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

Skip to comments.

WITH A WHISPER, NOT A BANG (Patriot Act II signed by President on December 13, 2003)
San Antonio Current ^ | 12/24/03 | David Martin

Posted on 12/28/2003 9:02:32 PM PST by Marianne

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241-259 next last
To: Lazamataz
We cannot know, can we? The laws are SECRET.

The world according to Laz.

[Federal Government]:We the people do hereby accuse Lazamatz of breaking a secret law.

[Jury]:What law is Laz accused of breaking?

[Federal Government]:WE can't say because it's secret.

[Jury]WTF!!!!!

181 posted on 12/29/2003 10:05:38 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
You remain substance-free.

At least you are doggedly consistent.

182 posted on 12/29/2003 10:06:08 AM PST by Lazamataz (I slam, you slam, we all slam, for Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Jury]:What law is Laz accused of breaking? [Federal Government]:WE can't say because it's secret.

This scenario has existed in many countries for decades. Russia. China. The Asian Rim countries.

It is one of my many goals to make sure this cannot and does not occur here.

183 posted on 12/29/2003 10:07:42 AM PST by Lazamataz (I slam, you slam, we all slam, for Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
At least I can vote out the executive branch if it runs amuck with these laws.

Really? So if Bush starts abusing these powers, who you gonna vote for? Dean?

184 posted on 12/29/2003 10:09:41 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; freeeee
[freee]:The fact that probable cause and a warrant are no longer required is all that is needed.

[sinkspur]:Probable cause is still required.

Probable cause is still required in a National security letter. The question is, what are the judicial checks and balances of a NLS?

Also a question is the number of e's in freeee?

185 posted on 12/29/2003 10:10:52 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
Try actually reading the act.

I assume from that that you have. Please provide the link for the rest of us. Thank you.

186 posted on 12/29/2003 10:11:00 AM PST by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Really? So if Bush starts abusing these powers, who you gonna vote for? Dean?

If Bush starts abusing executive powers, I will vote for neither.

After all, by your stipulation, I would need to vote for Dictator One or Dictator Two.

And I don't vote for dictators.

187 posted on 12/29/2003 10:12:22 AM PST by Lazamataz (I slam, you slam, we all slam, for Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Oh, give it your best shot. Even if I'm a bit thick, there are always the lurkers to consider.

Ok. Here goes....slowly sou you can understand.

T H E R E

A R E

P E O P L E

T H A T

W A N T

T O

K I L L

U S...

You may not understand this simple fact, but thank God some in this administration do.

188 posted on 12/29/2003 10:13:18 AM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Ditto....
189 posted on 12/29/2003 10:14:19 AM PST by Squantos (Support Mental Health !........or........ I'LL KILL YOU !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
At least you are doggedly consistent.

A foreign concept to you, I'm sure.

190 posted on 12/29/2003 10:15:15 AM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Lower55; Sabertooth
T H E R E A R E P E O P L E T H A T W A N T T O K I L L U S...

Oh, well, why didn't you say so! Let's do away with the Bill of Rights right away then!

191 posted on 12/29/2003 10:16:40 AM PST by Lazamataz (I slam, you slam, we all slam, for Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Hey man, I'm on your side in this! Check the context of my post.
192 posted on 12/29/2003 10:20:38 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Let's do away with the Bill of Rights right away then!

They did that long ago....when they decided they could confiscate my money to pay for your welfare and entitlements. This act is less abusive "IMHO" to that.

193 posted on 12/29/2003 10:20:41 AM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
what are the judicial checks and balances of a NLS?

None that I am aware of. Lacking an enforcement mechanism (traditionally called checks and balances) probable cause becomes irrelevent.

5 e's.

194 posted on 12/29/2003 10:21:09 AM PST by freeeee (I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
A foreign concept to you, I'm sure.

Dogged (and dogmatic) consistency is indeed a foreign concept to me.

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

195 posted on 12/29/2003 10:22:01 AM PST by Lazamataz (I slam, you slam, we all slam, for Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Hey man, I'm on your side in this! Check the context of my post.

Sorry, pal. :o) Sometimes I call napalm in on the wrong coords. :o)

196 posted on 12/29/2003 10:22:58 AM PST by Lazamataz (I slam, you slam, we all slam, for Islam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
Interesting response to Sabe's point. Here he is talking about how Ridge is being remiss in looking out for national security, and you respond by telling him that we have a national security problem. Brilliant.
197 posted on 12/29/2003 10:23:39 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
"A foolish consistency

Your MO, not mine.

198 posted on 12/29/2003 10:24:46 AM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Lower55

Ok. Here goes....slowly sou you can understand.

T H E R E

A R E

P E O P L E

T H A T

W A N T

T O

K I L L

U S...

You may not understand this simple fact, but thank God some in this administration do.

Oh, I understand that part just fine.

Here's the part that continues to elude me...

I F

T H E R E

A R E

P E O P L E

W H O

W A N T

T O

K I L L

U S,

T H E N

W H Y

D O E S

T H E

B U S H

A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

F A C I L I T A T E

T H E I R

A C T I V I T I E S

I F

T H E Y

U S E

M E X I C A N

I D E N T I F I C A T I O N

C A R D S ?


199 posted on 12/29/2003 10:25:56 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Sometimes I call napalm in on the wrong coords.

'Sokay. I was having a hard time warming up my pizza anyway.

200 posted on 12/29/2003 10:26:13 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241-259 next last

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