Defending the Truth
Articles | Interviews | Politicians | Groups | Arcade | Experience | Donate
  Defending the Truth > Debate Politics > Branches of Government

Branches of Government Debate topics of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of Government.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-05-2005, 02:54 PM   #1 (permalink)
Citizen
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 11
Points: 2,819, Level: 32
Points: 2,819, Level: 32 Points: 2,819, Level: 32 Points: 2,819, Level: 32
Level up: 46%, 81 Points needed
Level up: 46% Level up: 46% Level up: 46%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Send a message via AIM to Josiah
Josiah is offline
Reply With Quote
An Interesting Quote
"Those who sacrifice essential liberties for temporary security deserve niether liberty, nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

I came across this quote recently and as I read it I could not help but think of the Patriot Act.

Comments, anyone?
Sponsored Links
Old 05-05-2005, 07:13 PM   #2 (permalink)
Super Moderator
Moderator
 
hevusa's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seattle (grew up around D.C.)
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,017
Country:
Points: 29,971, Level: 99
Points: 29,971, Level: 99 Points: 29,971, Level: 99 Points: 29,971, Level: 99
Level up: 99%, 29 Points needed
Level up: 99% Level up: 99% Level up: 99%
Activity: 5%
Activity: 5% Activity: 5% Activity: 5%
hevusa is offline
Reply With Quote
Re: An Interesting Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah
"Those who sacrifice essential liberties for temporary security deserve niether liberty, nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

I came across this quote recently and as I read it I could not help but think of the Patriot Act.

Comments, anyone?

America is in store for less liberty and security because of Bushwacker's unjustified war.
Old 05-05-2005, 08:32 PM   #3 (permalink)
Head of Security
Moderator
 
tadpole256's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Cradle of Liberty
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,486
Country:
Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 37%
Activity: 37% Activity: 37% Activity: 37%
Send a message via AIM to tadpole256 Send a message via Yahoo to tadpole256 Send a message via Skype™ to tadpole256
tadpole256 is offline
Reply With Quote
Re: An Interesting Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josiah
"Those who sacrifice essential liberties for temporary security deserve niether liberty, nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

I came across this quote recently and as I read it I could not help but think of the Patriot Act.

Comments, anyone?
The PATRIOT act is simply the most horrid, and un-American piece of legislation the United States has ever seen. The broad, sweeping powers it afford both law enforcement and intelligence agencies is nothing less than orwellian in scope. It is a prime example of what happens when we make knee-jerk reactions...
Old 05-05-2005, 09:36 PM   #4 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,515
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 76 Times in 65 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Maybe you should think twice about the Patriot Act.

Quote:
Saving New York City
http://www.petrifiedtruth.com/archives/001922.html

Annoyed by harsh criticism of President Bush from former New York governor Mario Cuomo, Dick Morris explains how the Bush administration and the Patriot Act saved New York City from another terrorist attack.

In March of last year, federal intelligence officials reported to the NYPD that they had noticed significant "chatter" by al Qaeda terrorists about the Brooklyn Bridge. (Apparently, the name doesn't easily translate into Arabic.)

Under the terms of the Patriot Act, which the left criticizes, federal intelligence operatives were obliged to share their findings with the NYPD - precisely the kind of information sharing so little in evidence before 9/11. As a result, the department, under Ray Kelly's able leadership, flooded the bridge with police.

Federal intelligence officials then intercepted a communication to al Qaeda from an operative in New York that the operation against the landmark bridge was impossible because "the weather is too hot."

Bush's military and intelligence officials got a captive, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a top bin Laden deputy, to identify the terrorist assigned to blow up the bridge. Acting on the evidence they elicited from interrogations specifically allowed by the policies of the Bush administration, the NYPD closed in and arrested the terrorist, Iyman Faris, before he could act.

Faris' plans for the destruction of the bridge were chillingly detailed and coincided precisely with the findings of engineers employed by the NYPD to determine how one might go about destroying the 120- year-old landmark.

If the left had its way, we never would have arrested Mohammed or questioned him without his attorney or held him for any length of time. The information-sharing required by the Patriot Act would not have happened, and the bridge might today be a haunting memory along with the estimated 10,000 people who would have perished in the attack.
Old 05-05-2005, 09:45 PM   #5 (permalink)
The Man You Love to Hate
Premium Member
 
sgtdmski's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ketchikan, AK
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,943
Country:
Points: 7,593, Level: 58
Points: 7,593, Level: 58 Points: 7,593, Level: 58 Points: 7,593, Level: 58
Level up: 22%, 157 Points needed
Level up: 22% Level up: 22% Level up: 22%
Activity: 12%
Activity: 12% Activity: 12% Activity: 12%
Send a message via MSN to sgtdmski Send a message via Yahoo to sgtdmski
sgtdmski is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Everytime I hear someone criticize the Patriot Act it is always the same thing, sweeping generalizations of how it trashes are rights, our liberties and our privacy. How about you actually take the time to state what it is exactly that you do not like about the Patriot Act. Come on folks, cut the crap of broad statements and stick to specific points that you can actually argue.

dmk
Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles
-Russell Kirk-
Old 05-05-2005, 09:56 PM   #6 (permalink)
Head of Security
Moderator
 
tadpole256's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Cradle of Liberty
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,486
Country:
Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 37%
Activity: 37% Activity: 37% Activity: 37%
Send a message via AIM to tadpole256 Send a message via Yahoo to tadpole256 Send a message via Skype™ to tadpole256
tadpole256 is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski
Everytime I hear someone criticize the Patriot Act it is always the same thing, sweeping generalizations of how it trashes are rights, our liberties and our privacy. How about you actually take the time to state what it is exactly that you do not like about the Patriot Act. Come on folks, cut the crap of broad statements and stick to specific points that you can actually argue.

dmk
Ok how about this, I don't think surrendering my right to privacy, and giving the police more broad and sweeping authority to conduct unconstitutional searches and seizures is worth the illusion of security that the PATRIOT Act affords us.

We are no more secure today than we were on 09/10/01, we just think we are. We have beatenourselves down so much, and submitted to so much control and intrusion into our lives that we are convinced we must be more secure. We could have gotten all the same benefits of the PATRIOT Act, without the surrendering of so many freedoms, and the loss of so much privacy if we had taken the time to come up with a better, more well thought out piece of legislation. Or if we had designed an Act that actually had truly genuine, and altruistic intentions. Instead we settled for a document that simply brings us closer to 1984 and big brother.
Old 05-05-2005, 10:00 PM   #7 (permalink)
Website Owner
Administrator
 
RidinHighSpeeds's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Taxachusetts
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,515
Country:
Thanks: 12
Thanked 76 Times in 65 Posts
Send a message via AIM to RidinHighSpeeds
RidinHighSpeeds is offline
Reply With Quote
 
I don't understand how you can be so much against the Patriot Act while ignoring my previous post.

Do you understand that this system is proven effective? Do you understand that if you are not doing anything "wrong"...you will not need to worry?

I just don't get it.

You say we are no more secure today than we were on 9/10/01. I don't think we will ever be secure. But I feel we are more secure fighting terrorism over there than at home. Makes all the sense to me.
Old 05-05-2005, 10:06 PM   #8 (permalink)
Head of Security
Moderator
 
tadpole256's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Cradle of Liberty
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,486
Country:
Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 37%
Activity: 37% Activity: 37% Activity: 37%
Send a message via AIM to tadpole256 Send a message via Yahoo to tadpole256 Send a message via Skype™ to tadpole256
tadpole256 is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RidinHighSpeeds
I don't understand how you can be so much against the Patriot Act while ignoring my previous post.

Do you understand that this system is proven effective? Do you understand that if you are not doing anything "wrong"...you will not need to worry?

I just don't get it.

You say we are no more secure today than we were on 9/10/01. I don't think we will ever be secure. But I feel we are more secure fighting terrorism over there than at home. Makes all the sense to me.
Please don't get me wrong. I also agree we will never be 'secure'. And I also would rather fight over there, than here at home, wherever overthere turns out to be.

My concern is this, just because a system is proven effective, does not make it right. There are all sorts of systems the Nazis and Communists used that would make us vastly more secure, but they are not morally right.

I love freedom. And I love freedom more than anything in the world. I'd rather have a little danger and be free than safe and unfree any day.

My problem with the idea of "if you are not doing anything "wrong"...you will not need to worry?" is who is to say who is doing something wrong? What prevents abuse of these new powers? I witness abuse of power almost daily, where I work and elsewhere. Last thing I want is legislation to make such abuses easier. I gave up my freedom so you caqn have yours. If you don't have yours, my sacrifice was for naught.
Old 05-06-2005, 04:00 AM   #9 (permalink)
The Man You Love to Hate
Premium Member
 
sgtdmski's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ketchikan, AK
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,943
Country:
Points: 7,593, Level: 58
Points: 7,593, Level: 58 Points: 7,593, Level: 58 Points: 7,593, Level: 58
Level up: 22%, 157 Points needed
Level up: 22% Level up: 22% Level up: 22%
Activity: 12%
Activity: 12% Activity: 12% Activity: 12%
Send a message via MSN to sgtdmski Send a message via Yahoo to sgtdmski
sgtdmski is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tadpole256
Ok how about this, I don't think surrendering my right to privacy, and giving the police more broad and sweeping authority to conduct unconstitutional searches and seizures is worth the illusion of security that the PATRIOT Act affords us.

We are no more secure today than we were on 09/10/01, we just think we are. We have beatenourselves down so much, and submitted to so much control and intrusion into our lives that we are convinced we must be more secure. We could have gotten all the same benefits of the PATRIOT Act, without the surrendering of so many freedoms, and the loss of so much privacy if we had taken the time to come up with a better, more well thought out piece of legislation. Or if we had designed an Act that actually had truly genuine, and altruistic intentions. Instead we settled for a document that simply brings us closer to 1984 and big brother.
Again a broad and sweeping generalization. What power exactly has been granted that concerns you, how can you argue that your liberties are being violated by not even state which liberty is being violated and by what provision of the Patriot Act. If you cannot explain how your rights are violated, are you even sure that they are being violated???

dmk
Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles
-Russell Kirk-
Old 05-06-2005, 08:11 AM   #10 (permalink)
Head of Security
Moderator
 
tadpole256's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Cradle of Liberty
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,486
Country:
Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100 Points: 55,597, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 37%
Activity: 37% Activity: 37% Activity: 37%
Send a message via AIM to tadpole256 Send a message via Yahoo to tadpole256 Send a message via Skype™ to tadpole256
tadpole256 is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski
Quote:
Originally Posted by tadpole256
Ok how about this, I don't think surrendering my right to privacy, and giving the police more broad and sweeping authority to conduct unconstitutional searches and seizures is worth the illusion of security that the PATRIOT Act affords us.

We are no more secure today than we were on 09/10/01, we just think we are. We have beatenourselves down so much, and submitted to so much control and intrusion into our lives that we are convinced we must be more secure. We could have gotten all the same benefits of the PATRIOT Act, without the surrendering of so many freedoms, and the loss of so much privacy if we had taken the time to come up with a better, more well thought out piece of legislation. Or if we had designed an Act that actually had truly genuine, and altruistic intentions. Instead we settled for a document that simply brings us closer to 1984 and big brother.
Again a broad and sweeping generalization. What power exactly has been granted that concerns you, how can you argue that your liberties are being violated by not even state which liberty is being violated and by what provision of the Patriot Act. If you cannot explain how your rights are violated, are you even sure that they are being violated???

dmk
Very well put.

Let start with the obvious one, the new ease for law enforcement agencies to obtain search warrants. That alone id pretty horrible. What about thier right to access your bank record without notifying you, that's pretty horrible too. I'd rather take my chance with the lower 'security'.

You also managed to completely ignore the question of how do we prevent abuses of the system? I see a lot of checks, but not much in the way of balance...
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:49 PM.


 Top Political Sites
Poltical Topsites