FU Newt! The Patriot Act did not stop terrorist attacks!

[Ronulus]

2010 - Man flies plane into IRS building... http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/texas-man-flies-plane-irs-building-9881675

 

[Aratus]

Tsar Alexander II has a small bomb tossed at him by

an anarchist in the late 1800s. Please, please shut

the BIG "F" up Monsieur Newt! This is ancient...

 

[QuickZ06]

No one has been able to offer a single shred of evidence that the PA has violated any American's Rights that haven't been corrected under due process.

Anyone been sent to prison falsely under the PA? Nope
Anyone been falsely convicted in the PA? Nope

Whine whine whine...bitch bitch bitch......

After I posted this I got asked this, Anyone wanna help me on this question? Have not found anything yet on this, anyone know the PA act pretty well here, as I am still reading into it and i'm not 100% on some things yet.

 

[Pericles]

After I posted this I got asked this, Anyone wanna help me on this question? Have not found anything yet on this, anyone know the PA act pretty well here, as I am still reading into it and i'm not 100% on some things yet.

Unfortunately for us, that information is made secret by the PA. Which should tell you all you need to know about it.

 

[QuickZ06]

Unfortunately for us, that information is made secret by the PA. Which should tell you all you need to know about it.

That is what I figured as I could not find anything about it. Shame the government is suppose to fear us, yet I think it is the other way around.

 

[SL89]

After I posted this I got asked this, Anyone wanna help me on this question? Have not found anything yet on this, anyone know the PA act pretty well here, as I am still reading into it and i'm not 100% on some things yet.

Problem is once the act is used against you, you have no due process. You can't even challenge it in court unless it is an anonymous challenge. Therefore how can anyone know whether the government has abused their powers or not.

The Judge gives a quick summary here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNRSs6LsGeI

He actually goes into more detail on other videos if you look around a little.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

The study was between 2006-2009, and there were 1,600 some Drug Cases vs 100 some Fraud cases and exactly 15 Terrorism Cases. I remember because it was used for Drugs just over 100 times as often as terrorism. This is one area where I really wish Paul were a more gifted debater. Newt spews out bull crap about his fancy "strict separation" between "Criminal Law" and "National Security" that is utterly at odds with the reality of what is happening with the Patriot Act and there is nobody there to call him on it. It's especially bad because Gingrich is so smug and confident and says crap like "I've been studying this issue for years".

Source for that? That'd be killer

 

[Brian4Liberty]

After I posted this I got asked this, Anyone wanna help me on this question? Have not found anything yet on this, anyone know the PA act pretty well here, as I am still reading into it and i'm not 100% on some things yet.

It sounds like he really wants to say that he can't find any evidence that anyone has been falsely convicted. That is a completely different issue than having one's right violated. Perhaps he doesn't mind the government going through his house once a day on a fishing expedition just to see if they can find anything. The fact that he doesn't mind such searches does not mean that it isn't a violation of his rights.

It's a little hard debating rights with someone who doesn't appear to understand the concept.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I was talking about an offshoot of this last night, and am surprised it has not come up in this thread.

Hindsight is 20/20 of course, but I wish Ron's answer would have included the fact that the thwarted plots were thwarted... by citizens. The shoe bomber got on the plane, but was caught trying to light his shoe. The people who noticed this, the person who kept him from actually accomplishing his goal, could have waited for an authority figure to tell them what to do. They could have called in and followed protocol and all that. They could have appealed to the Government. They didn't. They acted. The underwear bomber also got on the plane, and was not subdued in mid-flight by a crowd of baton-waving police. I believe the guy who wanted to blow up trucks/cars in Times Square was turned in by a hardware store owner or something.

Those examples are also remarkable because, despite the TSA's "best" efforts, they are reactionary. These people made it on the planes, and then we had to take our shoes off. After shoe bombs made it on the planes. After people on "no fly" lists made it on the planes.

More good points.

 

[Anti Federalist]

http://nymag.com/news/9-11/10th-anniversary/patriot-act/

 

[Anti Federalist]

Source for that? That'd be killer

http://nymag.com/news/9-11/10th-anniversary/patriot-act/

 

[mello]

Quick question. The Times Square bomber was a Pakistani-American. Didn't he say that his reason for doing what he did was because the U.S. was nailing Pakistan with drone strikes that killed a lot of innocent civilians?

If that's true, he is a perfect example of blowback.