Top lawmakers agree to Patriot Act extension

[JBeukema]

The deal between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner calls for a vote before May 27, when parts of the current act expire. The idea is to pass the extension with as little debate as possible to avoid a protracted and familiar argument over the expanded power the law gives to the government.

Placeropolis.com

So... we'll not be getting our liberty back?

 

[JBeukema]

Nothing?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Certainly, Barack Obama, guardian of freedom, protector of rights, will veto this travesty of justice called "The Patriot Act" and restore freedom to the land for all Americans.

Yeah right.

Anyone who believes Obama is any different than Bush is kidding themselves. It's like cheering for the National League or the American League in Baseball. No matter who wins the World Series, you don't get to share in any of it! Suckers!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Nothing?

There’s really not much more to be said. Given the deal, replacing republicans with democrats or democrats with republicans isn’t going to help.

We’ve filed lawsuits over the years with mixed success – the "National Security Letters" lawsuit was successful along with the gag provision being struck down as un-Constitutional prior restraint.

Some suits were dropped because Congress just rewrites sections of the law making such actions moot. The Section 215 rewrite, for example, does now allow for challenges and legal consultation prior to responding.

But it could be argued Congress is not to blame, as it merely reflects the cowardice of the American people as a whole who will, yet again, surrender liberty for security.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Manifold gave me neg rep for the last post but notice he has not actually posted any proof of any lost rights. Why? Because there are none.

 

[dblack]

So... we'll not be getting our liberty back?

Not as long as we keep voting for Democrats and Republicans.

 

[Zander]

Manifold gave me neg rep for the last post but notice he has not actually posted any proof of any lost rights. Why? Because there are none.

The fact that the government is looking at your visa statements and bank records; listening to your telephone calls; reading your e-mails; this is not a loss of privacy and freedom?

Sorry RGS - You can't see the forest for the trees. The Patriot act is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Period.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

Manifold gave me neg rep for the last post but notice he has not actually posted any proof of any lost rights. Why? Because there are none.

What you fail to understand is that rights once lost may never be reclaimed.

 

[tallmike]

Certainly, Barack Obama, guardian of freedom, protector of rights, will veto this travesty of justice called "The Patriot Act" and restore freedom to the land for all Americans.

Yeah right.

Anyone who believes Obama is any different than Bush is kidding themselves. It's like cheering for the National League or the American League in Baseball. No matter who wins the World Series, you don't get to share in any of it! Suckers!

I didn't vote for Obama, but when he got elected I had some really high hopes that at least the patriot act would be repealed.

If Obama had become the anti-bush he promised to be and rolled back the expansion of federal powers that has been going on for the past few years he would very likely had gotten my vote in 2012. He will not be getting my vote.

 

[tallmike]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

Gunny-
I disagree with you that someone needs to have a verifiable loss of rights before we can look at a new law and say it is an unconstitutional expansion of government power. I can do it with the Patriot Act and Obamacare, just off the top of my head. Nobody ever lost a right to Obamacare, but the law certainly laid the framework for that loss.

That being said, Jose Padilla is a wonderful example of the government stripping an American citizen of his constitutional rights without ever providing a shred of evidence. Declaring a citizen to be an "enemy combatant" does not deprive him of his rights.

 

[MikeK]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

The issue is not what has been thus far but what could be. And considering the provisions in the Patriot Act the possibilities are ominous.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Manifold gave me neg rep for the last post but notice he has not actually posted any proof of any lost rights. Why? Because there are none.

The fact that the government is looking at your visa statements and bank records; listening to your telephone calls; reading your e-mails; this is not a loss of privacy and freedom?

Sorry RGS - You can't see the forest for the trees. The Patriot act is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Period.

Provide evidence that a single US Citizen not committing a crime has been affected in any way by any of the provisions of the Patriot act. I won't wait.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

Gunny-
I disagree with you that someone needs to have a verifiable loss of rights before we can look at a new law and say it is an unconstitutional expansion of government power. I can do it with the Patriot Act and Obamacare, just off the top of my head. Nobody ever lost a right to Obamacare, but the law certainly laid the framework for that loss.

That being said, Jose Padilla is a wonderful example of the government stripping an American citizen of his constitutional rights without ever providing a shred of evidence. Declaring a citizen to be an "enemy combatant" does not deprive him of his rights.

He had his day in Court and the Courts ruled he still had all his rights, try again.

 

[Jessica Blume]

The deal between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner calls for a vote before May 27, when parts of the current act expire. The idea is to pass the extension with as little debate as possible to avoid a protracted and familiar argument over the expanded power the law gives to the government.

Placeropolis.com

So... we'll not be getting our liberty back?

Impeach!

 

[MikeK]

Provide evidence that a single US Citizen not committing a crime has been affected in any way by any of the provisions of the Patriot act. I won't wait.

Because of the powers imparted to law enforcement by FISA and the Patriot Act, it is entirely possible that the rights of innocent Americans have already been violated with no way for other ordinary citizens to know about it. And that is the most insidious component of this latest abuse of our rights as Americans.

(Excerpt)

The federal government has turned American freedoms into a world wide mockery with their unchecked spying on ordinary Americans, part of a broad pattern of the executive branch using "national security" and or "suspected terrorism " as an excuse for encroaching on the privacy and free speech rights of Americans without adequate oversight. It eliminates many protections against unlawful imprisonment and now many rights in U.S. legal system are absent — such as the critically important right of habeas corpus.

As written the Patriot Act violates due process for all Americans. All the president has to do is call a citizen an "enemy combatant" and the person's due process rights disappear. The US Government says that U.S. citizens can be detained and then tried in secret trials — in absentia, and can use secret evidence that the accused cannot see or challenge. If evidence is obtained by coercion, or torture government lawyers contend that it should still be allowed as a basis for conviction, thereby erasing 300 years of Anglo-American jurisprudence.

Patriot Act unconstitutional

 

[tallmike]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

Gunny-
I disagree with you that someone needs to have a verifiable loss of rights before we can look at a new law and say it is an unconstitutional expansion of government power. I can do it with the Patriot Act and Obamacare, just off the top of my head. Nobody ever lost a right to Obamacare, but the law certainly laid the framework for that loss.

That being said, Jose Padilla is a wonderful example of the government stripping an American citizen of his constitutional rights without ever providing a shred of evidence. Declaring a citizen to be an "enemy combatant" does not deprive him of his rights.

He had his day in Court and the Courts ruled he still had all his rights, try again.

The government picked up an American citizen on US soil and held him for nearly 4 years without filing charges, presenting evidence, providing an attorney, or taking him before a judge. After those 4 years passed they handed him over to a civilian court, where he was never charged with the crimes they said he was picked up for.

They only handed him over to a civilian court for charges to stop the Supreme Court from setting a legal precedent that would stop them from doing these things to other citizens.

How does none of this bother you? I don't care if the president is an R or a D, if the citizen involved is a Muslim or a Christian, Black or White, a Man or Woman, even if he is a good guy or a bad guy - these things are unacceptable.

If the government can do this to one citizen without any evidence or legal proceedings, they can do it to any citizen. That is very frightening to me.

 

[JBeukema]

Not a single detractor from the Patriot act has provided a real or verifiable loss of freedom anyone has been subjected too.

But you keep whining.

Gunny-
I disagree with you that someone needs to have a verifiable loss of rights before we can look at a new law and say it is an unconstitutional expansion of government power. I can do it with the Patriot Act and Obamacare, just off the top of my head. Nobody ever lost a right to Obamacare, but the law certainly laid the framework for that loss.

That being said, Jose Padilla is a wonderful example of the government stripping an American citizen of his constitutional rights without ever providing a shred of evidence. Declaring a citizen to be an "enemy combatant" does not deprive him of his rights.

He had his day in Court and the Courts ruled he still had all his rights, try again.

And the Law said blacks had all their rights when they were slaves and that forced sterilization was (and remains) perfectly constitutional in the U.S.

You are closer to a NAZI than anyone else on the board, because you are a true Statist. Because the Law says it, it must be right in your eyes.

Fuck the Law. The Law of men and of the State means nothing.

 

[JBeukema]

Gunny-
I disagree with you that someone needs to have a verifiable loss of rights before we can look at a new law and say it is an unconstitutional expansion of government power. I can do it with the Patriot Act and Obamacare, just off the top of my head. Nobody ever lost a right to Obamacare, but the law certainly laid the framework for that loss.

That being said, Jose Padilla is a wonderful example of the government stripping an American citizen of his constitutional rights without ever providing a shred of evidence. Declaring a citizen to be an "enemy combatant" does not deprive him of his rights.

He had his day in Court and the Courts ruled he still had all his rights, try again.

The government picked up an American citizen on US soil and held him for nearly 4 years without filing charges, presenting evidence, providing an attorney, or taking him before a judge. After those 4 years passed they handed him over to a civilian court, where he was never charged with the crimes they said he was picked up for.

They only handed him over to a civilian court for charges to stop the Supreme Court from setting a legal precedent that would stop them from doing these things to other citizens.

How does none of this bother you?

Because he is a Statist

 

[uscitizen]

I told ya whiney little bitches who wanted to be kept safe.