Free Republic

Except fot Cavuto, I quit watching fnc when they hired geraldo.

I have nothing to hide.

You are missing the point of the "act" and that is you are agreeing to place unlimited power in the hands of strangers whom you think will do what's right and that is abject foolishness.

Perhaps, just perhaps, this administration won't invoke section 802 Clause A, B & C against Americans, but, the fact remains they signed this into law without one moment of Congressional discussion, therefore, they are suspect as to their true intentions as far as I'm conscerned. How would you like to be held incommunicado indefinitely if someone were to bring false charges against you?

The New World Order is not that far away from coming to fruition. Just look at all the international groups we are members in:

1: The International Atomic Energy Agency;
2: The Internation Labor Organization,
3: The Food & Agricultural Organization,
4: The International Development Association;
5: World Health Organization;
6: The International Finance Corporation
7: The International Monetary Fund;
8: The International Civil Aviation Organization;
9: The International Postal Union;
10: The International Telecommunications Union;
11: The World Meteorological Association;
12: The Intergovernmental Maritime Consultive Organization
13: The General Agreement On Tariffs & Trades a/k/a GATT
14: The International Bank For Reconstruction &
Development a/k/a The World Bank
15: The United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural
Organization a/k/a/ UNESCO
16: The World Trade Organization a/k/a/ WTO


Do you see the pattern? How far away is the New World Order? The only thing that remains to bring it forth is politicians whom you trust to willingly give up our sovreignty. Far Fetched? I think not.

I am not a fan of the aclu, however, if I happen to agree with their position relative to the obscene "act", then, so be it.

"It's dehumanizing"

Hmm, let me see, the female models are being Forced to do this? Who's de-humanizing women, the idea or the model's participation in the idea?

"the manner in which people are buying and selling sushi"

There's a pun waiting in the wings, however, I will refrain.

"It's dehumanizing to be treated as a plate."

It's the best design of a plate I've ever seen.

"Why?"

Why? Because it is a naked grab for power by the gov't to stifle future dissent and criticism of gov't policy(s).

It has nothing whatsoever to do with patriotism. The acronym is a not so clever use of semantics to fool people (you know the ones, those who want cradle to the grave security from Big Brother). It means Providing Appropiate Tools Required to Intercept & Obstruct Terrorism! In fact, the original acronym was USAPA which added Uniting & Strengthening etc.,.

Instead of restricting the liberties & freedoms of Americans, the gov't should CLOSE our borders. Short of doing that, thers is no real "war" on terrorism, rather, it is a selective "war".

If you want to read the pros & cons of this monstrous law, do a Google search.

End of rant.

"We do need political upheaval however"

I know you mis-directed your #7 to me, however:

IMO, what we need is polarization that places Constitutional Conservatives in one party and Liberals/ Moderates/Neo-Conservatives in one party.
Having a mix of political philosophies in parties allows a takeover of a given party as has happened to the republican party and democrat parties.

In the republican case we have "pretend" conservatives and in the democrat party we have a takeover of the leadership by leftists/socialists. In both instances, they spend, spend, spend & tax, tax, tax except the neo-cons give us an occasional cookie of small tax breaks, but, on the whole, all we get from both parties is "crumbs".

Consider the obscene NEW spending of the administration and their acceptance of the democrat's domestic aganda, i,e,; Their "Education" bill, Adding new airport security personnel (more than 60,000 New employees) on the taxpayers backs instead of turning it over to private enterprise, the acceptance of the dem's positions of giveing lawbreakers amnesty and citizenship, their silence on California's driver licenses for illegals, etc,. etc.,.

Bottom line, we have Different names, Different approaches, Same results. Here in Kaleefornia, the "conservatives" abandoned their announced "core beliefs" and voted for a guy who is diametrically opposed not only to their supposed core beliefs, but, also the Republican Platform, just so they could have a victory. Can you say, political whores?

It's the Future danger of Section 802 which has no expiration date. This obscenity in the hands of clinton types as respects the conjunctive clauses 5A, 5B (i) & (ii) and C that poses this danger. And yes, I have read the act and also other opinions by doing a Google search.

Only people who want "security" at any cost accept this act because a republican signed it into law. If the lowlife clinton had done it, well, you know the mantra.

FYI, the original acronym was USAPA. It was changed to "patriot" to give it the impression that it had something to do with patriotism which is does not! Here is what the "patriot" acronym means " Providing Appropiate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism", clever use of semantics don't you think? As for the meaning of USAPA, add Uniting & Strengthening, etc,;.

There are legal scholars who say all that had to be done was to add "domestic terrorism" to existing law, therefore, this draconian law is not needed. Finally, in view of the fact that to date we have still NOT locked down our borders, do you really believe there is a "war" on terrorism or is the word being being used selectively? Why is Saudia Arabia getting a free ride? Only when our borders are closed will I believe there is a real War on terrorism.

I leave you with the following quote:

"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it."-- H.L. Mencken

"The demise of the Democrat Party will be better for the health of America than the demise of the Soviet Union and world communism!!! ~by CROSSHIGHWAYMAN"

That is an incredible statement! It is an indictment of Every democrat voter. FTR, I am registered as an independant who used to vote For capital R republicans.

The communist party, as a whole, was/is more dangerous than a few powerful politicans of either party. Communism would not allow such a statement to be uttered or written without severe repercussions.

In a relatively Free Society ( which is the one we live in), we can remove politicians through the ballot box while in a communist society it would take an armed revolution.

The quote of the day holds no water.

P.S. Both parties are culpable as respects the demise of honor, integrity and liberty. Just read the "patriot act" and then tell me the democrats alone are responsible.

But, but, Saundra, Arnold is a republican, (gag)

"And," he said, "we will make America safer by helping to transform Iraq from an exporter of violence and terror into a center of progress and peace."

Hmmm, how about Saudi Arabia , Mr. President?

May Christ envelop him in His Sweet Embrace forever and a day.

"still believe Dubyuh's gonna haveta declare some sorta VICTORY in the War on Terrorism before his second term is out and ratchet back some of the more egregious impositions on our Civil Rights. However, I can't really recall the last time the Federal Leviathan voluntarily decreased their powers!!"

I'll believe there is a "war" on terrorism when our borders are locked down by the National Guard. So far, this "war" is, has been and continues to be selective!

FReegards

Mud;

Re: your question on my concern that the "patriot act" is potentailly dangerous, here's a brief history of it culled from Google: Note the original acronym is USAPA which was changed to "patriot act" to give it the appearance of being about patriotism to which it has no connection whatsoever as it means "Providing Appropiate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism". Clever use of semantics don't you think?

Commemts from Google: In quotations:

"The clumsily-titled "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001"(USA PATRIOT Act, or USAPA) introduced a plethora of legislative changes which significantly increased the surveillance and investigative powers of law enforcement agencies in the United States. The Act did not, however, provide for the system of checks and balances that traditionally safeguards civil liberties in the face of such legislation."

"Legislative proposals in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were introduced less than a week after the attacks. President Bush signed the final bill, the USA PATRIOT Act, into law on October 26, 2001. Though the Act made significant amendments to over 15 important statutes, it was introduced with great haste and passed with little debate, and without a House, Senate, or conference report. As a result, it lacks background legislative history that often retrospectively provides necessary statutory interpretation."

"The Act was a compromise version of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 (ATA), a far-reaching legislative package intended to strengthen the nation's defense against terrorism. The ATA contained several provisions vastly expanding the authority of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to monitor private communications and access personal information. The final legislation included a few beneficial additions from the Administration's initial proposal: most notably, a so-called sunset provision (which provides that several sections of the act automatically expire after a certain period of time, unless they are explicitly renewed by Congress"

My Comments:

A resolution by congress is only a "sense of the congress" and is not really a declaration of war as too many details are not included such as a full definition of who the enemy is. "Terrorism" is a vague term and can include verbal threats, demonstrations, stalking, etc..

In fact, section 802 of the phony p.a.t.r.i.o.t. act gives a broad definition of terrorism in sections 5B (i) & (ii)

Pay particular attention to 5B relative to the words
"appear to be intended"

(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended--!!!! (my eclamations)
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

I'm not an attorney, but, it sure looks like free speech and the right to assemble is a terrorist act if some appointed czar determines that a demonstration against a governement policy has a "bad intent", the same applies if someone "speaks" against a government policy.

Keep in mind, SECTION 802 Has No expiration date as does the rest of the act. Rather curious don't you think? Is it possible this will be the legal justification of the coming New World Order to stifle dissent? nyah! Our government wouldn't do that to us, now would they?

And yes, I do know that A,B & C are conjuntive, however, here's a scenario that poses a danger in the future:

A government goon(s) you know the ones I mean (Waco & Ruby Ridge) infiltrate a peaceful demonstration and set off a gun-shot or start a fight, the czar can then say the the demonstration "appeared to be intended" to injure the public or the safety of the public or to change a gov't policy(s) by coercian and force.

Now, to give the administration the benefit of the doubt that they wou't invoke this section, the fact remains that they are culpable in presenting and signing this monstrocity into law and giving the clinton types this enormous power in the future!

"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it."-- H.L. Mencken

I'll take my tin foil hat off now.

FReegards

Fantastic! Lock them up and throw away the key. Domino players are dangerous.

"Go back, and rather than being disappointed in the fact that Bush may have not acted as you would have had him act, see if he did, or tried to do, those things that he said he would try to do, and behaved as he said that he would behave."

A review of what Bush has done will show that he will be found wanting as respects his non-existant "conservatism" with the latest chapter of his obscenes spending spree, to wit,; an $87,000,000,000 GRANT to Iraq! Add to that, his embracing the democrat's domestic programs, his NOT locking down our borders and what do we have? A democrat clone that's what, just as the rest of the small r republicans in both houses. They don't even have the balls to stand up for their own judicial nominees.

"This is how you measure the worth of an individual."

He has been measured, weighed and has been found wanting.

Re: Your reponse in #503. Bravo! I second that! These small r republicans are no better than the democrat's defenders of the indefensible. They proved where they really stand in the CA recall election. You know, the big lie that they "preferred" McClintock, but, kept repeating the mantra "he can't win", a typical liberal trick.

"or convince the Republicans to get back to what we USED to stand for, smaller government..."

Will never happen. The Republican party has been captured by clones of the democrats and have become a small r party.

California proved how phony the "conservatives" like dreir, brulte, simon and the rest of them are. Every one of them is a political whore. Color them Democrat Lite and that goes for the National party as well.

But, hey, I wear a tin foil hat, so, what can I know?

I've been boycotting the alphabet stations for more than 20 years except in rare instances.

Of course he will increase taxes. He's spending our money and giving GRANTS like a drunken sailor. And, his obscene spending spree will be defended by the defenders of the indefensible come 2004.

"I get the impression that they believe that there is no difference between substance and spin"


Spin is no more than abbreviated lying! Spin, by it's nature, is going in circles and that's what "spinners" do with the truth.

Are we Lynch bashers because we don't buy into the heroine BS. They perpetuated a lie and continue to do so.

Is being pinned under a truck a new definition of a hero/heroine?

One REAL hero is that young LT who orderd his men to point their weapons to the ground to assure an angry crowd the soldiers had no intention of destroying their Mosque. Of course, this was a guy and what the libs/feminists needed was a female heroine. The only problem is they forgot to include the doctors in their fabricated story of her being shot/knifed. Time to put this story to sleep. We have heroes dying every day in Iraq to whom we should give the honor of calling THEM heroes.

Flame away.