Patriot Act II Resurrected?

wired news ^ | Aug. 21, 2003 | Ryan Singel

[MineralMan]

"And don't think for a second that another incarnation of a Reno justice department won't be scanning sites like FR for IP addresses so they can monitor the "trouble makers."

What makes you think the Ashcroft folks aren't doing that right now?

[opusprime]

Good point!

Thats my biggest concern. Just like the issue with Federal judges and dynamic congressional rule changes. One party starts it, the other party abuses it.

This is the most dangerous legislation ever put into law in my opinion. Imagine J. Edgar Hoover with these powers.

[kenth]

Ya gotta love FR. Much more rational thinking here.

I've seen way too many "conservatives" all but calling for cameras in their living room (a la lucianne.com) to placate their hysterical fears of terrorism.

These same people would be screaming if it were a democratic administration proposal. They don't stop to think that if it passes, sooner or later a democrat will have control.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Let's do what we can to find the terrorists among us. And whack 'em.

[jmc813]

Let's do what we can to find the terrorists among us. And whack 'em.

So if your kid was caught selling pot to some of his friends, you wouldn't mind him being considered a "terrorist"?

[John Beresford Tipton]

"So if your kid was caught selling pot to some of his friends, you wouldn't mind him being considered a "terrorist"?"

Caught??
Caught??

This JBT would probably rat out his own kid.

[Orangedog]

Recovering_Democrat wrote:

Let's do what we can to find the terrorists among us. And whack 'em.

IMO, you've got a lot more recovering to do with the whole democrat thing. ;)

[Orangedog]

This is the most dangerous legislation ever put into law in my opinion. Imagine J. Edgar Hoover with these powers.

At least Hoover was anti communist. Hitlery is anti America.

[montag813]

HEY ASHCROFT HOW USING YOUR GESTAPO POWERS TO DESTROY THE EARTH LIBERATION FRONT, BY FAR THE MOST ACTIVE TERRORIST GROUP IN THE U.S.

[DugwayDuke]

"Once again I have to ask, what will Hilliary do with this kind of power when she gets back in the White House?"

Irrelevent. Hillary, if elected, will do whatever she damn well pleases regardless of what the law allows or prohibits. Why would a lawless one be constrained by a lack of legal authority?

[Recovering_Democrat]

So if your kid was caught selling pot to some of his friends, you wouldn't mind him being considered a "terrorist"?

Heh. Nice try. Well, look, I challenge you to show me your typical high school kid selling his home-grown oregano dime bags being charged with terrorism, then we can talk. Until you can point to that case--irrefutably and irrevocably, then we've got nothin' to talk about.

BTW, if my kid was selling pot to his friends, he'd damn well better hope the Justice Department catches him before I do. He'd get better treatment, I guarantee it.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Irrelevent. Hillary, if elected, will do whatever she damn well pleases regardless of what the law allows or prohibits. Why would a lawless one be constrained by a lack of legal authority?

EXACTLY RIGHT, DUGWAY!

What the handwringers don't realize is that without this law, the chances for another 9/11 style attack are increased--and when that happens, the handwringers will be among those calling for the heads of the "incompetent administration" that didn't "put the pieces together" of the complex web of terrorist cells and their activities. Gone for a long time will be the cries of the ACLU, Patrick Leahy, and even the so-called libertarians.

[DugwayDuke]

Thank you. To me, this argument that such laws give too much power to Hillary are the most ridiculous argument since the argument must be based upon the assumption that Hillary won't do anything against the law.

[jmc813]

So y'all think we might as well allow government to expand without reservation then, your logic being that Republicans are benevolent and will only use expanded powers to fight terrorists, and Democrats are scumbags and will abuse the law anyway. Do I have it about right?

[Recovering_Democrat]

You're getting close...I believe evil administrators will administrate "evilly". Righteous men will administrate righteously.

Should we be vigilante? Always. And I am. I've repeatedly asked for evidence of the Clinton administration's corruption, and I've been rewarded in spades. TheBentOne and his gang of 40 Thieves were foul to the bone. When I ask for evidence of the current Commander In Chief, I'm given nothing but fearmongering rhetoric and conjecture.

I watched John Ashcroft's latest testimony before the Judiciary Committee of the House on CSPAN. The liberals on that panel, and they are legion, tried to pin him to the wall with the so-called damning Inspector General's report supposedly listing violations of civil rights engaged in by Ashcroft & Company...at least that's how the MAINSTREAM PRESS reported it. When the rubber hit the road in that meeting, however, the liberals on the committee were shut down by the facts. John Ashcroft quoted from the Inspector General's report, acknowledged his positions, and refuted so successfully every attack from the libs that very little about that hearing was ever reported in the press!

You can watch it for yourself, I'm sure, at CSPAN.org...I saw more of it on that web site. He left 'em holding the bag--because he was on target with his mission, and he demonstrated how he respected the Constitutional Rights of every terrorist suspect or detainee in custody.

Respectfully,
rd.

[DugwayDuke]

Thank you for misrepresenting my position. I am not for expanding government powers "without reservation". Now go back and read what I really said.