Our rights are being taken away-Patriot Act

[pparaska]

Regarding the war in Iraq (and no - I dont have the answer)' date=' I just find it interesting that we, America, were manipulated into WWI w/the sinking of the Lucitania whose events leading up to that event are highly suspect. And the fact that the History Channel reports how Roosevelt, who did nothing, had prior knowledge of Japans fleet before the Pearl Harbour attack to which many of the Fleet Admirals adamantly objected to parking the USA fleet in a coke bottle harbour...to which the attack on Pearl Harbour was the initial reason for America getting involved in WWII. Now we have the 911 event where the Zogby poll indicates that 66% of the people in New York believe that the current administration had prior knowledge and allowed the event to take place...which resulted in "The War on Terror" and the Patriot Act 1,2 and how ever many more acts are needed to make us "SAFE".[/quote']

 

In case anyone is looking for that info:

 

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2004/310804zogbypoll.htm

 

I'm shocked. What would be the motive for the Bush administration or anyone in the US government to ALLOW the 9/11 attacks to happen, with full knowledge of the approximate timing and devastation?

 

It sounds to me like a psychology experiment has been bought and paid for. I for one would love to have a psychologists point of view on this poll. I think it has something to do with the fact that Bush "stole" the 2000 election, NYC is damned near 100% Democratic, and Nov 2 is less than 50 days away - but I'm probably all washed up on that.

 

Do I give two shits if over half of 808 NYC residents think it's a conspiracy? Hell no. What I think is what matters to me, not what a bunch of pole respondents think.

 

I'm sorry Kevin, the conspiracy theory stuff just doesn't wash with me very easily - just as I don't believe in the Illuminati.

 

I dont have any answers. I just hate the sneaky inkling I have that we are being politically manipulated.

 

Yes, I agree, you are. By Zogby and 911truth.org, and the Democratic war machine and a bunch of leftist liberals in and out of the media.

 

Let's face one thing (I'll call it my "truth"). A large portion of the US citizenry is STILL pissed that GWB "Stole" the election from them. I see the seething everyday. It's DISGUSTING. Many millions of man-hours have been wasted since Nov 2000 on this issue. And it comes up in disguise over the Patriot Act, Iraq, the War on Terror, etc.

 

But that's o.k. It's a free country. And I'm glad I live in it. I just hope we can get someone in office that can make the hard decisions and steer us through the hell of the 21st century.

[Mikelly]

Pop, I 100% agree with your last post. I've said repeatedly that Bush was THE BEST candidate to deal with a 9/11 like disaster and I'm proud of the way he handled that one, only 8 months into learning how to run a country first hand. I'm still amazed that people FORGET that part...

 

Pete, Yup, we're ALL being duped. But let's spread the blame around... There is enough for democrats and republicans to share... This has been one of the biggest muck raking political experiences I can remember.

 

Perceptions of BOTH candidates have been staged by each side... this is Psy-Ops at its best.

 

We're all pawns being played...

 

Mike 8)

[Kevin Shasteen]

..' date=' Perceptions of BOTH candidates have been staged by each side... this is Psy-Ops at its best.

 

We're all pawns being played...

 

Mike 8)[/quote']

 

This is all I have trying to say all along...ONE GIANT PSY-OPS - AND AT ITS BEST! We are definately being played.

 

If a Psy-Ops exists for the forum of Presidential Elections...do you honestly believe that the Psy-Ops ends there?

 

Question: If you are not at the root of this "Psy-Ops" and you are not privy to who began said "Psy-Ops" then how can you even begin to put parameters around said Psy-Ops or even begin to identify its players as being Republican or Democrat? IMHO, this is much bigger than simple politics.

 

Simply admitting that a Psy-Ops exists...sounds rather conspiratatorial to me...Look out you may be one of those UFO abducted crazy anal-probed people for saying that!

 

I personally believe we will never know the truth and that somewhere in the middle of both sides of the story's extremes will the truth be found. This is why I am not shy about discussing both sides...regardless of how bizarre one side over the other may be.

 

I definately believe we are being played...not only in our elections, but the money issue and the State -vs- Fed citizen issues and spirtually to boot (I believe that pretty much covers the full gamut )

 

As far as getting off topic...does anyone know the price of chickens in China?

 

Kevin,

(Yea,Still an Inliner)

[Mikelly]

Chickens in China, Or chinese chickens?

 

Couldn't resist...

 

Mike 8)

[Kevin Shasteen]

 

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2004/310804zogbypoll.htm

 

I'm shocked. What would be the motive for the Bush administration or anyone in the US government to ALLOW the 9/11 attacks to happen' date=' with full knowledge of the approximate timing and devastation? [/quote']

 

Pete,

 

I have no political affiliation w/any party so I simply colllect any data I can, regardless of how weird it may be at first sight - then form my opinion.

 

Was the Bush admin involved? I dont know - all I can do is listen to others who have researched the subject: both mainstream media and alternative media. Again - somewhere in the middle we will trip & stumble over the truth.

 

If one of our admin were involved you asked WHY? What would be the point? I guess to answer that question we would have to ask a philosophical question, and that is, "Is Evil real and does it exist in our day?" What is the difference between a simple white lie -vs- a huge black lie? Spiritually speaking - what is the difference between lieing, stealing, or murdering?

 

To answer the question you would also have to ask yourself another question, "If evil exists - then how would you recognize it? Would evil simply come up to face to face & introduce itself? I doubt it.

 

This is why I really enjoy attempting to make a connection between polotics, economics, and religion: they are all interconnected.

 

As someone else said earlier: paterns w/in patterns. Some patterns are merely happenstance, while others are not so coincedental.

 

I dont beleive anything anyone tells me w/out first hearing the other side - regardless of how bizarre it may sound. I will not be cow-tailed into a corner by labels from others into dismissing the other side. I want to hear both sides...then I'll form my opinion.

 

Were you aware that the Bible has a prophecy in Isaiah where he proclaimed that Syria would be laid waste, nothing but dust remaining - and that when that takes place their people would then turn to God.

 

The interesting thing is that Syria is the oldest-longest continuing city in the history of the world. Syria has never been a ghost town. Even more interesting is that we, the Northern Alliance, is now in that neighborhood proclaiming that Syria and Iran have access to terrorist, dirty bomb nuclear weaponry ect.,ect. How odd it is that we would be taking on these factions thousands of years after that prophecy was given.

 

This is why I find the interrelations of Politits, Economics, Religion so intriguing. Which one is driving the other? Is politics driving economics and religion, is religion driving polotics and economics, economics driving politics and religion? The lines are muddy - yet they are crossing one another more and more each day.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The war on terrorism - regardless of why we are in it, IMHO, is a UN road map to Jerusalem.

 

Globalism is here and the Patriotic Nationalism is constantly under attack by said globalist...who are extremely evil - but first you have to believe that evil exists and then attempt to understand what evil's mission is. If God is real and Evil is real - is in not evil's mission to separate us from God at every aspect?

 

I know my point is probably in the minority - but that is okay: I'm still extremely humbled to be in America where we can discuss this topic and appreciative that HybridZ allows such discussions.

 

Kevin,

(Yea,Still an Inliner)

[pparaska]

Kevin, after digging a bit, I answered my own question on what the motives for the Bush II administrations reason for going into Afghanistan and Iraq are. I don't have the URLs handy, but googling a bit I read a few left wing articles (anytime I see the word neo-conservative used to describe the Bush II administration, I know I'm listening to a leftist). Supposedly Cheney is the anti-christ and had deals on oil pipe lines in Afghanistan. US troops being there made it easy to make sure that happened, or something like that. Supposedly, Cheney had control of the armed forces on 9/11 and made things happen to his benefit. If I find the URL where I read that, I'll post it.

 

This smacks of super-evil at the highest coordination. That's the kind of conspiracy theory stuff that makes me wonder about the lunacy of the people who write those articles. Sure, Evil is out there. But the high levels of coordination purported to exist within the Illuminati, the Bush Adminstration, etc., that leaves me questioning the plausibility of the theory.

 

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find any counter articles on the Zogby poll while I was looking. But I made my own. Near an election, people will go to great lengths to discredit the opposition. It seems the hate between the dems and the bush administration is about as bad as it can get. I'll wait for the history lesson from someone here to tell me that this is nothing, it's been worse.

 

I tell you what, one conspiracy theory that makes sense to me, mostly because it is simple and would involve only a few people, is the one where the republican party planted the fake letters from the reservist doctor about Bush's performance or lack of it. And it makes me laugh to see Dan Rather get smeared with it. He's part of the dishonest leftist media that has brought such shame to the industry and it's good to see him get burned. Would I admonish the republicans for doing it? Yes. They needn't stoop that low - just attack Kerry on the issues over and over with rational thought and they can win the election. But they seem to lower themselves to bashing the candidate on silly stuff about Nam. But hardly as much as the Dems seem to be doing it to Bush. Viet Nam service has no bearing on what the issues are today.

 

Back to the Patriot Act - I am beginning to do some research on just how it's effected the rights of the US citizen beyond the laws we had before it. From what I've seen on a quick overview is NOT MUCH. Like others have said, the mechanisms to get info on people by the government have been in place for quite some time. They need to be updated as new forms of communication are developed. Also, to keep groups like the ACLU from doing everything in it's power to throw up road blocks to investigation and prosecution of people in the name of protecting their rights, congress needs to make sure that the executive branch does not slowly get it's hands tied to the point that no one can be investigated. The existance of the ACLU is important to the US. But it must be checked against what must be allowed as far as investigatory and prosecutory abilities of law enforcement. Otherwise we will have mayhem and anarchy. Surely someone can sight a futuristic novel that takes the opposite view from 1984 to illustrate what might happen .

 

That gets to my point on a country with free open borders and the most extensive privacy rights laws known (the US). In the age where the US is a terrorist target, how can we go on the way we have in the past with hundreds of thousands of people illegally entering the country every year, and not being able to investigate SUSPECTED enemies. I agree that it's a slippery slope toward 1984, etc. to allow the government to have more power to investigate people, but without that ablility I think we would write the death certificates of many US citizens. This is war on very unconventional terms. New ways of dealing with the combatants and their helpers need to be brought to bear. Whether we need the Patriot Act to do that is the question, just as the assault weapons ban issue is - don't the laws we have on the books give the executive branch and state/local authorities to keep us safe? Maybe new interrpetations of the existing laws is all that is needed. But that takes precious time.

 

Personally I think the assault weapons ban is a joke and needs to be left dead as it is now. The Patriot Act - I'm not sure. There are those that have made prosecuting and making a case against criminals and combatants near impossible in the name of "upholding their rights". I think we've maybe swung too far in that respect. I for one don't think that the beautiful America we live in should be a place where enemy combatants can roam mostly unchecked due to privacy laws enacted when we were worried about conventional warfare, and the way they have been interpretted to this point. The cell and satellite phone and the Internet are tools that these laws did not envision when first enacted. I've not researched it, but hopefully the privacy laws have been updated to take new technologies into consideration. But I also realize that spies and enemy combatants working covertly in the US is nothing new. But in conventional war times the number of those individuals was small and mostly their mission was to gather information, not kill as many innocent civilians as possible. Well, that's my belief anyway. I'm ready to be educated otherwise.

[Kevin Shasteen]

Pete I have no problem w/your reasoning. Technology has changed the way the entire world does things. That is the intriguing ...I'm searching for a word here.., paradox(?) or slippery slope if you will, that we are on.

 

How the Patriot Act will be utilized in its full capacity remains to be seen - just one more 911 like event or a 911^3 event here in the States and I personally believe you can kiss all our privacy goodbye.

 

With Putin caving in to the Old-School Russia (hard liners) recently; things could really get interesting if we threw that variable in the equation(?).

 

Down the slippery slope we go, where we stop no one knows.

 

Kevin,

(Yea,Still an Inliner)

[Michael]

Several members on this board, including yours truly, are or were civil servants or government contractors, and in that capacity voluntarily submitted to intrusions into our privacy and abridgement of personal liberties in order to perform the jobs that we voluntarily undertook. Sure, it stands to reason that if you’re going to hold a clearance, you dutifully fill out your SF86 every 5 or 10 years. And if your office handles such and such information, that every envelope that hits your mailbox at work gets opened before it ever reaches you. But we need to remember that the rest of America isn’t run by the DoD. At least, not yet. It’s silly to expect that the average citizen should surrender his rights with as much alacrity as do civil servants. I work in a place surrounded by barbed wire and guards with M16s. Does that bother me? Yes, to considerable extent it does. But ultimately, that’s the life that I chose. I deal with it. But WHY should we expect that all Americans should have to just deal with it?

 

It’s one thing to “have nothing to hideâ€, and therefore to cheerfully accept surveillance because the sensitivity of one’s occupation requires it. But the argument breaks down when we attempt to extend it to the general public. In the outside world, it is strictly upon suspicion of wrongdoing that surveillance is ever justifiable.

[pparaska]

Several members on this board' date=' including yours truly, are or were civil servants or government contractors, and in that capacity voluntarily submitted to intrusions into our privacy and abridgement of personal liberties in order to perform the jobs that we voluntarily undertook. Sure, it stands to reason that if you’re going to hold a clearance, you dutifully fill out your SF86 every 5 or 10 years. And if your office handles such and such information, that every envelope that hits your mailbox at work gets opened before it ever reaches you. But we need to remember that the rest of America isn’t run by the DoD. At least, not yet. It’s silly to expect that the average citizen should surrender his rights with as much alacrity as do civil servants. I work in a place surrounded by barbed wire and guards with M16s. Does that bother me? Yes, to considerable extent it does. But ultimately, that’s the life that I chose. I deal with it. But WHY should we expect that all Americans should have to just deal with it?

 

It’s one thing to “have nothing to hideâ€, and therefore to cheerfully accept surveillance because the sensitivity of one’s occupation requires it. But the argument breaks down when we attempt to extend it to the general public. In the outside world, it is strictly upon suspicion of wrongdoing that surveillance is ever justifiable.[/quote']

 

Michael, you're talking about me as well, although the place I work doesn't have barbed wire and M16 wielding soldiers. I don't think that would bother me but make me feel safer, actually. I've worked in a place with barbed wire around the compound before - and it didn't bother me then. The way I look at it is that it's necessary to keep the secrets more safe than would be otherwise.

 

I believe that the intent of the Patriot Act means nothing more than to expediently (but legally with check and balances) surveil those who are strictly suspected of wrongdoing. But I've not researched it thoroughly. I agree with the sentiment though, wholeheartedly. Otherwise the US would become a police state, and you know way more that I do what that's like to live in.

[JMortensen]

I believe that the intent of the Patriot Act...

 

The intent of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law was to prevent soft money having such a huge influence on presidential election.

 

Intent may give you warm fuzzies, but it doesn't fix the problem. If there is a loophole, someone is going to exploit it. Wouldn't be the first time G-Men wearing dresses abused their power...

[Heavy Z]

I believe that the intent of the Patriot Act means nothing more than to expediently (but legally with check and balances) surveil those who are strictly suspected of wrongdoing. But I've not researched it thoroughly.

 

What I find intersting about the Patriot Act are in the most basic of details. This act was compiled in such a remarkably short time despite being of mammoth proportions. A rush job perhapse but more likely much was already on a shelf somewhere. Only two congressmen had actually read it before the vote took place, one of which voted against it based on what he read. The rest of congress got stuck waiting for their copies, thus voted on things unfamiliar to them.

 

That such a far reaching decision would be made without a worthy debate is what concerns me, clearly a case of where the pressures of emotion outweighed our need for thinking on things a bit. Too bad, maybe some of the controversy we mention in this thread could've been avoided had congress just taken it a bit slower and done its job.

 

The fact that so much emphasis has gone into increasing domestic surveillance while little has been done to secure ports and borders leads to other questions.

[Mikelly]

Again, I find myself stepping onto the soap box...

 

Great citizens of this great ... er' um'.. website, We need to look deep, deep, no, deeper still... into our own hearts and ask ourselves...

 

Sorry, wrong message... You guys aren't getting the full jist of how the patriot act came to PASS into law... Do you know that fewer than 10% of your elected officials even READ the act before signing it into law? Democrat, republican, doesn't matter... Almost NONE of them read the damned thing when it was presented... Did some assistant somewhere glance through it? Maybe, maybe not... Again, You elected these people to staff our senate and congress.

 

IF you are going to hold George W. Bush accountable for 9/11/2001, Afghanistan, Iraq and everything else the democrats are trying to pin on him, you better damned well line ever other elected senator and congressman/woman except Kennedy and Dean up right along side him... You can NOT do one without the other, PERIOD.

 

They all have access to the same data. They can ALL make requests of the various agencies to get specialized and specific briefings to educate themselves on something before voting... THEY ALL AGREED on the Patriot Act bill, Iraq, Afghanistan and the war on terror.

 

These are facts... period. You cannot dispute them... They are fact, logged into the annals of our countrie's history. F-A-C-T.

 

Cry and moan about how they were deceived into voting this way or agreeing on that topic all you want but the facts are facts and can NOT be disputed.

 

I'm tired of our government's elected officials not owning up to their own respoinsibilities for what THEY did and what THEY didn't do... I'm no longer one of the flock. I will no longer sit and believe what the left and right media try to perpitrate on our society. Bottom line is they are ALL liars and cheats and we need a reform.

 

Michael, This is war, we are in war. I'm sorry (NO, Actually I'm not ) if you and others feel your civil liberties are being stepped on. However, You still have yours to be stepped on... Those we burried after 9/11, they don't have any. I'd like to limit the losses to just them, if that's alright...

 

Never forget why we are there, and never forget the losses we suffered... Never forget those we lost to the hands of terror.

 

Mike 8)

[Guest Phil1934]

How many senators voted to or not to fund Iraq? I think 6. Everyone laid out because a vote either way might be viewed negative. Such is the quality of our representation.

[johnc]

I am always amazed by conspiracy theories and that they exist at all. A simple concept shuts them all down:

 

Occam's Razor

 

"...explanations should never multiply causes without necessity. When two explanations are offered for a phenomenon, the simplest full explanation is preferable."

[JMortensen]

Occam's Razor is built on probability. It's not right every time.

[johnc]

Nope. Occam's Razor is a heuristic argument. Occam's Razor is sometimes confused with Bayesian inference which is statistical in natture.

[JMortensen]

How about this then: Occams razor cannot determine who shot JFK.

[JMortensen]

Don't respond to that John. You're full of "cognitive bias" on this one.

 

Can you tell I just looked up Occam's Razor. I love the internet...

[johnc]

How about this then: Occams razor cannot determine who shot JFK.

 

Occam's Razor, being a heuristic arguement, cannot determine "cause." Its just helpful as a guide in selecting which theory is the one most likely to be correct based on the fewest unproven assumptions.

 

In the JFK shooting, the theory with the lest unproven assumptions is the lone shooter (Oswald) theory. And, given the test of time (41 years), it appears that the lone shooter theory is still the correct one.

 

EDIT: Sorry Jon, I answered it...

[tannji]

While our "open borders" and free travel is a concern, I really feel the Patriot Act was an attempt to cover our ass in another way, that we had collectively largely ignored or downplayed. Readers of Tom Clancy, Dale Brown, Stephen Coonts, and other spy/military "thrillers" will have a better feel for what is at stake. The people responsible for trying to protect the assets we have "hanging in the wind" suddenly realized that some of the Bad Guys might already be here, and indeed may been here for a significant amount of time, leading normal roles and looking as out of place as your next door neighbor. The realization was that while we were complacently trading verbal barbs with Korea, Syria, Cuba, and all the other usual suspects, people with a slightly more organized agenda had every opportunity to come in the back door and make themselves at home, biding their time for acts we can only shudder & imagine. The pilots of 9-11 were in all probability only the most obvious of those among us with dangerous, malicious agendas.

I get the feeling that the average Joe has no understanding of the consequences we could be facing for our complacency. The fact is.... there is almost zero chance of doing anything significant about threats already in place without doing things that intrude upon our privacy and rights. Pick your poison. Contaminated water supplies, damaged power grid, power plant catastrophe, shopping mall security.... and things we havent really even anticipated. We can poke all kinds of holes in the Patriot Act, but I say, until a better solution comes along (and my ears are "wide open" here) I dont really think there is a whole lot of justification for the complaints against it. Doomsday and police-state arguements in particular are laughable. We ARE losing some of our privacy, and perhaps freedoms. It has happened before.... how is this any different? What makes this situation suddenly so scary and troubling?

I think that political bias and historical ignorance are responsible for most of the "sheople" reaction to the Patriot Act. If we eliminate the agitators that have a tendency to knock Anything Bush or conservatives do, I would love to hear from the remaining minority on what significant and additional long-term threat the Patriot Act leaves us with, as compared to any other freedom-degrading threat in our history.

 

BTW, Please re-read the last paragraph before responding.