The USA Patriot Act

[Wei Wu Wei]

Ok, I'm reading about this thing as I'm writing this post. I just had a little note at my work concerning it, and all I realy know about it is that it supercedes Georgia's privact laws.

What is the Patriot Act about, exactly? That is, what is this thing designed to do? And what do you guys think about this act?

[JediBoricua]

It's really late so I'm not going into this with a big post (yet), but I believe the Patriot Act is the biggest victory of the 9/11 terrorist. Is a set of rules that trampled civil liberties, the right to dissent, and all those things that make democracies great. It is changing the american lifestyle and making citizens fear their government, just what the terrorists wanted.

And don't get me started on the Patriot Act plus that Aschroft wants to pass now.

[Figrin D'an]

I really hope the Patriot Act gets challenged and taken to the Supreme Court. There's no way, once examined closely, that the Justices could possibly rule that act constitutional.

[Darth Viscera]

We're involved in a world war, and we may or may not be winning. Similiar things have happened during wartime; the suspension of habeas corpus, the internment of the Japanese when all over this hemisphere Japanese immigrant communities had been infiltrated by Black Dragon operatives (these same sorts of operatives, operating with much fewer numbers in Brazil, were able to successfully shut down that country as a state capable of waging war against Japan, and Brazil is nearly as populated as the USA). Historically, the Patriot Act must be a mere slap on the wrist compared to its forebearers.

The Patriot Act could conceivably get a lot more beefed up. If the time ever comes that we're suffering suicide bombings on a daily basis with 20 casualties a day, like in Israel, then we could very well find more of our rights suspended for the duration of the war.

At least we don't have to endure meatless Tuesdays, car tires made out of wood because rubber has been rationed, fuel-less Sunday winter nights, pot and pan drives, war bonds everywhere, eggs at $2,000 a dozen, and in the case of blacked out WW2 London, dozens of men and women killed every night because cars weren't allowed to use their headlights, and so it was safer to run people over. The war could be a lot worse on our freedoms.

I'm guessing that Osama is much more interested in making you turn your back just long enough for him to slice it open with a saracen sword than making you ever-vigilant and alert so that he can't find a soft target.

[imported_Marcus]

There is a vast difference between the ability for the secret services to detain you, without trial, without a lawyer or without a warrant for as long as they wish and supply shortage. You are constructing a strawman argument... and I HATE strawman arguments, because they are not relavent to the discussion, but they are inarguably true.

Shortages and rationing are not fun, yes. But that is not what is the problem with the PATRIOT act. The PATRIOT act explicitly allows exactly what I posted above - that any person, under suspicion, resonable or otherwise, may be held indeifnantly with no notice, lawyer, or legal recourse. The definition of terrorism is so loose that you could be called one for possession of fertilizer. Or having notes on bomb making. Or just knowing another suspect!

How can you possibly defend something like Guatanamo bay - over 300 people held without trial or legal recourses, some of them quite likely to be innocent, until this 'war' is over. That is exactly what your country is doing right now. Your country now has this Patriot act and the secret service can now make people disappear liek the worst of the regimes around the world. Just posting this technically breaches the PATRIOT act.

And you know what? SCREW the war on terror. It is unwinnable as a gunfight. The only victory is the one that addresses the base reasons why terrorists exist in the first place. Believe it or not, not every terrorists starts life as a foaming in the mouth loony that wants to nuke washington. Once you solve ther reason that happens, then and only then can terrorism be stopped.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I agree with you Marcus, the Patriot Act scares me and I am worried what might happen if there is another terrorist attack. I am afraid they might try to take away more of our civil liberties. Sure we could be safer but I don't want to live in a fascist state to be safer I perfer the alternative in a heart beat.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

*books tickets for Switzerland* ^_^;

[Jedi Master Carr]

Nah Canada is closer:p

[JediBoricua]

What frightens me the most is the fact that a cable guy or a telephone guy can enter my house to fix something or to install new lines. He enters my room to connect my new tv and sees that I have a soviet army hat that my g/f bough me in Russia, a picture of my dad and Fidel Castro together in a US sponsored trade exhibition in Habana, and he could call the FBI and they will start profiling me. Just by that they can intercept my phones, question my friends, family and co-workers. They keep messing thourgh my life and find that I have friends that are militant in socialist groups or that I have a profesor, which I consider my friend as well, that was helping North Vietnam during that war, and because of that they can swipe me away without trial, lawyer, rights, etc. to a hellhole base in a hellhole beach for years and years...

It's a bit farfetched, I know, but legally under the Patriot Act it could be done.

[Ryla Relvinian]

It sucks, yes, but is it really worse than having absolutely no legal recourse?

Granted, knowing our government, they're not terribly likely to be responsible, mature and forthcoming, so this is going to get abused, but would you rather have more terrorism? Hopefully, the innocent have nothing to fear, but what if this goes too far?

I don't know... It's too touchy of a subject for me to make a call.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Ryla Relvinian
Granted, knowing our government, they're not terribly likely to be responsible, mature and forthcoming, so this is going to get abused, but would you rather have more terrorism?



The Patriot Act isn't going to stop terrorism. Sure, it may prevent an attack or two that they happen to catch in the plannin stages. But they're going to miss some of them. And each time an attack occurs, Ashcroft and people like him are going to push for the Patriot Act to be beefed up, and take away more civil liberties. If this kind of act is going to be allowed to remain in effect, it will only serve deny more freedoms to civilians and make them more timid and more afraid.

That's exactly what terrorists aim to accomplish.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Exactly and we could lose our rights including the first ammendent. I couldn't stand if we didn't have right to free speech etc and that could happen if we let this law survive one day. I am not willing to forgo my civil liberties to prevent terrorism to me like you said that is what the terrorists want and they win.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Exactly and we could lose our rights including the first ammendent. I couldn't stand if we didn't have right to free speech etc and that could happen if we let this law survive one day. I am not willing to forgo my civil liberties to prevent terrorism to me like you said that is what the terrorists want and they win.

Seditious speech is always illegal during wartime. You won't be going through anything that your granddad didn't, or your great granddad.



How can you possibly defend something like Guatanamo bay - over 300 people held without trial or legal recourses, some of them quite likely to be innocent, until this 'war' is over.

There is a high probability that all of them are mass murderers, that's how I defend it. The government (rightly) cares more about the safety of the people than the rights of scumbags who would like nothing more than to kill you. What if you're wrong, and the man who is presumed innocent and released ends up bombing Sydney 3 months later, resulting in the deaths of 3,000 people?

It's FAR better to err on the side of caution. Remember that the next time you see footage of the victims of the WTC who willingly jumped from the top of the tower rather than be immolated and crushed, ordinary people whose faces were so mashed that they were unrecognizable. Ordinary people, office workers, just a mass of broken bones and loose skin.

[Jedi Master Carr]

That is crap did people get thrown in jail for saying the Vietnam war was wrong , the answer is no. Did Charles Lindberg get put in jail for saying we shouldn't fight the Nazis, no. That hasn't not happened in the last 100 years to my knowledge. Point out one case where somebody was put in jail for saying a war is wrong. Plus there is no declared war, only Congress can declare war so we are not "at war" sure there is kind of war going on like the Cold War but we are not in reality in a war. Also you brough the issue of habeas corpus being repealled, I guess you mean the Civil War. Well the Supreme Court declared some time afterwards, don't know the exact year maybe CMJ can tell us :p, that it was unconstutional. I feel that this won't stand up to any constutional challenge either for the same reason. Personally I don't care what happens I will not sit by and watch our rights taken away regardless of how many might die. Its wrong being put into a Fascist State like Nazi Germany won't help us it will make things a lot worse, IMO.

[JediBoricua]

Ok, possibly all of the talibans in Guantanamo are scumbags and mass murderes. I wont discuss that. But by not granting them basic liberties, you can have them in prison, hell you can even give them a military trial, but you have to give them the right to meet with a lawyer, the right of a trial at the least. Give 'em the trial, all of them will be condemed and then you can lock them and throw away the key for all I care.

What guarantees us that what they are doing to the talibans today (and to a couple of american citizens as well that were helping Al-Quaeda and the Talibans) can't be done now to college kids protesting or to regular folks entering websites out of curiousity. Nothing at all, and that is what scares me.

[imported_Marcus]

Vis, drop the emotional heatrtstring tug. I'm not intereseted in that type of argument. You are strawmanning again.

The fact is, the PATRIOT act little or nothing to stop real terrorism. To stop terrorism, address the base cause and that is the whole point right now. What does the PATRIOT act do? It denies USA consitutional freedoms granted and undeniable under your law, for highly dubious anti terrorism benifits that can not work.


Point out one case where somebody was put in jail for saying a war is wrong

Look at Vietnam. There were certainly people jailed for saying that was wrong. That certainly was the case in Australia and it lead to a great deal of anger and protests.

[Darth Viscera]

Seditious speech != saying the war is wrong. Seditious speech is speaking of ways to overthrow the government. First Amendment or not, you can't talk about that kinda stuff during wartime. Those are the kinda restrictions I was referring to. I'm pretty sure you still have the right to protest during wartime.



Its wrong being put into a Fascist State like Nazi Germany

Bah, we've been A LOT closer to being a police state than this. Don't forget what happened on March 13, 1783, and 15 years later, with Adams's election and the passing of the Alien & Sedition acts, which were later repealed.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Marcus
To stop terrorism, address the base cause

The base cause is the PR nightmare that is known as Israel's drunken swagger through the Middle East for the last 55 years. We continue to try to beg them to play nice, but they have us on a tight leash.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I misunderstood you there so we can drop that. Still I think there are legal ways to fight terroism, using wire taps, warrants and stuff. The FBI broke up the Scillian Mafia and they didn't destroy the consitution to do it.

[Darth Viscera]

The Mafia doesn't think of killing millions of civilians and converting the rest to the most violent religion since the inception of humankind* as its primary goal, though. The mafia hasn't been plotting how best to conduct religious crusades against the "infidels" for the last 1,300 years.

*With the possible exception of the Aztec

[Jedi Master Carr]

Ah I disagree with you there the Christians in the Middle Ages rival some of what you said they were ploting ways to destroy the Muslims for several centuries it was the reason the Crusades happened. Christianity has had the same problems as Islam so don't bring that into it. Also what does that have to do with the legal means to get them? They can track them believe me, I am sorry I don't think we should be destorying the constitution to stop terrorism. If we could guarentee no terrorism but we would have to give up the first amendement would you be for it? I don't care this will be destroyed by the Supreme Court mark my words because its against the constitution.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Ah I disagree with you there the Christians in the Middle Ages rival some of what you said they were ploting ways to destroy the Muslims for several centuries it was the reason the Crusades happened.

The Muslims started that religious crusade circa 700 A.D. when they decided to blitzkrieg North Africa, cross the straits of Gibraltar, invade and Muslimize Spain*, and they almost succeeded in doing the same thing to France, but 1 lucky arrow turned them back. The christian crusades began when news arrived that Muslim forces had besieged Jerusalem and taken the Holy Sepulchre. It was just the latest in a series of Muslim attacks that had been going on for hundreds of years, and something that finally got Europe to swing into action and display its overwhelming battlefield mediocrity.

*They didn't finally leave Spain until January 2, 1492, when Sultan Muhammad XI in Granada was forced to surrender to the Spanish Army under Queen Isabella I. Know of any other 800-year-long Muslim occupations?


Christianity has had the same problems as Islam so don't bring that into it.

Oh God, I know.
[fake Saudi Arabian accent]
Just the other day I smashed a homosexual's head under a ton of bricks, stoned my wife to death for adultery, circumsized a newborn baby girl so she'll grow up to abhor sex, stabbed one of those infidel Shi'a muslims to death, and denounced the Barbie Doll as an "immoral Jewish doll". And that was just a normal Muslim Tuesday.
[/fake Saudi Arabian accent]


Also what does that have to do with the legal means to get them?

I'm trying to explain to you that you can't compare the Mafia to genocidal mass-murdering muslim fanatics who've been raised from birth to become foaming in the mouth loonies that want to nuke washington.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I was talking about in the Middle Ages maybe this is the Islam middle Ages. In the middle Ages the christians were horrible, the Inquistion, the killing of the Jews (Christians killed more Jews during the Middle Ages than the Nazis ever did) burning people at the stake for witchcraft or just being different. That is what I am talking about. Also the Crusades were no great moment for Christianity because the things ended with them turning on the major Christian nation in the middle east Byzantium leaving it helpless and left the slaughter for the Ottoman Empire to conquer.

[Darth Viscera]

I didn't say the christian crusades were a great moment, in fact I used the word "mediocrity". The christian crusades were one more act of defense in the face of a brutal, conquering enemy who had been on the offensive since 700 A.D. with aspirations to conquer Europe, then all the world.

The christian counter-crusaders didn't turn on the Roman Empire per se, they needed transit to the Holy Land. The price of that transit was getting involved in the politics of the Roman Empire and supporting a coup d'etat.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Actually that is not true what happened was during the sixth or Seventh I have no clue Venice decided it wanted the Byzantines out of the picture and it was down to money. Venice wanted to dominate the trade routes to the far east and Constantinople was the main player in that so, they influenced the pope to attack it and that destroyed the empire. Ironically I think the Crusades were an awful moment for Christianity but it became a slight turning point it is one of those things that helped being the Reformation and the Renassiance those two glourious events helped Europe get out of the rout of the middle ages.

[Figrin D'an]

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2003/09/14/patriot


Speaks for itself.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Venice decided it wanted the Byzantines out of the picture and it was down to money. Venice wanted to dominate the trade routes to the far east and Constantinople was the main player in that so, they influenced the pope to attack it and that destroyed the empire.


In 1198 the great medieval pope Innocent III came to power. Innocent III had a great interest in crusading and one of his first acts was to promote a Fourth Crusade. The initial response was disappointing, but some inspired local preaching and the Pope’s decision to tax the church to subsidise the crusaders helped to create a nucleus of a force around the counts of Champagne, Blois and Flanders as well as some important lords of the Ile de France.

The destination of the crusade was to be Egypt, the centre of Muslim power in the Near East. Venice provided the fleet of ships and in April 1201 was contracted to ship 4,500 knights, 9,000 squires and 20,000 foot soldiers to their destination for a sum of 85,000 marks. However, only one third of the force had reached Venice by October 1202 and the crusaders were unable to raise this sum. In lieu of payment they agreed to help the Venetians recover the town of Zara, lost to Hungary in 1186. Pope Innocent declared as part of his call for the fourth crusade that no Christian city be attacked, but the crusaders took Zara the following month.

Whilst this confused start to the Fourth Crusade was stuttering into life, the Byzantine Empire was in a state of dynastic crisis. The emperor at the time, Isaac Angelus, had been deposed and blinded by his brother, Alexius III. Isaac’s son (Alexius IV) fled to the west for aid and made a startling proposition to the crusaders. In return for restoring him and his father to power, he would pay them the princely sum of 200,000 marks, as well as reuniting the Orthodox church with Rome and contribute a significant force for crusading operations in the Holy Land. Whilst the Venetians and most of the crusade leaders agreed to these terms, many of the crusaders themselves found this to be unacceptable and they left the main force for the Holy Land.

On 24th June 1203 the main army reached Chalcedon, near Constantinople. They stormed Galata on 6th July 1203 and marched to the walls of the city. The Venetians prepared to attack the city from the sea. On 17th July, following a general assault, Alexius III fled and Isaac was released.

Isaac’s son, Alexius IV, was crowned co-emperor with his father and promptly tried to meet his obligations to the allies, who were camped outside the city walls. The clergy and people of Constantinople resented the terms of the agreement and the very presence of the crusaders. Anti-western feelings exploded in riots and street fighting. It wasn’t long before the reign of Alexius IV and his father was cut short: they were deposed and murdered in January 1204. The new emperor Alexius V was overtly anti-western. The crusaders began to feel isolated and threatened and decided to take Constantinople themselves. In March 1204 the crusaders and Venetians signed a treaty which dismembered the Byzantine Empire and divided the spoils. After 3 days of terrible pillaging, the city was theirs. Count Baldwin of Flanders was crowned the first Latin emperor of Constantinople and most of Southern Greece was conquered the following winter. Much of the Byzantine Empire was partitioned into new crusader states. The territories around Constantinople itself were controlled by the Latin emperors. Along the Northern Aegean as far as Athens, there was a new Latin kingdom of Thessalonica and in Morea, just north of Crete, the principality of Archaea was to be the most permanent of the crusader states in Greece.

Although the Byzantines recovered their capital in 1261, the Fourth Crusade did lasting damage to their Empire. By the time it was over, the friction and misunderstandings between East and West which had begun with the First Crusade had turned into permanent hatred.




"I don't think that those are frivolous fears," Lynch said. "We've already heard stories of local police chiefs creating files on people who have protested the (Iraq) war ... The government is constantly trying to expand its jurisdictions, and it needs to be watched very, very closely."

Good. If those protestors want to play dirty by firebombing starbucks and casual clothing stores in my city, then lock them up in the same cell as someone who's likely to deprive them of their Socialist virtue and throw away the key. No mercy for those militant ultra-left-wing Nazi thugs. If they're not molotov cocktailing the Starbucks, they're painting swastikas on the Holocaust memorial building. They're always committing some horrible atrocity in this city.

[Jedi Master Carr]

That is a very broad detail of what happened, from what I have heard from historians is the Venitians conned the pope because they wanted the spice trade from the Byzantium.

Also how could one be a left-wing Nazi thug?? That is an oxymoron Nazis are as far right as you can get. Sure maybe communist thugs I can see that.

[Darth Viscera]

Then explain why they painted a swastika on the Holocaust Memorial building.

[JediBoricua]

I read that article today in my local newspaper. It precisely shows the fears I have with the 'long leash' the Patriot Act gives prosecutors.

One thing is arresting looters, but arresting a guy for producing methamphetamine and charging him as producing chemical weapons is preposterous.

What's next? Arresting a guy for visiting a north korean website and charge him with attempting to contact and give information to terrorists?

[Jedi Master Carr]

More than likely that was some neo-nazi/skinhead group they do that stuff to Synegogues a lot (more in Europe then here) I don't think a leftwing group would do this case in point the Anti-Definmation league is a left wing group.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I found this in a book on the Fourth crusade and decided to add it

"The Fourth Crusade of 1204 was undobutedly the most successful of all the later oriental expeditions, but it was directed against byzantium rather than the Moslem world. Pope Innocent III, who preached the crusade, did not originally intend to take this form. But the Venetians, who provided the fleet for the crusading army )a motley collection French knights), insisted upon this change of plans, and since they had advanced loans to the crusaders, they were able to extract compliance from them." (Norman F. Cantor The Civilization of the Middle Ages.) I can't find a better reference on that that book give a broad scope of medieval history and don't get into as much details but from my study on Venice I know what they were up to they were trying to control the Spice trade and at that point in time they had the Pope's ear.

[Darth Viscera]

^
Well I'm not so sure that that's right, so let's just agree to disagree.

[Jedi Master Carr]

About what the Holocaust museum or the Fourth Crusade?? I say that because what I got from the Fourth Crusade comes from European scholars they no more about the subject than I do so I trust them on that. The Holocaust museum I really don't know the situation post a link and let me read it.

[Darth Viscera]

About the fourth crusade.