Senate Rejects Extension of Patriot Act!

[Dis]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs


You're taking his statement seriously?

actually I was serious. But Ninot got the point accross.

Although I'm not real heavy on airline security. As the incidient in Hawaii recently proved. Passengers will subdue people in flight. No one is going to stand idly by while their plane is hijacked. We should be okay unless we get a plane full of nuns or something. But nuns can be kind of tough as well.

[Dis]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Explain!

How does existing law help us fight terrorism, it obviously wasn't good enough prior to 9-11?

How does adding provisions that protect civil liberties but
make it harder to find terrorists, help us fight terrorism?

How does common sense help us fight terrorism?

do I have to invoke the quote again? I can't remember the quote word for word. But it involves giving up liberty in the name of security. In the end you will lose both.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Ninot
airline security is a different beast than spying on people.

Are you saying that airline/subway/train security is the only method we should use to fight terrorists? basically no spying, just increased security to try to spot the terrorists when they try to blow themselves up?

[Dis]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Are you saying that airline/subway/train security is the only method we should use to fight terrorists? basically no spying, just increased security to try to spot the terrorists when they try to blow themselves up?

yes. spot on.

increased security, vigilance and common sense.

syping on americans.

[Dis]

You guys don't want to know what the FBI is doing here in Las Vegas. We basically aren't publicising this because we don't want to scare people away from Las Vegas.

The FBI has been asking the hotels to provide names of everyone staying at their hotels.

But the hotels are now fighting back. They are sueing, I believe, to prevent having to do this.

Doesn't this bother anyone else? How can it be deemed acceptible for the FBI to know you are travelling to Las Vegas?

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/06/1557210

What happens in Vegas during New Years, doesn't stay in Vegas. The FBI knows about it.

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/article.cfm?contentID=140114

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Explain!

How does existing law help us fight terrorism, it obviously wasn't good enough prior to 9-11?

We were already tracking the hijackers; hell, a female FBI agent tried to get further scurtiny of their activities, but her pleas fell on deaf (or dumb) ears.

Then there was the August PDB Memo...

How does adding provisions that protect civil liberties but
make it harder to find terrorists, help us fight terrorism?

You'd have to read up on the proposed changes.

How does common sense help us fight terrorism?

By realizing that Ben Franklin was wise beyond your years, apparently.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Dis
increased security, vigilance and common sense.

Sorry but that is not good enough.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Dis
do I have to invoke the quote again? I can't remember the quote word for word. But it involves giving up liberty in the name of security. In the end you will lose both.

If this isn't an exact quote, it's darn close:

He who gives up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety.

...Benjamin Franklin

[lord of the mark]

another nonsense poly thread - shame on all of you.

Russ Feingold et al are NOT saying that we dont ever need to spy on Americans. They are NOT saying that airline security is enough. And they are CERTAINLY NOT saying that modifications of US foreign policy would assuage Al Qaeeda.

What they ARE saying is that "spying" must be done WITH warrants, not just "National Security Letters", and various other modifications to reduce the interference with civil liberties. Those who disagree with them insist that NSLs and other procedures in the Patriot Act are needed to expedite searches, etc. These are tradeoffs that we need to think seriously about, and Im glad the Senate is doing so. I lean (a little) toward the Feingold side - not that I think the Patriot Act as is, is leading us to a police state - but I think that the pendulum needs to swing back a little. We should certainly remain vigilant, and should use wiretaps, searches,etc in ways that are consistent with our traditional liberties.

[Odin]

Those willing to sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither. -Ben Franklin.


Diplo, why you hate America?

[Sava]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
another nonsense poly thread - shame on all of you.

Russ Feingold et al are NOT saying that we dont ever need to spy on Americans. They are NOT saying that airline security is enough. And they are CERTAINLY NOT saying that modifications of US foreign policy would assuage Al Qaeeda.

What they ARE saying is that "spying" must be done WITH warrants, not just "National Security Letters", and various other modifications to reduce the interference with civil liberties. Those who disagree with them insist that NSLs and other procedures in the Patriot Act are needed to expedite searches, etc. These are tradeoffs that we need to think seriously about, and Im glad the Senate is doing so. I lean (a little) toward the Feingold side - not that I think the Patriot Act as is, is leading us to a police state - but I think that the pendulum needs to swing back a little. We should certainly remain vigilant, and should use wiretaps, searches,etc in ways that are consistent with our traditional liberties.

Due Process, Checks and Balances, etc...

and this is not a nonsense thread...

in fact it is YOU WHO SHOULD FEEL SHAMED!!!

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by The diplomat
How does common sense help us fight terrorism?

to not using common sense to fight terrorism.


[/deliberately taking a comment out of context]

[Verto]

Originally posted by Dis
You guys don't want to know what the FBI is doing here in Las Vegas. We basically aren't publicising this because we don't want to scare people away from Las Vegas.

The FBI has been asking the hotels to provide names of everyone staying at their hotels.

But the hotels are now fighting back. They are sueing, I believe, to prevent having to do this.

Doesn't this bother anyone else? How can it be deemed acceptible for the FBI to know you are travelling to Las Vegas?

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/06/1557210

What happens in Vegas during New Years, doesn't stay in Vegas. The FBI knows about it.

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/...ntentID=140114

I heard that, in Miami I think it was, that the police were staging random raids of hotels, forcing people to show identification (at gunpoint I think, not sure) etc so we can all remain vigilant and aware of how much danger we're in.

[Sava]

Originally posted by The diplomat

How does common sense help us fight terrorism?

sig worthy

[Verto]

Originally posted by The diplomat


Explain!

How does existing law help us fight terrorism, it obviously wasn't good enough prior to 9-11?

How does adding provisions that protect civil liberties but
make it harder to find terrorists, help us fight terrorism?

How does common sense help us fight terrorism?

I assume you are in favor of stricter, harsher and more confining legislation with regards to gun ownership, since it obviously isn't good enough?

The WTC/Pentagon attacks occurred because of incompetence and fighting within the government agencies. The best way to fight terrorism would be to boost funding to local and state law enforcement agencies, as well as border patrol, FBI, etc, while streamlining communications and the ability for all three levels of government to work together. Imagine how much money we'd have available for fighting terrorism, if we weren't mucking about in Iraq?

Anyway, to the stupid Patriot Act - we've seen how readily our government is to use it for non-terrorists.