Liberty...what is it?

Can I ask which group or race has to wear a Identification mark as a result of the patriot act??

I am sure that you would be cool with Jews being forced to wear the yellow stars in the 1930's. As long as you are not inconvienced you could care less.

This is a seriouse question, as Danr's post links the patriot act with the persecution of the Jew's.

De Orc :kewl:

 

If you will recall many German citizens sat by while Jews lost their rights. This is a specific type of apathy that I see in regards to those losing their rights in America. As for the specifices of a yellow star, no we are not using a yellow star (duh).

 

Again you fail to answer a simple question, name one group that has to be specialy Id'd due the legislation laid down in the patriots act, Name one right you have lost due to this act?
Again I find I must point out something rather obviouse to you, I never mentioned the Yellow Star you did, therby creating a parallel between what happend in Nazi Germany in the 30s to what is happening in the USA today. I asked about ID Markings and how they related to any given group, please learn to read what I write and not make it up as you go along.

De Orc :thumb:

 

I did not answer the way you wanted me to. The specifics of the oppression are not the same.

 

But you are the one who drew the parallel between the two, not me. All I would like is for you to state openly what it is that you are against and why using your own words, what part of the legislation affects you in a adverse way, what part of your rights as a American Citizen are erroded by this legislation? What grouping of people (US Citizens) are adversley effected and in what way. Please be as clear as you can.
I am not having a go at your views some are the same as mine, I just want to know what you think.

De Orc

 

Bush does not have the same number of nose hairs as Hitler either. Many specifics are different.

 

Obviously I am not an American (so most of those measures affect me more than they affect US citizens), but what about surveillance of telephony and e-mail communication? Or evaluation of library loan infomation? What I found particularly strange was those secret "no-fly" codes - you are not allowed to fly (apparently because you are considered to be a security risk) but at the same time you are not told why you cannot fly. As far as I know, that is not applied any more, but when I first read about it, I thought that was kafkaesque.

Christian

 

Thank you Chris for a answer perhaps you would allow Danr to use it as he can not come up with anything other than sarcasm. Previously I have stated my opinion on phone taps & E,Mail survailance I have no problem with it as long as it is done in a regulated manner and all results that are not relivent are destroyed. Now I believe that the US argument is that the President has autherised this outside of the law, and regardless of any lifes that might be saved he should be punished. Here I suppose ultimatly the courts and the Senetors/Gongress people will decide the legality of it.
As for examining Libery activity I can see a dim & distant reasoning for this but on the whole I think it is a step to far. 1st I have heard about the secret no fly codes sounds very 'Catch 22' to me
Now there Danr you see how easy it is, a humble European has to come to your rescue LOL

De Orc :kewl:

 

Don't quite see it that way. I do find it problematic that the US being "at war" is given as a reason for many restrictive measures. War on terrorism, war on drugs ... and of course in a war "we" (or rather you US citizens) have to stand together and preferably not ask any questions. Don't know if that militarist vocabulary is new or whether it has been in use for a longer time. But neither Bush nor anybody responsible in his administration is a nazi or has other dictatorial ambitions.

And if you look at how the "Patriot" Act was extended in December by five weeks only, I don't think there is much of that apathy. Sure, that short extension was not what the US administration wanted, but it shows that (at least regarding the treatment and rights of US citizens) such issues are openly discussed.

Bottom line: I am certainly not a GWB supporter, not even an American, but I am pretty confident as far as the stability of the democratic system in the US is concerned.

Christian

 

All right Danr, this is what your web site and the ensueing search has proven to me. The ACLU’s number one case was the one in which a Paticia Davis and her daughter were left stranded here in the USA while her husband, Moussaoui Has was deported back to Pakistan.

First and most basic facts are that Patricia Davis was a natural born American living with a foreign national named Moussaoui Has. They were NOT married and the daughter was NOT his. He was only paying the bills and living with this woman. It seems that at the same time he was trying to recruit this womans brother to fight with the al-Qaeda in Iraq. He was also communicating with known terrorist groups affiliated with al-Qaeda, using the internet and via public library computers. All of which was proven and documentated. He was charged with engaging in activities that endangered national security of the USA. He was simply deported, rather than taking him out and shooting him, which I would have done.

By the way, his vesa had expired two years ago, and they wouldn’t have caught him except for the fact that Patricia’s own brother turned him in to the authorities.
Now, this brings us back to you and your imagined loss of personal liberties. Tell me again how any of this was in any way, shape, or form, removal any part of your personal freedoms. Again, here is the question:
And the question remains; name just one "liberty" you have had to give up because of President Bush?:kewl:

 

Ah yes I forgot about computers in public liberies I was thinking more along the lines of Ordinance servay maps (Not sure if you have them in the US)

De Orc

 

Right, and I think that was ultimately the reason why the US Congress was so reluctant when it came to extending the Patriot Act. As for data rentention laws, well, "we Europeans" have no reason to praise ourselves. The European Parliament approved a regulation, about six weeks ago, according to which telecommunication data in the EU will have to be stored for six to 24 months. (Not the content of a call or Internet connection, but its duration, the location of the calling party, etc.) With about 450 million citizens in the European Union, that will be an enormous amount of data.

Christian

 

Yep and it's going to cause all sorts of problems along the way

De Orc

 

What it really boils down to is that the ends justify the means. Bush is arguing that breaking the law is O.K. because he is saving Americans lives. He doesn't even see it as breaking the law but feels he had the authority under the war powers act which he didn't. He could have complied with the law retroactively easily but didn't bother and still isn't bothering.
What if Bush found out that terrorists were going to shoot down a jet in order to kill the Democratic Party whip. Could he then order the CIA to shoot the Democratic Party whip in order to save the rest of the peeple on the plane? Do the ends justfiy the means? The supreme court will not support his side I'd bet.

 

Unfortunately I find myself agreeing with Moen(Gasp!), Pres. Bush has violated the civil rights of numerous Americans, and his Patriot Act is a blatant violation of our rights. Example, Jose Padilla.Google it if you don't know who he is. Another example is the people being taken overseas to be tortured. I doubt it would be different under a Dem though.

 

Hey Moen, aren't you glad that craigG is in your corner? I know I am.:kewl:

 

I'm sure he is, right Moen? Actually, I'm just on your side to detract credibility from it. Not really.

 

I sort of feel all funny inside...My whole world is rocked. I can't go on like this... Good bye cruel world. If I have to live in a world were Craig and I agree, I don't want to live. Slowly coming back, coming back, whew! Just kidding, I'll still be around.

 

Um taken overseas to torture them, bit of a time waster realy why not just do it on the spot then shoot them after all they are only Muslims those guy's Craigy hates n wants to kill LOL Man he's sticking up for Muslims LOL looking out of the window for the end of the world LOL

De Orc

 

Is this José Padilla the same guy that they convicted of murder a few years back? He is also known as José Rivera, José Alicea, José Hernandez, José Ortiz and finally Abdullah Al Muhajir. Now you couldn't mean a nice kid like this could you, it's hard to believe just how far these people will go to protect people like craigG here in the USA, isn't it?:kewl: