Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 49

Thread: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    1 - I searched the CNN site for news or video of this and got nothing. You did not see it on CNN

    2 - the story as reported by the local station contained almost no information. It was badly reported, badly written and badly sourced.

    3 - If this was a real story, the mainstream media would be all over it, despite your conspiratorial belief that they would "hide" it.

    4 - the Patriot Act was cooked up by Republicans, and I didn't hear the right whining about it when Bush was president

    5 - When I am "trying to be witty" I will send you an PM to alert you.
    While I agree with 3 of your 4 points, this one is interesting:

    4 - the Patriot Act was cooked up by Republicans, and I didn't hear the right whining about it when Bush was president

    The Patriot Act was an act that had strong support on BOTH sides of the aisle with Democrat sponsors. I just wanted to correct the PARTISAN assumption that this was PURELY a partisan Republican act.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Zyphilin, I have a question.

    I have been informed that, under the Patriot Act:
    1. The President or Atty Gen can, by signing the appropriate form, declare an individual to be an "enemy combatant". No evidence is required, just that signature on that form.
    2. Having been so declared, the individual (even if a US citizen) may be taken into custody, held without charges, without a lawyer, without phone calls, etc indefinately.

    Is this correct?

    G.
    I believe that US citizens cannot be held under the Patriot Act in violation of their Constitutional rights. I believe the Patriot Act is geared towards non-citizens within and outside of the USA.

    It is highly unlikely that ANY case against a US citizen would correctly fall under this act, there are no cases where any US citizen has been detained under this act in the credible real world and you cannot be denied your rights regardless of the act as a US citizen.

    Now if you are NOT a US citizen, the gloves are off. However, due process is always the case when residing within the USA.

    I am always amused by the paranoia exhibited by people like Ikari over these perceived dangers; and yet, Ikari has a better chance getting the Ebola Virus than he does losing any of his Civil Rights.

    I know a few on this thread have made the CLAIM, like this distraught mother, that they have been detained under the Patriot Act, but there is no credible source to substantiate this.

    The reason this story can ONLY be found on YOUTUBE is because it is NOT newsworthy and is merely hyperbole for paranoid citizens who continually make the false claim that their Civil Rights are being denied.

    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act]USA PATRIOT Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    USA PATRIOT Act (H.R. 3162)

    MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS; HABEAS CORPUS; JUDICIAL REVIEW
    `SEC. 236A. (a) DETENTION OF TERRORIST ALIENS-
    `(1) CUSTODY- The Attorney General shall take into custody any alien who is certified under paragraph (3).

    `(2) RELEASE- Except as provided in paragraphs (5) and (6), the Attorney General shall maintain custody of such an alien until the alien is removed from the United States. Except as provided in paragraph (6), such custody shall be maintained irrespective of any relief from removal for which the alien may be eligible, or any relief from removal granted the alien, until the Attorney General determines that the alien is no longer an alien who may be certified under paragraph (3). If the alien is finally determined not to be removable, detention pursuant to this subsection shall terminate.
    `(3) CERTIFICATION- The Attorney General may certify an alien under this paragraph if the Attorney General has reasonable grounds to believe that the alien--
    `(A) is described in section 212(a)(3)(A)(i), 212(a)(3)(A)(iii), 212(a)(3)(B), 237(a)(4)(A)(i), 237(a)(4)(A)(iii), or 237(a)(4)(B); or
    `(B) is engaged in any other activity that endangers the national security of the United States.

    `(4) NONDELEGATION- The Attorney General may delegate the authority provided under paragraph (3) only to the Deputy Attorney General. The Deputy Attorney General may not delegate such authority.

    `(5) COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS- The Attorney General shall place an alien detained under paragraph (1) in removal proceedings, or shall charge the alien with a criminal offense, not later than 7 days after the commencement of such detention. If the requirement of the preceding sentence is not satisfied, the Attorney General shall release the alien.

    `(6) LIMITATION ON INDEFINITE DETENTION- An alien detained solely under paragraph (1) who has not been removed under section 241(a)(1)(A), and whose removal is unlikely in the reasonably foreseeable future, may be detained for additional periods of up to six months only if the release of the alien will threaten the national security of the United States or the safety of the community or any person.

    `(7) REVIEW OF CERTIFICATION- The Attorney General shall review the certification made under paragraph (3) every 6 months. If the Attorney General determines, in the Attorney General's discretion, that the certification should be revoked, the alien may be released on such conditions as the Attorney General deems appropriate, unless such release is otherwise prohibited by law. The alien may request each 6 months in writing that the Attorney General reconsider the certification and may submit documents or other evidence in support of that request.
    `(b) HABEAS CORPUS AND JUDICIAL REVIEW-
    `(1) IN GENERAL- Judicial review of any action or decision relating to this section (including judicial review of the merits of a determination made under subsection (a)(3) or (a)(6)) is available exclusively in habeas corpus proceedings consistent with this subsection. Except as provided in the preceding sentence, no court shall have jurisdiction to review, by habeas corpus petition or otherwise, any such action or decision.

    `(2) APPLICATION-
    `(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 2241(a) of title 28, United States Code, habeas corpus proceedings described in paragraph (1) may be initiated only by an application filed with--
    `(i) the Supreme Court;
    `(ii) any justice of the Supreme Court;
    `(iii) any circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; or
    `(iv) any district court otherwise having jurisdiction to entertain it.
    `(B) APPLICATION TRANSFER- Section 2241(b) of title 28, United States Code, shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus described in subparagraph (A).

    `(3) APPEALS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 2253 of title 28, in habeas corpus proceedings described in paragraph (1) before a circuit or district judge, the final order shall be subject to review, on appeal, by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. There shall be no right of appeal in such proceedings to any other circuit court of appeals.

    `(4) RULE OF DECISION- The law applied by the Supreme Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall be regarded as the rule of decision in habeas corpus proceedings described in paragraph (1).
    `(c) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION- The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to any other provision of this Act.'.
    (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of contents of the Immigration and Nationality Act is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 236 the following:
    `Sec. 236A. Mandatory detention of suspected terrorist; habeas corpus; judicial review.'.
    (c) REPORTS- Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 6 months thereafter, the Attorney General shall submit a report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, with respect to the reporting period, on--
    (1) the number of aliens certified under section 236A(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by subsection (a);
    (2) the grounds for such certifications;
    (3) the nationalities of the aliens so certified;
    (4) the length of the detention for each alien so certified; and
    (5) the number of aliens so certified who--
    (A) were granted any form of relief from removal;
    (B) were removed;
    (C) the Attorney General has determined are no longer aliens who may be so certified; or
    (D) were released from detention.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    YouTube - USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Youtube vid of a news report. It's kinda crazy, apparently nothing was found but the kid is still in jail. Actually, I was trying to find follow ups to see if anything else has come of this just yet or not. Regardless, the use of the PA against our citizens, it may not be "common place" as far as we know now, but it does seem the government will use it against us if it suits their cause. Scary stuff.
    How is this breaking news? Is YOUTUBE a valid news source; another epoch fail on your part.

  4. #34
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    This kid was NOT charged under the Patriot Act. Most of the popular perception of this case is entirely wrong

    Source [US Department of Justice | JUVENILE INFORMATION FILED] (Press Release)

    Hammond, IN—The United States Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana previously announced that a juvenile was arrested pursuant to a federal warrant. The arrest stems from a false bomb threat directed to Purdue University on February 15 and similar threats directed to other schools. The FBI, the Purdue University Police Department and the Tippecanoe County Prosecutor's Office, conducted an extensive investigation into this matter, resulting in that arrest.



    Over recent days several media sources have reported information that is incorrect. Accordingly, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana wishes to further announce that a juvenile information has been filed and is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. That charge alleges a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 844(e), which prohibits sending false information about an attempt to kill, injure or intimidate any individual or to unlawfully to damage any building through an instrument of interstate commerce. This charge is unrelated to the Patriot Act.



    The juvenile has appeared in court on three occasions, once in North Carolina for an initial hearing and a detention hearing, and twice in Indiana for a continued initial hearing and a status hearing. At each hearing, the juvenile was represented by counsel. The government has filed a motion with the Court seeking to transfer the juvenile to adult status for prosecution pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 5032; that motion is pending before the Court and is scheduled for a hearing during the month of May. The juvenile is presently housed in a juvenile facility in the Northern District of Indiana where he does not have contact with adult offenders. His mother has been apprised of each court appearance and has attended the hearing in North Carolina; she did not appear at either of the hearings in Indiana. The juvenile facility where he is housed permits family visits.



    Because the statutes governing juvenile proceedings limit public disclosure of information related to a juvenile case, the United States Attorney declines any further comment.



    The United States Attorney emphasizes that the filing of a complaint or juvenile information is merely a charge and that all persons are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law.
    The mother basically made the whole Patriot Act thing up - the media still takes some of the blame for inflating the claims as much as they did

    Source [Wired Threat Level | Bloggers, TV, Go Nuts Over Misleading ‘Patriot Act’ Arrest Claim]

    It’s the false TV news report heard ’round the world. Raleigh, North Carolina’s WRAL-5 reported last week that a 16-year-old bomb hoax suspect was hauled out of his mother’s home by federal agents, and is now being held without any legal rights on the authority of the 2001 USA PATRIOT Act, which “supersedes the Constitution.”

    [...]

    The arrest of the teenager is real enough. FBI agents investigating a February 15 bomb hoax that evacuated the mechanical engineering building at Purdue University traced the phone call to the juvenile’s Oxford, North Carolina home, served his mother with a search warrant and arrested the teen. They issued a press release about it, omitting the suspect’s name. That was on March 5, and he’s been held without bail in Indiana ever since.

    The claim that the boy is a victim of USA PATRIOT, though, appears to have been cut from whole cloth. While there’s plenty to criticize in that post-9/11 law, it doesn’t contain any provision that abrogates a defendant’s right to a trial. It’s also not responsible for making it illegal to phone in a bomb threat. That’s been a federal crime since 1939.

    The boy’s mother, Annette Lundeby, has even acknowledged in interviews that her son has been formally charged, has a court-appointed attorney, and has already made appearances in front of a judge. No military tribunals here. On Alex Jones, Lundeby seemed to more-or-less admit that the USA PATRIOT connection was something she dreamed up on her own.

    Jones: And they said they are charging him under the Patriot Act, so –

    Lundeby: They’re not saying that, but that’s exactly what they’re doing.

    Jones: Well, it’s in the newspaper.

    Lundeby: All their actions point towards that. But they don’t deny it either.
    Last edited by Kernel Sanders; 05-08-09 at 01:30 PM.

  5. #35
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    I am always amused by the paranoia exhibited by people like Ikari over these perceived dangers; and yet, Ikari has a better chance getting the Ebola Virus than he does losing any of his Civil Rights.
    I have a better chance of being hit by a car than being taken out by a terrorist as well...do you want to get into probabilities?
    Last edited by Ikari; 05-08-09 at 01:31 PM.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #36
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    How is this breaking news? Is YOUTUBE a valid news source; another epoch fail on your part.
    Blah blah blah blah

    I posted the news report to. Try reading.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Yet this very thread has a news report of an American Citizen being stripped of their rights and being held under the PA. So obviously through measured fact, everything you just said was bull****.
    What profound irony based on what I and Kernel posted, the only one spewing paranoid BS on the forum is.......tada; YOU.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    What profound irony based on what I and Kernel posted, the only one spewing paranoid BS on the forum is.......tada; YOU.
    You post BS, Kernel posted something valid.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #39
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders View Post
    This kid was NOT charged under the Patriot Act. Most of the popular perception of this case is entirely wrong

    Source [US Department of Justice | JUVENILE INFORMATION FILED] (Press Release)



    The mother basically made the whole Patriot Act thing up - the media still takes some of the blame for inflating the claims as much as they did

    Source [Wired Threat Level | Bloggers, TV, Go Nuts Over Misleading ‘Patriot Act’ Arrest Claim]
    Thanks for the info, I was wondering if there would be follow up. Hopefully it's all true. I still believe the PA to be a very bad piece of legislation, backed only by Statists. But at the very least, this boy wasn't caught up in it, or so it seems.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #40
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I get it, I'm an idiot.
    Not at all, in general I think you're an extremely intelligent person. In regards to the Patriot Act however in ALL my experience with you've I've found you to be extremely ignorant about the Act, knowing generalities that are stereotypes put out generally by those that think identically to you. I think you've made a choice on this from day one and you refuse to acknowledge anything or think of anything outside of your world view on it. Its not a critique on your general intelligence, its not calling you an idiot, but on THIS ISSUE I feel in all my dealings with you that you are incredibly uninformed or misinformed.

    Thanks for that great, insightful, and insult laden post. It did a lot to further the debate. Maybe I should retort with nothing but personal insults as well.
    Please, if you want to insult my VIEW and the reasons for my view and the way I present my view go about it. I expect it in a debate. If my view is so incorrect, if its so disgustingly opposite of yours, then you should be going after my view.

    Here's the thing. The PA needs to be scrapped in total. If you think there are good parts that need to be established, make a new damned bill.
    And as I said, if I believed it was likely in this political climate that the gigantic large needed portions of the bill would be repassed in expeditious fashion I would be all for it.

    However, at this point I believe that POLITICS would get in the way and it wouldn't be voted back in not because it wasn't SOUND or NEEDED but because of POLITICS.

    But the PA in its form is not good, it's too open, and apparently can and will be abused. Abused legislation must be taken away from the government
    Which the same could be said for FISA even if we strip away the PATRIOT Act. Are you also calling for its complete removal? The same can be said for TITLE III, are you calling for its complete removal? Are you trying to actually imply that there were no survelliance and investigative misdeeds by the federal government PRIOR to the Patriot Act? And, if that's not what you're implying, why is all your venom and animosity targeted solely at the Patriot Act?

    This is like saying you're hiring a construction company as a contracter. They are doing everything perfect, going above and beyond what you need, save for its found out one employee is bumping up the price of materials and pocketing the cash. YOU seemingly would fire the entire company, scrapping it all, and gambling on the fact you'll be able to find another company that can do it as good or even nearly as good as the company you just fired, instead of simply going to that company and saying "This person needs to be fired and I want to be re-imbursed".

    Its illogical, inefficient, and petulent.

    The government isn't this benevolent institution out there looking to bring us smiles and rainbows. It's a bureaucracy full of people who want to further their own power and because it wields the power and soveriegnty of the People, it must necessarily be constrained, restricted, and subject to multiple review. I'm not saying get rid of the arm because of the "tip of the finger" crap. I'm saying once government gets power it will abuse that power.
    YES! That's EXACTLY what you're doing. Sit here and tell me ALL of the Patriot Act is rife for abuse. Tell me that even 90% of it is rife for abuse. Please, tell me that to my face. At least then I can believe you actually realisticly believe that that's not what you're doing. However, its also an incredibly ignorant statement in regards to the Act and ANY rational review of it to say that the vast majority of it is rife for abuse unless you're EQUALLY calling for the repeal of FISA and TITLE III yet you NEVER speak with such venom and spit towards them because they're not the hot topic libertarian flag waving piece right now that you've read all your one sided information on.

    If we excuse the abuse because "most of the bill is good" blah blah blah then we do nothing more than encourage that abuse.The PA is NOT a good bill OBVIOUSLY because it can and has been abused. That makes it not a good bill on the whole. Once it is abused, it must be taken away. Anything which must be given to the government can be given to it with severe restrictions and warnings attached.
    You've got to be joking with me. Hmm, the government, specifically the justice administration lets say, is the one that abused the Patriot Act. That obviously means we need to get rid of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of State because if one part of the government is not good becuase its doing abuse than OBVIOUSLY all of government is not good and needs to be removed because it can and has been abused.

    Again, where's the cry to get rid of FISA and Title III? Where's your call to get rid of EVERY SINGLE GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION and every single bit of law governing them because every single one of them has had corruption and abuse happen before.

    Unless you're calling for Anarchy your logic DOES NOT WORK.

    Furthermore, the majority of the proper functionality which came from the PA could be accomplished without the PA.
    Yes, it could. Depending on the judge in question, the agency in question, the boss at the time in question. There were loopholes big enough to drive a Mac Truck through both for ABUSE by government and to ESCAPE from Government due to new technologies and fourty year old law.

    There are many things which could be done. I'm not saying we do nothing, no matter what you'd like to distort my argument into to make yours easier.
    No, you're not saying do nothing because you don't have to. You're not a stupid person. You know that in this political climate there is no way any kind of major rework of intelligence laws is going to get passed through congress no matter how sound proof it is for abuse. You're not dumb. So you don't HAVE to say it because it allows you to put up this act of "They could just pass things to replace it" to try and cover your tracks on it.

    I'm saying we can only take proper action, however. And that we must be CAREFUL in what we allow the government to do and with the degrees of freedom we allow it to do it with. But that's idiotic, huh? Stupid according to you.
    Not at all, which you'd realize if you read what I wrote but no surprise you seem to not have. Please, show me where I say we should leave the Patriot Act completely unchanced.

    I'll wait.

    .

    .

    .

    Hmm, wait, you won't be able to find it because I NEVER SAID IT OR SUGGESTED IT so I shouldn't waste my time waiting.

    I could do the same thing waiting for you to find where I said the Patriot Act doesn't have problematic parts.

    There ARE issues with the Patriot Act, and there are MULTIPLE avenues to fix it without removing the entire act:

    1. Pass laws that edit the powers deliniated within it.
    2. Don't vote to re-up a provision when it reaches its sunset
    3. Challenge it in court to get it over turned

    Let me spell it out, reallllllllly simple for you

    I AM FOR ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

    I am for changing the Patriot Act. I'm for removing any problematic part in it. I'm for having heightened oversight for it. I'm for having pieces of it completely being stripped out.

    The ONLY thing I'm against is chucking the ENTIRE ACT due to a tiny portion of it being problematic when there are OTHER options.

    If there were no other options I'd agree with you completely, but that's not the CASE.

    Now, you can CONTINUE if you wish to misrepresent my argument. Its not going to surprise me; you've done it throughout by accusing me of attacking you personally when I'm attacking your stances or your argument and you've done it in regards to my stance on oversight of the government. But the FACT is I'm FOR watching the government, I'm FOR correcting the problems of the act, I'm FOR individual liberties. However, I'm for it due to things based on REALITY and objective research from all sides instead of a mindless one sided non-objective constant drumbeat in one direction.

    What needed to be done could have easily been done without the PA. All the PA did was to authorize government with power it wasn't supposed to have; and that's far more dangerous than any terrorist could ever be.
    And this is why I said you're ignorant of the Patriot Act. No, it did not. Not unless you're equally screaming from the heavens that FISA and TITLE III needs to be removed and frankly I've not seen a single god damn thread from you about EITHER one of those things. Why? My guess is because there's not nearly as much paranoid over the top hugely one sided misinformation filled libertarian hogwash about those as there are about the Patriot Act.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •