tecoyah

Participants:

independent_thinker2002 vs. jallman

Debate Monitor:

jfuh

Topic:Civil Liberty/Current administration

Coin Toss: jallman goes first

Wednesday May 3rd will be a Dead Day in this debate, to meet the schedule needs of a participant.

jallman

I believe the current administration is being demonized constantly with this idea that it is out to take away all of our civil liberties. In a perfect world we would not have any of our telephone conversations overheard by people monitoring to guard us. In a perfect world your bags dont have to be X-rayed and you could arrive for your flight half an hour early. In a perfect world you can say whatever you want and let anyone you want come across your border and be your neighbor.

But we dont live in a perfect world. In the real world, planes fly into buildings and nutcase preachers lead their familied to picket the graveside memorials of brave men and women who died to defend their right to preach at all. At the same timewe have a basic right to bear arms, there are random citizens armed better than the entire Iraqi military. In the real world we are trying to fund a war while illegals are draining the government of billions a year in social programs that they arent even helping pay for. The situation that the real world is in should have dawned on everyone when three hi-jacked planes destroyed monuments of American society and a fourth was on its way when the passengers crashed it in a field in Pennsylvannia.

This current administration is faced with problems its never seen. We face an enemy that is intent on destruction at no cost to themselves because they dont care if they live or die. Our national security is of uptmost importance right now and if a few phone calls get tapped looking for that very enemy...to foil his plots of killing me or those I hold dear, then so be it. If its without a warrant that one of them gets caught, then so be it. This administration isnt looking to monitor its citizens, its looking to catch criminals. Our freedoms are not being taken away, but rather, they are being protected and well within the boundaries of the law. Though I may not like the current president and certain aspects of his leadership, he is doing an effective job of protecting the American people with their freedoms intact.

__________________
http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/d...amaSigcopy.jpg

independent_thinker2002

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." These words are as true today as they were when Benjamin Franklin in 1759.

The motive behind why the Bush administration is trampling upon our civil liberties is a moot point. It doesn't matter whether or not they intend to do so, they are infringing upon our civil liberties!

We have never lived in a perfect world. We won't ever live in a perfect world. Our government has infinged upon our civil liberties before with no logic to support it. McCarthy's hunt for Communists turned out to be an emotional, knee-jerk reaction. The Patriot Act is the same thing. It was passed 45 days after 9/11 and with little debate. Now reasonable people see it for what it is. It flies in the face of personal liberty and gives the Executive Branch endless, unchecked liberty.

The government can ignore the First and Fourth Amendments due to the Patriot Act. They can perform secret searches of private property without the owner's consent or knowledge. They can obtain medical records, library, banking, and internet use without the person's knowledge or consent. The third party holding this information cannot let the person know that the govt. has requested this information. The third party's First Amendment rights are being stripped with this maneuver. The government does not have to show probable cause or give due process which is a direct violation of the Forth Amendment.

The Bush administration doesn't even trust the Congressional or Judicial Branch to oversee their activities. They don't even want to work within the FISA court guidelines which gives them 72 hours after the surveilence to obtain a warrant.

They are using the excuse that they are looking for a needle in a haystack. Yet they are preying on people's fears that the needle could destroy that haystack. This is just not true. Yes, people who want to commit violence in our country have more effecient ways to do so now. They still can't destroy our country. Many things are more dangerous than terrorism. We have more murders with guns in America each year. Drunk drivers kill more people each year. The media and the government have just given us the perception that terrorism is more dangerous. They love to build up boogymen to get the masses emotions riled up.

The Bush administration has other issues with civil liberties. They are against same-sex marriage. Not one person can use empirical data to support such a stance. There is nothing same-sex marriage can do to harm heterosexual marriage. Marriage does not need defending. This is a case of the government revoking your liberty to marry who you love, no matter what gender they are. There is no threat to national security if people marry other people of the same gender.

__________________
==]:{o

jallman

Which is all well and good except that American citizens arent giving up any essential liberties. There have been no verified infringements upon the civil liberties of any American citizen as a result of the necessary measures taken by the current administration in response to 9-11, per the US Dept of Justice.

Except that again, there have been no verified infringements upon the civil liberties of any American citizen from this administration. If you can cite a verified transgression on the part of the president or any of his administration, please do so.

But we arent discussing the McCarthy era now are we? The enemy of the McCarthy era was an abstract enemy of ideology whom we fought through subversion and espionage, political maneuvering, and instigations of unrest in other countries. This enemy is very real, very sneaky, and very intent on causing direct damage to our citizens.

Wrong. The PATRIOT Act has been the victim of one of the most insidious and divisive misinformation campaigns in the history of our nation. Left wingers, hungry for power, would have you believe that the PATRIOT Act is a fully documented attempt by the current administration to strip us of all civil rights. However, if one looks at the Act itself, and separates the truth from the leftist agenda of regaining power, then he will see that there is nothing in the PATRIOT Act that tampers with the American standard of liberty. The PATRIOT Act of 2001 merely equipped our government with the ability to effectively and efficiently investigate threats to national security by breaking down impeding barriers and bringing our investigative techniques into the modern era. It supplies national security investigators with the same tools that investigators of non-security issues already have available. It is very telling that the Act was first passed a mere 45 days after introduction. It is also very telling that the Act was extended with a landslide vote. As Attorney General Alberto Gonzales stated on March 2, 2006:

Further, upon its extension, there were more than 30 new additions to the Act specifically designated to protect our civil liberties. The left, however, would like to paint the PATRIOT Act as a tool of the devil Bush to take away every basic freedom we have. That is simply not true.

Utterly false misinformation. I can only assume that you are speaking in reference to section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. This section is constantly under attack because it is the section that provides national security investigators with the same tools as regular law enforcement. Section 215 allows federal terror investigators to obtain records held by third parties and broadens the categories those third party records may be obtained from. It allows federal terror investigators to obtain documentation such as driver's licenses and flight school enrollments, for example. Section 215 eliminates the requirement that such records concern an "agent of a foreign power" but this is merely a reflection of our Congress recognizing that we cannot anticipate what sort of organizations of unwitting accomplices terrorist organizations may enlist.

Leftist critics would have you believe that the ability to obtain these records is based solely on the discretion of the investigator, but this too is not correct. Before an anti-terror agent can obtain these records, he must certify to a court that the records are relevant to protection against international terrorism AND(this is a very big AND) that the records are not being obtained based only upon a citizen's First Amendment activities.

Further exposure of the truth continues to undermine the idea that this administration is stripping citizens of our civil liberties. Opponents of the anti terror strategies outlined in the PATRIOT Act typically fail to divulge that grand juries have long had the power to obtain the exact same records without any showing before a judge. The PATRIOT Act, by requiring judicial review and protecting pure speech, is more solicitous of privacy than the criminal subpoena power. (Precedent: Eric Rudolph trial and subpoenaed bookseller records concerning Rudolph's purchases of material on bomb detonation.)

Further, the Fourth amendment does not guarantee privacy rights to third party records. Once you have revealed your consumer preferences to a vendor by using your credit card or signature to verify purchase, that material becomes available to investigators without need for probable cause warrants. The same applies to bookstore and public library records. (Precedent: subpoenaed library records in the Versace murder investigation and the Zodiac gunman investigation.

Terror investigators should have the same access to records as criminal investigators have enjoyed all along. It is not an attempt by this administration to trample on our civil rights by broadening the powers of those who protect us from terror activities. We now know that an al Qaeda associate in New York used a library computer to communicate with cell members; 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar reviewed airline reservations for their 9/11 flight at a New Jersey state college library computer; three more 9/11 hijackers are believed to have used Florida's Delray Beach Public Library in July 2001. It is hardly an infringement upon our civil rights that an investigator have access to that information.

Whether they trust congress and the judiciary or not, their responsibility to the other branches of government is not abolished with the PATRIOT Act nor any other action of this administration. The Acts of this administration are to safeguard our freedoms while updating the intelligence gathering capabilities of our counter terrorist groups.

jallman

CONTINUED

So are you denying that the reality of catastrophic terrorism? Did you not see two towers that can hold 50,000 citizens topple because of two planes full of our citizens being used as guided missiles? Do you deny that this enemy is still a threat to our national security? Would you promote a political agenda of leftist empowerment over our national security interests? And is it so necessary to blame Bush for all the ills in the world that you need to undermine his effectiveness in protecting our citizens?

Yes but what you fail to mention is that the Defense of Marriage acts are not a result of Bush administration introducing the legislation...it is the citizens themselves rallying for said legislation. Bush, as an elected official, has a constituency to serve and his constituency states that marriage does need defending. And it is a moot point as there is no civil rights violation being committed by not allowing gay marriage as it is not a stated right presently.

I will state in no uncertain terms...there is absolutely no verified evidence that this administration has taken an unconstitutional stance against our civil liberties.

independent_thinker2002

Here you go. This was a white collar crime, not terrorism.

"Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

You can verify this here: link.

Yes, this was an unreasonable serch and seizure that did not show probable cause.

Why don't local law enforcement agencies have the same powers as the Federal law enforcement? Are you alleging that local law enforcment isn't doing everything that they can to fight crime? I hardly think so. The reason is because of the protection of civil liberties.


What part of this is not history not repeating itself? Terror is an abstract ideology called martyrdom. Remember the Kamikaze pilots?

This is not a left vs. right debate. This is strictly a debate about President Bush, his administration, and civil liberties.

Yes, those 30 new additions prove that civil liberties had been violated. Yes, they are doing better. They still don't have it right yet though. Section 206, which is the roving wire taps, can't be used by local authorities. It is a civil rights abuse. Section 215, which can be used for "any tangible thing", still does not require probable cause by the standards that local law enforcement are required to show.



Third parties don't have a right to privacy? They have to show probable cause by the same standards as local authorities. Once again, local authorites have a higher threshold to meet to show probable cause. You claim that the feds just want the same powers but that is "Utterly false misinformation". Local police can't use roving wire taps.

Yes, but can use First Amendment activities, just not solely. The third party First Amendment rights are violated by not being able to disclose being served Section 215 orders. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments are being violeted for failing to require that those who are the subject of Section 215 orders be told that their privacy has been compromised.

Well, if you are talking about Grand Juries that is why we have the saying,"You could indict a ham sandwich." Yes, But in order to convene a Grand Jury you have to have some probable cause and the defendant should receive notification of the investigation, if and whenever it is possible.

Where is the oversite, due process, and probable cause?

(CONTINUED)

independent_thinker2002

CONTINUED

No, I am not. The Patriot Act isn't going to stop people from flying airplanes into buildings. F-15's and airport/airline security will.

Yes, I saw that. It really stirs up emotions in people. That does not mean that it will happen again. Beware of the boogyman.

No, but not as much as the USSR. They really could take out our whole country. Terrorist could take out part of a city at best.

No, this isn't a left vs. right issue. I don't care what political agendas have. I am interested in the truth. I am not into a partisan debate. Please don't distract people with partisan attacks. It makes it look as if there was a "political agenda".

When did I blame Bush for all of the ills in the world? This is a distraction strategy. Please, this is not a Civil Liberties/What leftists think debate. This is strictly about the Bush administration and Civil Liberties debate. Partisanship has nothing to do with the issue.


We still have counties in this country that would vote for segregation. Civil rights are to protect from the mob mentality. Civil rights are a federal issue. We had states that would vote for segregation when it was outlawed. You don't choose who you love. Even if you could, what gives anyone the right to tell you that you don't have the liberty to marry whatever consenting adult you so choose, regardless of gender?

There is a laundry list of legal actions involving the govt. The ACLU has 9 pages of links to show this. Here you go.

Before you try to use a partisan label for the American Civil Liberties Union. Who is the right-wing, independent civil liberties watchdog? There isn't one that has accomplished what the ACLU has. The Department of Justice is beholden to the president and has many people with loyalties to the Bush admin.

We have many other civil liberty issues we can discuss. There is the death penalty. We have a right to life. The justice system is not infallible. This is reason alone to dump the death penalty. Furthermore, the govt. should not have the power to kill it's own people unless it is in self-defense. Bush has said that he thinks,"We should err on the side of life". He could have done something to save the retarded man who was put to death in Texas.

(CONTINUED)

independent_thinker2002

CONTINUED

We also have reproductive rights. President Bush has a stance that he would support an amendement banning abortion.

Once again, the same-sex marriage issue. No he didn't introduce DOMA. He supports it though. It is a violation of homosexual's civil liberties. It is an irrational fear of people that are different than them (the majority). This is common with many civil rights issues. He hasn't done anything to change this. He hasn't changed the "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy in the military is also. This is a violation of freedom of speech. It is bigotry which is still enforced. His inaction on this issue is enabling bigotry. This is hardly what a civil rights advocate would do.

What has the Bush administration done to solve any civil rights issues? He has endorsed the status quo or endorsed taking away civil liberties.

Civil liberty is difined by Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary as the following.

By this very definition Bush has an inexcuseable record on civil rights. He has endorsed arbitrary governmental interference and ignoring the Bill of Rights.