What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
231 Comments
- osrevad, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17By the way, here's the ACTUAL quote from Franklin:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - partialinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15It's obvious to me that everyone here who is pro-Patriot Act has never read the law that has been renwed. If you think it only covers terrorism, you are wrong. If you think it only covers non-residents, you are wrong. If you think it has only been used against terrorist suspects or non-residents, you are wrong.
The fact that GWB has asked to remove FISA from the process of granting search warrants should be a tip off to you that something is up. FISA has never EVER denied a Patriot Act request. If that's so, why would GWB want to remove FISA from the process? It's because he wants so many search warrants that it would literally flood FISA.
The administration is on a phishing campaign -- so much so that the FBI can't keep up with all of the information that is flooding in from the NSA.
Please, before you decide that the Patriot Act is a good thing, PLEASE do some serious research and read about what's going on and why. This is NOT a left or right issue -- this is an American Citizen issue. - NCoolmn67, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16Funny how someone can say that people that oppose the act should go somewhere else, and the fact that what people oppose in the act are the infringements of civil liberties protected by the constitution. Dissent (free speech) and civil liberties, two things this country were founded on, and you dare say that people should leave the country for having these positions. What's wrong with you.
- partialinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9demagogue said: "Its for american safety.... and I seriously doubt it has been abused. The gov is going to do whatever the hell they want anyway....."
It is this kind of rationalization that sends shivers up my spine. You and all people who have the same type of mindset need to realize that we do not, and should not, have to put up with this kind of totalitarian authority.
The whole point of the Patriot Act is that it's completely 100% secret. This is one of the reasons why it's so scary -- there is no opportunity for review by objective third party. Everything that happens in FISA court is completely classified and inaccessible by anyone. If there ARE abuses, there is no way to know about them.
Not to mention that any use of the Patriot Act is already a violation of the Constitution. Should we just get rid of the entire document altogether? Would that make you feel safer? - Misos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9"And heck, If you have a problem with this act, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, we don't want you here."
Yeah, that's what Liberty is all about - bossing people around into compliance with your way of thinking.
Jack-*****. - dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Chancellor Bush:
"It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy … I love the Republic. The power you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated." - wolfzero, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The government is broken.
- dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10"Good. The PATRIOT Act is vital to America's safety and freedom. Without it, America could turn into another Iraq or Afghanistan."
You mean a place where the government has too much control over people lives and grants them no freedom because some of the people don't believe in their extremist ways and unlimited power?
Hmmm. Funny how contradictory that sounded.... (btw, try spell check next time) - TheFoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8It always amazingly how readily people will give up freedoms for the illusion of safety.
- MarkStrube, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"I guess its an anomaly to be a digg user and be a conservative republican."
Please don't confuse being a liberal with disliking the Patriot Act. I thought "conservatives" were the ones who wanted smaller government? Then how can you possibly support Bush or the patriot act? Ridiculous. Get some principles. - Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"That's a darn good question...what liberties have you liberals actually lost? I would love to read about the specific liberties the lefties have lost. I know my life has not changed one iota since the Patriot Act passed.
posted by Greymarch"
The law dramatically expands the ability of states and the Federal Government to conduct surveillance of American citizens. The Government can monitor an individual's web surfing records, use roving wiretaps to monitor phone calls made by individuals "proximate" to the primary person being tapped, access Internet Service Provider records, and monitor the private records of people involved in legitimate protests.
PATRIOT is not limited to terrorism. The Government can add samples to DNA databases for individuals convicted of "any crime of violence." Government spying on suspected computer trespassers (not just terrorist suspects) requires no court order. Wiretaps are now allowed for any suspected violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, offering possibilities for Government spying on any computer user.
Foreign and domestic intelligence agencies can more easily spy on Americans. Powers under the existing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) have been broadened to allow for increased surveillance opportunities. FISA standards are lower than the constitutional standard applied by the courts in regular investigations. PATRIOT partially repeals legislation enacted in the 1970s that prohibited pervasive surveillance of Americans.
PATRIOT eliminates Government accountability. While PATRIOT freely eliminates privacy rights for individual Americans, it creates more secrecy for Government activities, making it extremely difficult to know about actions the Government is taking.
PATRIOT authorizes the use of "sneak and peek" search warrants in connection with any federal crime, including misdemeanors. A "sneak and peek" warrant authorizes law enforcement officers to enter private premises without the occupant's permission or knowledge and without informing the occupant that such a search was conducted. - shockingbird, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I was getting tired of of the "unlawful search and seizure" part in the 1st amendment anyway.
- partialinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5There were no "compromises." The proponents of the act made very superficial changes that have little effect on the overall scope or power of the act. This was simply a dog and pony show -- the changes were made only to save face for both sides. Each of them can now claim a win.
- Jasruler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Greymach, that was the most shameless and obvious troll attempt I've ever seen on the internet, ever.
Ever.
Like seriously.
Ever. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Ah, my favorite argument.
"Our government is doing our job protecting us because there hasn't been another 9/11 type attack since."
Um, okay. That's just as ignorant as it gets people. Do you really believe that? Do you really think that terrorists are out there right now cursing our administration, saying, "Cursed Americans! Our plan to blow up Fort Knox has been foiled again thanks to those meddling kids!!!" Amazing that President Bush gets credit for doing nothing. That's the equivalent of saying "You know, there hasn't been another earthquake in San Francisco since 1989, all thanks to Mayor Willie Brown". - SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5"And heck, If you have a problem with this act, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, we don't want you here."
If yall don't like America why don't you just GIT out!!
That was a funny southpark episode. because we all know disagreeing is inherently unamerican. Just sit in fear that someone will attack you, even though you live in a trailer in some hillbilly-ass town that isn't even on the map. Accept any ***** they try to force on you, as long as they tell you its for your own security. we have had a legal system for hundreds of years. if people are actually committing crimes, we have all the laws we need to arrest and punish them. This "patriot" act exists to get around the safeguards that are in place to prevent innocent people from being abused by the government. Under the patriot act, the bill of rights is only an illusion. You have your freedoms as long as they decide to let you. The second they decide you are a "threat" or think of another reason to revoke them, you HAVE no rights. Is there a remote possibility that some sort of terrorist attack will occur? of course. unless you lock everyone up in cells and never let them out, there will be the possibility of terrorism. Do you want to live in a police state where you have no real rights or freedoms, just because it makes you feel warm and safe? This is the United States of America. the "land of the free" as the song says, though if this trend continues, the song may have to be re-written.
"Good. The PATRIOT Act is vital to America's safety and freedom. Without it, America could turn into another Iraq or Afganistan."
America could turn into a land where the government can legally make people "disappear" and hold them indefinitely without trial and possibly torture them? That sounds awful. Good thing we have an act allowing the government to legally detain people indefinitely without a trial and possibly torture them to protect us from a situation like the one you described. It would be just awful to live in a country where religious fanatics and uneducated masses rule over everything. All sorts of problems could be caused where any crazy person could just go out and buy an automatic weapon. You don't want that to happen here? Look around. It's already happened. Now you want to let it get worse. I just hope someone puts a stop to this before the United States of America, the greatest nation in the world, becomes just another oppressive dictatorship where the people lack basic freedoms. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Republicans and Democrats are essentially the same: they both are fighting to control your lives. Yes, maybe in different ways, but its still there.
Our government today is so screwed up, and its not just because of the republicans, or just the democrats. Its because the government as a whole is power-hungry, and needs to keep encroaching on the lives of private citizens. - thenativeraver, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@munboy
I hope you get harrassed by the police today. - snapcase, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I knew this was going to happen, but I had still hoped it wouldn't. If anyone actually bothered to read the Patriot act they would realize it is a bad idea.
"Good. The PATRIOT Act is vital to America's saftey and freedom. Without it, America could turn into another Iraq or Afganistan." - Munboy
Your ignorance is astounding. - Riluske, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have just as many problems with the Patriot Act as anyone else. It is a stupid law that violates out Bill of Rights. That's the end of the argument there. It goes against the Bill of Rights. It doesn't matter whether it helps or not, it goes against the constitution. It is a sign of corruption in the government, and, if I have my history correct, I believe it is the Constitution that states if the government is corrupt, the people must overthrow it. The government is corrupt, or at least on the way to corruption.
Having said this. No Digg. This has nothing to do with technology. If you want to talk about politics, do it in political forums, not here - thewise1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"When a terrorist detonates a dirty bomb in your town (because the Patriot Act didnt pass), and you spending the last few weeks of your life in a hospital bed, fading away due to the radiation coursing through your veins, I hope you remember your stance against the Patriot Act."
Got drama?
rofl - dpl_, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Why does opposing the Patriot Act make someone a "leftist" or liberal? Preserving our rights and freedoms is something everyone, no matter where they are on the political spectrum, should be concerned about.
- skooma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2it may seem like putting a band aid on a GSW but, we need to pass the read the bills act.
this act would make 51% of our lawmakers sit and listen to all future bills be read to them out-loud IN THEIR ENTIREITY following a month long grace period in which the proposed legislation would be posted on the internet and let the american people view it and be able to weigh in ( a WIKI would be awesome LOL ; ) visit downsizedc.org to petition support for this act.
This would effectively grind lawmaking to a crawl; make the wording of our laws much more brief and to the point of what they actually mean, and these 900+ page bills would disappear.
Noone even read the patriot act before it was voted on. its sad.
Remember laws are generally named after who they target, and i feel the patriot act is no different - partialinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Everyone who is saying things like "my life is unaffected" and "what have we actually lost?" -- you need to read the Patriot Act. And yes, law enforcement can keep "suspects" indefinitely and secretly. This includes American Citizens. Note that I wrote "suspects" and not "terrorist suspects."
If you are SUSPECTED of any crime as vaguely described in the Patriot Act, you can be held indefinitely with no outside contact allowed, no trial, no appeal. You would be lucky if anyone knew you were being held at all (because it's all done under secrecy laws).
If your neighbor saw you being arrested, it would be illegal for them to mention to anyone that you were arrested. Your neighbor could go to jail just for telling someone they saw you being arrested. - Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Good. The PATRIOT Act is vital to America's saftey and freedom. Without it, America could turn into another Iraq or Afganistan."
And WITH the act, we become the next People's Republic of China or Nazi Germany... - leobaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The 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.
- IvyMike, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Immense power has ALWAYS been abused by governments (or those within the government).
Sure, Bush and Cheney dont care about your phone sex calls. But now that there's a system to listen in, with virtually no oversight, you know somebody within the system will abuse it.
Seriously, conservatives seem freak out about the horrors of the Hillary Clinton presidency (because we all know what a bad time 1992-2000 was). Why do you want to give her (or whichever next president you dislike) THAT MUCH MORE power? - AKron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"This bill will allow our law enforcement officials to continue to use the same tools against terrorists that are already used against drug dealers and other criminals, while safeguarding the civil liberties of the American people," he said.
That's scary since drugs are plentyful, and cheap in this country - locojones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Greymarch has spewed some of the dumbest ***** I have ever read on here. So I will take his comments in turn:
1) "give me a specific instance of how the government took away your 4th amendment privileges since the Patriot Act was passed?"
First, a privilege is permissive. The 4th Amendment is a right, not a privilege. It is a right secured to the people in the Constitution, and is something you really should investigate before opening your mouth. Specifically, the 4th Amendment protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, instead requiring a warrant to be sworn on probable cause before instigating a search of your car, your home, or any other aspect of your body or possessions.
Under the Patriot Act, the government now has the authority to circumscribe the Warrant Clause entirely. Previous to the Act, warrants were required on almost all forms of electronic surveillance, and virtually any entrance into a private dwelling (barring hot pursuit of a felon, or effervescent evidence) first required a warrant to be secured. Today, the authorities can place roving wiretaps on a person without a warrant. They can demand your library records without a warrant. They can demand your phone and internet service provider logs without a warrant. They can enter your home, rifle through your belongings, and leave, without a warrant or any notice to you after the fact.
The purpose of the Warrant Clause was to require independent and detached judicial officials to weigh the evidence in order to take power away from biased law enforcement officials who have a personal and professional investment coloring their ability to rationally weigh the evidence. The standard under the Patriot Act has been lowered to merely being suspected as involved in terrorist activities. And with President Bush believing he has constitutional authority to engage in warrantless surveillance, combined with his desire to remove FISA entirely, there will be little, if any, judicial oversight of these activities. Unchecked power should concern anyone. Because uynder the Act it is illegal for you to speak to a lawyer or consult anyone about such requests from authorities. So what's to prevent an abuse of this power if the ability to challenge it has been so limited? That alone should frighten any American, because it was the very reason the founding fathers wrote the 4th Amendment the way it is -- because this is how the British acted in the colonies, busting down doors and seizing property with merely a pretext of a reason.
2) "When a terrorist detonates a dirty bomb in your town (because the Patriot Act didnt pass), and you spending the last few weeks of your life in a hospital bed, fading away due to the radiation coursing through your veins, I hope you remember your stance against the Patriot Act."
Do you honestly think that a piece of legislation is going to stop a small band of determined individuals from carrying out a well-conceived plan? This is the essence of guerilla warfare, and history has shown us time and time again that such tactics are very successful against an overwhelming, oppressive force. If somebody wants to detonate a dirty bomb inside the US, it's going to happen. We have to face the facts that there is nothing we can do to stop it, and quit being afraid and oppressed by our governments fearmongering.
In fact, the chances of dying in a terrorist attack are so miniscule that its ridiculous the amount of attention and resources we are devoting to it. We've spent nearly 400 billion dollars in a war against a phantom enemy, and things are actually getting worse. I mean, just how many terrorists do you think there are in the world?
Hey, here's an article about an asteroid's likelihood of hitting the Earth - http://www.physorg.com/news11340.html. They place the chances of impact at 1 in 1000. That's WAY more probable than ever being involved in a terrorist attack, and it will kill more people. Why aren't you afraid of that? Why aren't we spending billions of dollars combating that? Why aren't we passing legislation against that? Why? Because it doesn't further the government's agenda, that's why.
Hell, the chances of me dying of cancer, binge drinking, the flu, falling down stairs, being mugged, and spontaneous combustion are greater than a terrorist bombing. So to answer your question, I could go to sleep very comfotably at night without the Patriot Act, secure in the fact that the 4th Amendment is doing just fine, and that our government had the info it needed before 9/11, and chose to do nothing with it.
3) "You still havent given a specific instance of a law or right that you have lost since 9/11. The government isnt tapping your phone (unless you are a terrorist.) They are ONLY tapping the phones of international calls between suspected terrorists."
The point of the Patriot Act is that you don't have to notify someone under surveillance. And even if you do, they are bound under the threat of imprisonment from disclosing that to anyone, including a lawyer. So you wouldn't know, even if your phone was being tapped. And even if someone you knew had their phone tapped, they couldn't tell you.
By the way, considering the amount of the 4th Amendment that was chipped away by the Patriot Act, you're just a dumbass for even asking people to say what they've lost as a result. The answer is clear -- protection from unreasonable searches and seizures of their person or property, and the protection afforded from independent judicial oversight in the warrant process. Considering how unreasonable it is to search for terrorists that don't exist, if I were a Republican in this government, I'd want to get rid of that pesky 4th Amendment too. The Patriot Act is much easier than a constitutional amendment. And 9/11 provided the perfect pretext to pursue it. - TheFoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I meant "It always amazes me how readily people will give up freedoms for the illusion of safety."
- budderfly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So the government recently tapped your phone? When did this happen? Whom did you report it to?
But they CAN.
That's the scary part. It doesn't matter if they have, but that they CAN invade our privacy like that. - ZrO-1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I will use a quote from W to express how I feel about the PATRIOT Act and the path the federal gov't is taking:
"The desire for freedom resides in every human heart. And that desire cannot be contained forever by prison walls, or martial laws, or secret police. Over time, and across the Earth, freedom will find a way."
George W. Bush, Speech to UN General Assembly, September 21, 2004 - Pureeviljester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1First of all we don't even know what happened at 9/11. Please don't say you believe what the government tells you. There is a truck load of unanswered questions.
For those of you that don't know what the Patriot Act is. It's basically a way to expand government control and in the process(intentional or not) limits our freedoms. - ZrO-1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The USA has a long history of ***** people in the ass; us Americans just have a chronic case of conveniently forgetting these things.
Case in point:
* The US Govt followed a policy of manifest destiny as a justification for conquering it's way to the west coast.
* The US Govt has never held to the rights the Constitution has promised it's citizens. Just ask any woman who was alive before 1920, or an African-American who was alive before 1964-68.
* During WW2 the Govt held American citizens of Japanese origin/background in concentration camps, without charges or due-process.
* From 1950-54 US senator Joseph McCarthy led the Govt (particularly the senate) in a policy of unjust persecution and prejudice against "subversive" US citizens such as homosexuals and those they felt were sympathetic to communist or socialist philosophies.
* Before 1971 you could be drafted to fight in the military before you could vote on your Govt representatives who were sending you off to war.
* Since the 1980's Govt has been unequally swayed in it's policy-making by large corporations and private interests. This trend has been semi-obscured by the "monopoly-busts" that were put on mostly for show, two notable ones were the break-up of Bell telephone, the hearings regarding Microsoft, and the hearings regarding Enron. None of these has had any benefit for the American people, and were completely impotent.
* In the 1990's Govt began a trend of recognizing ownership on ideas, that has in essence removed the private individuals ability to ever threaten or compete with well-established, rich, big-corporations.
And now many of the items I have mentioned are being repeated or, worse, built-upon. So it's not like this ***** hasn't happened before, it's just more of the same. I'm not saying something shouldn't be done or that people shouldn't be upset over this, but it's not a new thing. Hell, I'd be first in line to join the revolution if there ever was one. I just think most Americans are too ignorant of the past, and too self-centered to be interested in really doing anything about what's happening. - cphuntington97, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1re: "It’s funny how people say that the Patriot Act attacks civil liberties, but no one can site one concrete example of how it has violated anyone’s civil liberties since it was enacted."
-- one of the worst aspects of the Patriot Act is that you may not speak to anyone about warrants that have been served. So, of course no one has heard about the abuses - they're illegal to speak of. - Konrad9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't care.
The Patriot Act *might* be kept alive by the next President. At the absolute most, the one after him, but that would amaze me.
Personally, I think it will be gone within 3 years.
Hopefully, Iraq will "stabilize" soon, and we'll be able to put money into things like keeping the people in our country healthy and educated. - tournedisque, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Another sad day for our ***** modern world.
As a citizen of the world, i realise the america i deeply love and admire is gone. - Johnny1337h4x0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Before reading my question (and it's not a sarcastic comment or a rhetorical question) please understand that I just recently started reading about the patriot act. So to the question:
If the patriot Act was passed before 9/11 how could the act prevent it? Before answering my questions though, remember that the terrorists would also, like the general public, be aware (somewhat) of the act. If someone can high-jack an airplane in your country and crash it into your country, do you really think that this act can prevent them from making other attacks?
Once again I really DO want these questions answered because I want to understand the situation more, and if I said something unintelligent instead of replying with a degenerated comment instead please explain why it is dumb. - bkman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As a member of the armed forces, I'm not going to state my opinion on what I think of Bush. I would like to say though that, generally i do not like the idea of the Patriot act, but given that it was 89-10, I'm going to say that it can't be as bad as the original proposed bill.
Also, saying people should move out of the country if they don't agree with government policy is just ignorant. People have the right to complain about it as much as they want (hence first amendment rights). I'm not defending a country where people aren't allowed to disagree. If people didn't disagree, then their rights would be trampled over. Martin Luther King Jr. didn't just move out of the country because he didn't like segregation. He started a peaceful movement to help change the country for the better. We are a constitutional democracy, where people are allowed to have dissenting opinions and can elect a different leader/party if they aren't doing their job. - CKer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Greymarch: "So the government recently tapped your phone? When did this happen? Whom did you report it to?
Oh I see. The government didnt tap your phone. Did they tap the phone of someone you know? No?"
Actually it's violation of federal law to provide you with that information. - kmcgahey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It’s funny how people say that the Patriot Act attacks civil liberties, but no one can site one concrete example of how it has violated anyone’s civil liberties since it was enacted. This isn't Nazi Germany. If you don’t like the act, everyone reading these comments has the ability to change it. It is called voting. Those 89 senators that passed the Patriot Act are your senators.
- SupaDawg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2ooooh say can you see?
poor American borthers. feel free to join us on the other side of the 49th in Canuckland for a warm glass of freedom any time you like.... just don't bring that useless leader of yours. - Tycho7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You know, there's nothing like a bunch of politically active geeks to brighten your day. I was starting to think I was the only one!
This whole PATRIOT Act thing is too Orwellian for my taste. I mean, come on, even the name is an acronym! Pretty soon we'll be goodthink of BB and IngSoc while selftrans to minipax.
Besides, if Bush becomes Supreme World Leader, it completely screws up my chances! - Kyderdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1>I'm so disappointed this happened. My respect for our administration dwindles daily.
Think How I feel... I never respected that Administration.... - yves, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, i guess everyone here is more educated than our elected officials. Damn, if only i had voted for you guys. wow, what a great nation we would be.
- sk545, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And to think how many people died to protect the very same right: Freedom.
No respect given to the brave and dead.
And why the hell is it called "The Patriot Act"? Doublespeak, anyone? - partialinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Greymarch said: "If this law had expired, it would be more like September 11th, 2001 all over again."
I think it's a shame that you really and honestly believe that. - thewise1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"I guess its an anomaly to be a digg user and be a conservative republican."
lol, I think it's actually just an anomaly to be a conservative republican, since republicans clearly no longer stand for the small government, fiscal responsibility, and states rights that conservatives supposedly stand for. - Greymarch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3That's a darn good question...what liberties have you liberals actually lost? I would love to read about the specific liberties the lefties have lost. I know my life has not changed one iota since the Patriot Act passed.
The vote today was 89-10. That's gotta drive liberals crazy. When a law passes 89-10, you know that A VAST MAJORITY of the American people wanted it to pass. This is how democracy is suppose to work. - mwebb1984, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2FYI -> The constitution does not "give" us rights.......... It affirms that we, as human beings, are inherently endowed with such rights by our creator, and thus the government cannot under any circumstance infringe on them.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 231 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is