The Reform Party wrong on its stance on the Patriot Act

Reform Party of the USA

[Lord Nelson]

5) Resolution on the Homeland Security Act/Patriot Acts I and II Whereas the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights enumerating our fundamental freedoms is the supreme law of the land and

Whereas, the Homeland Security Act/Patriot Act I and II violates the Constitutional rights of United States citizens by treating every major violation of law as if it were an act of terrorism even if clearly it is not, and

Whereas, in the Patriot Act any citizen tried under this act is denied attorney/client privileges, peaceful protests and demonstrations against governmental policies are also curtailed.

Whereas, the Patriot Act also employs police state tactics by increased wire tapping even when unwarranted, and secret arrests of citizens who the state suspects of being terrorists.

Therefore be it resolved; that the Reform Party affirms our Constitutional Rights, such as: the right to assemble, the right to be secure against illegal search and seizures, protection against cruel and unusual punishment (torture), and the right of any US citizen to have a fair trial before his peers.

Therefore be it further resolved, that the Reform Party believes the Homeland Security Act/Patriot Act I and II is wrong, unconstitutional and in need of repeal.

[Lord Nelson]

I was curious about what the Reform Party stood for so starting looking at their site. This bit sort of disturbed me and made me ask “How exactly does the Reform Party suppose it is going to protect America?” I know I have pushed this book before but I finished reading the Sword of Islam (The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam) by Serge Trifkovic. According to Serge, CAIR and other so called charitable Moslem organizations are speaking at forums in America declaring their intention to overthrow the US constitution and in its place install the Sharia. Shouldn’t preaching violence and overthrow of the United States warrant detainment? Possibly even conviction of a crime? I do concede there is a difference between citizens and immigrants. Immigrants are guests and should be tossed out of the US in a heart beat for doing anything that even smells of terrorism or preaching hate against the US. But even citizens, I believe, should come at least under surveillance if they are doing the hate speech circuit of American Universities. Am I wrong?

[Lord Nelson]

Sorry - I should have mentioned "this is an exerpt"

[pissant]

I bet it took hours for the three sole members of the reform party to come up with this gem. Let's see: Perot, Buchanan, and ummm, ummm. Guess there is only two.

[infidel29]

Maybe not wrong persay, but parts of the Patriot Act are in need of SERIOUS reworking.

[inquest]

But even citizens, I believe, should come at least under surveillance if they are doing the hate speech circuit of American Universities. Am I wrong?

If this "surveillance" is of the kind that ordinary American citizens aren't allowed to do to each other, then the answer to your question is yes.

[CWOJackson]

Don't forget justine raimondo...

[GOP_1900AD]

I must admit, that for a (short) while during the 1990s, I was quite interested in these folks as a rightist alternative to the GOP. But my, oh my, how far off course that outfit ended up. Just another bunch of Jacobin rabble rousers.

[GOP_1900AD]

Another angry gay living here in the Bay (Gay) Area. Raimondo and Moreford ... yeaauuuwwwch (!)

[CWOJackson]

Careful...he was one of pat buchanan's lieutenants during the Reform Party take over. buchanan still has a few bunker guards around here that take exception to such words.

[Lord Nelson]

LOL. Yes - 2 tools indeed.

[Lord Nelson]

I like your tagline. A good point to consider to counter “blind” patriotism. America is not good just because it is America. That’s a strange cycle that some fall into. It is great because of what it is founded on.

[D-fendr]

Reform Party is dead, kaput, folded its tent and disappeared.

[Lord Nelson]

What's the problem with watching people? What, under the old law we have to inform those we are watching? That's completely ineffective.

[Valin]

You might want to mention that to the members of the Gambino, Genovese, Lucchese, Colombos Crime Families. Many of them can be reached at several federal prisons.

[Lord Nelson]

The Mafia was the exception wasn't it? The FBI was allowed to monitor them without consent?

[Valin]

No. All the police need is a warrant, and that has not changed under the Patriot Act.

[inquest]

What's the problem with watching people?

That's a pretty open-ended question. So you don't mind if anyone at all keeps you under surveillance?

[Lord Nelson]

Normally I have no mind being watched if I am told I am being watched. However if I am a suspect, then yes, I have no problem being monitored without notice.

[inquest]

However if I am a suspect, then yes, I have no problem being monitored without notice.

So in other words if anyone at all considers you suspect?

[Lord Nelson]

No, only a law enforcement agency. Maybe I'm confused. Outside the Patriot Act, to conduct surveillance, law enforcement needs a warrant from a judge, correct? What does the Patriot Act change?