• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate moves Patriot Act toward extension

Councilman

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
4,454
Reaction score
1,657
Location
Riverside, County, CA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have mixed feeling about this. On the one hand, as you will find in the article, it risks infringing free speech and guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures.

On the other it had been used to catch a few bad guys.

Still there is the case of a Strip Club in San Diego where political corruption was the issue and they used the Patriot act to listen into conversations via On Star to gain convictions.

BTW they never had a warrant, and it held up on a slew convictions.

Senate moves Patriot Act toward extension - FoxNews.com
Squeezed against a deadline, the Senate late Wednesday moved past a standoff over a four-year extension of the anti-terror Patriot Act before part of it expire.

An agreement to hold a test vote early Thursday was the first progress all week toward resolving an impasse between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and tea party favorite Rand Paul, R-Ky., before three provisions of the act expire at midnight Thursday. Just before he closed the Senate on Wednesday night, Reid said there likely would be votes on amendments to the extension.

That could go a long way toward meeting Paul's demand that Reid make good on a promise earlier this year to hold a full debate on proposed changes to the post-9/11 law, which empowers the government to find terrorists on American soil. Paul and other civil libertarians of both parties say the Patriot Act should be reconsidered or repealed outright because it risks infringing free speech and guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures
 
Glad its being extended. Patriot will continue in the method it has over the past decade. The questionable and downright over the line portions of it will be stripped out through legislation and the court system, while the vast majority of the bill that is good, sound, and needed law that would never pass currently due to the partisan stigma now attached to it styas on the books. Its ridiculous to suggest our intelligence and survelliance laws should be based off things written in a time where the notion of a PAGER was science fiction, let alone a world where our phones can be as small as a driver's liscense and are so much more powerful then what was available then in giant mainframes that its like comparing a Model T to a 2011 Ferrari.
 
Last edited:
I have mixed feeling about this. On the one hand, as you will find in the article, it risks infringing free speech and guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures.

On the other it had been used to catch a few bad guys.

Still there is the case of a Strip Club in San Diego where political corruption was the issue and they used the Patriot act to listen into conversations via On Star to gain convictions.

BTW they never had a warrant, and it held up on a slew convictions.


Unless they get a warrant, the government has absolutely no business placing taps on phone lines, listening in on any American's conversations and or digging in on any American's records.
 
I have mixed feeling about this. On the one hand, as you will find in the article, it risks infringing free speech and guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures.

On the other it had been used to catch a few bad guys.

Still there is the case of a Strip Club in San Diego where political corruption was the issue and they used the Patriot act to listen into conversations via On Star to gain convictions.

BTW they never had a warrant, and it held up on a slew convictions.

Here I thought that the Patriot Act was to be used to catch terrorists™.
 
Here I thought that the Patriot Act was to be used to catch terrorists™.

Terrorists is defined as anything or anyone who happens to say anything bad about the government. The whole of the PA should be let go, but government does not readily let go of power it usurped.
 
Glad its being extended. Patriot will continue in the method it has over the past decade. The questionable and downright over the line portions of it will be stripped out through legislation and the court system, while the vast majority of the bill that is good, sound, and needed law that would never pass currently due to the partisan stigma now attached to it styas on the books. Its ridiculous to suggest our intelligence and survelliance laws should be based off things written in a time where the notion of a PAGER was science fiction, let alone a world where our phones can be as small as a driver's liscense and are so much mroe powerful then what was available then in giant mainframes that its like comparing a Model T to a 2011 Ferrari.

Can I quote this part?
 
Sure. You can even do what I'm guessing you're wanting to do, and incorrectly use it to misrepresent my position as somehow incapabatable with the constitution...probably specifically the 2nd amendment...despite the fact that my reasons for the above statement are such that it wouldn't apply in such a situation. But regardless if that's your intent or not, be my guest.
 
Here I thought that the Patriot Act was to be used to catch terrorists™.

It was pushed as a piece of legislation that would help us better catch terrorists and define them. Which it does do.

However, it was not to my knowledge stated by its drafters to be something that was singularly and uniquely aimed only at terrorists. The fact it updated decades old intelligence law and amended them is evidence of that, unless by amending them we were at that point saying that we could no longer do survelliance on anything BUT terrorists.
 
Unless they get a warrant, the government has absolutely no business placing taps on phone lines, listening in on any American's conversations and or digging in on any American's records.

I agree completely. :clap:
 
Here I thought that the Patriot Act was to be used to catch terrorists™.

Every stripper carries around a couple of bombs you know? :mrgreen:
 
On the one hand, as you will find in the article, it risks infringing free speech and guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures.

On the other it had been used to catch a few bad guys.

.

It should be corrected to "On the other it had been used to catch an innocent person." That's why the Patriot Act was delayed again and again. Sometimes three months, for most times one year. Because in their plan, the victim should have been demolished in their three months plot. I am the person the Patriot Act targets.

662. Intensified persecution timed with Patriot Act (3/24/2011)

“Fearing the worst: Plant evacuated; 140,000 ordered to stay indoors”

Japanese officials advised residents up to 19 miles away from the broken nuclear plant to stay indoors to minimize exposure. This news tell you well why the Feds created big snow storm in London, in San Francisco and New York when I alleged they tried to activate a nuclear attack, (or dirty bomb attack) on these cities. They knew what would happen. To minimize the cost, they let snow storm to keep residents home and keep the tourists away from the killing field.

In “654. A 90 days' project (11/30/2010)” kathaksung wrote,

“Anyhow, a new 90 days project is set up immediately. Here is a strange news.


"Israel's Netanyahu unveils U.S. plan for new talks

By Allyn Fisher-Ilan Allyn Fisher-ilan ¨C Sat Nov 13,

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101113/ts_nm/us_palestinians_israel_talks"

The US has given Israel a written guarantee that it won't pressure the Jewish state for additional settlement freezes if it accepts a limited 90 day construction moratorium to revive Mideast peace talks.”

The 90 days period should be from mid-November to mid- February. Feds determined to extinct kathaksung within 90 days. A “nuclear terror attack” and “war on Iran” are the cases just used to distract the attention on the framed case. In Feds’ mind, a witness of their crime is more important than any interest created by the war. Then why did they choose the February as their dead line?

Feb. 28 was the exterminate date of the Patriot Act. With virtually zero debate - or media attention, law makers extend that Act for another three months.
Obama signs temporary extension of Patriot Act
By The Associated Press
2/25/2011


President Barack Obama has signed a three-month extension of key surveillance provisions of the Patriot Act.

Lawmakers will soon start debating a multiple-year extension of the provisions, which have drawn fire from defenders of privacy rights.
Obama signs temporary extension of Patriot Act

I always view the Patriot Act was created particularly against me. (see “231. Lone wolf (5/29)”, “ 334. Patriot Act meeting on 7/21 (8/17/05)” and “545. Warrantless wiretapping law and my case (3/19/08)”)

The Feb 26 plot, (marked with two unusual snow storms in New York and San Francisco) was a last ditch effort for Feds for the extinguished 2010 Patriot Act. A new plot is quickly set up for the extended Patriot Act (three months). I expect to see big operation in coming April and May. It will be big one. They made the 3/11 Japan earthquake the biggest ever in Japan’s history. If in coming month you saw big earthquake or other natural disaster, terror attack in US and Europe, (especially in Britain and France, because I think the rulers there will allow the “terror attack” to take place on their people in exchange for the oil interest of Libya), war on Iran and then the “Patriot Act” extinguished in May without further extension, then you know the Feds have eliminated kathaksung.
 
Would you be arrested under a law you never heard of?

There’s a Secret Patriot Act, Senator Says

By Spencer Ackerman

May 25, 2011 "Wired" -- You may think you understand how the Patriot Act allows the government to spy on its citizens. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) says it’s worse than you’ve heard.

 There’s a Secret Patriot Act, Senator Says  :      Information Clearing House: ICH


We Can Be Arrested And Tried For Breaking Laws We Don't Know Exist
By Tom Burnett
5-26-11

"You are under arrest."

"For what?"

"It's a secret. You have already been tried and convicted."

"By who?!?!?"

"It's a secret. You are going to be executed at midnight."

"EXECUTED?!?!?!?"

"Yeah. I'll bet you wish you didn't do whatever it is you did."

"Wait! Don't YOU know?"

"No one knows. It's a secret law."

SEN. WYDEN DECRIES "SECRET LAW" ON PATRIOT ACT

An amendment offered on May 24 by Sen. Ron Wyden would have challenged the Administration's reliance on what he called "secret law" and required the Attorney General to explain the legal basis for its intelligence collection activities under the USA PATRIOT Act. But that and other proposed amendments to the PATRIOT Act have been blocked in the Senate.

"The public will be surprised... when they learn about some of the interpretations of the PATRIOT Act," Sen. Wyden said, based on his access to classified correspondence between the Justice Department and the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Sen. Wyden Offers Amendment to Combat Secret Law
We Can Be Arrested And Tried For Breaking Laws We Don't Know Exist
 
The slight advantage that these measures may provide in preventing terrorist actions is far overshadowed by the drastic reduction in our civil rights. The Patriot Act should never have existed in the first place, it does not make us safer*, and it needs to go.

*And even if it does, it comes at far too high a cost.
 
Sure. You can even do what I'm guessing you're wanting to do, and incorrectly use it to misrepresent my position as somehow incapabatable with the constitution...probably specifically the 2nd amendment...despite the fact that my reasons for the above statement are such that it wouldn't apply in such a situation. But regardless if that's your intent or not, be my guest.

So what you're saying is that the constitution can be interpreted through modern eyes in some cases but not others? How consistently inconsistent of the right wing.
 
Back
Top Bottom