Patriot Act and Civil Rights

[Karazenpo]

Paul, I just read your last post on the Bush Administration, it wasn't up there when I posted last. It appears you are a democrat, I may be mistaken but it appears so. I was a democrat for years, supported Jack and Bobby Kennedy, cried like a baby when they were murdered. However, I see now they were conservative democrats. I supported Clinton during all his problems and had some good battles with Republicans over it. Now, I believe I'm wrong. I'll say I'm Independant but now when I look back at Clinton I think he should have been put in jail for some of the things he pulled off. Put it this way, if it were you or I we'd better be packing our tooth brushes!, lol. I do agree and realize there are other threats to our country (North Korea for example) and they should not be neglected either and I know about the history of Saddam and Bin Laden going back to 1980 but after 9/11 I firmly believe we have a job to do and failure to do so will present us as a weak people in their eyes and we'll strengthen their cause. They are like the bully in school who keeps knocking over your books, the day you stand up to him and knock him on his ***, he goes on to someone else. Great debate Paul, it's fun, we get a lot of things off our chests, exchange ideas, viewpoints and principles and nobody gets hurt-sounds like the perfect world!, lol. Take care, Joe

 

[OULobo]

In response to idea of victims rights:
I whole heartedly agree with victims rights, and this is exactly what I am objecting to, but not only the treatment of the victims of terrorists, but the victims of the overzealous attempts of the government to stop terrorism. While I can't bring back the past victims, we can stop future victims of the blatant abuse of civil rights that the government is currently applying. Prevention is the key, not compensation.

I do believe that it is discrimination if an employer decides to deny employment of an ex-con because he is an ex-con. I think the criminals that have been rehabilitated should be given the chance to prove it in a job and that denying them that chance is criminal itself. That is without bringing up the instances where the crime plainly wasn't commited by the ex-con and the govern refused to recognize the fact.

There were many turn coats in the history of the mafia including the times of the prohabition. The reason the mafia has lost some of its muscle is because it is having to deal with competition from other organized crime. It's not the only bully on the block anymore.

The media coverage of the wars by CNN, ect. is hardly what I would call independant coverage. It might sound conspiracy theoryish, but my opinion is that the government is deciding what they show. Real independant coverage often, but not always, shows the governemnts actions in a neutral light. Regardless, in situations where only the government has the info, like in the case of the Patriot Act actions, are we really going to trust what the government says. I sure can't. If you want my trust, then open all the books to my eyes not just the ones that make them look good.

Yes, I do believe that the fundamental basis of these questions was envisioned by the forefathers when they wrote the bulk of the Constitution. Obviously the may not have imagined the details, but they sure knew that sooner or later the government would try to get powers that extend beyond the control of the people, and that is exactly what they were trying to safeguard against. As for revision, yes, I agree that you can't please everyone and that you can't solve all the problems, but in this case (Pat. Act), as Paul said, there are just too many problems to not throw it out and re write it. Too use the technique analogy, no matter how many times you customize a technique to defend a punch in different situations its still never a good (reasonable or logical) idea to block a punch with your face. No matter how much you change the law to fit the situation there are still things that are fundamentally wrong.

Let's keep it rollin.

 

[Karazenpo]

Hey OuLobo! Okay, I'm ready. Now, let's say you had a nice family owned business with your wife and kids working there (hypothetcially, of course), c'ome on now, if some ex-con that was convicted of violent/and/or sex offender crimes who paid his dues to society came in for a job and it was available and you could very well hire him, would you? I hate to presume anything but I really think not. Now, let's not be politically correct, but your answer from the heart. As a matter of fact how many reders of this post right now would not discriminate on this issue? It's easy to say we'd do this or that but just put yourself in that situation and see what you would really do, be honest. I think the vast majority of everyone would expect you to discriminate, lol. What's more important to you, the potentional lives and well being of you and your family or this guy's rights? See what i mean?

Now, on this that you stated:


There were many turn coats in the history of the mafia including the times of the prohabition. The reason the mafia has lost some of its muscle is because it is having to deal with competition from other organized crime. It's not the only bully on the block anymore.

*You could be right but I kind of also lean towards the fact they don't have the 'cosa nostra' ethics and loyalty they had before, again, when I say ethics I mean that as more of 'an honor amongst thieves'. I know they had their 'rats' then but I think they were more of the exception than the norm, now, most all seem to rat on each other when the pressure is put on. I don't see a Charles 'Luck" Luciano or a Meyer Lansky doing that. In retorspect, I don't think the repeal of the Volstad Act was a major blow by any means but it certainly didn't help. It just seems like there's no loyalty anymore, just look at the martial arts, sure there were always problems but nothing like today.

I think CNN and others reports that way of their own volition. I really don't think they would be controlled by the government unless they wanted to be. It's funny, look how easy they were on the Clintons' (Democrats), imagine if that was Bushes' right now being acused of everything the Clintons' were including "WhiteWater'! Notice, the left wing can't get at FOX NEWS, so I really have to say it's their political bias with CNN and its cohorts.

Yes, I believe the founding fathers showed a lot of good insight but I still don't think they ever imagined or prepared for today's
world problems. Just my thoughts! Okay, I'm more exhausted from this then a tough workout, I mean it, I'm burn't out so signing off for now! Great debate! Talk to ya later. "Joe"

 

[OULobo]

Yeah, I hear ya. I gotta head home from work. To be continued. Mabey on Monday. See ya!

 

[Cruentus]

I'll say I'm Independant but now when I look back at Clinton I think he should have been put in jail for some of the things he pulled off. Put it this way, if it were you or I we'd better be packing our tooth brushes!

Agreed! LOL...No I am an independent as well. I do have severe problems with our administration right now, though, which I'll address later. Some of my comments are toung and cheek too, like 'Baudi Barabia'...:rofl: I am glad that we are able to have a good discussion, with noone getting too upset.

I'll post more later on!

 

[OULobo]

An update in the immigration trial of Ashraf Al-Jailani.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1067686212271740.xml

 

[khadaji]

This was a great debate... I would like to add in my own comment..

If they hate freedom, and thats why they are at war with us, then if we give up our freedom to fight the war, then victory is theirs. All goals achieved. Freedom crushed.

 

[OULobo]

Another example of abuse of the law. Seems the government feels it can apply a law meant to be used against terrorists to polititians, strippers and club owners.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2003/Nov-04-Tue-2003/news/22512794.html

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by OULobo
Another example of abuse of the law. Seems the government feels it can apply a law meant to be used against terrorists to polititians, strippers and club owners.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2003/Nov-04-Tue-2003/news/22512794.html

Exactly...unfortunatily this law doesn't even differentiate between potential terrorist threats and others. Investigators should have to go through due process like everyone else.

 

[OULobo]

Just another update on the Conspiritor and Cheat. . .oops I mean Commander and Cheif's baby the Pat. Act and how the Supreme Court refuses to rule. Isn't the Judicial branch specifically supposed to decide these things? You know the whole checks and balances schpeel.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040223/us_nm/court_security_secrecy_dc_2

 

[rmcrobertson]

How easy the liberal media was on the CLINTONS? FOX News, last bastion of free speech?

Now that's comedy.

As for the Constitution, it may be instructive to check and see who exactly it is that keeps crying for new Constitutional Conventions or at least lots of whacko Amendments.

Hint: it ain't "liberals," whatever that means.

 

[OULobo]

US CIA contractor from Afghanistan to be prosecuted with Pat. Act. Now we are using an anti-terrorist law against the people stopping terrorism, or is a blurring of the line between terrorist and anti-terrorist.

http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/108764617832800.xml?nnusa

 

[Nightingale]

I ran into my own patriot act issue on friday.

I discovered, when attempting to E-file my taxes, that the social security people had my birthday wrong. They thought it was the 2nd, and its the 1st. a simple typo from when the card was issued.

So, I go down to the SSA with the following:

my birth certificate (altered)
my passport
my drivers' license
my social security card
my LA Fire Department ID
even my freakin' library card.

Every single little piece of info I can think of to verify my identity.

the lady at the counter says, that while she believes me, the "security measures we're required to implement by the patriot act" require that they get the ORIGINAL microfiche of my birth certificate from LA County to verify my date of birth.

The problem here is: I was adopted. Those records are sealed. They'll probably have to get a freakin' court order to open them, which, in the case of ANY adoption information, is a royal PITA and usually denied.

So... I'm grumbling about the mess, but figured it wouldn't be that big a deal, since, other than not being able to e-file my taxes, the issue hasn't caused me any trouble thus far.

HOWEVER... the lady then looks at my drivers' license and says "oh... we might have a problem here."

She tells me that now, the DMV is required to verify personal information with the SSA before issuing or renewing a drivers' license. My license expires in December. They're claiming it will take them at least six months or so to work through this mess to unravel the birth certificate issue, so, I will probably not be able to renew my drivers' license when it expires.


So, basically:

Because of the patriot act and some moron's typo, come December, I won't be allowed to legally drive a car.

someone please tell me how this is protecting America?

(and no cracks about my driving. I have a perfect driving record from day 1, thanks much.)

 

[Cruentus]

Come on, Nightengale...like you were actually USING those civil liberties anyways. :wink1:

 

[Rich Parsons]

I ran into my own patriot act issue on friday.

I discovered, when attempting to E-file my taxes, that the social security people had my birthday wrong. They thought it was the 2nd, and its the 1st. a simple typo from when the card was issued.

So, I go down to the SSA with the following:

my birth certificate (altered)
my passport
my drivers' license
my social security card
my LA Fire Department ID
even my freakin' library card.

Every single little piece of info I can think of to verify my identity.

the lady at the counter says, that while she believes me, the "security measures we're required to implement by the patriot act" require that they get the ORIGINAL microfiche of my birth certificate from LA County to verify my date of birth.

The problem here is: I was adopted. Those records are sealed. They'll probably have to get a freakin' court order to open them, which, in the case of ANY adoption information, is a royal PITA and usually denied.

So... I'm grumbling about the mess, but figured it wouldn't be that big a deal, since, other than not being able to e-file my taxes, the issue hasn't caused me any trouble thus far.

HOWEVER... the lady then looks at my drivers' license and says "oh... we might have a problem here."

She tells me that now, the DMV is required to verify personal information with the SSA before issuing or renewing a drivers' license. My license expires in December. They're claiming it will take them at least six months or so to work through this mess to unravel the birth certificate issue, so, I will probably not be able to renew my drivers' license when it expires.


So, basically:

Because of the patriot act and some moron's typo, come December, I won't be allowed to legally drive a car.

someone please tell me how this is protecting America?

(and no cracks about my driving. I have a perfect driving record from day 1, thanks much.)

Not the same, yet close. When I was 15, I received a letter form selective services stating that I had not registered on my 18th birthday. I went down to the post office and they took the sheet and said they woudl take care of it. Next year I received another letter, this time I insisted on seeing and talking to someone, as I was a junior in high school and looking at college, and this would mess up my chances at scholarships and also financial aid. I just went down and tried to sign up when I was seventeen, I gave up, and guess what they told me I was too young to sign up and register for selective services. Then I showed them the last two years of letters. I had lost the first one. When I turned 18, after I started college, it was all straightened out. I did not get financial aid possibilities for hte first two years of college because of this. It sucks.

Recently I was crossing the US Canada border. I had Paul J with me. The guy asked for my ID, I provided him with my passport. He was not happy wiht it being Blue and USA. I offered up my drivers license also. He then negligently said oh I need to see your ID too to Paul. Later while asking what we were doing in Canada and Buffalo where we came from, it came up we had friends through martial arts. The guys asks me if I ahve any weapons. I say no. Knowing I have training tools with me . Paul answers who I have knives and hatchets and blades and sticks, and ..., . The guys smiles a Paul and says ok, you can go.

Paul then realizes what he had said. His blonde hair and blue eyes was not a threat . Yet, this and more I get everythim I cross a border. I travel with more documentation then required, and Paul just smiles and says Yep I go t weapons so what of it.

Civil liberties????? Hmmm What are those Paul?

 

[Cruentus]

As a blonde hair blue eyed white male, I can tell you all about them! :rofl:

That was pretty funny. When we were on "code orange" they were searching everyones vehicles. They get to my martial arts bag, containing sticks, FMA swords, combat knives, hatchets, and so forth. Keep in mind, I had nothing to declare when asked. "what-r-these 4?" he asks. So I try to talk the lingo, "I teach combatives to Military, Leo, and Civilians." (not a total lie, as I had the opportunity to teach 2 army units, a handful of marine and airforce individuals, 3 cops, and mostly civilians. :uhyeah: ). He looks at me and says, "That's cool. You can go."

:rofl:

I'm thinking that there is no WAY that Rich P. could get away with that!

Hey Rich...next time, I say you where a turban and sunglasses, and we'll see if my whiteness will protect us then!

 

[Taimishu]

I have read the posts with great interest and not being American cannot say it has any effect on me. Also I have only a limited knowledge of the American constitution and the various ammendments. The point of this is to say that I cannot really comment on the Patriot act or on its effects on people.
The one thing I do know is that once the powers that be have thier foot on your neck they are not going to remove it easily. The Patriot Act places thier foot firmly on your necks and you have virtually no chance of getting it repealled now.
Also watch out for more "stealth" legislation as governments know that that is the only way to get this kind of thing through the system.

By the way isnt it nice to know that your (and our) leaders have your best interests at heart.

David

 

[Nightingale]

if the court declares it unconstitutional (there have already been several suits filed regarding this), then the act is null.

 

[Cruentus]

if the court declares it unconstitutional (there have already been several suits filed regarding this), then the act is null.

...Praying and hoping for the grand resignation of about half of our current supreme court justices, starting with scalia. :idea:

 

[OULobo]

...Praying and hoping for the grand resignation of about half of our current supreme court justices, starting with scalia. :idea:

. . . or a Pres. that will oppose it at evey turn, including controling his legal pit bulls like the AG.