More to my point:
The last two posts from "your" side that I responded to:
a lewrockwell.com article
Askel's pravda post
Both have a glaring lie in them, the Lewrockwell lie about the Patriot act is particularly odious- it subverts the efforts of critics of the act to an attack upon something that isn't in the law. That effort should be used to address the real faults of the law if those are faults are to be addressed.
Sure, opinion pieces keep the issue in play, but an appeal solely to emotion is not persuasive: Tom Paine's emotional language is backed by accepted facts.
And an opinion piece that includes dishonesty actually does damage to the position it purports to support!
"If the government states that the alleged commission of a crime should prove injurious to State Security, then the citizen cannot invoke Fifth Amendment privilege to remain mute. He can be compelled by “whatever means necessary,” (Ashcroft’s own words) to divulge what he may know. "
The first lie I found in the article.
23 posted on 1/15/02 2:46 PM Pacific by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To: Askel5
The rest of it is too incoherent to figure out when he's lying or what he's lying about.
He mixes the PATRIOT Act and the Tribunals up, at least I think he does.This dishonest rant does a great disservice to American citizens who care about the Constitutionality and consequences of our laws.
24 posted on 1/15/02 2:54 PM Pacific by mrsmith
Feel free to do so. I'm particularly interested in digging up Ashcroft's "by whatever means necessary" quote. But, of course, I've a penchant for the odd direct quote.