Patriot Act...

[Guest bengalrick]

12thman... sorry man, but i have to disagree w/ you on that one...

i tried to read that patriot act from the start to finish, but i was falling asleep so i decided to read the articles explaining what was wrong w/the acts, and read the specific problems that critics have w/ the act... some interesting "misinformation" is out there, let me tell you... i got the info from this [url="http://www.rutherford.org/articles_db/commentary.asp?record_id=262"]site[/url]:

[quote]Under the Patriot Act, the definition of terrorism is expanded to cover anyone or any group that tries to bring about change for political or ideological reasons and uses any kind of force to bring it about. This could range from nailing a poster to a courthouse door to carrying a picket sign. Thus, the government now has the authority to harass a broad range of political dissenters, ranging from Greenpeace to anti-abortion protesters to environmental activists to the National Rifle Association.[/quote]

well, they would be more efficent if the explained which section this was in, but i found other articles that explained that they were talking about 802 which reads this:


[quote]SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

<i took out the amendments to other laws... the boring stuff... >

    `(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--

        `[b](A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; [/b]

        `[b] ( appear to be intended--

            `(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

            `(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

            `(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

        `© occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'. [/b][/quote]

they say that this could be used against protesters and stuff like that... nice arguement considereing that the "more liberal" crowd tends to be against this act, but lets be real here... you have to be "involved in acts dangerous to human life that are a volation of criminal laws of the US or an state"... picketing and protesting are far from criminal activities, so this is WRONG!!! i call bullshit on these guys, b/c this does not included anyone that does not a)murder b)kidnapping c) assassination d)having weapons of mass destruction... this does not affect people that have a political agenda by itself, it means that people that try to use the above things, AND trying to make political change...

to the next problem area:

[quote]Under the Patriot Act, the government can, and most likely already has, conducted black bag and sneak and peak searches. In other words, government agents—much like other authoritarian regimes—can now enter your apartment or home and look through your documents, computer files and possessions (“sneak and peak”) or take documents, files and possessions (“black bag”) without giving you notice that they’ve ever been on your property.[/quote]

again, i had to investigate to find that they were talking about section 213:

[quote]SEC. 213. AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT.

Section 3103a of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

    (1) by inserting `(a) IN GENERAL- ' before `In addition'; and

    (2) by adding at the end the following:

DELAY- With respect to the issuance of any warrant or court order under this section, or any other rule of law, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required, or that may be required, to be given may be delayed if--

    `(1) the court finds reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the execution of the warrant may have an adverse result (as defined in section 2705);

    `(2) the warrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property, any wire or electronic communication (as defined in section 2510), or, except as expressly provided in chapter 121, any stored wire or electronic information, except where the court finds reasonable necessity for the seizure; and

    `(3) the warrant provides for the giving of such notice within a reasonable period of its execution, which period may thereafter be extended by the court for good cause shown.'.[/quote]

what is funny about this law, is this has been done for over a [url="http://www.factcheck.org/article259.html"]decade[/url]decade now... this only put in writing, what should and shouldn't be done, to better organize the law, like adding "would result in death or physical harm to an individual, flight from prosecution, evidence tampering, witness intimidation, or otherwise jeopardize an investigation" into the text...

next problem area:

[quote]Also under the Patriot Act, the government has routine access to your educational and financial/banking records as long as the government asserts that snooping through your records is “related to a terrorism investigation.” What this means is that all a government agent has to say to get access to your records is, “We’re conducting a terrorism investigation.” And, believe it or not, your school or bank cannot inform you that the government has gotten this information.[/quote]

[quote][b]SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.[/b]

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

  [b] (1) in paragraph (1)( (iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping'; [/b]

    (2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

    (3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

    (4) by adding at the end the following:

    [b]`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that-- [/b]

        `[b](A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;[/b]

        `[b]( appear to be intended--

            `(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

            `(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

            `(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

        `© occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'. [/b]

( CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

    `(1) `[b]act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism[/b] as defined in section 2331;'.[/quote]

until this law, we were allowed to issue subpeonas for business records for criminal inquiries, but not national security inquiries... you heard me right, this only added that we can now look into financial records, etc. for national security issues... very key law imo... and they act like the FBI can do this w/out any over sight... bull shit again... all requests under section 215 must first be granted by a judge and also be reported and approved to the attorney general... what the hell is this changing you may ask? so we can look into national security issues too...

these changes are pretty damn important, if you ask me... we amended [url="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/113b/sections/section_2331.html"]Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code[/url] to better define terrorism... what is wrong w/ the additions of "mass destruction" as a means of defining terror?


so in conclusion, i still don't see anything wrong w/ the act... it is one hell of a long act, and supposidely, there are more "bad laws" through out here, so i'd love for someone to point them out to me, so i can better educate myself and make an educated decision on whether it is hurting our civil liberties or not... so far, i've found nothing of the sort...

[b]<edit, i didn't add any of those 's in there... anytime there is a "b" w/ a ")" around it, that happens... just to not confuss anyone...[/b]

[Guest bengaljet]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='Jun 17 2005, 03:17 PM']jet, you didn't address my point... i have agreed w/ you about immigration since you have been bringing it up, and we are STILL in lockstep there... but that only serves part of the problem... what about the illegal immigrants that are already here, especially the ones that want to hurt us... don't you want the fbi, cia to have the best equipment, strategies, and powers to protect us?

<edit> to better explain myself, you brought up the point that why should we reenact the patriot act, when we can't secure the borders... i agree w/ that... now lets turn it around... why secure the borders, if we allow the illegals that are already here, to stay... you have to do both, to be halfway effective imo...
[right][post="104312"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
I'm really tired of this but here goes. I don't think we disagree on the open borders. IMO FDR was RIGHT (correct) in WWII to have rounded up Japanese in the US-US was at War,only my opinion but it was the SAFE thing to do.
The US today has no idea who these 10,000/day are,what they stand for,loyalties,intentions. IMO the SAFE thing to do TODAY is stop them before they get in and then identify the rest within the borders. IF 1 month ago(30 days)we would have stopped(hypothetically) the Illegals=300,000 that we would not have to investigate or worry about. I'm talking about cutting numbers of possible terrorists. IMO 100 terrorists can do more damage than 10,but 10 maybe easier to find.
Example:if you have termites(terrorists) in your house.You want to eliminate the termites within,but you need to also kill the ones coming from the outside 1st IMO.
On another post you mentioned why don't we just open our borders-10,000/day is pretty open IMO. I've always thought that 1 of the responsibilities of gov't was to protect the US citizens(borders)-hell I may be wrong on this. The only ones trying to stop Illegals is the Minutemen(citizens) on the Mexican border and some say they're WRONG. Minutemen haven't been investigated and NEITHER have the Illegals-I'll take my chances with the MINUTEMEN.
I was thinking this morning about the idea I sent to the Def. Dept. on dealing with terrorists.Funny thing was that part of my plan was to release some prisoners-you don't think...Naw there are smart people in this country that I hope will come up with the right plan.I told a friend what I did and he said"hell the gov't will probably investigate you for being a terrorist". [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/32.gif[/img] lol -Could happen and to be honest I could care less.
So now I'm a reactionary. If terrorists get in this country thru our borders,set off bombs,roadside bombs -I'm wondering what will be everybody's REACTION?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='Jun 18 2005, 11:37 AM']I'm really tired of this but here goes. I don't think we disagree on the open borders. IMO FDR was RIGHT (correct) in WWII to have rounded up Japanese in the US-US was at War,only my opinion but it was the SAFE thing to do.
The US today has no idea who these 10,000/day are,what they stand for,loyalties,intentions. IMO the SAFE thing to do TODAY is stop them before they get in and then identify the rest within the borders. IF 1 month ago(30 days)we would have stopped(hypothetically) the Illegals=300,000 that we would not have to investigate or worry about. I'm talking about cutting numbers of possible terrorists. IMO 100 terrorists can do more damage than 10,but 10 maybe easier to find.
Example:if you have termites(terrorists) in your house.You want to eliminate the termites within,but you need to also kill the ones coming from the outside 1st IMO.
On another post you mentioned why don't we just open our borders-10,000/day is pretty open IMO. I've always thought that 1 of the responsibilities of gov't was to protect the US citizens(borders)-hell I may be wrong on this. The only ones trying to stop Illegals is the Minutemen(citizens) on the Mexican border and some say they're WRONG. Minutemen haven't been investigated and NEITHER have the Illegals-I'll take my chances with the MINUTEMEN.
I was thinking this morning about the idea I sent to the Def. Dept. on dealing with terrorists.Funny thing was that part of my plan was to release some prisoners-you don't think...Naw there are smart people in this country that I hope will come up with the right plan.I told a friend what I did and he said"hell the gov't will probably investigate you for being a terrorist". [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//32.gif[/img] lol -Could happen and to be honest I could care less.
So now I'm a reactionary. If terrorists get in this country thru our borders,set off bombs,roadside bombs -I'm wondering what will be everybody's REACTION?
[right][post="104543"][/post][/right][/quote]



I'm wondering if your "plan" included something like this?
[img]http://www.photoatlas.com/photo/china_great_wall.jpg[/img]


In your phone calls, you may want to talk to Pat Buchanan he had the same idea when he ran for president not to long ago.

[Guest bengaljet]

hey jimi,thanks for the words of discouragement.No,didn't have anything to do with a wall-good guess tho.Probably about as deep as your mind could go.
Let me tell you the difference between what I did and you do everyday. My thought didn't cost the US taxpayer a dime,but you go SUCK-UP US taxpayers money for a living.
A friend(Conservative R,business owner) told me yrs ago that anyone that worked for the gov't was a leech. Don't produce anything and get paid for it. I've dealt with gov't employees in manufacturing-how true,how true. Not important but put on a good front.
Eat up those taxpayer $$,jimi

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='Jun 18 2005, 05:25 PM']hey jimi,thanks for the words of discouragement.No,didn't have anything to do with a wall-good guess tho.Probably about as deep as your mind could go.
Let me tell you the difference between what I did and you do everyday. My thought didn't cost the US taxpayer a dime,but you go SUCK-UP US taxpayers money for a living.
A  friend(Conservative R,business owner) told me yrs ago that anyone that worked for the gov't was a leech. Don't produce anything and get paid for it. I've dealt with gov't employees in manufacturing-how true,how true. Not important but put on a good front.
Eat up those taxpayer $$,jimi
[right][post="104609"][/post][/right][/quote]


[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]

I think that has to be the funnies thing I’ve ever heard...I’m a suck up huh?



Let me tell you what being a leech has done for our solider, you know the ones that actually protect us.

10 years ago when we went to desert storm the mobilization process for the reserves and national guard took about two weeks, was a paper process and many units were delayed to get over to the middle east if a soldier’s papers were lost or delayed ect. Unit Commanders couldn’t know at a glace how ready their unit was to go to war at any time, they had to ask their subordinates and because of it being a paper process those numbers weren’t always correct, there were real dangers of losing entire units when coming back from the war I recall a story my father told me 2nd hand that because of lost paperwork a unit almost didn’t make it back. Today not just unit, but entire Company commanders can keep tabs on their soldiers’ readiness and training so that when they have to mobilize they will be ready. The commander himself can see the data on his units/soldiers and doesn’t have to ask his subordinates, and the data is accurate and doesn’t get lost. This is a huge help in being ready to go to war at a moments notice and a huge help in just training and planning for it.

Let me tell you what being a leech has done for our department of education.

About 7 years ago the department of education's special needs department took and awarded grants for those that had disabilities so they could get an education. The way they did this was take data from one system and make their best guess as to how that went into awarding someone a grant, the data was missing many pieces to it and wasn’t always reliable. Today they can enter the data from electronic forms and the data is reliable and it helps them award the grants in a more efficient and timely manner so that those who have disabilities can get an education.

Let me tell you what being a leech has done for the FAA.

About 6 years ago the FAA had to report their funds to congress, not unlike everyone else. They however were keeping a spreadsheet based system that wasn’t reliable and caused them to not have the most accurate data, which in turn caused either more or less money then they actually had. Today they have a system that they can track their money efficiently and let them produce reports on what they have in their budget to congress.

Let me tell you what being a leech has done for the North Atlantic Regional Medical Command. (The Army's hospitals in the north east of the US)

About 9 years ago each hospital’s dermatology department had a minimum of 1 doctor in it (1 for the smaller areas) and if there were cases that they didn’t have an answer for they had to send the patient to a different hospital causing the taxpayers money and sometimes the health of the person was bad enough that they needed help right away. Today the NARMC has a electronic system that all the doctors can share their knowledge on cases with high quality images of each patients problem and can diagnose a solution from hundreds of miles away. As a matter of fact the day the system went live a patient came in to one of the hospitals and their info and picture of the problem are was put into that system, the problem was more serious than that doctor that entered the info thought, and because of that system another doctor was able to share his knowledge on it and actually save the life of the patient.

What your friend is talking about is the average government worker (they are called GS's) and I don’t disagree with him, but I’m a government contractor there is a difference. The government worker after 5 years on the job is damn hard to fire, the paperwork process to do so is so time consuming that many just don’t do it and ignore their problems. This causes people after 5 years to become complacent. I’ve seen 1st hand GSs sleeping on their jobs, skip out on meetings so they could go make an eBay bid, or just get up in the middle of them so they could have their government regulated break, not keeping their education up because they don’t care anymore after that 5 years they have a free meal...the list goes on. I can agree that they are leeches but the system allows for it. Its why I’ve been a proponent for changing the system for years. Unfortunately I just don’t believe that it will happen.

That was pretty funny though. Thanks for the laugh jet.
[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]

[Bengals_12th_Man]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='Jun 18 2005, 10:26 AM']12thman... sorry man, but i have to disagree w/ you on that one...

i tried to read that patriot act from the start to finish, but i was falling asleep so i decided to read the articles explaining what was wrong w/the acts, and read the specific problems that critics have w/ the act... some interesting "misinformation" is out there, let me tell you... i got the info from this [url="http://www.rutherford.org/articles_db/commentary.asp?record_id=262"]site[/url]:
well, they would be more efficent if the explained which section this was in, but i found other articles that explained that they were talking about 802 which reads this:
they say that this could be used against protesters and stuff like that... nice arguement considereing that the "more liberal" crowd tends to be against this act, but lets be real here... you have to be "involved in acts dangerous to human life that are a volation of criminal laws of the US or an state"... picketing and protesting are far from criminal activities, so this is WRONG!!! i call bullshit on these guys, b/c this does not included anyone that does not a)murder b)kidnapping c) assassination d)having weapons of mass destruction... this does not affect people that have a political agenda by itself, it means that people that try to use the above things, AND trying to make political change...

to the next problem area:
again, i had to investigate to find that they were talking about section 213:
what is funny about this law, is this has been done for over a [url="http://www.factcheck.org/article259.html"]decade[/url]decade now... this only put in writing, what should and shouldn't be done, to better organize the law, like adding "would result in death or physical harm to an individual, flight from prosecution, evidence tampering, witness intimidation, or otherwise jeopardize an investigation" into the text...

next problem area:
until this law, we were allowed to issue subpeonas for business records for criminal inquiries, but not national security inquiries... you heard me right, this only added that we can now look into financial records, etc. for national security issues... very key law imo... and they act like the FBI can do this w/out any over sight... bull shit again... all requests under section 215 must first be granted by a judge and also be reported and approved to the attorney general... what the hell is this changing you may ask? so we can look into national security issues too...

these changes are pretty damn important, if you ask me... we amended [url="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/113b/sections/section_2331.html"]Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code[/url] to better define terrorism... what is wrong w/ the additions of "mass destruction" as a means of defining terror?
so in conclusion, i still don't see anything wrong w/ the act... it is one hell of a long act, and supposidely, there are more "bad laws" through out here, so i'd love for someone to point them out to me, so i can better educate myself and make an educated decision on whether it is hurting our civil liberties or not... so far, i've found nothing of the sort...

[b]<edit, i didn't add any of those  's in there... anytime there is a "b" w/ a ")" around it, that happens... just to not confuss anyone...[/b]

[right][post="104538"][/post][/right][/quote]


From my quick read of your rebut here, I really dont have any problems with them. I do, however see problems and potential abuse of a government agency to walk in my house, without a warrant, and search my house without even telling me, let alone me being there. Our right to privacy shrinks every day.

[Guest bengaljet]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Jun 18 2005, 06:34 PM'] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]

I think that has to be the funnies thing I’ve ever heard...I’m a suck up huh? 
Let me tell you what being a leech has done for our solider, you know the ones that actually protect us.

10 years ago when we went to desert storm the mobilization process for the reserves and national guard took about two weeks, was a paper process and many units were delayed to get over to the middle east if a soldier’s papers were lost or delayed ect. Unit Commanders couldn’t know at a glace how ready their unit was to go to war at any time, they had to ask their subordinates and because of it being a paper process those numbers weren’t always correct, there were real dangers of losing entire units when coming back from the war I recall a story my father told me 2nd hand that because of lost paperwork a unit almost didn’t make it back. Today not just unit, but entire Company commanders can keep tabs on their soldiers’ readiness and training so that when they have to mobilize they will be ready. The commander himself can see the data on his units/soldiers and doesn’t have to ask his subordinates, and the data is accurate and doesn’t get lost. This is a huge help in being ready to go to war at a moments notice and a huge help in just training and planning for it.

Let me tell you what being a leech has done for our department of education.

About 7 years ago the department of education's special needs department took and awarded grants for those that had disabilities so they could get an education. The way they did this was take data from one system and make their best guess as to how that went into awarding someone a grant, the data was missing many pieces to it and wasn’t always reliable. Today they can enter the data from electronic forms and the data is reliable and it helps them award the grants in a more efficient and timely manner so that those who have disabilities can get an education.

Let me tell you what being a leech has done for the FAA.

About 6 years ago the FAA had to report their funds to congress, not unlike everyone else. They however were keeping a spreadsheet based system that wasn’t reliable and caused them to not have the most accurate data, which in turn caused either more or less money then they actually had. Today they have a system that they can track their money efficiently and let them produce reports on what they have in their budget to congress.

Let me tell you what being a leech has done for the North Atlantic Regional Medical Command. (The Army's hospitals in the north east of the US)

About 9 years ago each hospital’s dermatology department had a minimum of 1 doctor in it (1 for the smaller areas) and if there were cases that they didn’t have an answer for they had to send the patient to a different hospital causing the taxpayers money and sometimes the health of the person was bad enough that they needed help right away. Today the NARMC has a electronic system that all the doctors can share their knowledge on cases with high quality images of each patients problem and can diagnose a solution from hundreds of miles away. As a matter of fact the day the system went live a patient came in to one of the hospitals and their info and picture of the problem are was put into that system, the problem was more serious than that doctor that entered the info thought, and because of that system another doctor was able to share his knowledge on it and actually save the life of the patient.

What your friend is talking about is the average government worker (they are called GS's) and I don’t disagree with him, but I’m a government contractor there is a difference. The government worker after 5 years on the job is damn hard to fire, the paperwork process to do so is so time consuming that many just don’t do it and ignore their problems. This causes people after 5 years to become complacent. I’ve seen 1st hand GSs sleeping on their jobs, skip out on meetings so they could go make an eBay bid, or just get up in the middle of them so they could have their government regulated break, not keeping their education up because they don’t care anymore after that 5 years they have a free meal...the list goes on. I can agree that they are leeches but the system allows for it. Its why I’ve been a proponent for changing the system for years. Unfortunately I just don’t believe that it will happen.

That was pretty funny though. Thanks for the laugh jet.
[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]   [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]
[right][post="104633"][/post][/right][/quote]
Now that's impressive.I'm sittin' right here talkin' to a real hero. I bet they haven't made the medal you deserve yet.When "WE" went to war 10 yrs ago did you actually "GO"?
Sounds like real dangerous work you're doing.Ever have a paper-clip blow up in your hand?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='Jun 18 2005, 11:23 PM']Now that's impressive.I'm sittin' right here talkin' to a real hero. I bet they haven't made the medal you deserve yet.When "WE" went to war 10 yrs ago did you actually "GO"?
Sounds like real dangerous work you're doing.Ever have a paper-clip blow up in your hand?
[right][post="104738"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Jet ive grown tired of arguing with you, why is it you cant understand we both have the same goal of protecting our nation? Why is it you feel the need to attempt to belittle and berate me? Cant we discuss things in a manner that we can learn from each other with our differing point of views but same goals? When you actually want to talk about stuff rather than continue to berate and bitch at each other let me know becuase Id love to hear some of your ideas and have intellegent and honest discorse about your and about mine in a respectfull manner but Im done with the anger in both of our posts.

[jza10304]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='Jun 18 2005, 10:37 AM']I'm really tired of this but here goes. I don't think we disagree on the open borders. IMO FDR was RIGHT (correct) in WWII to have rounded up Japanese in the US-US was at War,only my opinion but it was the SAFE thing to do.
The US today has no idea who these 10,000/day are,what they stand for,loyalties,intentions. IMO the SAFE thing to do TODAY is stop them before they get in and then identify the rest within the borders. IF 1 month ago(30 days)we would have stopped(hypothetically) the Illegals=300,000 that we would not have to investigate or worry about. I'm talking about cutting numbers of possible terrorists. IMO 100 terrorists can do more damage than 10,but 10 maybe easier to find.
Example:if you have termites(terrorists) in your house.You want to eliminate the termites within,but you need to also kill the ones coming from the outside 1st IMO.
On another post you mentioned why don't we just open our borders-10,000/day is pretty open IMO. I've always thought that 1 of the responsibilities of gov't was to protect the US citizens(borders)-hell I may be wrong on this. The only ones trying to stop Illegals is the Minutemen(citizens) on the Mexican border and some say they're WRONG. Minutemen haven't been investigated and NEITHER have the Illegals-I'll take my chances with the MINUTEMEN.
I was thinking this morning about the idea I sent to the Def. Dept. on dealing with terrorists.Funny thing was that part of my plan was to release some prisoners-you don't think...Naw there are smart people in this country that I hope will come up with the right plan.I told a friend what I did and he said"hell the gov't will probably investigate you for being a terrorist". [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/32.gif[/img] lol -Could happen and to be honest I could care less.
So now I'm a reactionary. If terrorists get in this country thru our borders,set off bombs,roadside bombs -I'm wondering what will be everybody's REACTION?
[right][post="104543"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Terrorists don't cross deserts with explosives. They get visas due to the amount of $$ they have accessible to get things done (grease the wheels). Maybe the Canadian border would be a better place to start. Maybe we should round up all people from the middle east (students and professors my ass!) and stick them in camps. Shit I hope the U.S. never invades Cuba then...they'll lock down Miami.



....and for the record I don't have any loyalties except for what is right IMO. Screw nationalism, it can lead to fascism in extreme circumstances.

[Guest BlackJesus]

[url="http://www.checksbalances.org/index.php"]http://www.checksbalances.org/index.php[/url]


[b]Good site [/b]

[Guest bengalrick]

[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/politics/22terror.html?ei=5065&en=6671556774db3089&ex=1120104000&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print"]nytimes.com[/url]

[quote]June 22, 2005
[b]Social Security Opened Its Files for 9/11 Inquiry[/b]
By ERIC LICHTBLAU

WASHINGTON, June 21 -The Social Security Administration has relaxed its privacy restrictions and searched thousands of its files at the request of the F.B.I. as part of terrorism investigations since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, newly disclosed records and interviews show.

[b]The privacy policy typically bans the sharing of such confidential information, which includes home addresses, medical information and other personal data. But senior officials at the Social Security agency agreed to an "ad hoc" policy that authorized the release of information to the bureau for investigations related to Sept. 11 because officials saw a "life-threatening" emergency, internal memorandums say. [/b]

The Internal Revenue Service also worked with the bureau and the Social Security agency to provide income and taxpayer information in terror inquiries, law enforcement officials said. Officials said the I.R.S. information was limited because legal restrictions prevented the sharing of taxpayer information except by court order or in cases of "imminent danger" or other exemptions. The tax agency refused to comment.

[b]The Social Security memorandums were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a civil liberties group here. Copies were provided to The New York Times. [/b]

[b]Social Security and law enforcement officials said that they were sensitive to privacy concerns and had put safeguards in place, but that they believed that the information gave investigators a valuable tool.[/b]

[b]"We ran thousands of Social Security numbers,"[/b] said a former senior F.B.I. official who insisted on anonymity because the files involved internal cases.

[B]"We got very useful information, that's for sure," the former official said. "We recognized the value of having that information to track leads, and, to their credit, so did the Social Security Administration."[/B]

[b]Some privacy advocates and members of Congress, although sympathetic to the extraordinary demands posed by the Sept. 11 investigation, said they were troubled by what they saw as a significant shift in privacy policies.[/b]

Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, a New York Democrat who has sought information from the Social Security agency on the issue, said the new policy had "real civil liberties implications for abuse." Ms. Maloney questioned whether Congress was adequately informed.

"If we don't know when the Social Security Administration decides to change its rules to disclose personal information," she said, "I think Americans have a right to be skeptical about their privacy."

The director of the Open Government Project at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Marcia Hofmann, acknowledged the need for investigators to have access to vital information.

[b]"But an ad hoc policy like this is so broad that it allows law enforcement to obtain really sensitive information by merely claiming that the information is relevant to the 9/11 investigation," Ms. Hofmann said. "There appears to be very little oversight."[/b]

[b]In addition to easing its rules, the Social Security agency agreed to waive normal privacy restrictions for information related to the F.B.I. investigation of the sniper shootings in the Washington region in 2002, the internal memorandums show. It does not appear that any information was ultimately turned over. [/b]

The agency agreed two days after the Sept. 11 attacks to give the F.B.I. access to material from its files to obtain information on the hijackers, anyone with "relevant information" on the attacks and victims' relatives.

Under Social Security Administration policy, which goes beyond federal privacy law, such information cannot typically be shared with law enforcement officials [b]unless the subject has been indicted or convicted of a crime. The loosening of the policy was updated and reauthorized last year, the internal documents show, and Social Security officials said Tuesday that it remained in place.[/b]

Social Security officials said they were not aware of recent F.B.I. requests for information from their files in the inquiry.

[b]It appears that there was a flood of requests for at least a year after the attacks and perhaps longer, as bureau agents sought personal and financial information on illegal immigrants and other suspects who might be using fraudulent Social Security information. Some of the hijackers used fake Social Security numbers.[/b]

Officials at the Social Security Administration said the policy directives since Sept. 11 identified 11 offices - 10 in the inspector general's office and one in the privacy office - authorized to approve the F.B.I. requests.

[b]"Thankfully, these requests don't come up that often," Jonathan Cantor, the privacy officer at the agency, said. "You just have to look at each situation as it comes in, and it's my job to balance the privacy of the records against legitimate requests for that information."[/b]

[b]Mr. Cantor said that the bureau had made requests for financial and employment information from Social Security files, but that the agency had referred them to the I.R.S. because it was not legally allowed to release taxpayer information.[/b]

James Huse, who was the inspector general at the Social Security agency until March 2004, said his agency provided relevant identifying information to the bureau on possible terror suspects but relied on the tax agency to determine what information it would turn over on a suspect's income and employment.

[b]The F.B.I. requests "came in by the thousands," Mr. Huse said in an interview. "They would give us the names of people suspected of being terrorists for whatever reason, and we'd match them against Social Security indices to see if these people were real, did they have Social Security numbers, things like that."[/b]

[b]He said that most of the names and numbers run by the bureau did not match up to Social Security records, and that he was unaware of cases of governmental abuse in the requests. Mr. Huse added that "on a big-volume name check like that you wouldn't really know if you had a frivolous name thrown in or not."[/b]

A major debate is under way on access for the F.B.I. and other law enforcement agencies in national security investigations to confidential information like library checkout lists, hospital records or airline manifests. Bush administration officials say it is imperative for investigators to have broad tools to track terror suspects.[/quote]

this is a pretty good and balanced article imo... i posted this b/c i wanted to show the process that is taken in these cases better... we got a list of say 1000 suspected terrorists... are all of those guys terrorists... no, but alot probably were at least connected in some way... i really liked how the guy said "We got very useful information, that's for sure. We recognized the value of having that information to track leads, and, to their credit, so did the Social Security Administration." also: "Thankfully, these requests don't come up that often," Jonathan Cantor, the privacy officer at the agency, said. "You just have to look at each situation as it comes in, and it's my job to balance the privacy of the records against legitimate requests for that information."... in extreme cases like these cases, we did this... everyone assumes that we are doing the worst, but this guys job is to balance the privacy against the legitimacy... these are rules that will only be implimented during war times and terror attacks imo...

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://dca.boozle.net/candc.jpg[/img]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://dca.boozle.net/bushmosaic.jpg[/img]

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='Jun 18 2005, 03:25 PM']hey jimi,thanks for the words of discouragement.No,didn't have anything to do with a wall-good guess tho.Probably about as deep as your mind could go.
Let me tell you the difference between what I did and you do everyday. My thought didn't cost the US taxpayer a dime,but you go SUCK-UP US taxpayers money for a living.
[b]A  friend(Conservative R,business owner) told me yrs ago that anyone that worked for the gov't was a leech. Don't produce anything and get paid for it. I've dealt with gov't employees in manufacturing-how true,how true. Not important but put on a good front.
Eat up those taxpayer $$,jimi[/b][right][post="104609"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
So this friend's word is the sole basis of your opinion regarding this matter?!?!?!?
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE MOST ASININE AND UNINFORMED BUNCH OF SHIT EVER UTTERED....and I HAVE been there and done that, and so has my entire family for generations...without the support of the civilian sector there would BE NO MILITARY, NO GOVERNMENT, NO NOTHING!!!!

It's time for you to pack your bags for Canada...if they'll have you.

Man, I like a good debate as much as anyone, but you have just scraped the bottom of the barrel of nonsensical, alarmist, uninformed, opinionated, oblivious and maniacal garbage. Good job. No go see your local recruiter and when you're in boot camp, you can share these views with your drill sergeant....

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 22 2005, 08:39 PM'][img]http://dca.boozle.net/bushmosaic.jpg[/img]
[right][post="106171"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Far from the truth...you're being alarmist...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='Jun 22 2005, 11:05 PM']So this friend's word is the sole basis of your opinion regarding this matter?!?!?!?
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE MOST ASININE AND UNINFORMED BUNCH OF SHIT EVER UTTERED....and I HAVE been there and done that, and so has my entire family for generations...without the support of the civilian sector there would BE NO MILITARY, NO GOVERNMENT, NO NOTHING!!!!

It's time for you to pack your bags for Canada...if they'll have you.

Man, I like a good debate as much as anyone, but you have just scraped the bottom of the barrel of nonsensical, alarmist, uninformed, opinionated, oblivious and maniacal garbage.  Good job.  No go see your local recruiter and when you're in boot camp, you can share these views with your drill sergeant....
[right][post="106179"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


I think he was just trying to get to me Bung, we were both heated so... I hope he doesnt really believe the nonsence that you can support the goverment and do your part without having a gun in your hand..


I hope.

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Jun 22 2005, 09:08 PM']I think he was just trying to get to me Bung, we were both heated so... I hope he doesnt really believe the nonsence that you can support the goverment and do your part without having a gun in your hand..
I hope.
[right][post="106181"][/post][/right][/quote]
But...to spew such utter nonsense! Like govt workers don't EARN the taxpayer money they're paid for doing a good job for their country? It is SERVICE TO YOUR NATION! Army guys get paid too....you don't have to be the killer to assist in the killing, or the administration of the paperwork for the killers, or...well, you get the idea...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='Jun 22 2005, 11:13 PM']But...to spew such utter nonsense!  Like govt workers don't EARN the taxpayer money they're paid for doing a good job for their country?  It is SERVICE TO YOUR NATION!  Army guys get paid too....you don't have to be the killer to assist in the killing, or the administration of the paperwork for the killers, or...well, you get the idea...
[right][post="106183"][/post][/right][/quote]


I half agree with it, some don't... not all GS's but some, but like I said the system allows for it...it's like unions, good idea but the way the system is it allows for a certain amount of taking advantage and I've seen it. It's why I could never go for socialism.

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Jun 22 2005, 09:17 PM']I half agree with it, some don't... not all GS's but some, but like I said the system allows for it...it's like unions, good idea but the way the system is it allows for a certain amount of taking advantage and I've seen it. It's why I could never go for socialism.
[right][post="106186"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
There are always people who slack and take advantage...it is NOT exclusive to the public sector....

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='Jun 22 2005, 11:21 PM']There are always people who slack and take advantage...it is NOT exclusive to the public sector....
[right][post="106188"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Yeah thats true, I guess I just get easily frustread by that.