It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Senate votes to renew Patriot Act

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by Fatality


What what? Are you kidding me? I guess new boss , same as old boss.


Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

Isn't the Senate controlled by Republicans?

...Not that everyone isn't controlled by the ruling corporations, but...



Gotta love the uneducated masses - always blaming the GOP for everything, even for the mistakes of the Democrats!

[edit on 25-2-2010 by sos37]



posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by poedxsoldiervet
 


Having more senators than the other party doesn't mean jack about who controls the senate. 59-41, or 60-40, the party of NO has the upper hand.



posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by sos37
Gotta love the uneducated masses - always blaming the GOP for everything, even for the mistakes of the Democrats!

There's enough blame to go around. The Democrats are to blame for renewing the Patriot Act and caving to it when it was introduced, but don't pretend the Republicans didn't have anything to do with it. Let's not forget they created the thing in the first place.



posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   
reply to post by converge
 


Exactly! Some create it , and the others renew it , portraying exactly how they are the same on this issue. I just wish it would be gone already..



posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I notice there's nobody posting on this thread who thinks the Patriot Act could be a good thing. My guess is most people on ATS are against it -- it erodes people's liberty, etc.

I am of the same opinion, although I never actually read the whole Act. It's available to read.

Maybe there are some people in this country who really are dangerous to the rest of us. I don't know any, but it stands to reason that in a nation as big as ours there are some who want to bring the country down and need to be surveilled.

The trouble is almost everybody is suspicious about why certain people or groups are targeted as potential terror suspects and some are not, and rightly so.

Just want to avoid the typical knee-jerk reaction to the Patriot Act. There may be reasons why Congress keeps extending it. Just saying.



posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sestias
Maybe there are some people in this country who really are dangerous to the rest of us. I don't know any, but it stands to reason that in a nation as big as ours there are some who want to bring the country down and need to be surveilled.

I never heard critics of the Patriot Act claim that there aren't dangerous people and that law enforcement and intelligence agencies shouldn't have the adequate tools to do their job and keep us safe, but safety shouldn't be our only concern in current times—there are huge implications for privacy and even for the presumption of innocence.

When questioned, defenders of the Patriot Act usually point to September 11 as the reason for the introduction and need of such measures that it implements. An analysis of the events and what information law enforcement and intelligence agencies had on the suspects behind the attacks, quickly show us that, some agency or another, had some piece of relevant information but, we're told, were unable to connect the dots.

How does a failure of inter-agency communication and information sharing translate into, for example, a systematic nationwide voice and electronic surveillance program? The federal agencies failed, and not because they couldn't listen to everyone's calls or read their emails. And yet, now, thanks in large part to the Patriot Act, everyone is under constant surveillance.

We can't have a free society without a balance between privacy and state powers. The Framers recognized this and made certain protections, such as the ones expressed in the 4th Amendment, the supreme law of the land.

Frequently quoted, in many forms, but with good reason and as true today as it was then, Benjamin Franklin told us that “they who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”—I agree.



posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
If knowledge is power and power is [success] and control, than my question is this:

If you have it than why would you voluntarily give it back?

Seriously, why would you?



/Not saying that I believe it to be right, but we the people let them do it.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   
i dont see the big deal with it i have nothing to hide im not plotting to blow up or kill anyone

common sense tells me as well theres not enough people.
theres not enough computing power to process the billions of emails,phone calls,text messages us citizens make and are made every day in this country.

you want to feel like someone is watching you so be it maybe its your guilty conscious of you doing something you shouldnt be

[edit on 7-3-2010 by neo96]




top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join