in our system that it will move quickly to squash any true abuses that are comitted. Agree or disagree thats your right and priveledge [img]smile.gif[/img] I will wait and watch and see what comes to pass.

_________________________________________________
See, here is our en passe. I have no faith in our system, and I think it is widely abused. I also realize that on a purely philosophical level, a free society has a duty to mistrust those who are in power.

I did not respond to every point -- some you had were valid, and some parts of the article were a lot of "making hay."

[ 07-08-2003, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Mr. Mopery]

P.A.T.R.I.O.T.
...W.A.S.P
......B.C.I.S.
..........F.B.I.
...........A.C.L.U.
.............C.A.P.P.S. II

ARGHHGHGHGHGGHGH!!! Too many acronyms!

I've got a couple that could fit in the Patriot Act just as well:

F.U.B.A.R. or B.S.

And how 'bout one that's not an acronym?: Gerbil Jam

No matter what race, religion or political bent...not even a PROVEN terrorist should be caged without charge. No matter where it happens, if Americans are doing it (particularly the government), we're violating the spirit of the Constitution, if not the letter of the law.

edit: To clarify, not even a PROVEN terrorist should be caged without charge for this long. I suppose in an extreme case, like Afganistan or 9/11, some rules could be bent but X-Ray is quickly becoming something no similar (not the same, I realize) to what went on in the Taliban or Hussein regimes.
And that's just ONE issue out of the lot.

[ 07-09-2003, 03:24 AM: Message edited by: Mr. Mopery ]

[johnny]

You're right about proven terrorists, they shouldn't be caged. They should be taken out in the field, if their whereabouts are known. Like the Israeli's did in the 70's and 80's with terrorists who thought they had a safe haven in countries like France and East Germany. No need to waste time on bringing them to court. If they are positively identified, and no innocent bystanders can be harmed, they're game for all i care.

[Mr. Mopery]

Originally posted by johnny: You're right about proven terrorists, they shouldn't be caged. They should be taken out in the field, if their whereabouts are known. Like the Israeli's did in the 70's and 80's with terrorists who thought they had a safe haven in countries like France and East Germany. No need to waste time on bringing them to court. If they are positively identified, and no innocent bystanders can be harmed, they're game for all i care.

The Israelis' assassination policies have been tolerated for too long. Whatever your argument for the past, the fact is that this policy has been instrumental in continuing the current intifada. For every dead Israeli there are 3 dead Palestians and how many of those were children?

How do you "positively identify" a terrorist? And, in executing one, how do you avoid creating two more like the first one? Or worse? Maybe by executing the terrorist's extended family?

The best weapons against terrorism are education and opportunity. Fair, free-minded education of the kind that doesn't preach "democracy" as if it were the be-all, end-all of political evolution is paramount. Treat Muslims with respect, tolerance and fairness--sometimes even when you don't receive the same treatment--and change the cycle for the better. Allow them the freedoms to voice their opinions, no matter how radical, and you'll often find that the very freedom to speak marginalizes the radicals' effectiveness.

Or sometimes they just get sick of Theocratic rule that doesn't lead by example, as has been happening in Iran in recent years.

The whole point of the Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11, rather than a thoughtful measure. We're letting terrorists turn us into fascists, which is how they see us in the first place. Who wins in the end?

Nobody who uses a library, anyway.

[johnny]

They gotta want that education themselves you know, and i wonder what kind of education your talking about. Teaching them OUR values of freedom and how one is supposed to live in peace ? They have their own educational system, and their teachers ARE highly educated religeous people, who will continue to teach them that the way we live is wrong, or immoral. As long as we can live in peace together, that's fine with me. But obviously that's not going to work. So how do you propose an education that learns that the terrorist solution is wrong ?

And about treating others with respect, even if you don't get respected in the same manner, is NOT going to work either, you should know that. That's just not the "human" way. Every action causes a reaction. If the action is one that shows no respect, expect a violent reaction in return. That's the way it is, and always has been, and no education is ever gonna change that.

[Mr. Mopery]

Not a lot of time here, so please forgive my butchering of your text.

Originally posted by johnny: They gotta want that education themselves you know, and i wonder what kind of education your talking about. Teaching them OUR values of freedom and how one is supposed to live in peace ? You can't tell an un-educated person, "you're uneducated." And they generally don't think "I want education." You have to give them the opportunity. IMO, I wouldn't only want to teach them "OUR values of freedom" because, as is highlighted by things like the Patriot Act, our values of freedom aren't perfect. The fact that we barely tolerate theocratic governments is an example of the limits of American values of freedom. If they're not OUR values, we don't value them very much. (ps. I'm not saying theocratic governments are very good either, just playing devil's advocate) They have their own educational system, and their teachers ARE highly educated religeous people, who will continue to teach them that the way we live is wrong, or immoral. As long as we can live in peace together, that's fine with me. But obviously that's not going to work. So how do you propose an education that learns that the terrorist solution is wrong ? Have you read anything about the Mullahs in Afghanistan? Most of these men were highly educated--in the Koran. Only. I'm not trashing the Koran but many of them couldn't READ, just learned through oral tradition. And the Mullahs were running Afghanistan. Many of the leaders in the Middle East regard Islam as an entire system for living, encompassing government and commerce. That's fine, but unfortunately many Muslim teachers (radical Shias, mostly) believe that the only perfect time for Islam was a 30 year period of rule under the Prophet's first four successors. Hundreds of years ago. To answer your question, I propose Islamic education which teaches tolerance and meaningful communication with the West. We need education too, and tolerance, in order to forge a peaceful and understanding relationship that respects the beliefs of (non-radical) Muslims. Even the beliefs we think are counter to our way of life--they may be counter, but it isn't OUR way of life. And about treating others with respect, even if you don't get respected in the same manner, is NOT going to work either, you should know that. That's just not the "human" way. Every action causes a reaction. If the action is one that shows no respect, expect a violent reaction in return. That's the way it is, and always has been, and no education is ever gonna change that.

I agree with you to a point, but you're saying exactly what Sharon says. And it's gotten Israel nowhere...just more dead people. Hate breeds hate, true, but the Holy Land is gonna be blood red FOREVER if people mindlessly follow the logic you posted.

[johnny]

It's not my logic Mr. Mopery, it's just a conclusion i draw from what i see day in day out, be it in my direct vicinity, or on TV. It would be nice if things were like you pointed out, but it's not likely to happen. But feel free to give me a call when it's a perfect world, and i'll buy you a beer.

Originally posted by Mr. Mopery: And how 'bout one that's not an acronym?: Gerbil Jam

Hey, I kind of like Gerbil Jam [img]smile.gif[/img] may I use it?

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: __________________________________ Planning a defense with the opposing side snooping? You're asking a lot. BTW, is the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine), a registered charity, a terrorist organization? What about the Federalist Society -- which advocates a strong removal of federal power to the states? Is that treason? The names of the groups do not matter TL, it is where their money and support go that counts. As for the Federalist society, if they openly are enciting people to take up arms against the Government, I believe they are at the very least guilty of several crimes, which you as a lawyer are very well aware You are guilty of the same crime the Act commits -- presuming guilt before it is legally established. It is impermissible to do that. Only for citizens. Different rules have to apply for unconventional threats. _____________________________________ ______________________________________ Again, you assume treason was committed before it's been determined judicially -- naughty naughty. It does not require a "strong" case of treason -- just a vague allegation. You implicitly assume benevolence on the part of the officials as well. That's not always the case. Scoundrels get elected, and scoundrels get appointed. I knew a girl whose fairly-wealth family in Thailand lost EVERYTHING when an angry neighbor made an allegation they were selling opium. The government burned their house down. This is clearly the first step down a similar path in the US. If you are caught fighting on the side of a hostile force, you have given up any rights to protection you may have had in my opinion. I think the only mistake is in keeping the person alive and bringing them back to the US. Interrogate him in the field and then do what has always been done with spies and traitors. Find a small hole to bury them in. (you may note Im not too broken up over people who join the terrorist organizations that are bent on the destruction of "the great satan) _________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Parts of the Bill of Rights pertains to non-citizens, parts do not. As old as our first founding documents is the notion of habeas corpus which is clearly infringed by this Act. Well you are the lawyer, you would know better than I. Best thing to do is just shoot them in the field so we don't have to worry about lawyers getting involved when it comes to military actions. __________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Internet service providers move to quash such subpoenas because you and I will patronize the ISP's that respect our privacy. It is a business decision to challenge subscriber info subpoenas, and they have every right. I would post NO thoughts here WHATSOEVER if every one of you great folks I pissed off could call an 800 number and get my personal and financial info. You are advocating a breakdown of the freedom that the internet has helped return to us. The gov't has been seeking to break this freedom for years, but we citizens won't have it. But speak the magic word "Bin Laden" and *poof* we all roll over. TL, ummm I don't know where yo got the Idea that the Internet provided security for your personal info. More likely than not I can dig up more info on you than you would like all because of the Internet. It also being a public domain, should mean that since it is PUBLIC that the government should be free to go there too. As for rolling over...I haven't [img]smile.gif[/img] It may seem like it some times though [img]smile.gif[/img] _____________________________________________ No, it's true. And, it's why I have to remember to take my crack cocaine out of the dash everytime I go to the airport. ALL SEARCHES SHOULD BE REASONABLE. Today we pass a law saying any search at an airport is reasonable, based on security concerns. Tomorrow we pass a law saying any search on a highway is reasonable, based on security concerns. The next day, we have no 4th Amendment protection. I disagreed with him because his position is too smplistic. There will be a reason for suspicion for any searches conducted. What the provision actually does is allows them to have the suspicion but yet be free from being forced to say what it was so that the ACLU and bleeding heart types won't be able to bog down the investigation. Boy, will you disagree when some British chap named Ray Engle who has connections to a guy named Ahmad flies to the country, gets put on a no-fly list, and then gets YOU popped because the bureacracy spit out your name as a red flag. Considering that the name is German, yeah I would be [img]smile.gif[/img] Again the protest aganst this, is in my opinion crying for a minorty of passengers. If 3 billion people fly in ten years and 20 of them are accidently misidentified, I think thats a fairly good average. Expecting perfection in any system is ludicrous. _____________________________________________ _________________________________________________ But, you must admit it is bullying at its finest. Coercion of a foul nature. I don't see how it is coercion or bullying. I see it as reasonable. I disagree that the public has the right to know "EVERYTHING". ____________________________________________ Yeah, those horrible schools harboring free thinkers -- glad they closed THAT loophole. I have a friend who is the Immigration lawyer for a college. It is all she does. She is on the payroll at 60K+ to perform this one service full-time. The INS issues on campuses go up there with the worst of your education spending waste you love to cite. Adding more fuel, and more bureons, to the fire will not help. Actually Im talkign about a very real and serious problem I have witnessed with my own eyes on campuses here. There are some major Islamic hate groups spreading a lot of propaganda to the Islamic students. It is some of the miost vile and hate filled garbage ever to be uttered, and yet the people doing this are in the country in many cases illegally after having violated their student visa's. I am not one that likes to give our enemies easy acceess and help in causing problems. _______________________________________ ______________________________________________ Look, it's simple. There are two categories: POW and civilians. "Enemy combatant" is a pure BS term that even someone with GWB's dim wits should not have let be coined. Now who is resorting to rhetoric and political biases? _________________________________________________ See, here is our en passe. I have no faith in our system, and I think it is widely abused. I also realize that on a purely philosophical level, a free society has a duty to mistrust those who are in power. Actually I don't disagree with you here. In that I believe abuses have happened, and want to see stricter controlls, and a citizen should (and is) free to question their government. I did not respond to every point -- some you had were valid, and some parts of the article were a lot of "making hay."

[wellard]

Q* What does America stand for?

Not democracy.refer 5 to 4 high court ruling in Bush v Gore.

Not the land of the free

The patriot act just about defies all major points in the American constitution as we overseas know it. While I may not be able to back up timbers points with facts. There is a great Australian joke from a film, which deals with our own constitution. It goes, when asked specifically what part of the constitution has been broken the lawyer replies "the vibe your honour, it's against the vibe".

MagiK ask yourself, in years to come when people ask what is America? can you honestly reply "It's the land of the free"

Is America, once the beacon for human rights and ideals, the resting place for those oppressed and victimised, now a monolith to past glories?