 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
US searching for 'radicalized' Americans
The headline is from the article
Is this an invasion of privacy?
Should the government be allowed to take such actions?
Those that criticize the patriot act as well as the wire tapping of calls originating in foreign countries how do you stand as far as this action goes?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100306/...an_patterson_1
subroc
Article [I.]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Article [II.]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The whole thing is Bull Sh**!!!
Looking for radicalized Americans?
Obama, Emanuel, Axelrod, Pelosi, Reid, Barney, Ayers, Wright????
How about we look for radicalized Muslims????
Just a thought!
rk
stan b
SR-HR-UH-Field of Dreams Mr. Elvis
"Don't give up.....don't ever give up!!!"
Jimmy V
__________________________________________________ ____________________
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Don't know if the link was bad, or just very vague. Not enough details of WHAT they're doing and HOW they're searching. For me, its not a partisan issue at all. We had this discussion about consistency not long ago. I was against some of the Patriot Act provisions when it was passed, and I still am now that it was renewed. Bush or Obama, makes no difference to me. Its the bill that matters.
I suspect that the same people who were FOR the Patriot Act under Bush and against it under Obama, will be against this measure, not because of the merits of the program, but because "Obumma dun did it!", and he can do no right, even if its the same thing they supported under W. This will play out in the typical partisan fashion, if I may go out on a limb.
God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!
That is exactly the point of the post, the search for consistancy of thought and belief and partisanship.
subroc
Article [I.]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Article [II.]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
From the article, I can't tell what is being done. Tracking people based on associations is nothing new. Throughout the Cold War, travel to Russia, East Germany, Cuba, and similar countries was a guaranteed way to have an FBI file opened for your benefit. Similarly, anti-war and civil rights activities ensured FBI "supervision" up to and including phone taps, personal investigations, and covert surveillance.
Personally, I believe that any government surveillance activities or restrictions based solely on expressed beliefs or legal associations has a chilling effect on first amendment rights and is inapppropriate. That is true whether the associations are to the KKK, right wing militias, radical peace, environmental, or animal rights groups, or whatever. However, some level of preventive surveillance is appropriate when there are reasonable suspicions of illegal activities or association with groups involved in illegal activities. The FISA court provides an easy vehicle for the government to obtain warrants for such surveillance with minimal difficulty and minimal dur process. I am not crazy about what is permitted, but accept it as arguably jusitifed. I do not accept arguments suggesting that surveillance should be permitted without any due process.
The context of the article is that they're looking for Americans who have travelled to Pakistan to receive terrorist training. With that clarified, can we have a show of hands of those who think that's a bad idea?
I'll take the river down to still water and ride a pack of dogs.
What a coinkydink...5 mins later and I see the news that they captured that American Taliban asshat in Karachi. What a blow to the civil rights of all Americans.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest
Hopefully the Pakis waterboarded him a few dozen times before turning him over to our boys.
I'll take the river down to still water and ride a pack of dogs.
Why on earth would you think that is a blow to civil rights of Americans???Originally Posted by Hew
What a coinkydink...5 mins later and I see the news that they captured that American Taliban asshat in Karachi. What a blow to the civil rights of all Americans.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_pakistan_al_qaida_arrest
Hopefully the Pakis waterboarded him a few dozen times before turning him over to our boys.
Surely you're not projecting your beliefs onto others again, are you?
God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!
Apparently they haven't released the name of the one they nabbed, but how bad does this guy make your blood boil?
This is Adam Gahdahn, the American turncoat terrorist appearing as a Taliban spokesman egging on extremist muzzies to commit terrorist acts in the U.S. and praisign that Dr. Nidal that shot up Fort Hood. There's a million-dollar bounty on him--I'd sure like to see a deserving serviceman get that.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
