hmm for 'terrorism' I have no problem with it, that's the only thing I am aruging against is when phrases or laws are used for 'all' citizens or has the ability to be used against 'all' citizens. So I'm sorry I don't see where that argument works. Of course times change, that does not mean our rule of law should as well go against US citizens who are afforded rights under the constitution. Yes it can be ammended, it however has yet to be done. terrorist activity from citizens of this country or terrorist groups attacking and killing people. In the modern day term probally not, but I would almost be willing to bet back in the days of the constitution signing they were more worried about non US residents and US residents alike trying to hurt the government and or country.
No one can deny that terrorism is a disease. Ask us, Indian, who are fighting against it for more than a decade. it is simply a fact that present acts and regulations are not enough to fight against terrorism. so new laws are needed, and ofcourse those new acts are suppose to be harsher. its painful when people die in terrorist attacks but what is more painful, when terrorists escape. may be Mr. bush or any other polititian is not good to lead a country but one single person doesnt make the laws. and ofcourse law makers are not fool/Stupid/dumb/jerks/evil/wacko/satan etc etc. This law doesnt mean to drag an innocent person form his/her house at midnight, anything can be abused and I mean anything. isnt sexual abuse law being abused itself? Yes, it is. I have no sympathy with terrorist or anyone involved in terrorist activity or anyone who supports them or anyone who whin or complain when a new law comes up against terrorism.
Ahh but it's not just about terrorism, the patriot act in particular was a group of laws some have been trying to get in for years but were never able to because of constitutional issues. It was not even debated, reports state even our congressman who voted for it were not even allowed to read it. Does this not raise any red flags for people? I have no problem for even tougher laws against 'terrorism' as long as the laws specified are just for 'terrorism' Give it more teeth where it belongs, not less in a broad spectrum. Abuse of the law is not the case, abuse 'if' the law can go against our constitution is the case. All laws can be abused, but not all laws in place have realy any meaning to the constitution.
See, I am not the US citizen, So I cant fully understand how it will affect the constitution. but you know that terrorism can not affect a country untill there are some internal support from people who live in the same constitution in which you live. so actually there is a need of law which can affect the constitution.
I don't believe that as taking away the constitution or effecting it in a rights erorsion is worse than the terror itself IMO. Doesn't it give the 'terrorists' exactly what they want, or at least the case argued in the US they hate us for our 'freedom'
I seriously doubt there is a group of terrorists sitting around saying "if only we could get the US to modify their constitution then we have won".
I doubt that to, however the term they 'hate us for our freedom' is used almost non stop is it not? Anything that could erode our constitution is taking away our freedom is it not?
I don't think I've ever really heard they hate us for our freedom used before, seriously. I always thought it was about our greedy capitialist nature and desire to run the entire world by butting into the affairs of every nation. Also, our lose moral values. Hate us for our freedom sounds very juvinile compared to that. lol
LOL, maybe I watch the news to much compared to others on here. Look at my obsession with being on DP, imagine me being in one of my news 'cycles' The they hate us for our freedom is used or at least was used by GWB and many others almost every speach.
You don't have cable? I never could sit through a whole speach anyway. I mean not when there is a Friends rerun on at the same time.
I have satellite, not mere cable I find it difficult to sit through speaches at well at times, but I do much of the time simply to see what our leaders are for if I like them or agree with them or not.
Yes.. go ahead and keep slamming me. But in 10 years when a lot more of our freedoms are gone because of "terrorism" and it DOES effect every one of us... just remember I told you so I'm sorry... but I'm not willing to sit back and "trust" the government will not abuse its powers. If I don't trust them, I can only assume they are going to "suspect" someone that's never done anything wrong and do who knows what to them.... Meanwhile you're all sitting around crying about terrorism and people who disagree with Bush...and you're willing to shred up the constitution so you can pretend you're safe...
10 years are long..Who knows in 10 years you become a terrorist...sorry...I-mean-A-Rebel against Govt's Evil policies and kill all of us. Note: Above expressed comment tells that i am completely bore.
Nah.. if this countrie's debts keep rising and the constitution keeps shrinking I'll be on my way to paradise somewheres in Central/South America. I'm not going down with a sinking ship I never agreed with....
That is running from the situation. if I were you, I'd pick the gun up, call myself rebel and would fry ass of others. statutory Warning:- this comment is posted in a funny mood, please take it seriously at your own risk.........seriously.
10 years. You don't even register a thought in my mind 10 minutes after I read your posts. Go ahead and get the hell out now and don't let the proverbial doorknob hit you in your whiny ass on the way out.