Our rights are being taken away-Patriot Act

[pparaska]

The only legal prosecution of a terrorist group in the U.S. has been overturned because it was obtained illegally. Now the government is pursuing deportation.

 

A great example of where the American "justice" system failed us. Justice would have meant life imprisonment or (my preference) death to those guys. The fact that the irrefutable evidence of terrorist acts and plannig was obtained illegally got them off the hook. Talk about an injustice. I say deport them to a small island somewhere, where real Americans can hunt them down wiht small caliber rifles.

[Mikelly]

Actually that isn't the case...

 

The pre-ban guns had up to 20 round capacity clips in them... The Glock 17 I used to carry had 17 rounds plus one up the pipe.

 

My new glock, model 27 carries 9 in the clip and one up the pipe... The same round capacity that its full framed companion carries... 9 rounds plus one up the pipe. The old gun was a 9mm, and the new is .40 cal. Nockdown power is the #1 reason I bought it, and I carry three clips with it in my fanny pack... I'm considering the new Taurus Colt 45 five shot snub nose lightweight... Bottom line is if you can't hit and incapacitate your target in five rounds, you are likely dead, or have scared the threat away anyway.

 

Clinton's Ban on assault weapons goes back to an earlier statement I made and that few have publically hit on...

 

What good came from John Kerry as a senator? What positive difference has been made in his wake? How about GW Bush, prior to his place in the whitehouse? What steller impact did he make as Governor of Texas? What was the greater good either of these back markers made on society as a whole?

 

I don't care about their pathetic records in the military. Both served in some capacity... both did as they have in public office... "Good enough for Gov't" is the term that comes to mind when discussing both of these men... What G-O-O-D have they done???

 

So sad that we would focus on the dirt, and not see the real tragedy in their opportunities missed... These two men are self serving, have very little good to show for their efforts to "represent" their states in federal gov't... So why would the two most powerful political parties in the WORLD pick these to back markers to fill such vaulted placed in history? Anyone? BUELLER?

 

The answer when we return...

 

And now a message from our sponser... 8)

 

Mike the fence sitter...

[JMortensen]

Maybe we'll get some Texans to answer that question Mike, but I seem to remember a lot of Democratic Texas legislators throwing support behind Bush in the last election. Wasn't that the whole "uniter not a divider" thing. Guess he can't run on that one anymore. Still it seemed like he was VERY popular in Texas as governor.

[pparaska]

No' date=' I'm just fine with uncle sam watching my PC and checking out my phone logs... I've got nothing to hide, and anyone who thinks this is a real invasion on their privacies needs to go back and READ what the intent of the Patriot Act will be used for...[/quote']

 

You say its ok if the government watches you on the internet and listens to your conversations because you have nothing to hide, so it would be ok to let them search through your mailbox and read your mail, or better yet, put cameras in your house to watch your every move? It would be fine right? You have nothing to hide.

 

I think I know why Mike feels that way - the same reason that I do. Let's just say that to have certain kinds of employment , you have to sign papers that give away parts of your "freedom" from being watched. That's the way it HAS to be.

 

Consider the following:

 

We are at WAR. Unless you truly believe that, none of the rest of what I'm going to say matters.

 

This is a war that has no home country to target, no uniforms or outward bases or posts to attack. Just cowardly individuals and small cells that are great at hiding and mixing in and laying low until they strike.

 

TELL ME - How the hell else are you going to fight such a war than to "give up" some privacy rights?

 

Is your safety or the safety of the US and American's abroad less important than the government taking some of your privacy rights?

 

In all wars that the US has been in besides this one and the cold war, I'd say the answer was probably no - but there are instances where if we had caught certain spys in earlier wars, we could have won more quickly.

 

But in the very real WAR ON TERRORISM, I see no other way. But I'm open for suggestions.

 

Let's say that you REALLY suspect someone of being a terrorist (whether it means laundering money, gathering money or supplies, acting as a safe haven for other terrorists, planning terrorist acts, commiting terrorist acts). Let's say that the person you suspect gives EVERY outward appearance of being an upstanding US citizen. No speeding tickets, pays taxes ahead of time, everybody thinks he's a great guy and role model for others. But you have seen or heard a few things that make you think he's a terrorist (connected to terrorist organizations, etc.).

 

You go to the police or FBI with this info, and before the Patriot act, they show you the door, saying we need real evidence to go after an upstanding citizen with wire taps, etc.

 

Now, post Patriot Act, the government has the possibilty of having a way of at least checking this individual out. If he's found to show no real terrorist behavior, they'll get bored and spend their resources looking at someone else. But if they find he's connected to terrorism, they can look to see how far and what the other players are.

 

Let's say he's a terrorist.

 

Remember, he doesn't spout terrorist propaganda, doesn't wear a uniform that says he's a terrorist, doesn't own a gun or any other "army issue" that could brand him as a terrorist. But he's actually a very important planner for a local cell in your home town. He has connections to top Al Qeda members. He is planning a very deadly attack on a nearby area or event that you and your loved ones will be at/near. (BTW, we had several of the 9/11 planners and attackers living within miles of my house. This stuff HAPPENS!)

 

Should he have the full protection of his privacy?

 

The problem is that people want to see black and white situations. Keep all personal privacy freedoms and not knowing about how the enemy is working to kill us right under our noses versus losing SOME privacy freedoms and increasing our safety and effectiveness in this war.

 

Both choices are non-optimal. Either makes you feel as if you're in a non-perfect world. GUESS WHAT - YOU ARE!

 

Stop thinking like an idealist and tell us what your answers are. The far left is full of illogical idealists, and pieces like the one done by the ACLU on the Patriot act are designed to feed on that. The far right plays into the religous zealot's way of thinking. Stay in the middle and think pragmatically, with your brain, not your emotions.

 

If voting populous does this, I think I know which way the election in November will go - unless the Terrorists have a Madrid-like victory effect. I believe there will be numerous terrorist attempts in the US just before Nov 2. I can only hope that they will all be thwarted. But my pessimistic side says they won't. My real fear is that the terrorists will get at least one large act to go off as planned and the voters will be scared into a "we have to make a change" way of thinking like the idiots in Spain did. Talk about Sheople!

 

I also believe that the Patriot Act is important to thwarting some if not all of those attacks. THE ENEMY IS AMONG US. More than ever before. So they're not killing you right this minute. You just bought something from one of them in their store - you don't realize it. Then months later they are linked to a terrorist act that kills someone you know and/or love. Does the fact that they were sly enough to making you feel co0mfortable mean they are any worse than a soldier with a gun that shoots any enemy within his sights?

 

Kerry scares the hell out of me. More than any candidate ever has.

 

Bush's speech on 9/20/2001 showed incredible clarity of where we are really heading. I think what's happened is that too many Americans don't believe there's a real war taking place because it's one we can't stamp out with our high-tech weaponry. This is an American war on terror and a holy war to the terrorists (at least the ones that have been brain-washed that it is). I don't for one instant think Bin Laden thinks it's REALLY a holy war - just a way for him to gain more POWER.

[JMortensen]

TELL ME - How the hell else are you going to fight such a war than to "give up" some privacy rights?

 

Well the murder rate has dropped in a number of states that have concealed carry laws. They didn't need to read people's email to lower the rate either. How about issuing a buttload of concealed carry permits to citizens with no criminal record?

 

Should he have the full protection of his privacy?

 

I think he should IF he's a citizen. I have had several friends try to tell me that the US should treat everyone in this world as if they were US citizens, whether they be hostile countries or illegal aliens or actual citizens. That to me just doesn't make any sense at all. But citizens should get the benefit of their Constitutional rights.

 

Just because the Patriot Act is good for the war on terror doesn't mean that it is good for the country as a whole. I think that the terrorists are going to have successful attacks on us regardless of the Patriot Act, and the better way to deal with the problem is to let the ordinary people who are going to be affected by that situation have an opportunity to stop it.

 

I'd rather we all keep our secrets, but when the terrorist shows his hand he comes up against 100's of armed citizens. I know it won't stop the Timothy McVeighs, but I'd sure hate to see us adopt a system where Timothy McVeigh wouldn't have a chance to make a successful attack.

[pparaska]

TELL ME - How the hell else are you going to fight such a war than to "give up" some privacy rights?

 

Well the murder rate has dropped in a number of states that have concealed carry laws. They didn't need to read people's email to lower the rate either. How about issuing a buttload of concealed carry permits to citizens with no criminal record?

 

I'm all for that method of crime prevention - except even the most level headed person can snap - and if they are carrying a gun - well...

 

Should he have the full protection of his privacy?

 

I think he should IF he's a citizen. I have had several friends try to tell me that the US should treat everyone in this world as if they were US citizens, whether they be hostile countries or illegal aliens or actual citizens. That to me just doesn't make any sense at all. But citizens should get the benefit of their Constitutional rights.

 

I'm with you on one thing. One huge country on the planet where anyone that can manage to get there gets incredible freedoms - that's a country ripe for terrrorist acts....

 

But being a citizen really doesn't mean someone is not a terrorist. There are sleeper citizens....

 

Just because the Patriot Act is good for the war on terror doesn't mean that it is good for the country as a whole.

 

I don't like to see civil liberties taken away - I really don't. But I also don't think that we can come up with a way of keeping all our civil liberties and live without terror. Maybe that's the answer. We lose the war on terror, but keep our civil liberties intact. I dunno.

 

 

I think that the terrorists are going to have successful attacks on us regardless of the Patriot Act

 

I agree. But it stand to reason that with the Patriot act we have a better chance of finding these terrorists before they strike.

 

, and the better way to deal with the problem is to let the ordinary people who are going to be affected by that situation have an opportunity to stop it.

 

I'd rather we all keep our secrets, but when the terrorist shows his hand he comes up against 100's of armed citizens. I know it won't stop the Timothy McVeighs, but I'd sure hate to see us adopt a system where Timothy McVeigh wouldn't have a chance to make a successful attack.

 

One problem with that line of reasoning. I don't care if you have 1000 citizens packing guns standing next to a building - when the terrorist drives up and blows it up, they'd not have any warning to stop it... It may have helped those on the planes on 9/11 - but the FAA doesn't like guns on planes - except if you're a law officer.

[JMortensen]

I'm all for that method of crime prevention - except even the most level headed person can snap - and if they are carrying a gun - well...

 

So what? I'm not saying that [insert your gun crime here] wasn't a tragedy but that doesn't mean that gun ownership by our citizens is not worth the risk. Citizens are capable of wielding all kinds tools that have the capability of determining the life and death of another citizen. That's always going to be the case.

 

But being a citizen really doesn't mean someone is not a terrorist. There are sleeper citizens....

 

Agreed. And there are normal people who go berzerk at the Post Office. Should we end gun ownership because of some jackass who just can't take it anymore? I think not. Lots of people disagree with me I suppose.

 

But it stand to reason that with the Patriot act we have a better chance of finding these terrorists before they strike.

 

That's the ONLY legitimate argument I've heard for the Patriot Act. I don't think that the potential dangers of the abuse of the Patriot Act outweigh the benefits, at least in theory. You're compromising the rights of 280 million people here. I don't think that Bush or Cheney are out to get me, and my political distaste for them is not the reason that I disapprove of the act. In fact I will vote for Bush. I disapprove because it would become easier and easier to continue the erosion of civil liberties as more terror attacks happen, and I don't see them stopping. It's a slippery slope thing to me.

 

One problem with that line of reasoning. I don't care if you have 1000 citizens packing guns standing next to a building - when the terrorist drives up and blows it up, they'd not have any warning to stop it... It may have helped those on the planes on 9/11 - but the FAA doesn't like guns on planes - except if you're a law officer.

 

Agreed. I'll take the risk of the car bomb over the totalitarian govt that prevents it from happening though.

[Pop N Wood]

Some interesting thoughts here. I like to think of this site as one barometer of public opinion.

 

Someone said think with your head, not your emotions. Fear is an emotion. We can’t let it get the better of us.

 

I think selectively interpreting the constitution is unforgivable. It is not a road I am willing to go down. IMO the current situation simply does not warrant some of the extreme responses.

 

I know I am in a minority here, but I honestly have a greater fear of being victimized by a situation like Richard Jewel faced than anything a Mohammad Atta could throw my way. And I know I am really in the minority when I say it is unreasonable for us to think we can totally prevent another terrorist attack. There are simply too many nuts rattling around in the bottom of the can. So no, I don’t think we need to give up on the constitution just yet. More importantly, I don’t know that I would want to live in a world that is so strict that it could positively prevent another attack.

 

This problem is not going away anytime soon. We need forgo short term cures in and take more of a long term outlook.

[tannji]

A tiny bit of background before I comment....

 

I grew up in a commune, met Dr. Leary as a kid, Grew up in poverty but didnt know it, was part of a religeous cult, skipped school until high school, and served in the navy, in Nuke Subs. Go ahead and stereotype me... if you dare!!

 

90% of the comments made here criticizing the Patriot Act are based on idealistic emotion. Idealism is for peacetime. We use Realists to fix the Idealist's mistakes in times of war. President Lincoln made some of the grossest violations of personal rights in the history of the country, and we not only survived, we prospered, and got those rights back. This is no different. It is fine for someone to say they would take their chances on car bombs over losses of personal freedom.... I tend to believe that there are a few million people around the world with actual experience who would beg to differ, as well as wonder at the cavalier attitude of Americans. How can you we say we support our troops, but we will take our chances with car bombs here? Many Americans are far too willing to take stands that they havent fought for, nor would in truth be willing to stand and fight for. The Patriot Act, as unpleasant as it may be, is an extension of the war abroad. We should fight that war with equal effort and equal determination, and thank our men getting bloody that we DO NOT have to take car bombs for granted on our own soil, because they certainly do.

 

I once was awakened at 3:00 AM by police pounding on my door downstairs. I went to my window in my underwear, and found about 10 guns trained upon me, and a bullhorn adviseing me to come down and open up. (I complied, and remembered to put some pants on a little too late.) Turns out they had a tip that I was harbouring a prison escapee, with a VERY violent past, who was armed and on the run. Furthermore, He had been staying with his family, in the apartment under MINE, and was later caught after a very close call with a hostage. How concerned should I have been about my civil rights in that situation? Like MOST of YOU (!!) I had no time to worry about it until after the fact, but I was alive and free to bitch about the violation, IF I so chose. I did not. You all have the right to bitch about it should you choose. Just do so without the respect of many of us who have served, and who so unjustifiably feel that we have a slightly more Realistic view of our personal freedoms, and what they are worth.

[Z-Dreamer]

What "GOOD" has Bush done for me?

 

Well besides making me "FEEL" safer today as opposed to what a Gore presidency (shudder) would have brought me. Last year I received a check for $1,600.00, due to president Bush, for my four children I am currently raising up to be fine citizens. Our previous president gave me nothing, but took more of my hard earned money in the form of a higher tax bill.

 

I do not agree with everything this president has done and I certainly don't trust any government entity farther than I could throw them. But with all things considered, I'll again vote Bush/Cheney come November.

 

Mark

[johnc]

Why don't we look at the facts as they relate to Patriot Act abuses:

 

1. The Patriot Act includes a provision requiring the Inspector General of the Justice Department to review any and all complaints about civil liberties and civil-rights abuses involving Justice Department personnel.

 

2. The inspector general has to make a twice-a-year report to Congress on potential civil rights and civil liberties abuses by Justice Department officials.

 

3. The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility is the actual investigative department tasked with investigating any complaint of abuse regarding the Patriot Act.

 

4. The latest report expected to be released tomorrow covers the period between Dec. 16, 2003, and June 21, 2004.

 

5. During that time, the inspector general received 1,613 such complaints, the vast majority of which did not require investigation. Nearly 1,000 of the complaints did not involve a Justice Department employee or included farfetched claims, such as that the government was interfering with a person's thoughts or pumping poisonous gas into someone's home. Another 410 complaints were outside the inspector general's jurisdiction, including claims of improper prison medical care and inadequate library facilities. Of the remaining 208 complaints, only 13 were determined to warrant further review, the most prominent of which Brandon Mayfield case.

 

Mr. Mayfield, a Muslim convert, was arrested May 6 on a material witness warrant after an FBI analysis concluded he was a match for a fingerprint found on a bag containing detonators like those used in the attacks on trains in Madrid that killed nearly 200 people and wounded 2,000. A few weeks later, Mr. Mayfield was released after the FBI admitted it had made a mistake and that the fingerprint did not match Mr. Mayfield's. The investigation is focusing on how the fingerprint error was made.

 

Mr. Mayfield's arrest and detention were the result of a bad fingerprint analysis, not improper implementation of the Patriot Act. You and I (pre-Patriot Act) have always faced the risk of a bad fingerprint analysis, incorrect witness identification, erroneous license plate identification, etc. That's a basic risk we all face.

[JMortensen]

That's all fine and dandy John, and I don't think anyone here is really claiming that their rights have been violated (your previously used argument on other threads about this subject). The issue is that the law allows these rights to be violated and then uses the govt to ensure that they won't be.

 

Kinda like letting the fox into the chicken coop, then allowing the chickens the right to complain and giving the fox review powers to determine if any chickens had been wronged by the fox.

[Mikelly]

Tannji, Let me first say that you're a great American and I'm proud to know you... Second, let me say that you, in your post, captured EVERYTHING I feel about the Patriot Act, and our current environment...

 

Mark, Re-read what I said in my previous post... BEFORE Bush was President, what did he do? And BTW, the Democrats will argue that that check you, me and everyone else got, contributed directly to our deficite. I'd not toot that horn to loudly...

 

One of the things Clinton will forever be credited with, and I will NOT argue, and history will not dispute is that during his presidency, we dug ourselves out of the deficite we had previously been buried in. Say all you want about "It was the work previously set in motion by Reagan and Bush Sr... " Doesn't count. Period. DOES NOT COUNT... Argue it all you want... Beside the stained dress and Monica's footnote in his presidency, our children's children will be forever taught that Clinton turned around our nation economy. Again, as John and others have commented (Most recently Phil and Tannji), set emotion aside and look at FACTS.... Assertions and emotion need not apply, or the waters just get more and more muddy on both sides of the political river of muck! 8)

 

Mike 8)

[Pop N Wood]

Guess I should start reciting my resume here and all I have done, and continue to do, for the defense of this country. Don't consider it relevant.

 

IMO the patriot act is an emotional decision, and in a way an admission of defeat. I am overstating things to make a point, but an element of fact none the less. Why do we have to tolerate another Manzanar? How does apologizing for it years later make it alright?

 

I guess I have too much faith in the strength of this country and our way of life that I just don't see the need to compromise either in the pursuit of "terrorists". That statement is just too nebulous and open ended for me. I don't consider this emotional idealism, but rather a rational evaluation of the situation. For some reason the phrase "don't throw the baby out with the bath water" keeps coming to mind.

 

And I stand by my previous statement. It will be the courts that will strike down the offending portions of the act. The "government" will never voluntarily relinquish that much power.

 

BTW. Bush is probably the first president who actually gave people like me a tax cut. Seems like the rich have their protectors and the poor theirs, but the rest of us in the middle just keep taking it year after year. While I appreciate the adjustment in my favor, I also wish we could do something about the deficit. Bush has to face the negative fall out of two wars and record oil prices while Clinton enjoyed stable oil prices and the imagined wealth of the dot com bubble. But I do hope Bush can see the difference in the economy since his election day and won’t be afraid to make unpopular decisions if needed.

[tannji]

Manzanar? I dont recall any Japanese getting released with apologies from their camps due to mistaken identity or technical foul-ups.... and I think comparing the Patriot Act to the WWII camps is a little extreme. Ironically, our current technology will probably prevent the Patriot Act from becoming another Manzanar. Nor do I see it as an admission of defeat. Perhaps you meant of failure? We certainly failed in a situation that perhaps we couldnt have suceeded, but should have done better in. Defeat is too all-incompassing, we lost a battle, but are still fighting the war, by my reckoning. I would MUCH rather apologise for violating some liberties later, than attend more funerals sooner. You are however correct in your assessment of where the Patriot Act will be constrained and repealed... in the courts. Thus my comparison to another "dark period" in our history, the interments and executions of the civil war. The courts eventually dealt with that security method as well.

[Z-Dreamer]

Mikelly, what Bush did or didn't do before he was president was not as much a concern to me as what Clinton/Gore did in there previous eight years. The only reason Clinton had the ABILITY to pay down the deficit as much as he did is that he became president just BEFORE the BIG .COM boom and the tax revenues that came from them. That and the slash and burn measures he used in gutting our military and security funding. As to the deficit, our country has been in the red since what, Roosevelt? And as to what the demo's think or say I could CARELESS, how my government effects me, my family and my wallet is what concerns me! I don't believe much of what any elected official says let alone the media!

 

Nice thread!

 

Mark

[Heavy Z]

The only reason Clinton had the ABILITY to pay down the deficit as much as he did is that he became president just BEFORE the BIG .COM boom and the tax revenues that came from them.

 

True. So you like our strategy better now that times are tight? Spending has gone through the roof and with less tax revenue from a juicy tax cut, we borrow at breakneck speed. You may feel comfortable now, but our currency will continue to weaken if this isn't curtailed.

 

As to the deficit, our country has been in the red since what, Roosevelt?

 

$1.2 trillion when Carter left office, nearly quadrupled 12 years later by Reagan and Bush1. Clinton borrowed during his first term too, and now we have Bush2 steering us into uncharted financial territory. That tax cut you got - the $1,900? That money was borrowed, sad to say. Also be advised that the average family's share of the war works out to $2,000 (and counting) so I guess you could say it's even money.

 

Keep worrying about terrorists, just don't forget to worry about the financial mess we're leaving to our children. It may prove to be more dangerous than would appear.

 

 

P.S. Here's an article from today's paper underscoring the severity of our debt:

 

Speeches ignore impending U.S. debt disaster

No mention of fiscal gap estimated as high as $72 trillion

 

Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau

Sunday, September 12, 2004

 

Washington -- The first of the 77 million-strong Baby Boom generation will begin to retire in just four years. The economic consequences of this fact -- as scary as they are foreseeable -- are all but ignored by President Bush and Democratic challenger John Kerry, who discuss just about everything but the biggest fiscal challenge of modern times.

 

Yet whoever wins the 2004 race will become the first U.S. president to confront what sober-minded experts across the political spectrum describe as an impending "fiscal catastrophe" lying right around the corner.

 

Astronomical federal debt, coming due as the Baby Boom generation collects Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, is enormous enough to swamp the promises both candidates are making to voters, whether for tax cuts, health care, 40,000 more troops or anything else.

 

"Chilling" is the word U.S. Comptroller General David Walker uses to describe the budget outlook.

 

"The long-term budget projections are just horrifying," added Leonard Burman, co-director of tax policy for the Urban Institute. "I've got four children and it really disturbs me. I just think it's irresponsible what we're doing to them."

 

What these numbers portend are crippling tax increases on workers, slashed benefits for retirees, gutted budgets for homeland security, highways, research and everything else, and an economic decline or a financial collapse that devastates the middle class, as happened recently in debt-strapped Argentina. Eventually, analysts insist, someone -- today's children or tomorrow's elderly or both -- will pay this debt.

 

Traditional budget measures used by politicians and the press give what Walker and many others call a highly misleading view of the U.S. debt. These focus on publicly held debt already incurred, now at $4.5 trillion, or 10-year budget forecasts like the one released last week by the Congressional Budget Office showing a record $422 billion deficit this year and a $2.3 trillion 10- year deficit.

 

'Fiscal gap' in the trillions

 

But these figures, worrisome enough, are deceptive because they ignore future liabilities such as Social Security and Medicare payments to the Baby Boomers. An array of government and private analysts put the actual U.S. "fiscal gap," which means all future receipts minus all future obligations, at $40 trillion (Government Accountability Office) to $72 trillion (Social Security Board of Trustees).

 

These are not sums, but present-value figures, heavily discounted to show in today's dollars what it would cost to pay off the debt immediately. The International Monetary Fund estimates the gap at $47 trillion, the Brookings Institution at $60 trillion.

 

"To give you idea how big the problem is," said Laurence Kotlikoff, economics chairman at Boston University, who has written extensively on the subject, to close a $51 trillion fiscal gap, "you'd have to have an immediate and permanent 78 percent hike in the federal income tax."

 

These obligations are not imaginary. And unlike the 1980s and 1990s, economic growth cannot bail out the government because the Baby Boom retirement is at hand. Those born in 1946 will reach age 62 in 2008, allowing them to take early retirement and receive Social Security benefits...

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/12/MNG2S8NOI21.DTL

[Guest Phil1934]

The Libertarian candidate has only spent $20,000 or so so his campaign consists of two billboards saying the average American's share of the debot is $300,000. For 140 million taxpayers thats a $42 trillion dollar debt. If it's $72 trillion, that's $500,000 each. Look at it like your wife bought a LARGE vacation home while you were at work. What's the monthly payment going to be?

[Pop N Wood]

Manzanar? I dont recall any Japanese getting released with apologies from their camps due to mistaken identity or technical foul-ups.... and I think comparing the Patriot Act to the WWII camps is a little extreme. Ironically, our current technology will probably prevent the Patriot Act from becoming[/i'] another Manzanar. Nor do I see it as an admission of defeat. Perhaps you meant of failure? We certainly failed in a situation that perhaps we couldnt have suceeded, but should have done better in. Defeat is too all-incompassing, we lost a battle, but are still fighting the war, by my reckoning. I would MUCH rather apologise for violating some liberties later, than attend more funerals sooner. You are however correct in your assessment of where the Patriot Act will be constrained and repealed... in the courts. Thus my comparison to another "dark period" in our history, the interments and executions of the civil war. The courts eventually dealt with that security method as well.

 

 

Apologies? We paid them reparations. How much more of a Mea Culpa do you want? Mistaken identity is not the issue. A flat out violation of constitutional protections by a nation at war. How is that not directly relevant?

 

And yes, I mean “defeatâ€. As near as I can figure (and who knows what these nuts really want), the terrorists whole goal is to bring down our way of life. Like I said, I am overstating things, but aren’t we doing that when we knowingly turn our backs on our constitutional beliefs?

 

I would MUCH rather apologise for violating some liberties later, than attend more funerals sooner.

 

You are unnecessarily limiting yourself. Why not avoid the funerals and not have to issue any apologies in the process? We are more than capable of doing both. Part of the problem was being alerted to the threat. I get a little peeved at the second guessers who want to blame someone other than the terrorists for 9/11 (not saying you are one of those, because you obviously are not). Before 9/11 we were a peace time nation (more or less). Now we are fully mobilized and alert to the threats. The fact that the courts will be the ones to overturn the act, and everyone knows it, must also show that those same people know it is a violation of the constitution.

 

People keep bringing up past transgressions during times of war to show this is to be expected and thus somehow OK. I keep bringing them up as a warning so that we don’t make the same mistakes again. Just because we did it “wrong†before (a very subjective statement) doesn’t mean we should do it the same way again.

 

One last thing. “Our current technology†is the one thing that scares the ever loving bejesus out of me. If anything we need to strengthen and better define some of our laws to better deal with how powerful the information revolution has become.

 

You know one of these days I need to start on my V8 swap so I can spend more time in the other forums.

[Mikelly]

Pop, I disagree... and Furthermore, I really don't care about "rights Violations".

 

I take a polygraph test and suffer an extesnive background investigation every five years. Every year in July I submit a financial disclosure statement for my total earnings and debt for the last twelve months. I have nothing to hide, nothing to worry about and nothing to fear. Maybe I do trust in our system to much, but it is a price I'm willing to pay to do the work I do and get the inflated salary that my company dares to pay me.

 

No, I'm not sorry for the way we are currently dealing with sleeper cells and internal support networks for terror organizations... Sorry, but I'm all for public executions and death of THEIR way of life... I liken these extremists to a cancer that needs to be exterminated... Erase them from the face of this earth...

 

I also have another saying...

"Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck... Must be a duck!" If you don't want to be mistaken for being involved with an organization, or person who might potentially be suspected of supporting terrorism, then don't hang around them, donate money, or associate with their type. Easy as it gets in my eyes...

 

Kill them all, and let Allaah sort them out... I'm tired of trying. This is war, and we have been attacked and CONTINUE to be attacked in Iraq and Afghanastan... Hit them, hit them hard and erase them from existance... and I will shed NO TEARS if a few innocent bystanders get axed in the process, because god knows enough innocents have been taken in the past by them... the nature of the beast.

 

In ideal circumstances, we can deal with situations ideally... Unfortunately I'm tired of playing by rules those who oppose us choose to avoid.

Mike 8)