To: ApesForEvolution
"Does this still not trouble you?"
Perhaps our posts crossed, as I covered this in #473.
Troubling is not at issue.
My dispute is with those who haven't read the actual Patriot Act legal text, yet criticize it as unConstitutional anyway.
I'd prefer to actually debate with someone who **has** read the actual legal text and yet comes to the opposite conclusion as myself. That would be a much more enjoyable debate.
But alas, the Big Lie persists, and I seem to get stuck with only the useful idiots (Lenin's term for those duped into pedling his propaganda, not my own).
481 posted on
07/11/2003 10:57:19 PM PDT by
Southack
(Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: Southack
I have serious doubts that you ever read it other than sections I had to lead you by the nose to tonight.
As for the 'Big Lie' mularkey, the only 'Big Lie' is that the "Patriot" Act is anything but a MASSIVE usurpation of our Constitutional rights, allowing an ever growing Federocracy to basically stick their noses in whatever they wish, whenever they desire and as long as they deem fit.
It presents a big 'end-around' due process afforded Americans.
Let me know if you can't find a copy of the Field Guidance document.
485 posted on
07/11/2003 11:01:13 PM PDT by
ApesForEvolution
("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
To: Southack
I've read it many times, marked up a couple copies, and I find it troubling. It is an issue. Why is it not troubling to you?
487 posted on
07/11/2003 11:03:14 PM PDT by
ApesForEvolution
("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
To: Southack
"Troubling is not at issue"
Let me put it this way.
Section 213 changes the law as it applies to ALL government searches for material that "constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States" and is not limited to investigations of terrorist activity.
The prior law (2001) had authorized delayed notification of a search ONLY under a very small number of circumstances (such as surreptitious electronic surveillance).
The expansion of this extraordinary authority to all searches constitutes a radical departure from 4th Am. standards and, I believe, could result in routine surreptitious entries by LEOs.
You trust that Bush won't 'do it to you', but do you trust that Pres. Hillary won't?
494 posted on
07/11/2003 11:08:27 PM PDT by
ApesForEvolution
("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
To: Southack
the Big Lie persists, and I seem to get stuck with only the useful idiots (Lenin's term for those duped into pedling his propaganda, not my own).
-481-
The biggest propaganda lie, imo, is that there was a 'compellng reason' for the Patriot Act.
496 posted on
07/11/2003 11:11:08 PM PDT by
tpaine
(The USSC ~must~ stay out of State law, unless Rinos don't ~want~ the USSC to stay out of State law)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson