Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

  1. #41
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    You want to know the idiotic ignorant scare tacting on the part of most people, especially people who 9 out of 10 times do NOTHING but parrot talking points from whatever political websites and sources they choose that are directly in line with their thinking without EVER giving a legitimate attempt to view the information from the other side and get actual REALISTIC fact is? It's this "terrorists are going to get us" line. It's "accept the expansion of government and the usurpation of your power as sovereigns because the terrorists are coming". That's the real source of ignorance in this Republic. People who think we have so much to fear from terrorists that we have to let government expand and take more and more power, excusing the abuses the entire way because "part of it is good". That's true ignorance right there.


    Wonderful little rant there. Alex Jones would be proud. However, gotta ask.

    What the **** does that have to do with anything I said?

    Please, again, point me to where I said the Patriot Act needs to stay in place "because terrorists are coming" or because "the terrorists are going to get me". I know I'm not one of those in the 9 out of 10 range unless the ACLU and EPIC are somehow pro-patriot Act and I just missed it.

    Yes, there ARE ignorant people on BOTH sides of the Patriot Act spectrum. Those that try to say the act is 100% lock tite, everything is great about it, and nothing needs to be removed are JUST as wrong and I'll argue against them JUST as much when they come out and say it. I'm not sure why you're ranting about it in this response because I don't disagree with you.

    We had wiretaps which were abused by the FBI, that's measured.
    Yep, that's the government abusing something. We need to get rid of the FDA cause naturally since they're government they will also abuse, chop it all off.

    And, are you telling me Ikari that we never had any wiretap abuses prior to the Patriot Act? And, if we did, how exactly is it the ENTIRE Patriot Acts fault because the government did the same thing it did previous to it, abused power at times.

    The audit showed in both pure number and percentage the sample having well too much abuse.
    Indeed, and I'm likely all in favor of restricting back that power.

    By the way, which power is it exactly? Could you provide me a reference point in the Act to which power specifically you have issue with or is this just some nebulus "issue"? Perhaps that's why you hate the entire act, because everything you read just frames it...much like this news story you posted...as "The Patriot Act" because god forbid someone actually do some research to find out specifics.

    The PA has been used at least once against its own citizen and that's too much.
    Yep, so has the FBI. Remove it. CIA. Remove it. They turned the Military against private citizens once. Remove it. Wait, the President of the United States of America perpetrated abuse against its own citizens once under Nixon....we need to remove the position of President of the United States of America.

    But it's stupid to watch out for that, huh? Idiotic and ignorant to lay blame towards the government when it abuses power...right? Don't question the government, it's here for us; Zyphlin would disagree with that.
    Actually, I wouldn't. Actually, in my posts IN THIS VERY THREAD I even stated there were abuses and they needed to be changed. But go ahead, continue to just blatantly misrepresent me, its kind of funny.

    They'll protect us, and their usurpation of power shouldn't bother us. Move along, nothing to see here. What's idiotic is ignoring the warnings of the founders.
    Ahh, here comes the libertarian version of Godwin's law. Yes Ikari, yes, channel the founders. Let them flow through you. I'm sure you're got the spirit of jefferson and washington speaking right in your ears, let it out.

    What's stupid is absolute trust in the government. What's ignorant is the abdication of the duties and responsibilities of freemen, the abandonment of the never ending battle of freedom, and tuning one's back to the Republic in favor of oligopoly. Weak individuals who can't accept the responsibilities and consequences of freedom and liberty. Pathetic.
    Well, glad I don't have absolute trust in the government. Wow glad I'm not abdicating duties and responsabilities or abandoning the battle for freedom. Glad I've not turned my back on things. Glad I'm not just being a hyperly paranoid person parroting the standard hyper libertarian talking points while giving out no specifics and acting hysterical about the big bad government while at the same time being absolutely inconsistant as I MASSIVELY misrepresent the viewpoint of the person disagreeing with me.

    Phew, for a moment there I thought your little rant was actually going to apply to me.

  2. #42
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    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.
    To be fair, while generally YouTube videos aren't legitimate sources it was a video of an actual news cast and was later backed up with the print story.

    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 ĎPatriot Actí Arrest Claim]
    OMG! You're kidding me? You mean a lawyer with an agenda and a woman who likely got fed worthless information by hyper paranoid people decided to trump up the evil scary word "Patriot Act" and then a news organization decided that instead of doing legitimate reporting or having any actual integrity they'd run a sensational story that typical "OMG the Patriot Act the embodyment of evvvvvvvil" folks then run around with as if its some kind of giant damning evidence?

    Wow, I'd never have imagined that was the case.

    And wait, you mean the "ODD" reason that it wasn't picked up by any major outlets or even any real blog sites WASN'T because the government was being so super duper uber secretive and letting anything out......but because there was no story?

    Well my god, what kind of complete flippin idiot that MUST be a mindless drone of the government that walks along like a zombie going "U.S.A is all good, can do no bad, brains brains!" could EVER had suggested that........

  3. #43
    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
    You post BS, Kernel posted something valid.
    Yeah, posting a link to the actual ACT and definition of what it entails is BS.

    Let me summarize this for you:

    You post a BS YouTube video as "breaking news", make uninformed paranoid statements about an act you OBVIOUSLY havenít bothered to read and know little to nothing about, then claim OTHERS are full of BS when they post a link to the actual act?

    I canít find a better definition for closed minded petty arrogance combined with a lot of denial and paranoia.

  4. #44
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    Wonderful little rant there. Alex Jones would be proud. However, gotta ask.

    What the **** does that have to do with anything I said?
    You were calling me stupid for my belief in government restriction. I don't think believing the government should be restricted and watched is being stupid, nor demanding that improper legislation be removed as an act of ignorance as you wanted to claim. Just giving back a little of what you were dishing out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Please, again, point me to where I said the Patriot Act needs to stay in place "because terrorists are coming" or because "the terrorists are going to get me". I know I'm not one of those in the 9 out of 10 range unless the ACLU and EPIC are somehow pro-patriot Act and I just missed it.
    It's one of the most widely used excuses for the PA.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yes, there ARE ignorant people on BOTH sides of the Patriot Act spectrum. Those that try to say the act is 100% lock tite, everything is great about it, and nothing needs to be removed are JUST as wrong and I'll argue against them JUST as much when they come out and say it. I'm not sure why you're ranting about it in this response because I don't disagree with you.
    Yet you do disagree with me. The PA has parts which are bad, they aren't restricted enough and allow too much leeway. Considering what it is that the PA concerns itself with, particularly when it comes to defense against charges laid by the government; something that could prove so catastrophically dangerous should be done away with. The vast majority of the proper functionality of the PA could be handled through different means. The overall existence of the PA is a danger, and thus must be done away with. Further laws need to note this and if we are going to grant additional power to the federal government, it must be severely and clearly restricted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yep, that's the government abusing something. We need to get rid of the FDA cause naturally since they're government they will also abuse, chop it all off.
    Didn't you bitch in this very post about me misrepresenting you? And then you do it to me again? Interesting.

    There is legitimate reason for the FDA to exist, and properly restricted it can benefit many. I see it as too floppy right now and needs better regulation and control. But it's also not going to take away habeas corpus from you either; the threat levels of the government institutions and benefit derived from it are different.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    And, are you telling me Ikari that we never had any wiretap abuses prior to the Patriot Act? And, if we did, how exactly is it the ENTIRE Patriot Acts fault because the government did the same thing it did previous to it, abused power at times.
    The government has abused much before the PA. I just don't think we should be making it easier for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Indeed, and I'm likely all in favor of restricting back that power.

    By the way, which power is it exactly? Could you provide me a reference point in the Act to which power specifically you have issue with or is this just some nebulus "issue"? Perhaps that's why you hate the entire act, because everything you read just frames it...much like this news story you posted...as "The Patriot Act" because god forbid someone actually do some research to find out specifics.
    I don't like their classification of terrorist being mostly up to them and the repercussions of government labeling one as terrorist with no ability to fight or defend yourself against the claim. The PA is in general too vague and overall unnecessary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yep, so has the FBI. Remove it. CIA. Remove it. They turned the Military against private citizens once. Remove it. Wait, the President of the United States of America perpetrated abuse against its own citizens once under Nixon....we need to remove the position of President of the United States of America.
    I certainly hope you're not such a blatant hypocrite that you would then later in this post bitch about me misrepresenting you. Especially if you claim I'm MASSIVELY misrepresenting you. Cause hell, that's all this is. And you were doing it earlier too. But you're not that blatant a hypocrite, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Actually, I wouldn't. Actually, in my posts IN THIS VERY THREAD I even stated there were abuses and they needed to be changed. But go ahead, continue to just blatantly misrepresent me, its kind of funny.
    Oh snap!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Ahh, here comes the libertarian version of Godwin's law. Yes Ikari, yes, channel the founders. Let them flow through you. I'm sure you're got the spirit of jefferson and washington speaking right in your ears, let it out.
    I know, I totally have to Madam Cleo it because the founders certainly didn't write anything, did they? I mean that's preposterous. Thinking there's something like the Federalist Papers or Anti-Federalist Papers, or collections of communications and essays, newspapers, etc. Certainly the founders never used anything like this to put into words their philosophies. Never in a million years. So we totally have to guess at what they wanted...damned their shortsightedness. If only they had written down their thoughts, we could glimpse at what they believed were dangers and virtues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Well, glad I don't have absolute trust in the government. Wow glad I'm not abdicating duties and responsabilities or abandoning the battle for freedom. Glad I've not turned my back on things. Glad I'm not just being a hyperly paranoid person parroting the standard hyper libertarian talking points while giving out no specifics and acting hysterical about the big bad government while at the same time being absolutely inconsistant as I MASSIVELY misrepresent the viewpoint of the person disagreeing with me.
    That last part is a lie. You've done nothing but misrepresent me, from the moment you insulted me. I just fed back some of what you had dished out. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Phew, for a moment there I thought your little rant was actually going to apply to me.
    Mmmm, condescension. I like how you expect to be treated fairly and with respect, but don't give it out to others.
    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."

  5. #45
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    You were calling me stupid for my belief in government restriction. I don't think believing the government should be restricted and watched is being stupid, nor demanding that improper legislation be removed as an act of ignorance as you wanted to claim. Just giving back a little of what you were dishing out.
    No, I was not calling you stupid. You really need to get it through your head that one can believe that ones OPINION is stupid without believing the PERSON is stupid. I think your OPINION that the ENTIRE Patriot Act needs to be removed is stupid and based on either your ignorance of the true facts about it or based on an inconsistant view on how the government should function.

    It's one of the most widely used excuses for the PA.
    Well and good. Show me where I used it.

    Yet you do disagree with me. The PA has parts which are bad, they aren't restricted enough and allow too much leeway. Considering what it is that the PA concerns itself with, particularly when it comes to defense against charges laid by the government; something that could prove so catastrophically dangerous should be done away with. The vast majority of the proper functionality of the PA could be handled through different means. The overall existence of the PA is a danger, and thus must be done away with. Further laws need to note this and if we are going to grant additional power to the federal government, it must be severely and clearly restricted.
    Yes, I do disagree with you. I disagree with you that the ENTIRE ACT needs to be stripped. What I don't disagree with you about is that there are PORTIONS that are bad.

    No, the "vast majority" of what the Patriot Act does can not be done effectively and without massive loopholes and nebulus places for abuse, that unlike the Patriot Act ones wouldn't be so cut and dry, without it.

    The overall existance of the PA is in no way, shape, or form a "danger".

    Didn't you bitch in this very post about me misrepresenting you? And then you do it to me again? Interesting.
    I bitched that you completely and utterly misrepresented me.

    "But it's stupid to watch out for that, huh? Idiotic and ignorant to lay blame towards the government when it abuses power...right? Don't question the government, it's here for us; Zyphlin would disagree with that. "

    No, Zyphlin would not disagree with that and nothing Zyphlin typed in this thread stated a disagreement with that, indeed thigns Zyphlin stated in this thread actually agreed with it.

    You specifically and blatantly lied about what my stance was.

    What I did was illustrate the absurditity of your argument by providing an analogy that, for you to be consistant, would need to be true. In no way shape or form did I believe or imply it was what you actually do think about the FDA.

    There is legitimate reason for the FDA to exist, and properly restricted it can benefit many. I see it as too floppy right now and needs better regulation and control. But it's also not going to take away habeas corpus from you either; the threat levels of the government institutions and benefit derived from it are different.
    There are legitimate reasons for the Patriot Act to exist, and properly restircted it can benefit many. It has issues right now that are potentially damaging and needs further refining and oversight. However, abuses were present in the intelligence and law enforcement fields prior to it coming into being and much like a gun doesn't kill people, repealing the entire Patriot Act isn't going to magically make people not abuse things.

    The government has abused much before the PA. I just don't think we should be making it easier for them.
    Yes. The government has abused NUMEROUS laws before, but I don't see you screaming for them being repealed.

    Again, I urge you, justify how you next to never ever touch FISA or TITLE III which also deal with giving the government the ability to use survelliance on people and has been abused before yet are routinely going after the Patriot Act?

    I agree, we shouldn't make it easier for the government to abuse the Patriot Act. We should continue putting in safe guards, editing out dangerous portions of it, having further oversight, and having it challlenged in court. ABSOLUTELY.

    We just shouldn't scrap the entire thing.

    I don't like their classification of terrorist being mostly up to them and the repercussions of government labeling one as terrorist with no ability to fight or defend yourself against the claim. The PA is in general too vague and overall unnecessary.
    I agree COMPLETELy about your view on the classification of terrorist. Hell, I said pretty much EXACTLY THAT in this thread. However, that is one portion of a large bill that would be more logical and efficient to edit out with one small new law rather than scrap the entire thing and try to create numerous large new laws to replace the good that was just destroyed.

    Its funny you keep talking about the "vagueness" of the Patriot Act becuase you've still yet to produce even a single specific section you have an issue with.

    I certainly hope you're not such a blatant hypocrite that you would then later in this post bitch about me misrepresenting you. Especially if you claim I'm MASSIVELY misrepresenting you. Cause hell, that's all this is. And you were doing it earlier too. But you're not that blatant a hypocrite, right?
    As already explained, there is a difference with flat out stating what I "disagree with" something and me stating that if you are making an argument that if X happens than Y must happen then you need to be consistant and apply that all across the board.

    That last part is a lie. You've done nothing but misrepresent me, from the moment you insulted me. I just fed back some of what you had dished out. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
    I've not insulted you, I've insulted your position.

    And I've not misrepresented you at all. You've stated that if the government is abusing a piece of legislation than that is reason to remove the entire legislation? Is that not what you said? Your own words:

    "The PA is NOT a good bill OBVIOUSLY because it can and has been abused."

    Is that not saying that because it was abused the whole thing must go and is bad?

    "That makes it not a good bill on the whole. Once it is abused, it must be taken away."

    is that not saying that because it was abused than the whole thing is bad?

    Is that NOT what you said.

    See, that's your issue. You flat out said that, so I used hyperbole to say that if you agree with that how can you not apply it to the rest of the government.

    You however have to completely and utterly ignore entire segments of my posts to come up with your comments. I actually said earlier in this thread:

    "And, as I already acknowledged in my initial point, there likely IS an issue with the Patriot Act here and if it ends up being the case I hope these guys win and I hope that section of it is stricken down, as it should be."

    Now see, no matter what hyperbolic length you take that to it is in no way able to made out to be anywhere near this:

    "Don't question the government, it's here for us; Zyphlin would disagree with that. "

    Because thats pretty clearly me stating that they NEED to question the government and that I hoped they WIN in doing so if he was wronged and things would change.

    You can keep trying to play it off like what I'm doing with your statements and what you did with my stances is the same, but they're simply not. You're completely ignoring things I stated and making up my position from square one. I've taken things you've said and putting forth analogy's to show how inconsistant that view is.

    Mmmm, condescension. I like how you expect to be treated fairly and with respect, but don't give it out to others.
    Sarcasm actually. Yes, long winded rants that generally don't apply to me can tickle my sarcastic bone rather well.

  6. #46
    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
    Yeah, posting a link to the actual ACT and definition of what it entails is BS.

    Let me summarize this for you:

    You post a BS YouTube video as "breaking news", make uninformed paranoid statements about an act you OBVIOUSLY havenít bothered to read and know little to nothing about, then claim OTHERS are full of BS when they post a link to the actual act?

    I canít find a better definition for closed minded petty arrogance combined with a lot of denial and paranoia.
    It was a news broadcast. Jesus. That's breaking news, is it not. I also linked the printed version too if you care to even read anything.
    You merely posted the PA, but you offered nothing in connection to the story. So what you said was BS. Other people contributed and added to the debate, you did nothing.
    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. #47
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens

    Moderator's Warning:
    USA using Patriot Act against its own citizensEnough about the accusations of it not being breaking news. As already stated, the youtube video was to a legitiamte news affiliate doing an actual reporting story, not an opinion piece, and was backed up later with the physical article.

  8. #48
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    No, I was not calling you stupid. You really need to get it through your head that one can believe that ones OPINION is stupid without believing the PERSON is stupid. I think your OPINION that the ENTIRE Patriot Act needs to be removed is stupid and based on either your ignorance of the true facts about it or based on an inconsistant view on how the government should function.
    Please, you misrepresented my position from the get go. You also called me Alex Jones. I don't know what to say, you were being extremely condescending to me from the beginning because I take great exception to things like the PA and the Real ID Act and the Military Commissions Act. There's a long list of things I'd personally get rid of because I don't think the federal government has business in them. But whatever, you say you didn't mean it than fine. I apologize and consider it dropped.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Well and good. Show me where I used it.
    To be fair, I never said you used it. I said it was ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yes, I do disagree with you. I disagree with you that the ENTIRE ACT needs to be stripped. What I don't disagree with you about is that there are PORTIONS that are bad.
    Because of what is ruled over in the PA, if it can be abused it must be done away with. There are fundamental liberties at stake and abuse of the fundamental leads to very bad things. The whole of it should be scrapped because the potential for damage is huge. And who can say if it hasn't been abused. This case wasn't substantiated in the end, but that doesn't mean there hasn't been abuse or there won't be. The level at which the breakdown can occur is such that we can't rightfully let it go. If something of the order of the PA is needed, draft a new bill with explicit restrictions and regulations and go from there. I don't think there's a necessity for it at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    No, the "vast majority" of what the Patriot Act does can not be done effectively and without massive loopholes and nebulus places for abuse, that unlike the Patriot Act ones wouldn't be so cut and dry, without it.

    The overall existance of the PA is in no way, shape, or form a "danger".
    It is an overall danger because it can remove from you all ability to defend yourself against charges laid by the government. Is that not danger? I certainly would classify it as such. Attacks against the fundamental should be removed as soon as possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I bitched that you completely and utterly misrepresented me.

    "But it's stupid to watch out for that, huh? Idiotic and ignorant to lay blame towards the government when it abuses power...right? Don't question the government, it's here for us; Zyphlin would disagree with that. "
    I merely took your wording and reorganized some things. You've been trying to portray me as basically an anarchist and misrepresenting the type of control I wish installed in the government from the get go. So you can bitch about being misrepresented, but those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    No, Zyphlin would not disagree with that and nothing Zyphlin typed in this thread stated a disagreement with that, indeed thigns Zyphlin stated in this thread actually agreed with it.
    But there isn't, you're mostly waiting around for a violation before you do anything. I'm saying the violation would be so grave as to not be permitable in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You specifically and blatantly lied about what my stance was.
    Well you know the old saying "Let he who is without sin..."

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    What I did was illustrate the absurditity of your argument by providing an analogy that, for you to be consistant, would need to be true. In no way shape or form did I believe or imply it was what you actually do think about the FDA.
    No you didn't. The type of threat posed by the FDA and that by the PA are different leagues. And then you went off the deep end saying that I pretty much think the CIA, FBI, etc should all be abolished. But I never said any of that. They should be restricted, but government agencies and legislation which lends additional power to the government are different things. You purposefully used hyperbole and distortion to try to cast my arguments in a negative light as to make your arguments easier to make. Again, I merely returned to you the favor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    There are legitimate reasons for the Patriot Act to exist, and properly restircted it can benefit many. It has issues right now that are potentially damaging and needs further refining and oversight. However, abuses were present in the intelligence and law enforcement fields prior to it coming into being and much like a gun doesn't kill people, repealing the entire Patriot Act isn't going to magically make people not abuse things.
    I see no reason for the PA to exist. I see no benefit from it. Abuses have been present before the PA and will be present after, and they must be punished. I don't see how it behooves us to say these things happened, and go about making it easier for it to happen again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Yes. The government has abused NUMEROUS laws before, but I don't see you screaming for them being repealed.
    I think the vast majority of laws should be repealed, but this was about the PA; not how many laws I think should be taken off the books.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Again, I urge you, justify how you next to never ever touch FISA or TITLE III which also deal with giving the government the ability to use survelliance on people and has been abused before yet are routinely going after the Patriot Act?
    This wasn't about FISA or Title III. I'm not sure how constitutional FISA is, it doesn't sound like it reports to the Supreme Court or is under its review. I don't like the idea of secret courts either, nor warrantless searches, nor knockless entry, nor confiscation of private property which is standard in many drug cases, nor subsidies, nor the Department of Education, nor the ATFE agents, nor the War on Drugs. I mean...how much do you want here? We were talking about the PA, but I'm against a great number of government agencies...especially the NSA. I can't help but think those guys are up to no good all the time. No way you need all those PhD level mathematicians and aren't up to anything fishy. I also can't stand the Office of Information Awareness...crazy crap right there. And to be perfectly frank, I don't like the Department of Homeland Security. I think we had everything we needed without adding another government agency. We can side track all day if you want, but it doesn't really add anything because we're talking about the PA.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I agree, we shouldn't make it easier for the government to abuse the Patriot Act. We should continue putting in safe guards, editing out dangerous portions of it, having further oversight, and having it challlenged in court. ABSOLUTELY.

    We just shouldn't scrap the entire thing.
    We should scrap the entire thing. Instead of waiting for something bad to happen, we should head it off at the pass. If what you claim is true, then make new legislation with proper restriction. But as it exists, there is too much danger from it and it needs to be done away with. If the worst it could do was to limit beer purchases on Sunday, I may be more inclined to say work with it and revise it. But it's not, it's much more ruthless than that; and because of that it needs to be thrown out. Start over if you must, chances are I won't agree with that either, but at least then you'd prevent the abuse and can start with something more restrictive in nature.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I agree COMPLETELy about your view on the classification of terrorist. Hell, I said pretty much EXACTLY THAT in this thread. However, that is one portion of a large bill that would be more logical and efficient to edit out with one small new law rather than scrap the entire thing and try to create numerous large new laws to replace the good that was just destroyed.
    That one portion of a large bill makes it so dangerous that it shouldn't be allowed to exist. The rest of the bill authorizes some pretty bad things, and if you get mislabeled because that's what's best for the government at the time; you're ****ed. That can't be allowed to happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Its funny you keep talking about the "vagueness" of the Patriot Act becuase you've still yet to produce even a single specific section you have an issue with.
    I already told you, it's right above in fact.
    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. #49
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    As already explained, there is a difference with flat out stating what I "disagree with" something and me stating that if you are making an argument that if X happens than Y must happen then you need to be consistant and apply that all across the board.
    Nein, because what you were doing wasn't that. You were trying to apply the arguments made against organizations and misrepresent what I think is proper government action and what is reserved for the People and the States. Taking my stance on abusive legislation and applying it to branches of the government as well. I think maybe you went so far as to insinuate I was an anarchist, which is right out. So again, those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I've not insulted you, I've insulted your position.
    You've done both in reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    And I've not misrepresented you at all. You've stated that if the government is abusing a piece of legislation than that is reason to remove the entire legislation? Is that not what you said? Your own words:

    "The PA is NOT a good bill OBVIOUSLY because it can and has been abused."
    that's an argument against the PA. What the PA authorizes is extreme and because it can and has (though that may have to be augmented, because the "has" was based off the article) been abused it must be done away with. It can be generalized to other acts of legislation as well. There are lots of abusive laws out there, most of those should be done away with, and depending on what they deal with affects the urgency by which they should be done away with. You may be able to get away with augmenting legislation to avoid the abuse, but abusive laws in general should probably be thrown on the chopping block.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Is that not saying that because it was abused the whole thing must go and is bad?

    "That makes it not a good bill on the whole. Once it is abused, it must be taken away."

    is that not saying that because it was abused than the whole thing is bad?

    Is that NOT what you said.
    It is what I said. I didn't say to get rid of the FBI or the government itself as you have tried to state. Abusive law most likely needs to be done away with. The PA specifically definitely needs to be done away with. I wouldn't scrap government agencies as I would scrap abusive law. I would take away the abusive law so the government agency can not act improperly. That's where your whole distortion comes in. You are applying my arguments on wrongful law and legislation to government agency and the government itself. I'm not an anarchist, there is proper role for government and we must have it for those roles. You can construct rightful and just legislation and law to fulfill those roles. You can also construct treasonous and abusive legislation which go beyond those roles. That doesn't say get rid of the government, that says get rid of the law. But you are trying to use my argument against the actual federal agencies themselves. Make no bones about it, there are definitely government agencies I wouldn't mind seeing go the way of the dinosaur, but my argument against abusive legislation doesn't necessarily speak to that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    See, that's your issue. You flat out said that, so I used hyperbole to say that if you agree with that how can you not apply it to the rest of the government.
    I apply it to the rest of law. The government will abuse power, thus you have to take that power away once abused. you don't take the government away, you take away the abusive legislation. You forbid the government from abusing that power again. You are trying to say that I should want to get rid of the government in general, and that's where the lies and distortion come in. I do not want to get rid of the government in general, I would like to get rid of abusive and treasonous laws in general.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You however have to completely and utterly ignore entire segments of my posts to come up with your comments. I actually said earlier in this thread:
    Says the pot to the kettle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    "And, as I already acknowledged in my initial point, there likely IS an issue with the Patriot Act here and if it ends up being the case I hope these guys win and I hope that section of it is stricken down, as it should be."
    But you'd wait for the abuse to occur, and considering the scope of this abuse with the PA; I don't think it's permissible. So you wouldn't dissent until something bad happened. I'll dissent before we're ****ed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Now see, no matter what hyperbolic length you take that to it is in no way able to made out to be anywhere near this:

    "Don't question the government, it's here for us; Zyphlin would disagree with that. "
    Nor is anything I said indicative of me wishing to scrap the whole of the government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Because thats pretty clearly me stating that they NEED to question the government and that I hoped they WIN in doing so if he was wronged and things would change.
    As well it might. But my dissent against the PA and other unrightful legislation is not indicative of some overall anarchist belief either. If you want to insinuate that, then understand you'll get the same treatment back.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You can keep trying to play it off like what I'm doing with your statements and what you did with my stances is the same, but they're simply not. You're completely ignoring things I stated and making up my position from square one. I've taken things you've said and putting forth analogy's to show how inconsistant that view is.
    It is the same. My dissent against abuse and improper legislation at no point says I want to end the government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Sarcasm actually. Yes, long winded rants that generally don't apply to me can tickle my sarcastic bone rather well.
    It was condescending, like the majority of the attitude you copped against me this thread.
    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."

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

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