A freeper's observation: The Anti-terrorism campaign

Yesterday, President Bush signed an anti-terrorism bill which gives police wide ranging powers to search people's homes and business records secretly as well as to eavesdrop on telephone and computer conservations. This bill expands the wiretapping authority for federal officials.

There have been some concerns expressed about this new bill and about the possible abuse of the wiretapping and surveillance powers, so what I want to do is try to put things into perspective and give you some observations about this new campaign.

As I'm sure many of you are well aware, we are at war. Not against a certain religion or group, but rather against certain groups of people who are seeking to do enormous harm to this country and it's people. What this new law will do is allow federal offcials to track down these groups of troublemakers and prosecute them

What needs also to be stressed is that his bill has a sunset provision which allows for these provisions to expire on December 31st, 2005. The lawmakers put this cap in place because they knew that there was an appropaite time for these things to be in effect and this is the time with our nation at war.

Next up, you should know that we have a reputable administation in office as opposed to the previous one. With the current one in place, it would be almost assured that there would most certainly be no abuse of these powers, only to go after the perpatrators. Where as with the previous administration, one would suspect that the only people they would go after would be their adversaries and critics like here on FR and elsewhere. I don't think I have to tell you that the Democrats look at all of their adversaries and critics as potential troublemakers who need to be tracked and cracked down on and I can assure that if they were given these very powers under this bill, they would gladly and unapologetically missuse and abuse these powers to go after anyone whose political and religious ideas made them feel unconfortable. Needless to say, if Al Gore were in office now instead of George W. Bush, conservatives and christians would be sitting ducks.

Now, of course this bill has a sunset provision time of December 31st, 2005 which is as it should be. What we will have to watch is any kind of attempt to renew this legislation. There will be some who say well, this has proven to be effective, let's extend it or they will say no it hasn't been effective enough. Let's extend it and make it tougher. Our current administration's term expires in January 2005 so the law will still be in effect. If we put a Democrat in the White House and Democrats in control of both houses of congress with this law still in effect, this would put us (conservatives) in a very bad situation since they consider us enemies of the state. If however, we keep our current administration in Office and put the G.O.P. in charge of both houses, I don't think we'll be as quite at risk. If our goverment is split, well it depends, but not quite at risk with a Republican in the White House.

I think the bottom line here is we do have a new anti-terror law but we also have reputable people in charge so I don't believe the risk for abuse of wiretapping and surveillance powers is quite as great as it would have been had a Democrat administration been in power. We'll see how it all comes out.

Does anyone think that the administration of Bill, Hillary, and Janet Reno would let a little thing like it being illegal stop them from taping your phone, email, or internet communications?

The argument that a disreputable administration might use this law to tap your email or web site is just crazy. The laws preventing the government from tapping the internet only keep honest adminstrations like Bushes from catching the terrorists. Laws did not stop the Clintons from doing anything.

Get a Clue Gang! A Hillary administration would not need a stinking law for permission to read your communications.

Yesterday, President Bush signed an anti-terrorism bill which gives police wide ranging powers to search people's homes and business records secretly as well as to eavesdrop on telephone and computer conservations.
Which "people's", that is the question. Should you have put "terrorists" in that slot? Your statement, and the stated intent of the new legislation, is that it is intended for "terrorists", not "people" in general. Maybe you should rethink this statement. Unless, of course, you think that "people" are the problem and not foreign subservives in our nation. Nothing like being succinct!

As I'm sure many of you are well aware, we are at war.
I can't seem to find where the "declaration of war" is. Could you give some help? I've only found a "use of force" aspect with a possibility of a declaration of war possibly being declared later.

Not against a certain religion or group, but rather against certain groups of people who are seeking to do enormous harm to this country and it's people.
See how easy it is to misconstrue your intent with the misuse of the term "people"? Maybe...to this country and it's Citizens?

What this new law will do is allow federal offcials to track down these groups of troublemakers and prosecute them
And now the more ubiquitous term "troublemakers".

What needs also to be stressed is that his bill has a sunset provision which allows for these provisions to expire on December 31st, 2005.
Wouldn't it have been more intelligent that the sunshine clause be set for the end of the current administration's term? That way the new incoming administration, notice no one says President anymore, it is an "administration", would be forced to act anew in addressing the issue. Nothing like holdover legislation!

Next up, you should know that we have a reputable administation in office as opposed to the previous one.
How can you determine this after such a short time? What will you say a month, or a year, from now? You really have me curious on this one.
Needless to say, if Al Gore were in office now instead of George W. Bush, conservatives and christians would be sitting ducks.
If he is no more competent than he was under Clinton he might be impeached too, leaving us with Mr. Joe. So many possibilities...

Let's extend it and make it tougher.
If the purported objective of the PATRIOT Act is not fulfilled by the date of the sunset date then I would say that someone was not doing their job! Make it tougher? The intended goal of the damn thing ought to be accomplished by that time! Of course, somebody has to do something about visa, immigration, and borders for some real movement.

I understand some of the concerns being expressed with regards to the administration of this bill, but I would still submit that given the right people in charge there is not as much of a chance for abuse as there would be if XXX42 was still in charge.

Which leads me to reference one more thing about the finger pointing being done by the F.B.I. about the Anthrax. There are ongoing thread on this subject. I think it's time for President Bush to clean house over at the F.B.I. and put new people in charge.

With that, I'll trun the floor back over for more comments.
Regards. E.G.C.

Yep, I hear the sound of those crickets. Let me go ahead and address those who are concerned about the abuse of these new powers under the law. I will grant you that if thse powers are abused then we do need to call these people to the carpet about it. Obviously, there are going to be some actions that are not going to neccesarily be popular with some people and I do realize that. The only questions I would have, though, is would you have felt the same way if XXX42 or Al Gore were in office? Would Senator Fienstein or Jesse Jackson felt the same way? That's what you have to think about.

You see in their minds they'd sleep a little better if those powers in the hands of one of their own because they know it would then be abused and misused to go after their adversaries and critics. Remeber when we (conservatives and christians) were blamed for Oklahoma City in 1995? How they would have liked to use these powers to track down and catch us instead of going after the real terrorists? Some of these people from the previous administration are still at the FBI right now. Why else would you figure out the finger pointing they are doing with the anthrax scares? President Bush really needs to clean house at the FBI

To my knowledge I don't see any brownshirts on any of the street corners here where I live. I don't have any soldiers in my house. I don't see any black helicopters. If that changes, you'll be the first to know. But I just don't see any of this happening under this new law with our current administration. I just don't

Thanks for your posts on this subject. Regards.

I should also metion in reponse to post #8 that a lot of us freepers have 9 to 5 jobs and don't have a lot time to participate in message board discussions. So, what we just do (a lot of us) is post our thoghts on the issues of the day and then start an overnight thread to see how people feel about the sbuject. Then we wake up the next morning and turn on our computers and check in on that thread to see what kind of responses were posted. It works just as well as any other thread here at FR and yes, a lot of us do understand the concerns expressed, enen if we don't have the time or the opoortunity to discuss the issues.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.