Patriot Act

[Modu$OperanDi]

the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;


How can anyone who claims to love America support this. This is a huge step towards a police state. We as the public can no longer speak our minds if it disturbs the Governments plans. If there is a leader of a social movement that they feel is endangering their power they can legally kill him. Do you feel safer? Our liberties have been fucked by the Government taking advantage of our need for a sense of security. And it is only the beginning.

I know this is super old news but whoever supports this is part of the problem. And don't say I do too because John Kerry also supports it, John kerry and Bush are playing their fucking Skull and Bones roles in this election. The new world order is coming without a fight from the public because of this left-right bullshit of everyone thinking their side is right when really they are both part of a currupt spectrum which is addicted to power and money.

 

[Sun Dog]

I bet Ralph Nader doesn't support it. I think a major problem in US politics is the general consensus that it must be a 2 party system... imagine how 3 or 5 would do. Real good old capitalistic competition

 

[Merlin1047]

the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;


How can anyone who claims to love America support this. This is a huge step towards a police state. We as the public can no longer speak our minds if it disturbs the Governments plans. If there is a leader of a social movement that they feel is endangering their power they can legally kill him. Do you feel safer? Our liberties have been fucked by the Government taking advantage of our need for a sense of security. And it is only the beginning.

I know this is super old news but whoever supports this is part of the problem. And don't say I do too because John Kerry also supports it, John kerry and Bush are playing their fucking Skull and Bones roles in this election. The new world order is coming without a fight from the public because of this left-right bullshit of everyone thinking their side is right when really they are both part of a currupt spectrum which is addicted to power and money.

This post may be acceptable on Yahoo or Slate. On this board it is advisable to support your assertion with factual specifics especially if you start a thread. Otherwise people rightfully assume that you're just another escapee from the asylum.

So if you want anyone to take you seriously, why don't you go back and research the Patriot Act, then provide the excerpts which support your position. Then provide documented examples of incidents where the rights of a citizen have been violated and what provision of the Patriot Act would give the government the right to kill the leader of a social movement. Also, since you mentioned the Skull and Bones, why not provide some documentation of any specific actions which that group has taken that jepoardize anyone's freedoms.

If that's too much trouble, then perhaps one of the following applies:

 

[Avatar4321]

I second Merlin's instructions. I think we might be able to have a decent discussion about this one of the days. ive actually tried to start discussions on the patriot act. Problem is those against it dont bother to provide anything to support their assertions. Its kinda hard to discuss how the patriot act hurts our rights when the side claiming it does cant point to any part of the legislation that actually does.

 

[dmp]

I third those instructions....partly cuz I'm a post-whore...but mostly because I agree.

 

[NATO AIR]

I second Merlin's instructions. I think we might be able to have a decent discussion about this one of the days. ive actually tried to start discussions on the patriot act. Problem is those against it dont bother to provide anything to support their assertions. Its kinda hard to discuss how the patriot act hurts our rights when the side claiming it does cant point to any part of the legislation that actually does.

i would love to see you post (as several on this board can also) an intelligent, thought out summary of the patriot act. at the end, throw in what YOU think works, what YOU think doesn't work. then others can do the same. if we get a troll or an ABB guy (except naked and a couple others) we can just ignore them.

i would find it educational and useful, others might also.

we should not let trolls ruin the richness of our debate and exchange.

 

[dmp]

There would be enough Mega Moderators in the thread to keep the trolls out, imo.

The thread could be a good resource for when we excape the santuary of reason and sanity which IS USMB, and try talking about issues on other forums.

 

[NATO AIR]

Let's go! :baby4: i'm ready to shut up and learn something about all this.

 

[Modu$OperanDi]

I quoted the Patriot Act in my first post,

the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

Well, that gives the Government authority to kill the leader of a social movement, since we are allowed to kill terrorists. Who ISN'T a terrorist under this definition!? Dr. Phil is a fucking terrorist. Appear? Oh so now they can kill people who they 'thought' were terrorists and take no responsibility. But you guys are right, I mean, geez the governemnt would never misuse its power against the public, why would we ever think that?

P.S. - Merlin what do you think Leaders of social movements do? Do I need to provide you with documented examples of Martin Luther King's actions to show you that leaders of social movements coerce populations? Can you not see what's right in front of you?

 

[dmp]

I quoted the Patriot Act in my first post,

the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

Well, that gives the Government authority to kill the leader of a social movement, since we are allowed to kill terrorists. Who ISN'T a terrorist under this definition!? Dr. Phil is a fucking terrorist. Appear? Oh so now they can kill people who they 'thought' were terrorists and take no responsibility. But you guys are right, I mean, geez the governemnt would never misuse its power against the public, why would we ever think that?

quote that section of the Act IN CONTEXT...

 

[sagegirl]

These definitions of domestic terrorism come from art 802 sec VIII

Went and took a look at the patriot act. I waded thru the legalese and found some things that I thought were bothersome. Just a short overview if you havent the time or inclination to muddle thru it.

Section I is basically the title
Section II enhanced surveillance
Section III money laundering and anti terrorist financing
B. bank secrecy
C. currency crimes, counterfeiting
" IV protecting the borders (immigration mostly)
" V removing obstacles to investigating terrorism
" VI providing for the victims of terrorism
" VII increased information sharing (between gov agencies)
" VIII strenghthening the criminal law against terrorism
art 802 definition of domestic terrorism
a modifies Sec. 2331 of title 18 US Code to add this:
domestic terrorism means activities that
A. involve acts that are dangerous to human life that are a violation
of criminal laws of the US or of any state.
B. appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.
Section IX improved intelligence
art 904 Temporary authority to defer submittal to congress of reports on in
telligence and intelligence related matters.
Section X Misc.

I got to agree the line "appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce" is so speculative it could apply to just about any sort of social conduct.

For this document to come out of an administration that advocates less government and less lawyers is laughable. However it isnt very funny.

We must be diligent in exercising our freedoms and watch out for those who try to chip them away.

Some potential activities that could "appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce....." walking in a picket line while on strike, protesting abortion, the war anything, supporting a recall vote, objecting to the right of imminent domain, organising to allow or prevent a local issue such as establishment of a tent city for the homeless in your neighborhood. This list could include your
activity someday.

I think this is a good post, we should all be more concerned about this.

 

[dmp]

These definitions of domestic terrorism come from art 802 sec VIII

Went and took a look at the patriot act. I waded thru the legalese and found some things that I thought were bothersome. Just a short overview if you havent the time or inclination to muddle thru it.

Section I is basically the title
Section II enhanced surveillance
Section III money laundering and anti terrorist financing
B. bank secrecy
C. currency crimes, counterfeiting
" IV protecting the borders (immigration mostly)
" V removing obstacles to investigating terrorism
" VI providing for the victims of terrorism
" VII increased information sharing (between gov agencies)
" VIII strenghthening the criminal law against terrorism
art 802 definition of domestic terrorism
a modifies Sec. 2331 of title 18 US Code to add this:
domestic terrorism means activities that
A. involve acts that are dangerous to human life that are a violation
of criminal laws of the US or of any state.
B. appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.
Section IX improved intelligence
art 904 Temporary authority to defer submittal to congress of reports on in
telligence and intelligence related matters.
Section X Misc.

I got to agree the line "appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce" is so speculative it could apply to just about any sort of social conduct.

For this document to come out of an administration that advocates less government and less lawyers is laughable. However it isnt very funny.

We must be diligent in exercising our freedoms and watch out for those who try to chip them away.

Some potential activities that could "appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce....." walking in a picket line while on strike, protesting abortion, the war anything, supporting a recall vote, objecting to the right of imminent domain, organising to allow or prevent a local issue such as establishment of a tent city for the homeless in your neighborhood. This list could include your
activity someday.

I think this is a good post, we should all be more concerned about this.

Uh - we should be LESS worried about this. Intimidate or coerce? Applied to those who picket? What a crock of horse pooh. Do you know what either of those mean in context with 'terrorism'?

 

[Sun Dog]

Also concerning is the clause about defering reports to Congress.... until when? A lot less accountability... but I guess Congress could have Al Qeda sleepers in it so we must keep information from them : D

 

[Merlin1047]

I think this is a good post, we should all be more concerned about this.

Sage if that statement refers to your own post, I agree. But the basic post in this thread as well as his follow up were simply the work of a lazy bomb-thrower who wanted to make a statement without working to provide a foundation.

 

[MissileMan]

" VIII strenghthening the criminal law against terrorism
art 802 definition of domestic terrorism
a modifies Sec. 2331 of title 18 US Code to add this:
domestic terrorism means activities that
A. involve acts that are dangerous to human life that are a violation
of criminal laws of the US or of any state.
B. appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.

It would appear to me that domestic terrorism would have to meet both condition A and B, for instance, if it's just A, a DUI or Armed Robbery, it's not terrorism because condition B isn't met. If it's just B, then it's Kerry and the rest of the Dems!..jk

 

[sagegirl]

Sage if that statement refers to your own post, I agree. But the basic post in this thread as well as his follow up were simply the work of a lazy bomb-thrower who wanted to make a statement without working to provide a foundation.

Merlin: You're right, the original post was weak as far as substance. I referred to the topic of the patriot act....I had to go read it before I could even respond.

 

[Zhukov]

Sec. 802 [5a,b (i-iii)]

the term 'domestic terrorism' means activities that involved acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and occur primarily with the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

As you can see, all this passage is doing is taking pre-existing violations of criminal laws and defining these violations as 'domestic terrorism' if they were commited with a specific intent.

No new law is created here.

 

[fubar]

I have challenged these bombthrowers elsewhere to submit one example of civil rights being violated...never once got a reponse. It's like a magic spell to shut up panic stricken lefties.

But then again if I were posting,emailing and publicly spouting "Blame America first !" then I might get a little paranoid ,too.

 

[White knight]

Most of you are aware of some alleged civil rights violations that followed after 911, people who were imprisoned with out due process, no access to lawyers. Etc…

I will acknowledge this; I don’t see what point he is trying to make.
Modus, can you elaborate on your concerns?

Issues where people have voiced concerns with the P.A. are in the area of privacy.

V removing obstacles to investigating terrorism

VII increased information sharing (between gov agencies

)

 

[dmp]

Most of you are aware of some alleged civil rights violations that followed after 911, people who were imprisoned with out due process, no access to lawyers. Etc…

I will acknowledge this; I don’t see what point he is trying to make.
Modus, can you elaborate on your concerns?

Issues where people have voiced concerns with the P.A. are in the area of privacy.

)

Taking the bill out of context could be scary for folks..sure.