Discussion in 'General Nonsense' started by CyberDruid, Feb 18, 2009.
You have stumble don't you? Thats Bush for ya...
Coming from a liberal on a liberal network. That is almost as bipartisan as the stimulus bill.
There is no doubt that it is one sided, but a lot of those facts are pretty damning no matter what the excuse in my opinion. The constant undermining of freedom is simply unforgivable.
Thats weird, I was thinking the same thing!
Some of the stuff they blame him for are idiotic issues that both Democrats and Republicans have been creating for the past few decades.
I recent my previous comment. Bush did a lot of horrible things, but the second half of that video they're just using him as a scapegoat.
Have any personal proof your freedoms have been undermined in the last eight years? I don't. A lot of people blew the USA PATRIOT Act out of proportion basically painting it as the epitome of evil. Read some of it--it isn't all that evil. Yes, it expanded the powers of government but its not like Uncle Sam taps everyone's phones without provocation either.
And where is your proof of that?
Are you an upper echelon NSA operative?
oh well thats politics for yah mate... :shadedshu
I cant wait for them to do "4mins of 4 years of Obama's bush fixes"
I'm holding out for the 8 minutes of Obama's 8 years
And BTW Liberal is no longer a dirty word. NeoCon is the new dirty word. Learn it. Love it. Live it.
I have to say nice find CD.
It was pretty entertaining.
And that is just politics and they way our evil world lives, we are going to have to get used to it, or just all die when the Apocalypses arrives.
The bill. Yes, it allows some forms of surveillance without an order from a judge but that doesn't mean a judge can't declare it illegal later.
I HIGHLY doubt that Odrama, oh sorry I meant Obama, will be in office for 8 years.
but, that's where the Patriot Act was able to operate in "grey-area."
If it's illegal, and could be deemed illegal, it shouldn't be done in the first place . . . non of this crap where "let's see what we can get away with," because even if a judge decides later on that those actions were illegal, unconstitutional, etc. - it doesn't change the fact that those actions were carried out.
No matter how a judge rules, it doesn't erase the past . . . only sets a level for what is now allowable . . . which means those in the Fed organizations using the Patriot Act as their "blessing" can interpret that judge's decision, the actions that led to it, and avoid copying that mistake - doing it a different way that will, again, require interpretation later down the road.
Secondly, this all revolves around the fact that someone becomes aware of the surveilance or otherwise - and what are the chances of that actually occuring? On top of that, you then have to deal with the levels of red-tape and federal bueracracy as you try to defend your rights while taking it to federal court . . . not an easy task, and the process willl be very long and drawn out.
IMO, the whole Patriot Act was a full-blown dismissal of consitutional rights that have been granted by our original federal constituion and bill of rights. It was a means for the government to use fear as a tool to accomplish their goals - in the name of defense of the state, anything is permissable, right? Why should we wait for the terrorists to come to our shores? We should go invade the country they reside in, kick the terrorists ass, kick the country's ass for harboring them, and claim that we're defending our freedoms and rights, correct?
Tell me again . . . what freedoms and rights do we american citizens have on foreign soil? Tell me where in our consitution, or any of the amendments and bills of law does it state that our freedoms and rights as US citizens supercede the freedoms of other nationalities as long as we're paying them a visit?
The last 8 years has seen our government moving more towards acts of tyranny moreso than that of a republic. Your rights as an individual mean nothing if your fit the "profile" and "stereotype" of an individual who might commit a crime against the nation. Your rights as a prisoner of war mean nothing if our leaders feel that you might have information on the whereabouts of important terrorist leaders and such organizations (you wouldn't believe some of the BS our country has pulled in regards to "information extraction" from POWs over the last 8 years . . . Guantanamo Bay is just the tip of the iceberg).
My personal opinion - I feel a lot of the leaders we've had over the last 8 years should be tried as war criminals and abusing the nations power for their personal interests instead of the nation's interests.
good video most of it is one sided but a lot of it is fact, it wasnt just bush other factors but most him
as for obama wait and see what happens if an alternative appears then vote for him/her in 4 years
news is so biased in the USA there is no happy medium its either pro liberal or pro conservative/democrat or republican
its okay you guys learned from the best the british empire! on how to steal and cheat and enslave, we were the original bad boys and world leaders: note i condemn past actions
Look at it from the perspective of the FBI, CIA, and other intelligence agencies. You might get intelligence from someone saying such and such will be away from his/her residence an hour from now. That is your window to move in and bug the place. Normally, the window would be missed because a judge couldn't review the evidence and issue a warrant to search it. How do we know that later that night, this person will go over detailed information about an attack scheduled for the next day? A disaster could have been averted but because of the slow judicial system, it wasn't.
At the same time, if the residence was bugged and nothing criminal was discovered, no harm done. The person's house that was bug could always file a complaint/court case against the agency that bugged it about being under surveillance without a warrant. At which point, a judge will review the case and decide if it was illegal or not exacting punishment on the people that ordered the bugs in the first place. I have yet to hear of a case where USA PATRIOT act was used to surveillance someone and it was done so unlawfully. It is extremely rare where the dominoes fall (credible evidence to suggest he/she knows something and there is an immediate opportunity to bug it) in to place in an order that makes the agency feel certain it is in the right to act before a judge can okay it.
Until there is actually consequences of an agency going beyond the law using the USA PATRIOT Act as leverage, there isn't a problem. If you don't want to get your house bugged, don't do anything that suggests criminal activity (like moving a lot of funds to an off shore account).
Name a case where someone was staked out under USA PATRIOT Act, was accused of a crime and was innocent. Either you are guilty of a crime or its like it never happened. Where's the problem?
What right? Constitution does not have a "right to privacy" clause. If there was a right to privacy clause, it would be illegal for you to listen in on a conversation someone else is having. The only thing the USA PATRIOT Act did was allow intelligence agencies to react quickly to a situation that would otherwise be missed. I have no problem with that.
Actually with the collection of a few amendments and especially the 9th amendment, the right to privacy exists in a manner although not directly being written as some would like to see it. The USA PATRIOT Act was the most BS act ever done. It's such an invasion of privacy to the American Citizens. Giving the them access to our telephone, email and financial records and I would have been totally fine with his had I felt the "Terrorism Threat" were real to begin with.
Some BS excuse to go to war and give the gov more power over us. The same way they brought fear to the American citizens with Terrorism, they used Communism as the fear for the earlier days. Even Hitler burned his own parliament down during his early reign of power saying the communists did it to convince his citizens to give up their rights for their own protection and looked what happen to them. I feel the same way Hitler fooled them we have been fooled with the Twin Towers. Our own gov blew that shit up killing our own people, they point the finger at a country most susceptible and scare everyone in America into thinking a plain is going to drop in their fucking yard. BS, why tf would a terrorist want to bomb your church or yard or school? What makes it so important?
Bottom line is I don't like were things are going. I don't even feel like it matters what president is in office any more, Republican, Democrat, Cheech or Chong its going to be the same thing. Anyone good who does any real good change gets shot. Thats how its been that how it will be, RIP JFK. Their are bigger people running the show out there, dare to speak the truth and they'll silence you. JFK who dared speak the truth was assassinated brought about by his speech "President and the Press". Thats how I feel and I know some others as well.
"Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed." don't think many people got the messages he gave his speech.
and say for instance someone down the street from you called up the local FBI saying you were involved in a terrorist plot . . . how would you feel about authorities taking such action against you? not to mention the possiblity of losing time from work as they'd detain you for questioning, and all the other jazz that comes with such things.
I still feel authorities need a warrant before tapping someon out . . . if you have reasonable cause that someone could be up to no good, there wouldn't be a problem obtaining a warrant . . . then it's just a matter of getting your timing right to bug the place or scope it out.
Without a warrant, we're giving authorities full-right to use the "probable cause" excuse whenever they want to, without actually having to go to someone over their head for permission to do so. it's a breach of trust.
whether or not you do anything to suggest criminal activity isn't the point - you could be a little 'ol gran-ma that goes to church every sunday morning, goes to the grocery twice a week . . . part of the local women's guild, volunteers for charity, donates to the poor and needy . . . but if the government for some strange reason gets a hair up their ass that little 'ol granny is up to no good . . . Patriot Act to the rescue!
And, I doubt that any time soon we will see a "legitimate" case against the Patriot Act . . . reason being is that very few people would even know if their being monitored. Without knowledge of what the government might be doing in your own home, there's no way to file a complaint . . . right?
Besides, wire taps and stuff like that wasn't the only stuff they were allowed to monitor - even down to snagging emails from users and IM if certain "keywords" were found. Suspicious letters and mail could be checked over . . . it was quite an extensive list of what was considered permissable if something potentially threatened the nations security.
I re-iterate . . . the whole of the Patriot Act was nothing other than using fear as a tool to accomplish what they wanted to at that point in time. People were still scarred and hysterical over 9-11, and it left an opportunity where the Patriot Act could be signed without the general populace throwing a fit over it, because we were told it was to protect us from the terrorists already in our country . . . to find them out. Try and pass a law like that today, of 5 years prior to 9-11, and the people would've had none of it.
how many citizens were targeted by our officials after 9-11, even though they had no ties to terrorists or any criminal activity? Have you completely forgotten those incidents that were occuring on a daily basis of people being detained for questioning, their homes being searched, being targeted . . . simply because of how they looked, how they talked, their names, their faith? Many of these people were either US citizens, or legal immigrants who were being singled out because of their heritage, and the view that the US has over who a terrorist is. Try telling those people that what we did was right - try telling them that it's OK they lost their jobs and had their lives ruined because we had to make certain they weren't terrorists or not.
It's all OK as long as it's in the interest of national security, right?
I mean - I'm sure the native americans would agree that it's alright we pushed them across the country and into federally protected reservations . . . because we wanted their land.
I'm certain the american japanese completely understand why we had to corral and herd them like cattle into detention camps after the bombing of Pearl Harbor - just to be sure they weren't spies.
I'm sure african americans are completely willing to dismiss the Jim Crowe laws and subsequent segregation because we felt they weren't fit to take part in society.
Certainly all those US citizens and legal immigrants of slavic and baltic descent that lost their jobs and had their lives destroyed during the red scare, spearheaded by McCarthy, accept that it was to assure that communism hadn't spread into the free world.
Awww . . . hell . . . what's another discriminated nationality under the great belt of US national security, right? We're all created equal, as long as your ethnicity doesn't challenge the welfare of the state.
I find it humorous that you would defend so adamantly an expansion of governmental powers. Didn't we discuss in another thread how you damned such offenses. But of course, if a Republican such as yourself proposes the issue, just cause was there. Had Obama released a similar act, he would be jumped on in a heartbeat by conservatives who always claim government should butt out, unless that government shares their ideals, that is to say, unless that government is republican. You will argue pretty much every turn about the patriot act b/c of the president who supports it, not the act itself. I would think something such as that should be staunchly opposed by such a constitutional conservative as yourself.
Tough shit. Isn't worth giving up our personal freedom.
Bullshit. Their freedom and privacy was already violated
But the damage was already done
You have yet to hear a case because they don't want you to know about it, and they cover their tracks, conviniently under the cover of the Patriot Act.
If I want to move billions of dollars to an offshore account, that is nobody's bussiness but my own.
Do you honestly believe you would here about these cases?
It also gives them free reign over anyone's privacy.
Declaring it illegal later doesn't help anyone while it is occurring . I'm sorry, but the Patriot Act is a terrible piece of legislation, that does, in fact, undermine our freedoms. For someone so against the the bailouts, I'm surprised you are OK with the patriot act.
When "privacy" is not defined by the Constitution, how can one "invade" it? The problem isn't the USA PATRIOT Act, it is lack of definitions on privacy (in regards to the government) in the Constitution. USA PATRIOT Act merely exposed the flaw and is therefore, quite the hated bill.
The USA PATRIOT Act was the response to the complete failure of intelligence to foil the 9/11 plot. It was discovered that signs were missed and not enough information was available to prevent the events of 9/11 from unfolding. The USA PATRIOT Act addressed that, among other issues. Invading Afghanistan was the other half of the equation. Invading Iraq is rather unrelated to those two.
I would demand they show me the evidence that they believe makes me guilty. Then I would provide evidence that contradicts theirs to prove I'm not guilty. If I am innocent, I have nothing to hide. If I'm guilty, well then, they did their job; in which case, I deserved to get spied on.
In most circumstances, I agree; however, I acknowledge that in intelligence gathering, there are situations where time is not on your side. Times like those is when I need to act and be prepared for the consequences whether or not my actions were justified.
That's how intelligence works. You have to keep your nose to the ground for leads. Most turn up blank while some make it worth your time. It is a very rare instance where the changes the USA PATRIOT Act made come into play. That's why exceptions to the rule that cause all this political dismay (Patriot Act is evil!!!!) are so rare. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its perfect because there is a lot of room for improvement; however, there's nothing worse than bureaucracy and red tape being the reason a criminal got away. Their name can be cleared if the action was in error.
Indeed, the USA PATRIOT Act was intended to bring the intelligence community up to speed. Ever thought that maybe because there was nothing similar to the USA PATRIOT Act prior to 9/11 is the reason the events of 9/11 were allowed to happen? 9/11 proved the intelligence community was crippled. USA PATRIOT Act addressed the problem. Over 7 years later, numerous terrorist plots foiled, and we have yet to get successfully attacked. USA PATRIOT Act worked.
All the aforementioned cases were paranoia and racism. Anyone that appeared to come from an Islamic nation was shunned. It was horrible and entirely uncalled for. Did it happen without the USA PATRIOT Act? Yes. What did the USA PATRIOT Act change in that regard? Nothing. No matter how hard we try, we can't stop racism.
I don't look at it as an expansion of governmental powers; I look at it as a means to postpone the bureaucracy when time is of great importance. Republics, by nature, are slow to respond. The only branch that is relatively fast is the executive branch which can issue executive orders (which often are excessive use of governmental powers).
I don't vote for parties, I vote for people. Party affiliation be damned.
See Freedom of Information Act.
It usually reeks of ill-gotten gains. It is the FBI's business because how do we (the people) know you aren't another Madoff that ran away with some $9 billion in investor funds? If we do probe it and it turns out to be a Bill Gates sending money to a charity in Africa or it is a payment for one business to buy out another, nothing comes of it. No harm done. If it ended up being Osama bin Laden's brother wiring him $100,000,000 to pay for his "war," we cut off one source of funding to bin Laden and imprison his brother.
Again, it's not unlike someone listening to your conversation inconspicuously behind a newspaper. The only difference is the methods (Internet, cellphones, emails, etc.).
Just as expected (judging by your responses), the USA PATRIOT Act is a much despised bill (which I clearly feel is unwarranted). I may not respond to further posts on the subject for the sake of time.
The freedom of information act doesn't cover classified (or higher) documents. If the info was obtained thru use of the Patriot Act, it is deemed a matter of national security, and therefore not bound by the Freedom of Information Act
And how I came about my money is still no ones business but mine. If it was by illegal means, they can follow the paper trail by getting warrants, just like they did in the past. There is no need for the Patriot Act at all in this case.
For someone so level headed on other topics, you are sure being naive about the government exploiting the Patriot Act. Do you honestly believe the government would do no such thing?
Rarely is information pertaining to an individual at classified or higher (unless they're a deep-cover spy/still living informant). Most information that is classified covers the current administration and current military projects. Any information on someone that was spied on during the Bush administration should be relatively easy to obtain now.
The quicker the conviction comes, the less damage the criminal can do. An example of this is the importance of stopping a serial killer or someone like Madoff. Madoff, being able to do what he did for so long, proves the USA PATRIOT Act isn't as broad as some opponents make it out to be. It could be more effective, far more effective. Madoff may very well be the exception that proves the point.
We have the judicial system to make sure the government treads on the straight and narrow. I don't doubt that there is abuse of the USA PATRIOT Act just as there is abuse of Medicaid/Medicare and Social Security. We just need to pursue those that are inclined to abuse the system for personal gain.
Separate names with a comma.