Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Toughen Patriot Act, attorney general says
Anchorage Daily News ^ | 7-22 | KATIE PESZNECKER and NICOLE TSONG

Posted on 07/22/2003 6:21:38 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan

Edited on 07/07/2004 4:48:55 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

United States Attorney General John Ashcroft told federal and local officials Monday the USA Patriot Act should be expanded, not softened, even as protesters gathered nearby and the Anchorage Assembly and state Legislature have passed resolutions protesting the national anti-terrorism law.


(Excerpt) Read more at adn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bigbrother; orwell; patriotact; unpatriotact
The Patriot Act needs to be REPEALED, not strengthened. It sucks. It was pushed by Klinton, Hatch, and Reno twice before. Ashcroft ironically opposed it then.

I wish we had the old Ashcroft back, not this statist.

1 posted on 07/22/2003 6:21:39 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
"I think it seems to most Americans that an adjustment may be appropriate," Ashcroft said. It should expand to give federal officers more authority, he said.

Holy $#!t!!! Now Ashcroft thinks Americans want the KGB to monitor their lives??? I gotta say he's gone over the top.

Stregthening the Patriot Act??? We can kiss the Bill of Rights goodbye and welcome Orwell's Oceania

2 posted on 07/22/2003 6:45:31 PM PDT by El Conservador ("No blood for oil!"... Then don't drive, you moron!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
"I'm embarrassed to be an American."

I'm not yet "embarrassed to be an American."

But sure as Hell "I'm embarrassed [that Ashcroft purports to be] an American,"

and double embarassed that Bush backs that JBT.
3 posted on 07/22/2003 7:10:21 PM PDT by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
I agree that the Patriot Act has some worrisome features to it. Just imagine those powers in the hands of the President's enemies.
4 posted on 07/22/2003 7:16:19 PM PDT by GranpaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Good post bump!
5 posted on 07/22/2003 7:19:10 PM PDT by Brian S ("Mount up everybody and ride to the sound of the gun!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brian S
btttt
6 posted on 07/22/2003 7:30:14 PM PDT by ellery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
The Patriot Act in the hands of Dubya and Ashcroft doesn't really worry me. I have seen no evidence of abuse. However, I don't know if I can have that level of faith in their successors.
7 posted on 07/22/2003 7:32:54 PM PDT by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Amen to that. Somehow ,shoe polish on the tongue doesent appeal to me. (If ya know what I mean)
8 posted on 07/22/2003 9:14:59 PM PDT by Cheapskate (Freedom,use it or lose it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: squidly
The Patriot Act in the hands of Dubya and Ashcroft doesn't really worry me. I have seen no evidence of abuse. However, I don't know if I can have that level of faith in their successors.

MY question:

If a Democrat were to get in the White House (say Hillary in 2008), to what extent could this "Patriot Act" be used against gun owners, and/or against Conservative Christians?

Is there any chance that this "Patriot Act" being pushed by Ashcroft (who is supposedly pro-gun and pro-life in his beliefs) being used at some time in the future to put gun owners and/or abortion protestors in jail?

9 posted on 07/22/2003 9:47:11 PM PDT by Screaming_Gerbil (Let's Roll...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Screaming_Gerbil
If a Democrat were to get in the White House (say Hillary in 2008), to what extent could this "Patriot Act" be used against gun owners, and/or against Conservative Christians?

Now I'm going to have a hard time sleeping tonight, thanks. I firmly believe that the Patriot Act should go away before Dubya leaves office, but I'm not sure how much before.

10 posted on 07/22/2003 10:02:00 PM PDT by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
The 4th Ammendment has been pissed on by the Feds and the States for years, at least this time its for a good reason.

Theres no time to see a liberal judge and get denied a search warrant right before a nuke goes off in a major American city (and it aint gonna be in friggin Idaho or Michigan, Detroit is already bombed out).

Approriate modifications are prudent and necessary,those opposing them irresponsible at best and in league with the enemy at worse.

Amy Christiansen wore blue cloth around her chest and draped across her shoulder, mocking the cloth Ashcroft ordered placed over a half-nude statue at the Department of Justice last year. She said her outfit demonstrated Ashcroft's agenda, including a justice system that limits citizens' civil liberties.

"I don't feel safe in my own country," said Christiansen, 41, a veterinary technician. "I'm embarrassed to be an American."

Are you sure you wanna be on her side?

11 posted on 07/22/2003 10:12:25 PM PDT by Rome2000 (Convicted felons for Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
The 4th Ammendment has been pissed on by the Feds and the States for years, at least this time its for a good reason.

So there's good reasons to "piss" on parts of the Constitution? Which other amendments are OK to "piss" on? The 2nd? 1st?

12 posted on 07/22/2003 10:20:26 PM PDT by jmc813 (Check out the FR Big Brother 4 thread! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/943368/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
The Patriot Act needs to be REPEALED, not strengthened.

Exactly. I, as much as anyone else, recognize the need to fight the mohammedan radicals but the post 9/11 security measures, patriot act included, impose the burdens of security not on the terrorists but on normal US citizens.

Same goes for the government buildings in DC. Post 9/11 there is not a single one of them that doesn't have an airport style security clearance station to simply get in the door and many are not even accessible to citizens anymore on a regular basis. I was up in DC during the Clinton impeachment only 4 years ago and you could walk into the capitol building from pretty much any door. They made you go through a metal detector, as it should be, but you could enter at leisure. Now normal citizens can't even get inside unless they are part of a guided tour going through a controlled access checkpoint in a doublewide on the lawn. That also means that you have to make arrangements in advance to get tickets for a tour, or wait in line for hours. Now I understand the need to protect the capitol from terrorists, but exactly what was wrong with the old system? Why couldn't they have simply kept the metal detectors at the doors? It offends me that Congress, the so-called legislature of, by, and for "the people" of the United States, has locked itself up in a building that doesn't grant access to its citizens.

Same goes for the other buildings. You now have to show a photo ID and go through a security checkpoint to simply get into the FOOD COURT of the federal triangle building, home to the oh so terrorist-vulnerable agency called the EPA. Same goes for the smithsonian museums, which of course means long lines of frustrated tourists having their bags of souveniers searched at each and every building to simply get through the door. Now I understand metal detectors at Congress etc. to prevent somebody from harming one of the officials, but the Smithsonian? Is some terrorist seriously gonna throw a knife at the wright brothers plane? And on July 4th they even set up the same stuff on the national mall. That isn't even a building - it's a grassy field and they ran us through metal detectors before we could go sit on the grass in an open field! One has to ask exactly what the purpose of it all is and when the insanity will ever stop.

13 posted on 07/22/2003 10:37:12 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: squidly
The Patriot Act in the hands of Dubya and Ashcroft doesn't really worry me. I have seen no evidence of abuse. However, I don't know if I can have that level of faith in their successors.

YES. That is the real problem. The same thing happened back in the early 1920's with the federal budget process. A GOP congress reorganized the federal budgeting process in a way that vastly increased presidential power to control its formation. Warren Harding was in the White House so they didn't worry about any leftist radicals using the new powers to push through social programs. But all that changed a decade later when FDR got into office. He seized upon the powers that had been exercised with greater prudence under Republicans Coolidge and Hoover then put them to work in cramming the New Deal through Congress. The procedures remained the same but they had fallen into the bad guy's hands with disastrous results.

14 posted on 07/22/2003 10:43:12 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: El Conservador
"Stregthening the Patriot Act??? We can kiss the Bill of Rights goodbye and welcome Orwell's Oceania"

Yep, you got that right!
15 posted on 07/22/2003 10:44:11 PM PDT by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
The 4th Ammendment has been pissed on by the Feds and the States for years, at least this time its for a good reason.

There is NEVER, EVER, a good reason to piss on the constitution.

Theres no time to see a liberal judge and get denied a search warrant right before a nuke goes off in a major American city (and it aint gonna be in friggin Idaho or Michigan, Detroit is already bombed out).

If there's a nuke pending, there won't be a denial, even from someone like Judge Reinhardt.

Approriate modifications are prudent and necessary,those opposing them irresponsible at best and in league with the enemy at worse.

Then AMEND the constitution. Those that support these bills are ignorant of history and are cowards at best, police state advocates at worst. See, I can play the same type of game there.

Are you sure you wanna be on her side

I'm not on her side. I'm on MY side. I don't trust Ashcroft with these powers, let alone another Butcher of Waco like Reno.

16 posted on 07/23/2003 5:21:41 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("Say hello to my little friend!" - Tony Montana)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson