Blackmagik:
"Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve to have neither" - Benjamin Franklin.

 

i think thats what the government is doing right now, even though we dont even need the security.

 

What leads you to believe we don't need the security?

 

please elaborate on how you've lost freedom? has your life in particular changed in any way other than you talk about the same thing over and over on a web forum? have you or any of your friends been adversely affected by increased security at an airport?

i am well aware of that quote... i am also well aware that ben franklin lived in a time of conventional warfare. we, on the other hand do not. times change. you as a liberal should know that as well as any since the general liberal mindset pushes change, needed or not.

 

Among other things, the restrictions placed on how assorted law enforcement agencies go about conducting surveillance on whomever they please have been greatly diminished by the Patriot Act. The scope of the Act is overbroad and not limited solely to terrorism but the general ability of the US government to spy on its citizens. There are indeed many parts which relate solely to the prosecution of terrorism but there are similarly many sections which have no mention of terrorism whatsoever and deal with surveillance in general. In addition, several computer crimes are now classified as terrorist acts with the justification that terrorists might use hacking as one of their weapons. It definitely has nothing to do with increased security at airports.

Obviously some sort of legislation needed to be put in place to help our law enforcement deal with terrorism more effectively. The Patriot Act however, goes too far in compromising the rights of American citizens to privacy at the expense of going after terrorists. It seems to me that the scope of the act was deliberately made overbroad by right wing political opportunists who could push through legislation that undercuts civil liberties (which we all know is an agenda of the right) under the guise of fighting terrorism.

Finally while the argument "if you're not a terrorist then you've essentially got nothing to worry about" does indeed seem inherently correct, the possibility exists now more than ever that non-terrorist but suspicious activities on the part of law-abiding (or hell, even law-breaking but not terrorist) people now have a higher likelyhood of drawing scrutiny from law enforcement and the level of information which will be able to be obtained by law enforcement is that much greater. Just because someone may appear to be a terrorist does not mean they are in fact a terrorist and they deserve the same protection of the prpivacy laws of this country as anyone else. The Patriot Act erodes those protections.

I find it highly contradictory that while the right wing preaches for the reduction of the overall size of government they don't hesitate whatsoever to increase the size of military or law-enforcement agencies; and at the same time they erode through policy the legal protections citizens have from those branches. We don't live in a police state and I for one don't want this country to get a millimeter closer to becoming one.

 

Just for the sake of argument, an example:

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/N...443041,00.html

Gore: Repeal Patriot Act
10/11/2003 08:16 - (SA)


Washington - Former United States vice president Al Gore accused President George W Bush of failing to make America safer after the September 11 attacks and using the war against terrorism as a pretext to consolidate power.

"They have taken us much farther down the road toward an intrusive, 'big brother'-style government - toward the dangers prophesied by George Orwell in his book '1984' - than anyone ever thought would be possible in the United States of America," Gore charged Sunday.

Gore, who lost the disputed 2000 presidential election to Bush, said terrorism-fighting tools granted after September 11 amount to a partisan power grab that have led to the erosion of the civil liberties of all Americans.

He brought the crowd to its feet when he called for a repeal of the Patriot Act, which expanded government's surveillance and detention power, allowing authorities to monitor books people read and conduct secret searches.

Gore chided the administration for what he said was its "implicit assumption" that Americans must give up traditional freedoms in order to be safe from terrorists.

It makes no sense

"In my opinion, it makes no more sense to launch an assault on our civil liberties as the best way to get at terrorists than it did to launch an invasion of Iraq as the best way to get at Osama bin Laden," Gore said.

In both cases, Gore said, the administration has "recklessly put our country in grave and unnecessary danger".

He also said the administration still has "no serious strategy" for domestic security - charging that there aren't sufficient protections in place for ports, nuclear facilities, chemical plants and other key infrastructure.

His speech before a crowd of about three thousand people was sponsored by the liberal activist group Moveon.org, which earlier this year held an online presidential primary in which Howard Dean finished first.

A second sponsor, the American Constitution Society, is a national organisation of law students, professors, lawyers and others that says it seek to counter what it characterises as the dominant, narrow conservative vision of American law today.


and FYI, yes, I've been harassed enough by Emperor Bush's Gustapo SS Homeland Security. **** them, and **** him. Have a nice day.

 

another thing ... more troops are dying in Iraq and am I correct in hearing Bush said "we are not leaving until we find Saddam" ?

Isnt that what he said about Bin Laden? He needs to get his priorities straight. This is such a sad excuse of a presidency.

 

LMFAO. Are you serious? When was the last time they busted into your house in the dead of the night to drag you to an interrogation room? Do they follow you to work? Or tap your phone lines? Do they hold your loved ones prisoner? Please, elaborate on this "harassment".

 

And I couldn't let this little gem pass by either. So to be in the military means that you are trigger happy and take lives? I was in the army and never took a life. I'm pretty sure Blackmagik (i think the spelling you are looking for is blackmagik) has never taken a life in the line of duty. Don't assume things that you know nothing about. By filter out the window dressings, do you mean ignore logic? I support Bush because the man has values and thought processes above and beyond b*tching about every step the government takes. What would you like to see happen in this country? What would make it the "perfect" government to you? Going back to isolationism? Or would you just complain that now wearent doing anything for the less fortunate countries? Liberals must be so miserable being unhappy with everything all of the time. Try some prozac or valium or something, huh?

 

I had a flat tire on the interstate and some guy pulled saying he was "homeland security". I just laughed at him and told him to piss off because this was I thought this was before they were actually "formed" by Dubya, but when he got out of the car and tried to search my car as it was "odd that someone would be hanging out at an overpass at 1am." I told the guy "are you blind? I have a flat tire ... you call that hanging out?" Basically I gave him the typical ACLU shit that I give the local sheriffs office, and he gave up, but that's not the only time that's happened.