NationStates Jolt Archive

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?

I personally am a big fan of the Patriot Act. I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.

I also believe that protecting our families and friends is worth a few hardships, such as being videotaped in public, and allowing police to search our bags on mass transit systems when they feel it is our best interest.

Don't get me wrong. I don't put blind faith in our governments. But I also don't believe they are the evil big brother that some would make them out to be.

So what are your thoughts? Please be gentle, this is my first post here.

Can anybody name a specific example of nuclear weapons negatively affecting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what they could do if used?

Read what you posted, and then read what I did. You'll notice some terribly disturbing similarities.

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?

Actually, I can. It involved me sending some barbecue sauce to a forum member here and having that package blocked.

I won't go into more detail as to protect the privacy of the other member, but yes, I - A MUSLIM - have been hit by the Patriot Act in more ways than you can possibly imagine.

Shit, man ... I got a shipment from Egypt of some nice cotton cloths and I was forced - FORCED - to open my packages in front of the local Postmaster and a Sherrif, never minding that my mail is my own private fuckin' business.

So you can take your Patriot Act and shove it up your monkey ass. How's that?

The USA PATRIOT Act not just affected Americans but to us Canadians as well. :mad:
USA Patriot Act comes under fire in B.C. report
Last Updated Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:04:58 EDT
CBC News

VICTORIA - The USA Patriot Act violates British Columbia's privacy laws because it can order American companies to hand over information on British Columbians in secret, B.C. Privacy Commissioner David Loukidelis said Friday.

In a report on the privacy implications of the Patriot Act, Loukidelis notes that once information is sent across borders, it's difficult, if not impossible, to control.

The 151-page report states that under the Patriot Act, the U.S. government can demand access to a wide range of personal and confidential information about Canadians from U.S. financial institutions, phone companies and internet providers.

"It is never possible to guarantee perfect protection of information. Regardless, our report concludes that measures can and should be put in place that meaningfully guard against access by the USA Patriot Act," said Loukidelis.

One important recommendation is to have Ottawa and the provinces pass legislation that will "prohibit personal information from being stored or sent outside Canada."

Loukidelis would also like to make it illegal for Canadian subsidiaries of U.S. firms to turn over information to a U.S. agency without a Canadian court order.

Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Ontario employ U.S.–based companies to manage provincial government databases.

The B.C. government has contracted out some business to one U.S. firm and wants to use another American company to operate the province's Medical Services Plan.

CIBC credit card holders in Canada sign an agreement that allows personal information about them to be viewed by U.S. authorities, the report said.

The privacy commissioner began his investigation earlier this year after concerns were raised about the effect of the Patriot Act on the privacy rights of British Columbians.

This month the B.C. government passed a law to prevent the U.S. from examining information on British Columbians that is in the possession of private U.S. companies.

Those that break that law risk fines from $2,000 for individuals and $500,000 for corporations.

The Patriot Act was enacted following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It allows the U.S. government to review information on private and public businesses in an effort to hunt down terrorists.

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?
Wait, isn't what could happen a legitimate concern? If this weren't the case, why do most states force us to by auto insurance policies? Hell, if it isn't a valid concern, why does the insurance industry exist at all?

I personally am a big fan of the Patriot Act. I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.
Right, because we all know how effective this country's law enforcement officials are at stopping the real threats. It all comes down to the trade-off between freedoms and security, and I guess you're on the opposite side of the line from me, apparently.

By the way, if you "don't see how it would ever affect me" regardless of who you associate with, you're not looking hard enough. The Patriot Act, like just any other piece of legislation on the books, can be abused. Badly.

I also believe that protecting our families and friends is worth a few hardships, such as being videotaped in public, and allowing police to search our bags on mass transit systems when they feel it is our best interest.
Except that, as a general rule, we were videotaped in public and had our bags searched before the Patriot Act anyway, so these points aren't particularly substantive.

Don't get me wrong. I don't put blind faith in our governments. But I also don't believe they are the evil big brother that some would make them out to be.

So what are your thoughts? Please be gentle, this is my first post here.
You're right, it doesn't affect most people, but sometimes oppressive laws don't. The government passes laws like this so that they can pick and choose when to enforce them; the simple fact that it doesn't directly screw a lot of us over is not a point in favor of its legitimacy. Basically, now the government can do all this ridiculous shit and when it does [as mentioned above], now it has the 'law' on its side [never mind that it grossly violates the 4th Amendment].

So I guess it all boils down to who you think had a better head for politics: G.W. Bush and the neocons, or Thomas Jefferson and co.

So you can take your Patriot Act and shove it up your monkey ass. How's that?
There's no call for you to speak to me like that. If you feel the need to act like a child, I'd appreciate it if you didn't respond to me.

So you can take your Patriot Act and shove it up your monkey ass.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to warn for that. If you'd kindly do me the favor of apologising, I won't have to open up the Centre and send you a telegram.

I don't know...the Patriot Act seems a little excessive; that's all. OK, so I have to let people search my jacket and my fiancee has to let people search her purse before entering a hockey game, but the arena staff would do that on their own, Patriot Act or no Patriot Act. What I don't like is how quickly it was pushed through Congress right after 9/11. It was almost as if 9/11 was an excuse to pass the Patriot Act. Not to say the government let 9/11 happen...I believe that's a little far-fetched...but it does look a little too much like it was put on reserve for such a situation. After all, the Bush administration was looking for an excuse to invade Iraq (why else would 9/11 be tied to Iraq) and wanted to ensure he had as much support as possible. The Patriot Act was a pretty good litmus test, really.

Though it hasn't affected me directly, I don't like the idea that the government can snoop in on me in the name of security. Plus the Patriot Act has so much pork on it, money's going to just about everything in the name of national security. We need security, yes, but a police state ain't the way to do it.
There's no call for you to speak to me like that. If you feel the need to act like a child, I'd appreciate it if you didn't respond to me.
Heh, welcome to the forums, chief.:p

So I guess it all boils down to who you think had a better head for politics: G.W. Bush and the neocons, or Thomas Jefferson and co.
I think you make some very valid arguments, and you have given me a bit to think about, but this statement is a bit naive, IMHO, because I don't think Jefferson and Co. had Jetliners, plastique explosives, shoulder fired missiles, anthrax, or any number of other nasties on their mind when they wrote the Constitution.

I understand that laws can be abused, and I would be quite upset about having to open my mail in front of other people, but I really fail to see how it is SO bad, compared to the alternative of just not doing anything to give law enforcement the tools they need to find terror cells.

I'll open all my mail in front of someone, if it means saving lives. I don't get anything in the mail that would get me in trouble, or that I would be ashamed of.

Perhaps when someone comes up with a better solution, I'll be more inclined to say that it's time for the Patriot Act to be taken off the books.

I think you make some very valid arguments, and you have given me a bit to think about, but this statement is a bit naive, IMHO, because I don't think Jefferson and Co. had Jetliners, plastique explosives, shoulder fired missiles, anthrax, or any number of other nasties on their mind when they wrote the Constitution.
You're missing the point. The point here is about the freedom/security dichotomy; the advances made in weaponry have nothing to do with it. For the founding fathers, the answer to this perceived danger was to allow Americans to bear arms. In an individual sense you can't really get much more secure than this, since obviously a theif is going to have a hard time picking my pocket with a .45 in his face.

Again, it boils down to freedoms vs. security. The people we trust to protect us [i.e. the Police and the Military] have a fine line to toe insofar as that is concerned, but are we really going to get anwhere if we solve the problems by contradicting our own founding principles? What's the point of freaking out and making the Homeland Security Dept. more uber if it rapes our freedoms in the process? Why shouldn't we just surrender to totalitarianism, if the Constitution is so outmoded?

This is something of a slippery slope. By saying "I don't think Jefferson and Co. had Jetliners, plastique explosives, shoulder fired missiles, anthrax, or any number of other nasties on their mind when they wrote the Constitution," you're basically suggesting that technology has essentially rendered our founding principles [i.e. the Bill of Rights] invalid.

Heh, welcome to the forums, chief.:p
He's right MIB, Keruvalia may have upset you but in this forum you have to grow some skin. ;)

I'm afraid I'm going to have to warn for that. If you'd kindly do me the favor of apologising, I won't have to open up the Centre and send you a telegram.

I was asked for any specific reason to speak out against the Patriot Act and I gave it. If you want to warn me for that, so be it. I will not, and cannot, apologise for the US Postal service singling me out for being Muslim.

Period.

I stand by my statement. Take your Patriot Act and shove it up your ass. I say that as an American Citizen.

I understand that laws can be abused, and I would be quite upset about having to open my mail in front of other people, but I really fail to see how it is SO bad, compared to the alternative of just not doing anything to give law enforcement the tools they need to find terror cells.
You might not care, but other people certainly do. If I were asked to open my mail in front of the postmaster, I'd hit the roof. Is it because there's anything in there I don't want them to see? No. It's because my government is contradicting itself by telling me I have a right to privacy [4th Amendment] and then turning around and telling me [if I were of Arabian descent] that I have to open my mail in front of them for no better reason than my skin is dark.

I'll open all my mail in front of someone, if it means saving lives. I don't get anything in the mail that would get me in trouble, or that I would be ashamed of.

Perhaps when someone comes up with a better solution, I'll be more inclined to say that it's time for the Patriot Act to be taken off the books.
The solution, strictly speaking, is to knock it off with this interventionist bullshit we've been pulling since 1917. If our collective politicians would have had two neurons to rub together for warmth, we wouldn't be in this position in the first place. We're not obligated to police the world because we happen to be the most powerful nation on it.

Incidentally, anyone who ever espoused altruism as a doctrine really ought to take a good hard look at where it's gotten us, foreign policy-wise.

I was asked for any specific reason to speak out against the Patriot Act and I gave it. If you want to warn me for that, so be it. I will not, and cannot, apologise for the US Postal service singling me out for being Muslim.

Period.

I stand by my statement. Take your Patriot Act and shove it up your ass. I say that as an American Citizen.
Keruvalia, I'm on your side in this argument, if you'll notice I'm making numerous points against the Patriot Act, and I too am an American citizen. My problem [obviously] is not with your arguments, but rather with your decidedly undiplomatic closing phrase. If you're going to insist on being a prick about it, you might just have to go a few days without posting here. I strongly suggest [hint, hint] that you leave this thread anyway, as I see you've chosen to repeat your comments despite the fact that I just warned you for the exact same goddamn thing.

At any rate, as a result of your comments, I've affixed a warning to your account anyway. A telegram is not necessary as you seem to understand the nature of your offense. Do it again and you can kiss your posting privileges goodbye. I'm not going to offer you an exemption for flaming just because you have a legitimate point.

THIS thread has certainly garnered some well-deserved attention.
And, based on my posting history, any guesses whose side i'd have to take here?

I would like to point out that the Patriot Act allows the government to jail us without any reason, and for as long as they desire. Sure, it's never happened to me, but it has happened to plenty of people already (there are news articles about this, go find them if you don't believe me), so it's not just some "could" situation, even though "could" situations are important to note.
Furthermore, that specific right was placed into our Constitution for a reason. In ancient to colonial Britain, the monarchy would jail people in a similar manner, simply because the monarchy was not happy with the people, sometimes for political reasons and sometimes for personal reasons, but not for legitimate legal reasons. That right was put into the Constitution as a safeguard against corrupt government officials. I prefer keeping safeguards to not keeping them.
In the case of the Patriot Act, we do not get anything back for it (contrary to what was suggested by the first poster). If the government has real concern about whether or not a person is jeopardizing the safety of any of the people of the country, it has other legal possibilities availible to deal with the problem. These possibilities amount to the same things as outlined in the Patriot Act, it's just that the government must do it specifically for the person it's concerned about, and it must have a relevant concern in mind. Therefore, we do not gain any safety in return - people who the government know will cause danger can be dealt with without the use of the Patriot Act.

Basically, the difference between having the Patriot Act and not having the Patriot Act is that the government no longer has to have a reason for refusing people any of their rights.

You might not care, but other people certainly do. If I were asked to open my mail in front of the postmaster, I'd hit the roof. Is it because there's anything in there I don't want them to see? No. It's because my government is contradicting itself by telling me I have a right to privacy [4th Amendment] and then turning around and telling me [if I were of Arabian descent] that I have to open my mail in front of them for no better reason than my skin is dark.


The solution, strictly speaking, is to knock it off with this interventionist bullshit we've been pulling since 1917. If our collective politicians would have had two neurons to rub together for warmth, we wouldn't be in this position in the first place. We're not obligated to police the world because we happen to be the most powerful nation on it.

Incidentally, anyone who ever espoused altruism as a doctrine really ought to take a good hard look at where it's gotten us, foreign policy-wise.
Hey, i've got a question for you, Melkor, what if the best posts of evidence and such on this topic occurred on a thread that was on the old server? Are any thread archives available of, say, Patriot Act by Forseral?
I think they would be useful here.

He's right MIB, Keruvalia may have upset you but in this forum you have to grow some skin. ;)
No worries. I have some pretty thick skin. I'll just ignore him. Seems he may be a bit touchy, being a Muslim in America. Can't say as I blame him, I guess.

Of course, I'm an Atheist, so I don't really see the point in praying to thin air anyways, so I don't really know how it feels, but I do know persecution. Ever try telling your fiancés mom that you aren't getting married in a church? I'd rather face the feds! :p

Hey, i've got a question for you, Melkor, what if the best posts of evidence and such on this topic occurred on a thread that was on the old server? Are any thread archives available of, say, Patriot Act by Forseral?
I think they would be useful here.
I'm given to understand that some of that stuff can still be found if you know exactly what to look for, but I've never had much success in such undertakings. Before the Jolt move, we had to purge the forums every once in a while and even if you could still find old stuff, there's a 50/50 chance that it was purged.

My problem [obviously] is not with your arguments, but rather with your decidedly undiplomatic closing phrase.

Wait .... you think anything about me is "diplomatic"? I don't know whether to be offended or flattered!

If you're going to insist on being a prick about it, you might just have to go a few days without posting here. I strongly suggest [hint, hint] that you leave this thread anyway, as I see you've chosen to repeat your comments despite the fact that I just warned you for the exact same goddamn thing

Yes, well ... perhaps someday someone will bring up something that affects you beyond a passing level and truly speaks to you on a cultural or religious level. I understand that maybe someone could make a legislation against the Jews and it wouldn't affect you, personally, but maybe you could understand that it would affect others. The Patriot Act affects me on levels that the average White Christian American will never understand and, unfortunately, I'm now being told that if I were to explain it on a level as deeply emotional and troubling as the 9/11 bombings - which it is - that I can be banned from these forums. No, I'm not screaming "freedom of speech", but I am questioning motives. Would you do the same to someone who, on an emotional level, decries the head of Muslims on a pike based on 9/11? Come on ... the Patriot Act singles out Muslims. If you don't see that, you're blind.

At any rate, as a result of your comments, I've affixed a warning to your account anyway.

It ain't the first, and it won't be the last. I have a great deal of respect for you, Melkor, but I think your blinders hinder you more than you care to admit.

Be honest ... it's because I proved you weren't a hard-ass. ;)

Wait .... you think anything about me is "diplomatic"? I don't know whether to be offended or flattered!
Irrelevant. You're expected to treat other posters with some modicum of decency, whether you regard yourself as "diplomatic" or not.

Yes, well ... perhaps someday someone will bring up something that affects you beyond a passing level and truly speaks to you on a cultural or religious level. I understand that maybe someone could make a legislation against the Jews and it wouldn't affect you, personally, but maybe you could understand that it would affect others. The Patriot Act affects me on levels that the average White Christian American will never understand and, unfortunately, I'm now being told that if I were to explain it on a level as deeply emotional and troubling as the 9/11 bombings - which it is - that I can be banned from these forums. No, I'm not screaming "freedom of speech", but I am questioning motives. Would you do the same to someone who, on an emotional level, decries the head of Muslims on a pike based on 9/11?
Dude, is any of this getting through to you? It's OK to hate the Patriot Act and I definately understand why you do, beleive me, I hate it too. The fact that something fucks you over does not make it OK to tell other people to shove $OBJECT up their asses. That's never been OK here and it never will be; I don't care who you are, I don't care what color your skin is or what temple you pray at. Capeesh?

It ain't the first, and it won't be the last. I have a great deal of respect for you, Melkor, but I think your blinders hinder you more than you care to admit.
Right, because I'm issuing a warning for something which is quite clearly flaming :rolleyes:

You speak of "blinders" yet you keep responding to me under the assumption that I'm pro Patriot Act or somehow don't understand why people don't like it. Arguing with me about this is not going to improve your position; quite the contrary in fact.

Be honest ... it's because I proved you weren't a hard-ass. ;)
Oh yeah? I wouldn't be so sure. Keep arguing with me about it and we'll see just how soft I really am.

Hey Keruvalia, I think the problem is the "you." If I've read the rules correctly, you could have said pretty much the same thing and it would have been totally fine. I think you probably could have said "The Congress should take their Patriot Act and shove it up their..." (yes, you can finish the quote) and it would have been okay (although perhaps Melkor should check that). I'm not sure I'd advise saying it because it's still a bit terrible, but I think it would have been perfectly fine according to the rules of NationStates, and it would have sent across the same sentiment.

Wait .... you think anything about me is "diplomatic"? I don't know whether to be offended or flattered!



Yes, well ... perhaps someday someone will bring up something that affects you beyond a passing level and truly speaks to you on a cultural or religious level. I understand that maybe someone could make a legislation against the Jews and it wouldn't affect you, personally, but maybe you could understand that it would affect others. The Patriot Act affects me on levels that the average White Christian American will never understand and, unfortunately, I'm now being told that if I were to explain it on a level as deeply emotional and troubling as the 9/11 bombings - which it is - that I can be banned from these forums. No, I'm not screaming "freedom of speech", but I am questioning motives. Would you do the same to someone who, on an emotional level, decries the head of Muslims on a pike based on 9/11? Come on ... the Patriot Act singles out Muslims. If you don't see that, you're blind.



It ain't the first, and it won't be the last. I have a great deal of respect for you, Melkor, but I think your blinders hinder you more than you care to admit.

Be honest ... it's because I proved you weren't a hard-ass. ;)
How can you compare 3000 dead Americans to having to open your mail in front of people?

I'm not excusing the action. I think it was wrong of them, and I think you should file a suit (and I hope you win) if they had no other reason than skin color, and if it means anything to you, I apologize if I offended you. But I think the comparison between the Patriot Act and 9/11 is a bit lop sided.

BTW, thats what you do when a law is misused. You use the law to right the wrong.

I'm given to understand that some of that stuff can still be found if you know exactly what to look for, but I've never had much success in such undertakings. Before the Jolt move, we had to purge the forums every once in a while and even if you could still find old stuff, there's a 50/50 chance that it was purged.
Well, there's only two threads i'd be likely to exhume, being Heikoku's thread, "C'mon get me, pseudo-christians" because, even with all the heresy, it really was an interesting read.
And of course "Patriot Act" by Forseral, since it went on quite a while with some excellent posts as well.
I'm not just interjecting my own involvement here and being conceited, i really think those were my favorite threads (that i remember) since starting here.

I punched up myself to see what i've posted, and it doesn't go any older than October, i think. At least it didn't last time. :(

Hey, I think the problem is the "you." If I've read the rules correctly, you could have said pretty much the same thing and it would have been totally fine. I think you probably could have said "The Congress should take their Patriot Act and shove it up their..." (yes, you can finish the quote) and it would have been okay (although perhaps Melkor should check that). I'm not sure I'd advise saying it, but I think it would have been perfectly fine, and it would have sent across the same sentiment.
Yes, that would have been remarkably more approriate. It's not a crime to speak ill of political figures here, since that's a big part of what political debate and discourse is all about.

That said, I would appreciate it if we could stop derailing this thread. Keruvalia, you've been warned; and if you [or anyone else] have an issue with it take it up in Moderation. This thread was meant to discuss the Patriot Act, not the site's forum moderation policies.

Hey, I think the problem is the "you." If I've read the rules correctly, you could have said pretty much the same thing and it would have been totally fine. I think you probably could have said "The Congress should take their Patriot Act and shove it up their..." (yes, you can finish the quote) and it would have been okay (although perhaps Melkor should check that). I'm not sure I'd advise saying it, but I think it would have been perfectly fine, and it would have sent across the same sentiment.

Unfortunately, our emotions get the better of us, don't they? How many times do I have to see on these forums "Muslims should be beaten and hanged" before I see a mod say, "Not all Muslims are reponsible, I'm attaching a warning to you."??

Yes, the Congress should take the Patriot Act and shove it wherever I deem fit, but so should those people who say "No American citizen has been harmed by it". I am an American Citizen and I HAVE been harmed by it.

BTW, thats what you do when a law is misused. You use the law to right the wrong.

Yeah .... send me the money to hire a lawyer, mmkay?

How can you compare 3000 dead Americans to having to open your mail in front of people?

I'm not excusing the action. I think it was wrong of them, and I think you should file a suit (and I hope you win) if they had no other reason than skin color, and if it means anything to you, I apologize if I offended you. But I think the comparison between the Patriot Act and 9/11 is a bit lop sided.

BTW, thats what you do when a law is misused. You use the law to right the wrong.
And again, you're missing the point. Being forced to open's one mail in front of the local constable is not comparable to two planes flying into the World Trade Center and he's not suggesting that. What he is suggesting is that the crusade against Muslims is precisely as ridiculous as the events that perpetuated it. I beleive he's expressing concern about the policies that underlie the action rather than the action itself.

I'm not excusing the action. I think it was wrong of them, and I think you should file a suit (and I hope you win) if they had no other reason than skin color, and if it means anything to you, I apologize if I offended you. But I think the comparison between the Patriot Act and 9/11 is a bit lop sided.

BTW, thats what you do when a law is misused. You use the law to right the wrong.

Actually, the point is that the Patriot Act makes that perfectly legal, and so the law is no help, because that IS the law. Read my post.

BTW, would anyone like a link to the original text of the Patriot Act? I found it before (and only read the first 32 pages - it's over 100 pages long!), and could probably find it again.

This thread was meant to discuss the Patriot Act, not the site's forum moderation policies.

This thread was meant to discuss how the Patriot Act was really such a bad thing.

From the OP: "Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?"

I named an example. I aplogize if I get a little emotional when an act of Congress curtails my rights as a citizen.

I beleive he's expressing concern about the policies that underlie the action rather than the action itself.

Thank you, Melkor. See? I told you that you were a good man. :D

Yeah .... send me the money to hire a lawyer, mmkay?
Have you tried calling the ACLU? Or perhaps asked someone in your religious community if they could help or know anyone who can?

And BTW, I hope you don't think I'm calling for Muslims "heads on a pike" I never said that. I respect Muslims as much as I respect Christians, Jews, and any other religion.

Dude, is any of this getting through to you? It's OK to hate the Patriot Act and I definately understand why you do, beleive me, I hate it too. The fact that something fucks you over does not make it OK to tell other people to shove $OBJECT up their asses. That's never been OK here and it never will be; I don't care who you are, I don't care what color your skin is or what temple you pray at. Capeesh?


Ok ok ok ... *this* I can understand. Somewhat ... but I'll be watching. (as I always do)

Oh yeah? I wouldn't be so sure. Keep arguing with me about it and we'll see just how soft I really am.

Now now ... don't assume I'm afraid of authority. I will argue with you as long as I feel it's a valid argument. I grew up being taught every day since I was 5 to say "Fuck Authority". That "3 words under my name" may work on some kids, but I am immune because I know you're a reasonable human.

Have you tried calling the ACLU? Or perhaps asked someone in your religious community if they could help or know anyone who can?


Unfortunately, anyone who's tried to fight this are just "liberal America hating faggots".

And BTW, I hope you don't think I'm calling for Muslims "heads on a pike" I never said that. I respect Muslims as much as I respect Christians, Jews, and any other religion.

Lol ... no ... I know the posters who hate Muslims, regardless of ethinicity.

Now now ... don't assume I'm afraid of authority...

Irrelevant. It's effect on you will be the same whether you're afraid of it or not. My point wasn't so much that you should be afraid of what I'll do to you; rather it was that you were going to be forumbanned if you kept it up.

It seems you've settled down a bit, and it seems I've gotten through. Please, just take a minute to relax if you feel the urge to suggest using lengthy documents as suppositories. At the very least, choose another target next time. Like Congress. Or Bush. :D

Unfortunately, anyone who's tried to fight this are just "liberal America hating faggots".

Well, ya can't just give up, man! I don't mean fighting the law itself, just the particular applicaton of it. You can't expect to change what's wrong if you just throw your hands up in the air and say "Oh well, what can I do?"

I'd nail those fuckers to the wall, one way or another if you feel they didn't apply the law in a proper manner.

Lol ... no ... I know the posters who hate Muslims, regardless of ethinicity.
Cool! Don't want my first thread here to brand me a racist. That would put the icing on an already fucked up day.

At the very least, choose another target next time. Like Congress. Or Bush. :D
How about suggesting that congress use a holly bush as a suppository? That OK? :D

How about suggesting that congress use a holly bush as a suppository? That OK? :D
I'd rather they use a mature cactus, but that's just me.

Is anyone going to respond to my posts? Anyone?

Keruvalia - this is true, but the judges still have to be impartial, so progress can be made nonetheless. The ACLU wouldn't be a bad one, actually, since they're already annoyed about the Patriot Act. Still, it might be worth seeing if the Patriot Act gets renewed or not. You might not have to go through any process at all!

MIB - so... I'm confused. Have you changed your stance, or are you just upset about this application?

It seems you've settled down a bit, and it seems I've gotten through. Please, just take a minute to relax if you feel the urge to suggest using lengthy documents as suppositories. At the very least, choose another target next time. Like Congress. Or Bush. :D

Ok ok ok ... would you feel better if I said all the people who voted to uphold the Patriot Act (which are 95% of all the members of Congress) and all members of these forums who agree with them and who believe the Patriot Act to be good for America should be shot, hanged, and tried for crimes against humanity should actually be tickled with a goose feather?

I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.


I bet a lot of people said that during the McCarthy era.

"So you hate the Patriot act?"

No.

"So you hate the Patriot act?"

No.

I do ... and so should you.

Is anyone going to respond to my posts? Anyone?

Keruvalia - this is true, but the judges still have to be impartial, so progress can be made nonetheless. The ACLU wouldn't be a bad one, actually, since they're already annoyed about the Patriot Act. Still, it might be worth seeing if the Patriot Act gets renewed or not. You might not have to go through any process at all!

MIB - so... I'm confused. Have you changed your stance, or are you just upset about this application?
I'll respond. Sure, feel free to post a few links to the full-length patriot act, and whatever summations you feel are fitting/appropriate.

I do ... and so should you.
I have seen none of the alleged "detrimental impact on our civil liberties" so decried by the ant-Patriot Act crowd. So tell me why I should oppose it.

"So you hate the Patriot act?"

No.
Guns don't kill people ... bullets do. ;)

"So you hate the Patriot act?"

No.

You know what? Fuck it. I couldn't send a good sample of my homemade barbecue sauce to Eutrusca - that's right EUSTRUCA - because Muslims are seen as suspect.

Capt. Forrest can't enjoy the fruits of my bbq labour thanks to the Patriot Act.

So, you know what, I've said it once and I'll say it again: Shove your Patriot Act up your monkey ass.

Ok ok ok ... would you feel better if I said all the people who voted to uphold the Patriot Act (which are 95% of all the members of Congress) and all members of these forums who agree with them and who believe the Patriot Act to be good for America should be shot, hanged, and tried for crimes against humanity should actually be tickled with a goose feather?

Of course. Just remember to add in the part of them being tickled forever. I think many of them would prefer the shooting, hanging, and trials.

You know what? Fuck it. I couldn't send a good sample of my homemade barbecue sauce to Eurtrusca - that's right EUSTRUCA - because Muslims are seen as suspect.

Capt. Forrest can't enjoy the fruits of my bbq labour thanks to the Patriot Act.

So, you know what, I've said it once and I'll say it again: Shove your Patriot Act up your monkey ass.
I find that difficult in the extreme to believe. Sorry.

I have seen none of the alleged "detrimental impact on our civil liberties" so decried by the ant-Patriot Act crowd. So tell me why I should oppose it.
Eutrusca, you have indeed SEEN them, you just haven't taken them seriously.
Certainly you've seen my and CanuckHeaven's *many* posts on this topic, as well as Domici's and Gymoor II:The Return's. With all that scattershot something would've nicked your perceptive abilities by now.

I find that difficult in the extreme to believe. Sorry.

Suit yourself. *shrug* It's always hard to believe when you're not in the minority.

I know, for a fact, that you've experienced elder discrimination. I, as a 30-35 year old would never understand it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

I find that difficult in the extreme to believe. Sorry.


Actually I tell you what ...

Wrap a turban around your head and have some loose fitting clothes and try to buy a plane ticket or try to mail a package to someone.

Good luck.

I'll respond. Sure, feel free to post a few links to the full-length patriot act, and whatever summations you feel are fitting/appropriate.

OK! I guess you'll just have to copy and paste, unless it randomly decides to become a link on its own. http://www.aclu.org/FilesPDFs/patriot_text.pdf

Although I actually meant to my arguments, but that works too! Now I don't feel nonexistant.

This sure as h-e-doublehockeysticks is turning into an interesting thread.
Move over, Desperate Housewives!!

*munches popcorn*

Actually, all humour aside, not all the Patriot Act is completely evil, some is relatively benign in *function*. But it sure as h-e-doublehockeysticks FUNCTIONS AS A WHOLE in an unholy fashion.
And surprisingly enough, a senator - REPUBLICAN, at that - from my state isn't going along with the smoke & mirrors and is actually making the most crucially evil/invasive acts much harder to implement.
Amen to that.

(BTW - is there an emotie for "roundeyes" - not roll eyes ... like "Macauley Culkin?)

OK! http://www.aclu.org/FilesPDFs/patriot_text.pdf

Although I actually meant to my arguments, but that works too! Now I don't feel nonexistant.
Thanks for your prompt and curteous reply!
And .... if you don't want to feel nonexistant, just bash that chimpf*ck Bush a few times in the right manner, or come up with some bizarre illogical rant tangent off of someone's post, and you should do fine.
Oh, and if i may extend as much, welcome to NS.

EDIT: even better, give a tangent on the perils of "liberalism" or the infallibility of conservativism, and someone'll tag ya real quick like.

Actually I tell you what ...

Wrap a turban around your head and have some loose fitting clothes and try to buy a plane ticket or try to mail a package to someone.

Good luck.

Forrest, like every other Bushevik, suffers from the "It's Not Happening To Me" Disease in regards to the Patriot Act. It's not happening to him so he couldn't give a flying fuck about the misery that Muslims in America have to go through.

I find that difficult in the extreme to believe. Sorry.

You know what? I have a better comparison for you ....

How many of your brothers in arms came home to a ticker tape parade? You know as well as I do that the people who fought in your war were spit upon and hated.

They were hated because some media jack-ass told them to hate them.

Well, guess what ... some media jack-ass is now telling the American people to hate me ... why? Because I pray 5 times a day in a certain direction.

You, of all people, should be on my side.

Patriots fought to free this land from colonial rule and forged a new law for us to live by so the government could never abuse the people living under it. We are all supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in this land, so why should we have to open our mail and be tossed in jail for doing no wrong?

I am proud and free and good. I have nothing to hide from my government, but I would be mad as hell if what happened to Keruvalia happened to me. It's not the act, that's simple enough, but the fact that my countrymen don't trust me. I am a good person, I should not have to open my mail like some evil smuggler. It is my right to pick up my mail unmolested... or it WAS my right. The Patriot Act is an insult to the patriots who fought to free America! I would rather live free, than live safe.

I would rather live free, than live safe.
...and insert Ben Franklin quote here, and rightly so. *bows*

I was not allowed to get a job with the NSA due to some information that they had on me from a conversation that would not have been able to be tracked without the patriot act. There you go.

I would rather live free, than live safe.
Is the proper, or at least more dramatic, form of the saying I'd rather die free, than live safe. Though I'd rather live free and safe.:p

Has the Patriot Act really made the American people safer in actuality?:confused:

Look at how willing many are to give up rights that many Americans have died for. The main problems most have with the act is (taken from Amnesty International):

Creates a broad definition of "domestic terrorism" that may have a chilling effect on the US and international rights to free expression and association. The law defines "domestic terrorism" as acts committed in the United States "dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws," if the US government determines that they "appear to be intended" to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," or "to intimidate or coerce a civilian population." Such ambiguous language allows for loose interpretation that might violate civil liberties and international human rights.
Allows non-citizens to be detained without charge and held indefinitely once charged. This is permissible if the US government certifies that there are "reasonable grounds" to believe a person's action threatens national security. This runs counter to US and international rights to due process and could also lead to violations of rights in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which guarantee that governments be notified if their nationals are detained.
Infringes on the right to privacy and removes many types of judicial review over intelligence activities.
The USA PATRIOT Act permits the government to scrutinize peoples' reading habits by monitoring public library and bookstore records, without notifying the suspect. It also allows for "sneak and peak" tactics such as physical search of property and computers, wiretapping and monitoring of email, and access to financial and educational records, without providing notification. These activities contradict the right to be free from arbitrary interference with individuals' privacy, as protected in the US Constitution and the ICCPR.

Give the gov't an inch, they will take a mile. Once the people willingly give up their rights - they will never come back.

J Edgar Hoover used illegal wiretaps and sneak and peek tactics to gain information to blackmail citizens and gov't officials to get his way. He accumulated a vast amount of information on his enemies and used for his own personal gain. Take away the judiciary involvement and you leave the door wide open for another powerful nutcase to legally obtain this type of information and use it against private citizens and gov't officials.

First of all, Keru...don't get a forumban. You raise good points, and I understand the passion you feel. Believe me, I do. But getting forumbanned means that for however long, you won't be able to make your points, and will miss a chance to maybe change someones mind. You have proven that yes, in fact, the patriot act effects good Americans. Keep making those points, but do it as calmly as you can (again, I understand the passion you have...just don't let passion cloud your good judgement)

Now, for the OP.

I have been impacted directly. What is worse, I only found out today, and the incident happened 2 months ago...which makes it worse.

I have given donations to the ACLU (strike 1). Unfortunatly, due to a clerical error, or my bad handwriting, my middle name was recorded as "Alam" rather than "Alan" (strike 2).

I sent some CD's and other stuff (my moms cookies) to a friend of mine. They were in a non-descript brown box with sharpie writings (or scratchings, as my handwriting has been described) for the adress and return. I asked if my friend had ever recieved them, and he said yes, a week ago, but what happened to the box and the cookies. Now, when I sent it, it was a pristine box. Now, I understand that shipping damages the box, so that was my first reaction. Then he described what it looked like when it got there. The top had been folded four-corner style to close it. packing tape to seal it, with cardboard layers peeled off. The problem? I had used duct tape, and hadn't 4-cornered it. What is more, the package had been delayed for several weeks. At that point, the cookies had grown a nice layer of mold.

I called the post office to see if they could explain to me why my package had been delayed and opened. Appearently, my handwriting again looked to say "Alam", and it was flagged, searched (legally under the patriot act because non-descript brown boxes are suspicious:rolleyes: ) and THEN shipped.

seems that most problems come through the mail. I don't let it get me down too much, but it is really a pain in the ass. Not to mention the implications for my privacy rights

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?

I personally am a big fan of the Patriot Act. I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.

I also believe that protecting our families and friends is worth a few hardships, such as being videotaped in public, and allowing police to search our bags on mass transit systems when they feel it is our best interest.

Don't get me wrong. I don't put blind faith in our governments. But I also don't believe they are the evil big brother that some would make them out to be.

So what are your thoughts? Please be gentle, this is my first post here.

Does the Patriot Act positively impact your life, specifically? Or is your liking of it only due to the fact that it COULD prevent terrorism attacks?

I hate the patriot act. I don't see how it would ever help me unless I'm the victim of a terrorism act, which is unlikely, because I live in a pretty unimportant city, and don't go to important ones often.

I believe that rare terrorist attacks are worth not suffering through countless unfair searches, and hinderances, as well as the cost. We are losing less than 20 people a year!(Its a guess, but seems about right)

Don't get me wrong, I put blind faith into the government. But I don't believe terrorism will ever effect me directly.

Anyways, I hate jews, christians, and muslims, eat babies, am a neo-nazi communist who loves unadulterates market systems, and I masturbate 3 million times a day to kiddie porn. Plz don't flame me I'm new kthxbie.

Keruvalia, Sarkhaan, and Burshwack, I ask if any of you will be offended if, the next time this topic comes up -AND IT WILL- i mention you and your circumstances, at least what you want to share on this forum?
I will absolutely NOT mention them in jest.

?

I have seen none of the alleged "detrimental impact on our civil liberties" so decried by the ant-Patriot Act crowd. So tell me why I should oppose it.
So are you taking notes, Eutrusca?

Keruvalia, Sarkhaan, and Burshwack, I ask if any of you will be offended if, the next time this topic comes up -AND IT WILL- i mention you and your circumstances, at least what you want to share on this forum?
I will absolutely NOT mention them in jest.

?
hell, mention them in jest if it so pleases you (yes, that is my overtired way of saying feel free) If it will further an argument against this damn act, then you have my permission and blessing. And if anyone tries to call you out or you need more details, feel free to tg me. I tend to skip lots of threads, so I prolly wont see it.

hell, mention them in jest if it so pleases you (yes, that is my overtired way of saying feel free) If it will further an argument against this damn act, then you have my permission and blessing. And if anyone tries to call you out or you need more details, feel free to tg me. I tend to skip lots of threads, so I prolly wont see it.
Thank you. I mean that. This is one of the few things i take very seriously on this forum.
*bows*
Good luck/providence to you and i sincerely hope that you don't go through any further abominable circumstances due the idiocy/evil of most of Congress and most of the lot of the rightwing f*ckhead supporters.

Here's my 2 cents, for all it's worth...

Did anyone hear about Sister McPhee?

Yes, that's Sister as in nun.

It took her nine months to get her name cleared from the government's no-fly list. Keeping in mind that her job includes working with the Department of Education and speaking frequently at conferences.

And why was she on this no fly list? Because there was a terrorist supposedly using the last name McPhee...they didn't have any idea what first name the person was using, so they black balled people with that last name in general.

How did she get this resolved AFTER 9 MONTHS? She finally had to have the head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops contact the White House to get it resolved so she could fly again.

The information used in the no-fly lists is in part furnished courtesy of the Patriot Act.

Now, I know those catholic nuns are pretty nasty with those yard sticks and all...but c'mon! :headbang:

Full story is:


I feel sorry for people with the last name Smith.

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?

I personally am a big fan of the Patriot Act. I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.

I also believe that protecting our families and friends is worth a few hardships, such as being videotaped in public, and allowing police to search our bags on mass transit systems when they feel it is our best interest.

Don't get me wrong. I don't put blind faith in our governments. But I also don't believe they are the evil big brother that some would make them out to be.

So what are your thoughts? Please be gentle, this is my first post here.

i am no big brother fearing...oh my god my rights...

however,just because i walk down the street or go to the library,i DO NOT want my rights violated!my right to privacy,my right to NOT being videotaped(unreasonable search and seizure,innocent until proven guilty)
all that quaint stuff are constitution spells out and for some silly reason i hold dear as an article of faith between myself and my government.

i pay taxes for our collective good and to provide a safety net for the unfortunate...i do not pay taxes to give my government the right to trample the rights i have spelled out in the constitution,that my grandfather and father died protecting,so some power hungry politician/government can control my daily movements,or worse yet,some weak ass please protect me from the world ninny..feels safer.

our governments job imho is to protect us from external threats...not from ourselves,to provide a safety net for the poor amongst us,deal with trade and stay the hell out of my life.

the local police deals with issues of someone denying some ones rights,and only,only when they have violated someones rights.

innocent until proven guilty,not pre emtive policing...kinda like the bush doctrine in iraq that i despise.

it's a real slippery slope when you start giving the gov. the power to snoop around what your researching at the library,or asking for your "papers" at there whim.

ultimate power corrupts ultimately...and better yet,"to trade freedom for security"you end up with neither,just a bunch of jack booted thugs at your door,because you looked up something on the web.

you say if you did nothing wrong,then you have nothing to worry about...germans said that in the 1930's and we know were that led.

freedom until i violate your rights...then come knocking..until then..stay out of my biz!

or move in with your mommy and hide under the bed,cause i would rather be blown to bits by a terrorist,then have my individual freedom usurped by people (gov) that "knows what is better for me"

if i violate your rights,then i deserve punishment,and should pay for my misdeeds...but until i violate your rights,i demand to move thru my life unmolested or my privacy invaded!

read the constitution and try to figure out why we are who we are...to put it simply,i dont need no stinkin nanny!!

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?

I personally am a big fan of the Patriot Act. I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.

I also believe that protecting our families and friends is worth a few hardships, such as being videotaped in public, and allowing police to search our bags on mass transit systems when they feel it is our best interest.

Don't get me wrong. I don't put blind faith in our governments. But I also don't believe they are the evil big brother that some would make them out to be.

So what are your thoughts? Please be gentle, this is my first post here.

i am no big brother fearing...oh my god my rights...

however,just because i walk down the street or go to the library,i DO NOT want my rights violated!my right to privacy,my right to NOT being videotaped(unreasonable search and seizure,innocent until proven guilty)
all that quaint stuff are constitution spells out and for some silly reason i hold dear as an article of faith between myself and my government.

i pay taxes for our collective good and to provide a safety net for the unfortunate...i do not pay taxes to give my government the right to trample the rights i have spelled out in the constitution,that my grandfather and father died protecting,so some power hungry politician/government can control my daily movements,or worse yet,some weak ass please protect me from the world ninny..feels safer.

our governments job imho is to protect us from external threats...not from ourselves,to provide a safety net for the poor amongst us,deal with trade and stay the hell out of my life.

the local police deals with issues of someone denying some ones rights,and only,only when they have violated someones rights.

innocent until proven guilty,not pre emtive policing...kinda like the bush doctrine in iraq that i despise.

it's a real slippery slope when you start giving the gov. the power to snoop around what your researching at the library,or asking for your "papers" at there whim.

ultimate power corrupts ultimately...and better yet,"to trade freedom for security"you end up with neither,just a bunch of jack booted thugs at your door,because you looked up something on the web.

you say if you did nothing wrong,then you have nothing to worry about...germans said that in the 1930's and we know were that led.

freedom until i violate your rights...then come knocking..until then..stay out of my biz!

or move in with your mommy and hide under the bed,cause i would rather be blown to bits by a terrorist,then have my individual freedom usurped by people (gov) that "knows what is better for me"

if i violate your rights,then i deserve punishment,and should pay for my misdeeds...but until i violate your rights,i demand to move thru my life unmolested or my privacy invaded!

read the constitution and try to figure out why we are who we are...to put it simply,i dont need no stinkin nanny!!

by the way..welcome..and i hope i didn't sound harsh to you.not my intent...great question i happen to passionate about...thanks and welcome to the wonderful world of "oh yeah"..lol:fluffle:

Well i note that i haven't mentioned much help here.
So i'm posting the name of Maher Arar, whom CanuckHeaven and i have covered in great detail on this forum before.
Google him sometime. I've seen there's even a website about the details and status of his legal proceedings.

First of all, Keru...don't get a forumban.

I elected to go to bed instead. It's an emotional topic, tempers will rise.

I elected to go to bed instead. It's an emotional topic, tempers will rise.
understandable.

Can anybody name a specific example of the Patriot Act negatively impacting their life? Or is your opposition based solely on what could happen?
You'll find that most people's objections to any peice of legislature are based on what might happen, rather than what has happened: once you have fallen foul of a stupid law, it's too late to do anything much about it, after all.

I personally am a big fan of the Patriot Act. I don't see how it would ever affect me unless I'm doing something wrong or associating with bad people, and I feel it gives law enforcement a valuable tool to keep us safe.

I also believe that protecting our families and friends is worth a few hardships, such as being videotaped in public, and allowing police to search our bags on mass transit systems when they feel it is our best interest.
"Those who are willing to exchange lasting freedoms for temporary security deserve neither freedom nor security, nor will they receive either."

I would like to point out that the Patriot Act allows the government to jail us without any reason, and for as long as they desire.

By "us", I assume you mean US Citizens. Can you cite a specific line in the Patriot Act that makes this possible? I'm reading it right now, and I can't find what you're talking about.

SEC. 412. MANDATORY DETENTION OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS; HABEAS CORPUS; JUDICIAL REVIEW.

This section only applies to people who are not US citizens.

If you're a US citizen, the claim that you can be detained indefinitely without charge is not part of the Patriot Act.

While we may have done such arrests, that was not done under the authority of the Patriot Act.

This section only applies to people who are not US citizens.

If you're a US citizen, the claim that you can be detained indefinitely without charge is not part of the Patriot Act.

While we may have done such arrests, that was not done under the authority of the Patriot Act.
It would, however, be perfectly possible for Bush to demand the extradition of a UK citizen then to lock them up without trial as soon as they arrive in the 'States, though.
That said, the problem with this case is the bloody stupid unilateral extradition agreement Blair rushed through Parliament without telling anybody rather than any of the American legislature.

I don't like the "Patriot Act", quite an ironic name for good American people anyway. Not only does it pick on certain groups, but it created when it first came along an aurora of fear. So if I could personify the Patriot act and the Government responsible, they would say something like this: "We're invading your privacy because terrorists could be anywhere... even next door."
I'm sure this has led many paranoid neighbours and law enforcement officers pick regularly on Muslims, Arabs and Blacks (in some states it's just another excuse to carry out an underlying racist culture).

So if I was an American, I would vote for a more socially minded government when Bush says bye bye.

It would, however, be perfectly possible for Bush to demand the extradition of a UK citizen then to lock them up without trial as soon as they arrive in the 'States, though.
That said, the problem with this case is the bloody stupid unilateral extradition agreement Blair rushed through Parliament without telling anybody rather than any of the American legislature.
The US has a prior history of dispensing with habeas corpus, not only in this administration, but all through our Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was famous for it.

Without passing any Act, either.

I'm sure this has led many paranoid neighbours and law enforcement officers pick regularly on Muslims, Arabs and Blacks (in some states it's just another excuse to carry out an underlying racist culture).

You're obviously not from the US. Not only are there anti-profiling laws and regulations and policies, these are also held by corporations as well as law enforcement. Hence the policy by Northwest Airlines that you can't question anyone who appears to be a young Arab male because they don't want to be accused of profiling. Or why the TSA also has a no-profiling policy that results in 80-year old white great-grandmothers being strip searched at the airport.

Really, a lot of people outside the US have the view that somehow the US is still locked in the early 1960s - that somehow we still have segregated lavatories, and Rosa Parks is still forced to sit in the back of the bus.

You need to come to the US and stay at my house for two weeks - and just go anywhere in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. You'll have your eyes opened and washed.

You need to come to the US and stay at my house for two weeks - and just go anywhere in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. You'll have your eyes opened and washed.

I think you need to come to Texas and hang around with me for a couple of weeks and watch as horrified WASPs scramble to find a cop because prayer time comes around and I pull my prayer rug out in a quiet corner of a shopping mall.

You'll have your eyes open and washed.

The US has a prior history of dispensing with habeas corpus, not only in this administration, but all through our Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was famous for it.

Without passing any Act, either.
This is true, but the issue wouldn't even arise in this case if it wasn't for Blair making it easier for the GOP to demand that anybody they've taken a dislike to can be extradited to the US rather than getting to be tried here. The justification cited for this was (of course) barking mad fundamentalist Imans, but I have a suspicion that might end up being used on all sorts of other groups in practise.

Really, a lot of people outside the US have the view that somehow the US is still locked in the early 1960s - that somehow we still have segregated lavatories, and Rosa Parks is still forced to sit in the back of the bus.
Given that she's dead, I doubt that she's sitting anywhere on the bus anymore.

You're obviously not from the US.
Yeah I'm from GB, and I may not see the states through your point of view, (or necesarily Keruvalia) but I believe that this way I have a view from outside the box (like thinking out the box? ...yeah).

The US has certainly improved in some aspects since the 60's, but I think there is still a major ethnic divide which is enforced by the government, police and the media.

And I have never ever seen a black american police man in non-fiction media.

If anyone wants to actually know what the patriot act says, instead of jsut repeating Rhetoric for either side your can find it at

http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

Yeah I'm from GB, and I may not see the states through your point of view, (or necesarily Keruvalia) but I believe that this way I have a view from outside the box (like thinking out the box? ...yeah).

The US has certainly improved in some aspects since the 60's, but I think there is still a major ethnic divide which is enforced by the government, police and the media.

And I have never ever seen a black american police man in non-fiction media.
Did you watch the coverage a few years back about the so-called "Washington sniper"? Montgomery County, Maryland - a fairly white, very affluent suburb of Washington, D.C.

The police chief was black - not that any of us cared one way or the other:

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2003/US/07/08/moose.ethics/story.moose.file.jpg

Did you watch the coverage a few years back about the so-called "Washington sniper"? Montgomery County, Maryland - a fairly white, very affluent suburb of Washington, D.C.

The police chief was black - not that any of us cared one way or the other:

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2003/US/07/08/moose.ethics/story.moose.file.jpg
Well good for him. Clearly some states are better than others.
eg. I don't think you'd see something like that in Arkansas or ummm the one with a modified confederate flag for it's state flag.

Well good for him. Clearly some states are better than others.
eg. I don't think you'd see something like that in Arkansas or ummm the one with a modified confederate flag for it's state flag.
actually, I'd say every state has minorities in high power locations...be it on the police force, law bodies, governors (iirc, wasn't it a southern state that had the first black governor?)

Well good for him. Clearly some states are better than others.
eg. I don't think you'd see something like that in Arkansas or ummm the one with a modified confederate flag for it's state flag.
Virginia was the capital of the Confederacy, and there are still roads named for Confederate generals and still statues of them in various places.

But we elected a black governor over a decade ago.

Well good for him. Clearly some states are better than others.
eg. I don't think you'd see something like that in Arkansas or ummm the one with a modified confederate flag for it's state flag.
actually, you do now find black police chiefs throughout the South and across the country. You find minorities of all sorts in all sorts of govenrment positions. The trouble with racism and bigotry in America is that its gotten much more insidious and sutble. The blatant, media projected, stereotypes of a decade or two ago no longer are in fashion. There is a public veneer which doesn't hold up when put under pressure.