The History of the Democrat Party

SmarterThanYou said:
no, things like THIS are more my concern. The government and it's alphabet agencies are too incompetent and not accountable enough for their errors.
Click to expand...

so again....the problem isn't in the law, the problem is in your imagination.....you can think of things that might happen, therefore you are concerned....rather than they are doing things which are illegal......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
so again....the problem isn't in the law, the problem is in your imagination.....you can think of things that might happen, therefore you are concerned....rather than they are doing things which are illegal......
Click to expand...

the whole point of the constitution was to protect the individuals rights. at least in the beginning. over the last 200 years, democrats and republicans have gone to great lengths to turn it around so that the constitution condemns the individual until proven otherwise.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
no
Click to expand...
if they have the right to tap a terrorist's phone and you call him....of course they are going to be listening to you.....

if there is a warrant to tap Giovonni's Pizza because it's a suspected bookie joint and you call to order a pepperoni, your conversation is being recorded without your permission....that doesn't make it illegal......the same is true with the tap of a foreign suspect under FISA or the Patriot Act......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if they have the right to tap a terrorist's phone and you call him....of course they are going to be listening to you.....

if there is a warrant to tap Giovonni's Pizza because it's a suspected bookie joint and you call to order a pepperoni, your conversation is being recorded without your permission....that doesn't make it illegal......the same is true with the tap of a foreign suspect under FISA or the Patriot Act......
Click to expand...

thats all fine and well. the issue is that the patriot act leaves all phone calls originating outside the US as unprotected. The constitution is supposed to restrict and constrain the federal government, not make it a superpower to anything outside CONUS
 
SmarterThanYou said:
yeah, god forbid someone who is plain ole innocent should be afraid for their lives when they just finished stopping at an ATM machine, and all of a sudden thugs with guns come running at you. I forget though, that as the model republican, you espouse total obeisance to authority.

the main point is that government does two things well, and only two things.

1) they violate rights
2) they fuck shit up.
Click to expand...
The only facts that we know in this case is that the guy dropped of some gal at the location then took off when confronted by officers in broad daylight with witnesses all around. This isn't some "dark alley" situation. A reasonable person would have stuck his hands in the air and kept his foot on the brake. That's what I did when I was confronted by an army unit on patrol near Fort Drum many years ago. Sure I was detained and yes they made a mistake. Shit happens some times and reasonable folks can usually deal with it pretty well.

So what does this have to do with the Patriot Act?
 
WinterBorn said:
(§215) Allows FBI agents to investigate citizens for criminal activity without probable cause if they say it is for "intelligence purposes".


(§218) Allows law enforcement to search a person's home without anyone present and to delay notification indefinitely.



Those both seem pretty serious to me. The 4th amendment is clear about this.
Click to expand...

A lot of people are just plain uninformed about the abuses that have occured under the Patriot Act. This is because our alleged "liberal" media does not blast such incidents over the three mediums with the same introspection as the latest reality show escapade of John & Kate. Here's just one example:

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/32772prs20071114.html
 
Interesting that you'd bring up the ACLU in a discussion of the Democrat Party's history. Here's a bit of theirs:

From its very beginning, the ACLU had strong socialist and communist ties. As early as 1931, the U.S. Congress was alarmed by the ACLU's devotion to communism. A report by the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities stated

The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly, but it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect the communists.
Click to expand...

Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman founded the ACLU in 1920 along with three other organizations dedicated to the most leftist of causes. The histories of these two individuals belie their claims of patriotism and respect for the Constitution.

Baldwin openly sought the utter destruction of American society. Fifteen years after the founding of the ACLU, Baldwin wrote:

I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself ... I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.

Earl Browder, the general secretary of the Communist Party of the United States, admitted that the ACLU served as a "transmission belt" for the party. Baldwin agreed, claiming, "I don't regret being a part of the communist tactic which increased the effectiveness of a good cause."

Baldwin was a devoted follower of the anarchist Emma Goldman (or "Red Emma" as she was called), who was eventually deported to the Soviet Union in 1919 for her communist activities. Goldman was a consistent promoter of anarchism, radical education, "free love" and birth control. According to an online exhibit of Goldman's papers, her career "served as inspiration for Roger Baldwin, a future founder of the American Civil Liberties Union."

Eastman was a zealous feminist, an anti-war activist, and a great admirer of the Soviet revolution. Of her many leftist friends and associates, Eastman held the highest regard for Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. According to Eastman, "We [feminists] must all be followers of Margaret Sanger."

Of course, Sanger was a passionate advocate of eugenics – the attempt to improve the human race through selective breeding. Abortion was a primary means to this "improvement," leading Sanger to write, "The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."
Click to expand...
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45959
Didn't you realize that Sanger hated blacks and sought to selectively breed them out through abortion? Her movement, Planned Parenthood, has been very successful at killing black babies for decades.
 
Taichiliberal wrote: A lot of people are just plain uninformed about the abuses that have occured under the Patriot Act. This is because our alleged "liberal" media does not blast such incidents over the three mediums with the same introspection as the latest reality show escapade of John & Kate. Here's just one example:

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general...s20071114.html
Click to expand...

PostmodernProphet said:
that's an example of an ACLU member complaining to Congress.....the "facts" send a chill down my spine.....
Click to expand...


Wrong as usual, you should have read thoroughly and followed the links. It's a citizen who suffered by the hands of a bloated bureacracy that falsely accused him. Does his job status make him less of a citizen?

There are others.



Why don't you grow a spine and learn to honestly deal with reality and ALL it's facts?
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
Wrong as usual, you should have read thoroughly and followed the links. It's a citizen who suffered by the hands of a bloated bureacracy that falsely accused him.

There are others.

Why don't you grow a spine and learn to honestly deal with reality and ALL it's facts?
Click to expand...

all I see is a report that some lawyer testified to Congress....if you want to present some evidence, present some evidence....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
all I see is a report that some lawyer testified to Congress....if you want to present some evidence, present some evidence....
Click to expand...

Well toodles, since to date NO ONE has proved this man to be a liar, I'd say that testimony of his personal handling via the Patriot Act is bonafide.

But of course, a Postmodernfool stubbornly refuses to use his cognitive reasoning skills when confronted with the conclusion that his assertions are wrong.

But, in the interest that even a pompus neocon blowhard can be educated, here's an appropo to the previous link FYI http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5053007/
 
Taichiliberal said:
Well toodles, since to date NO ONE has proved this man to be a liar, I'd say that testimony of his personal handling via the Patriot Act is bonafide.

But of course, a Postmodernfool stubbornly refuses to use his cognitive reasoning skills when confronted with the conclusion that his assertions are wrong.

But, in the interest that even a pompus neocon blowhard can be educated, here's an appropo to the previous link FYI http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5053007/
Click to expand...

lol....THAT case?.....what does that have to do with search warrants....he was detained because of a mistake in fingerprinting records.....if you want to provide evidence of abuse under the Patriot Act you ought at least use a case where the Patriot Act was involved.....

Court documents released Monday suggested that the mistaken arrest first sprang from an error by the FBI’s supercomputer for matching fingerprints
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
lol....THAT case?.....what does that have to do with search warrants....he was detained because of a mistake in fingerprinting records.....if you want to provide evidence of abuse under the Patriot Act you ought at least use a case where the Patriot Act was involved.....
Click to expand...

What was the DATE of the case, you pompos windbag? Did it not fall under the time when the Patriot Act was in place? If you had paid attention, the actions that happened went beyond the usual methods....remember, the Patriot Act CIRCUMNAVIGATES HABEUS CORPUS AS WELL AS PROBABLE CAUSE. READ what the people are saying instead of skimming through to find what you can excerpt to fit your assertions. But I see you need more basic examples:

http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-04-16/news/victims-of-the-dragnet/1
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4756403
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top