Liberty's revenge in the USA?

Quote:

---

The seatbelt law actually affects me. The Patriot Act does not in any way, shape or form. Is that so hard to understand?

---

Surely it affects all Americans, and all foreigners in America at any given time? Just because it hasn't impacted you does not mean it doesnt affect you. The war in Iraq hasn't impacted me in the slightest... it still affects me.

Quote:

---

You can try as hard as you like to trash Bush by claiming this is harming our rights as citizens, but until it does, youre only fulfilling your own fantasies about Bush.

---

I never said anything about Bush...? Its not Bush I would be worried about in relation to the Patriot Act or civil liberties. He's a jolly ould Texan with a distinctly "defined" view of the world, something of the sort that I personally would view as perhaps a little simplistic, but he certainly is not a bad man. More than anything else he is a puppet figurehead for much more sinister forces. If you question and oppose a seat belt safety law on the grounds that it could potentially be part of a broader movement that could lead to an Orwellian, big-brother state (as I believe you pointed out in the other thread). Then surely THIS is something to take note of for its massive potential for undoing core values. For someone who repeditively praises the merrits of small government, this seems remarkably inconsistant...? Could this be partisanism? Im not saying it is, but objectively evaluate your own position and at least allow yourself the oppertunity...

Quote:

---

When this law affects me, anyone I know, or even anyone ive ever heard of, then Ill treat it like the seatbelt law.

---

But isnt that the dark beauty of totalitarianism, it is something that is permissably on the grounds of security (or whatever happens to be the flavour of the month... ) until it is impossible to stop, because any emerging totalitarian worth his weight in rice will first target the very things that can remove him. Im not saying that the Patriot Act IS designed as a direct plot to turn America into a fascist dictatorship, (...but then again, I'm not saying it isnt ~;) ) but was the "Rule by Decree" Article (Article 48) of the Weimar Constitution really designed to enable Hitler's rise? It was seen as a vital in ensuring that Germany could survive in the face of dangers, (and lets face it, the domestic issues that Weimar had to deal with, the shaking to the very core it received on an almost annual basis, I would say dwarf the dangers faced by the US from terrorism today). Yet it turned out to be one of the (if not, THE) biggest factors in Hitler's rise. These checks on Government control may not be removed by those that will abuse their absence, but once gone you have no protection from those that would. Once it begins to impact the majority of the population, its allready far too late. And one thing is clear as day, a liberty gone is a liberty gone. Once you wave goodbye to a civil liberty, your not likely to see it again. ~:(

Forcing the 20th hijacker to listen to Aguilera into the wee hours of the night?
Now that is an inhumane torture , stop it , have you no pity ~;)

No its more harsh as in indefinate detention without charge , let alone conviction .

I don't mind listening to her music, as long as I can watch the video too.

Warning: Gratuitous cheesecake ahead:



































http://www.davidlachapelle.com/videos/aguilera.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

As an American who is against what the Patriot Act could become, I must say this comment is stupid.

Were you joking or do you really think that America sometime in the future will be shoveling people who have bought a Koran into ovens?

---

Bit of both, the humour was in the extremes of dark. But there is a cause and effect dominoes possibilty whereby the Patriot act could set of a reaction of ever harsher laws aimed at, "protecting the people". The Patriot act is just one step in the direction, but one step can beget another unless constrained and forced back.

However it was slightly offensive and in bad taste so I apologise if I offended you.

Quote:

---

Surely it affects all Americans, and all foreigners in America at any given time? Just because it hasn't impacted you does not mean it doesnt affect you. The war in Iraq hasn't impacted me in the slightest... it still affects me.

---

How? Please, Mr. Irish Man explain to this dumb american how it has affected me, because I live here and Im having a hard time coming up with any impact, effect, or whatever you want to call it that the law has had on me or anyone i know or have even heard of. ~:confused:

Quote:

---

never said anything about Bush...? Its not Bush I would be worried about in relation to the Patriot Act or civil liberties. He's a jolly ould Texan with a distinctly "defined" view of the world, something of the sort that I personally would view as perhaps a little simplistic, but he certainly is not a bad man. More than anything else he is a puppet figurehead for much more sinister forces.

---

Yawn. The sinister neocons havent hurt me, in fact im enjoying the tax breaks. ~;)

Quote:

---

If you question and oppose a seat belt safety law on the grounds that it could potentially be part of a broader movement that could lead to an Orwellian, big-brother state (as I believe you pointed out in the other thread).

---

Actually I said the seatbelt law was not a big deal. However, a law that will help the government stop future 9/11's is a big deal.

Quote:

---

Then surely THIS is something to take note of for its massive potential for undoing core values. For someone who repeditively praises the merrits of small government, this seems remarkably inconsistant...? Could this be partisanism? Im not saying it is, but objectively evaluate your own position and at least allow yourself the oppertunity...

---

This battle should have been fought during the FDR administration. The "information" gained by the government from the patriot act is tiny compared to what it already has.

I dont like the huge federal government we have here but im not going to make a mountain out of a mole hill over a law designed to protect us.

If you liberals are all of a sudden so worried about the government holding information on you, why dont you ever talk about Social Security or any of the other huge programs we have here? Why is it only a law supported by Bush? Could it be partisanship?

Quote:

---

But isnt that the dark beauty of totalitarianism, it is something that is permissably on the grounds of security (or whatever happens to be the flavour of the month... ) until it is impossible to stop, because any emerging totalitarian worth his weight in rice will first target the very things that can remove him. Im not saying that the Patriot Act IS designed as a direct plot to turn America into a fascist dictatorship, (...but then again, I'm not saying it isnt ) but was the "Rule by Decree" Article (Article 48) of the Weimar Constitution really designed to enable Hitler's rise? It was seen as a vital in ensuring that Germany could survive in the face of dangers, (and lets face it, the domestic issues that Weimar had to deal with, the shaking to the very core it received on an almost annual basis, I would say dwarf the dangers faced by the US from terrorism today). Yet it turned out to be one of the (if not, THE) biggest factors in Hitler's rise. These checks on Government control may not be removed by those that will abuse their absence, but once gone you have no protection from those that would. Once it begins to impact the majority of the population, its allready far too late. And one thing is clear as day, a liberty gone is a liberty gone. Once you wave goodbye to a civil liberty, your not likely to see it again.

---

The difference is that Hitler burned down the Stag, or more correctly, had it burned down. 9/11 was an attack by a real enemy, and we need real protections against them.

It bothers me to see 9/11 increasingly downplayed by people with an agenda. You and your ilk should really go back and watch the videos before comparing the Patriot Act to Art. 48. Its disgusting, and it all has its roots in this unrational hatred of the President. I guarantee you that if Kerry had pushed for the renewal of the Patriot Act, not a word would be mentioned. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

If youre not a terrorist, why should you worry?



Oh please.. How have you or your liberties been affected by the Patriot Act?

---

in this forum i read just yesterday someone describing the compulsory seat belt law like an infringement on personal liberties......

but the patriot act is no problem......go figure... :dizzy2:

Said By PanzerJager in the seatbelt thread..

Quote:

---

Couldnt have said it better myself. I thought i was the only one who had a problem with these "safety laws".

Goofball also had a point that this is a minor thing.. It should be included in a broader fight against all these safety laws.

---

anyone i know or have even heard of.
Ummm read post 26 , if you havn't heard of Cat Stephens I am sure you heard of Ted Kennedy or that Republican Congressman whose name eludes me at the moment .

Quote:

---

How? Please, Mr. Irish Man explain to this dumb american how it has affected me, because I live here and Im having a hard time coming up with any impact, effect, or whatever you want to call it that the law has had on me or anyone i know or have even heard of.

---

Well Mr. American Man (...hey, lets remember that we are both German citizens, if we are going to start throwing nationalities around for some reason! ;) ) something affects you when it can potentially impact you. The Patriot Act affects you because the FBI or NSA or some agency neither of us know exists, CAN barge in on you in the next 4 seconds, imprison you or generally do with you as they wish, and you wouldnt even get a lawyer. It hasnt impacted you (...yet) and may never (lets hope so), but it still affects you directly. To bring the German thing back into it, Im sure if youve got German Grandparents, you can hear all about it from them. Hitler and the Nazi's didnt impact my Grandparents at all, untill my Grandfather was made join the Luftwaffe, and my Grandmother's brother was killed in Russia. Ask 99% of that generation in 1935 if Hitler's coercive policies against the perceicved threat bothered them, and you would have got a good resounding "NO". Many would have praised them for their affect of seemingly preventing another Reichstag fire (even if van der Lubbe didnt do it, we are talking about perception here not fact).

Quote:

---

If you liberals are all of a sudden so worried about the government holding information on you, why dont you ever talk about Social Security or any of the other huge programs we have here? Why is it only a law supported by Bush? Could it be partisanship?

---

On the risk of sounding a little offensive, but what a bloody typical stereotypical American way of responding. "you liberals"... as if anything was as simple as liberals/conservatives, black/white, with us/against us, etc... etc.. for crying out load, PLEASE dont lump me and any/everyone who happens not to agree with you in as "Liberal". As if that somehow makes it easier to dismiss what they have to say. Its pathetic! There are infinite shades of grey, something that is being quickly lost in the increasingly polarised America of today. Sorry for this little outburst, but its infuriating! :bomb:

Perhaps I'm misinformed, but can Social Security come into your home, arrest you without charge? Do anything remotely like what the Patriot Act allows, are they even at all comparible, or are you just muddying the waters with something you disagree with? Anyway, I would rate the American Democratic party as on almost the same level as the Republican, I'm no fan of either, believe me! Its not Partisan in my case at least...

Quote:

---

The difference is that Hitler burned down the Stag, or more correctly, had it burned down. 9/11 was an attack by a real enemy, and we need real protections against them.

---

Maybe you misunderstood exactly what I said, or are not familiar with this particular period of German History, but Article 48 had nothing to do with Hitler in its conception. It was part of the 1919 Weimar Constitution as a security measure against domestic subversive forces (ironically, including Hitler and his Munich boys himself!!!), which staged coup after revolution after revolt. It was a miracle that the Government survived at all IMO. Fascism as we know it had not even been born properly yet, but it was a fatal weakness in the armour of democracy. Then when Hitler came into the picture, this avenue opened a clear path to Total control, it was almost handed to him on a plate. All that was needed was another "national emergency", the Reichstag Fire, and the by now senile von Hindenburg practically declared Hitler Fuhrer! Im not equating the Sept 11 attacks with the Reichstag fire, Im saying that they are similar to the tumultous political evens that prompted German lawmakers to include such foolish provisions in their laws. Which then were exploited a generation later by a certain failed artist from Veinna to acheive his goals.

:oops:

Quote:

---

Well Mr. American Man (...hey, lets remember that we are both German citizens, if we are going to start throwing nationalities around for some reason! ;) ) something affects you when it can potentially impact you. The Patriot Act affects you because the FBI or NSA or some agency neither of us know exists, CAN barge in on you in the next 4 seconds, imprison you or generally do with you as they wish, and you wouldnt even get a lawyer. It hasnt impacted you (...yet) and may never (lets hope so), but it still affects you directly. To bring the German thing back into it, Im sure if youve got German Grandparents, you can hear all about it from them. Hitler and the Nazi's didnt impact my Grandparents at all, untill my Grandfather was made join the Luftwaffe, and my Grandmother's brother was killed in Russia. Ask 99% of that generation in 1935 if Hitler's coercive policies against the perceicved threat bothered them, and you would have got a good resounding "NO". Many would have praised them for their affect of seemingly preventing another Reichstag fire (even if van der Lubbe didnt do it, we are talking about perception here not fact).

---

Again with Nazi Germany. The comparisons are almost as infuriating as me calling you a liberal. ~;)

The thing is these powers are already held by the government. The patriot act only makes it easier. Instead of having to wait 5 days to see a judge for a warrent theyll just do what they would have done anyway. With or without the Patriot act, the government can already do all sorts of monitoring if it feels you are a criminal.

The difference between America and Nazi Germany is that people who are not criminals need not fear the intrusion. To be perfectly honest, American citizens lost much of their privacy from the government before I was even a citizen - i dont see the big deal made over a law that continues down that path.. Why didnt people rise up earlier when all the government needed was a rubber stamp from a circuit court judge to do the exact same thing to a citizen who was not a criminal?

Quote:

---

Perhaps I'm misinformed, but can Social Security come into your home, arrest you without charge? Do anything remotely like what the Patriot Act allows, are they even at all comparible, or are you just muddying the waters with something you disagree with? Anyway, I would rate the American Democratic party as on almost the same level as the Republican, I'm no fan of either, believe me! Its not Partisan in my case at least...

---

The original argument was over the information the government could obtain about you - that is why I brought SS into the equation.

As I said earlier, if the argument has shifted to the scary fact that the government can come into your house and grab you if they feel it neccessary - well thats been existent long before the Patriot Act and America is still a republic.

Quote:

---

Maybe you misunderstood exactly what I said, or are not familiar with this particular period of German History, but Article 48 had nothing to do with Hitler in its conception. It was part of the 1919 Weimar Constitution as a security measure against domestic subversive forces (ironically, including Hitler and his Munich boys himself!!!), which staged coup after revolution after revolt. It was a miracle that the Government survived at all IMO. Fascism as we know it had not even been born properly yet, but it was a fatal weakness in the armour of democracy. Then when Hitler came into the picture, this avenue opened a clear path to Total control, it was almost handed to him on a plate. All that was needed was another "national emergency", the Reichstag Fire, and the by now senile von Hindenburg practically declared Hitler Fuhrer! Im not equating the Sept 11 attacks with the Reichstag fire, Im saying that they are similar to the tumultous political evens that prompted German lawmakers to include such foolish provisions in their laws. Which then were exploited a generation later by a certain failed artist from Veinna to acheive his goals.

---

Im very familiar with that period of history. That is why I took your point to its logical conclusion - the Stag fire. What I am saying is that the Patriot Act is being used against real enemies, not percieved ones.

As I said earlier, if people who are so upset by the Patriot act are truly worried about America becoming a totalitarian state, why did they only choose to speak up after so many years of having such a large government?

The time to fight against intrusive laws and big government were in the 30s and 40s - not in 2005 against a law that is helping us fight against the people who perpetrated 9/11.

If a future leader wants to take power much in the same way Hitler did, the framework was established long before the Patriot Act. Its simply up to us to make informed decisions about our leaders.

The answer to most of your questions is that the Patriot Act removes the Judicary, the one branch of the government that is independent of the Legislators and the Executive (at least its meant to be...) from this process. Pretty dangerous wouldnt you say? Those checks on the Government are there for a damn good reason, removing them is about as bad as ideas get imo. Lets not be idealistic, the American Gov, and the Agencies which carry out its biddings, are just as fallable as any other human institutions out there. Removing constraints designed to protect a country from itself has never just been about efficiency.

Quote:

---

The difference between America and Nazi Germany is that people who are not criminals need not fear the intrusion.

---

There's a long history of abuses that denies this.

The difference between America and Nazi Germany is that we haven't condoned shoving jews into ovens, but IMHO its pretty naive to think that a law as powerful as the Patriot Act isn't without it's dangers.

It seems that some Republicans have come to their senses, and realized that we don't need to have the ability to pry into people's lives, even innocent hard-working non-criminal lives, without a few checks and balances.

I pay my taxes, don't blow people up, and generally am law-abiding, and the Patriot Act makes me nervous. If someone else doesn't mind it, that's OK, but I'm glad the House has come to its senses and stepped back from a slippery edge.

ichi :bow:

Quote:

---

The answer to most of your questions is that the Patriot Act removes the Judicary, the one branch of the government that is independent of the Legislators and the Executive (at least its meant to be...) from this process.

---

It does not remove it. You still have to see a judge, just a special one. Also it may have slipped by you all but even this has never been used. Once more our drug laws are far more invasive of our privacy as is the tax return the government requires us to file every year. The Patriot act as its wriiten now doesnt threaten me at all. Without security there is no freedom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Once more our drug laws are far more invasive of our privacy as is the tax return the government requires us to file every year.

---

Very true, as are many of the laws created to fight organized crime. There is a bunch of spin taking place on this subject- the most upsetting part of this I know of are the sneak and peek searches, but these have been possible in non-terrorism cases for a long time. I also understand that Feds want the ability to write their own 'national security' warrants, but I think that was a proposed expansion of the PATRIOT Act- one which is unlikely to be passed, nor would I want it to be.

So far, I really haven't heard anything but scare tactics and fear mongering from opponents of the Act. Can someone point out something 'new and terrible' under the PATRIOT Act that wasnt already possible elsewhere? If someone wants to work themselves into a lather over something, why not look into the RICO Act?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Ive been living under the patriot act for a few years now and - big surprise - nothing has changed. That might have to do with the fact Im a law abiding citizen though. ~;)

---

Interesting, that is what the most Chinese says under the communist rule as well..... ~;)

Quote:

---

The seatbelt law actually affects me. The Patriot Act does not in any way, shape or form. Is that so hard to understand?

---

Sorry to keep going back to the pre-war Germany references, especially given the nationality of the person under-fire here. I don't like digging up this period from the past but I think this poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller is especially relevant for this quoute:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

The poem isn't Nazi specific. If you tolerate unfair or extreme measures because they don't affect you, then don't be surprised when one day extreme measures are introduced that do affect you and nobody stands up for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Very true, as are many of the laws created to fight organized crime.

---

Probably true, I think it's a good thing that people are standing up for their rights again. This is a good first step. The war on terrorism and the war on drugs can (and have) been used against law-abiding citizens of the US. The patriot act probably less so. Although, apparently, you can get arrested for trying to translate/publish an Arab book.

The point is that the powers of government should be limited, surely every republican can agree with that ? Otherwise, why have the Bill of Rights, you could just trust your government and surely nothing bad will happen to you ? The Patriot Act was a clear attack on the separation between the private and the public, the basis of the first amendment, and if you check the Federalist papers, one of the founding principles of the US democracy.

And let's face it, it's a waste of money. Checking kids that want to read about Islam ? Monitoring debate groups that talk about how we should have world peace ? You can never have perfect security in a free country. You'll just have the learn to live with that. A terrorist can always find a way. That, of course, doesn't mean you can't try to stop them, but you have to focus your efforts, and you have to make sure no innocents get hurt along the way.

The Patriot act gives too much room for possible abuse.

Quote:

---

Monitoring debate groups that talk about how we should have world peace ?

---

Let's hope they don't read the org then otherwise we're all doomed apart from PanzerJager.

Quote:

---

Sorry to keep going back to the pre-war Germany references, especially given the nationality of the person under-fire here. I don't like digging up this period from the past but I think this poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller is especially relevant for this quoute:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

The poem isn't Nazi specific. If you tolerate unfair or extreme measures because they don't affect you, then don't be surprised when one day extreme measures are introduced that do affect you and nobody stands up for you.

---

Youve made my point for me. The patriot act hasnt "come for" anybody.

Its funny to see certain people so opposed to the patriot act, after not making a sound during the Reno dictatorship.

Reno, Reno... That was either 1993 or 1996 was it not. Either way I was either 7 or 10 years old at the time. Forgive me for not being more vocal! ~;)

Anyway, didnt the ACLU successfully battle some of its implementation in court? Seems pretty consistant to me, not just against something Bush-backed.

Im talking about Janet Reno and the true infringement of rights during the Clinton administration.

If you really want an example of the government bursting into a place and shooting it up - look at Waco. ~:eek:

Ok, I thought you were talking about the Communications Decency Act or whatever it was called... I know well who Reno was, I just assumed you were reffering to a specific Act, not the period of her office in general.

And again, should I have been more vocal as 5 - 10 year old about the civil liberty encroachments in another country?? Surely I can only protest and speak against what is happening in my time? And wasnt the ACLU up in arms about this stuff?

Quote:

---

The patriot act hasnt "come for" anybody.

---

On the contrary. Many people have been detained on grounds made lawful under the Patriot Act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doc_bean

And let's face it, it's a waste of money. Checking kids that want to read about Islam ? Monitoring debate groups that talk about how we should have world peace ? You can never have perfect security in a free country. You'll just have the learn to live with that. A terrorist can always find a way. That, of course, doesn't mean you can't try to stop them, but you have to focus your efforts, and you have to make sure no innocents get hurt along the way.

The Patriot act gives too much room for possible abuse.

---

Can someone show me where this is delineated in the PATRIOT Act? As far as I know, monitoring library records and debate groups is already allowable with court approval. How has this changed?

Quote:

---

On the contrary. Many people have been detained on grounds made lawful under the Patriot Act.

---

Who?

Quote:

---

And again, should I have been more vocal as 5 - 10 year old about the civil liberty encroachments in another country?? Surely I can only protest and speak against what is happening in my time? And wasnt the ACLU up in arms about this stuff?

---

The point was: people who have a problem with the Patriot Act didnt seem to have a problem with the much greater infringements of previous years. The supposed outrage is very political in nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Can someone show me where this is delineated in the PATRIOT Act? As far as I know, monitoring library records and debate groups is already allowable with court approval. How has this changed?

---

Well, it's what the original post was about.

I think the 'court approval' part got changed, or at least that's what the leftist media leads me to believe.

Quote:

---

I think the 'court approval' part got changed, or at least that's what the leftist media leads me to believe.

---

They do their job well dont they? Again its just what judge you have to go in front of that has changed.

Right, my understanding is that approval by a federal judge is still required. The difference is that it allows the hearings to be fast tracked to an intelligence court that will handle such requests in a more timely manner- still federal judges though.

Well Panzer since you havn't changed you mind over the Patriot Act like you said you would if you had heard of anyone who had been affected by it I shall assume that was a bluff . I mean surely you had heard of Ted kennedy his family have been in American politics for a long time , one of them even achieved the highest office in the country .

So onto a different track .
The patriot act hasnt "come for" anybody.
Yes the 1200+ people detained in the early life of the legislation were nobody really , there were tentative links established between 10-15 of them and Al-Qaida , but none were linked to 9/11 in any way and none were charged with any terrorism related offences . Then you have the second batch of 800+ people followed by a third batch of 1000+ , and it goes on and on .

Who?
Very good question , who indeed ?
Well there is a a little thing in the act (section 201) that means that the government does not have to identify who they have detained under the act indefinately , until they have criminal charges filed against them , even if those persons are American ctizens .
So far out of the thousands detained how many have been charged with anything ? Less than 200 , of those few how many were charged with terrorist related offences ? 39 !!!! of those 39 how many were charged in connection to middle eastern terrorism (not just Al-qaida) ? Less than a third .
And one of those is being charged with falsely claiming that he had links to Al-Qaida and knew of bomb plots against 5 American cities .
So despite the all encompassing powers of this act what has it achieved ?
Practically bugger all .
One example of a really dangerous individual who was detained under the act was Farouk Abdel-Muhti . Two years in detention without legal counsel or any recourse to justice . Then he is just released with no apology or anything , they coundn't even get him on immigration violations .
His supposed "crime" which led to his loss of Liberty ?
He campaigned politically against the Israeli occupation of Palestine . ~:confused:

Since the American German and the Irish German have bought up the Riechstag fire and the similarities between the laws passed then and the Patriot Act maybe it is an idea to compare the "Verordnung des Reichsprasidenten zum Shutz von Volk und Staat" of 1933 with the American version . One difference is that the German version was written and passed within 24 hours of the "attack" , congress took slightly longer ~;)