Loss of liberties...

C+P's from an rx7club thread, but i want responses and thoughts from people on this forum, who generally display more intelligence than the rotor freaks over there.

Guess what ladies and gentlemen... the US has now formally accepted the National ID card and the Patriot act II, as of a few days ago. The US Intelligence Bill, a 3000+ page document, was printed and issued to congress one hour before they voted on it. How are you supposed to read 3000 pages in an hour?




“Your Papers Please”

US adopts National ID: Homeland Security Now In charge of Regulations for all US States Drivers Licenses and Birth Certificates

By: Jonathan Wheeler

In a chilling act more reminiscent of the now defunct Soviet Union or the Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler, the United States Congress passed legislation yesterday that requires the States to surrender their regulatory rights over driver’s licenses and birth certificates to The Department of Homeland Security.

The massive US Intelligence Reform Bill weighed in at over 3,000 pages and though unread by individual Members of either the House or Senate nevertheless passed all of the legislative hurdles needed in order to become law.

President Bush lobbied hard for these provisions, only objecting when Senator Sensenbrenner attempted to require these same provisions for illegal aliens but which the President opposed. This provision was dropped from the final bill.

Beginning in 2005, the Department of Homeland Security will issue new uniformity regulations to the States requiring that all Drivers Licenses and Birth Certificates meet minimal Federal Standards with regard to US citizen information, including biometric security provisions.

Added to currently existing Federal Laws and Supreme Court rulings American citizens when born will be issued a Social Security Number that will be included on their Birth Certificates, along with DNA biometric markers. All birth certificates will also be registered in a Federal Government database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security. No child will be allowed enrollment to schools or be entitled to either State of Federal Government benefits programs without first presenting a certified Homeland Security registered Birth Certificate.

Drivers Licenses will also contain DNA biometric markers and include the holders Social Security Number and be required for receiving and applying for all State and Federal benefits programs. Previous Supreme Court rulings have also upheld State and Federal Law Enforcement authorities right to request Identification from any American citizen, for any reason and at any time as not being violations of their, the citizens, constitutionally protected rights.

Major Banks and credit card companies have applauded the adoption of a National ID system as being important to counter fraud and increasing instances of identity theft. National ID cards with biometric markers will eliminate them from having to issue Credit and Debit cards, which for the first time in US history have surpassed the usage of checks and cash. Utilizing The Department of Homeland Securities centralized federal database, Banks and credit card companies will only require the presentation of a citizens Driver’s License to make purchases as all of the persons financial information, including credit and cash balances, will already be known in ‘real time’. (The combining of Homeland Security and Banking databases on citizen’s balances and purchases, along with their past and present purchasing information, has been allowed under previous Federal Laws including the Patriot Act.)

Also included in this bill is a law to require The Department of Homeland Security to establish a separate ID system for citizens to use prior to boarding airplanes, and which is eerily reminiscent of the Soviet and Nazi regimes dreaded Internal Passport.

Never before in our history have the words of Benjamin Franklin been so correct when he stated: "people willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both".

Today, December 9, 2004 will be one of those moments in time that future historians will look back on and pin point as being the day that the United States of American, and as it was founded by its forefathers, ceased to exist.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index575.htm

And here's some information about the new Patriot Act II:



Secret Patriot Act II to give Hitler's Powers to Bush

Infowars.com
December 8, 2004

Alex wrote this back in 2003 and it won second place from Project Censored. We're glad that this story is still circulating -- it is as important and timely as ever. Now, the National ID Card and Patriot Act II have passed the house and is in the Senate.

Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex) told the Washington Times
that no member of Congress was allowed to read the
first Patriot Act that was passed by the House on
October 27, 2001. The first Patriot Act was
universally decried by civil libertarians and
Constitutional SECRET PATscholars from across the
political spectrum. William Safire, while writing for
the New York Times, described the first Patriot Act's
powers by saying that President Bush was seizing
dictatorial control.

On February 7, 2003 the Center for Public Integrity, a
non-partisan public interest think-tank in DC,
revealed the full text of the Domestic Security
Enhancement Act of 2003. The classified document had
been leaked to them by an unnamed source inside the
Federal government. The document consisted of a
33-page section by section analysis of the
accompanying 87-page bill.

The Patriot Act II bill itself is stamped
"Confidential -Not for Distribution." Upon reading the
analysis and bill, I was stunned by the scientifically
crafted tyranny contained in the legislation. The
Justice Department Office of Legislative Affairs
admits that they had indeed covertly transmitted a
copy of the legislation to Speaker of the House Dennis
Hastert, (R-Il) and the Vice President of the United
States, Dick Cheney as well as the executive heads of
federal law enforcement agencies.

It is important to note that no member of Congress was
allowed to see the first Patriot Act before its
passage, and that no debate was tolerated by the House
and Senate leadership. The intentions of the White
House and Speaker Hastert concerning Patriot Act II
appear to be a carbon copy replay of the events that
led to the unprecedented passage of the first Patriot
Act.

There are two glaring areas that need to be looked at
concerning this new legislation:

1. The secretive tactics being used by the White House
and Speaker Hastert to keep even the existence of this
legislation secret would be more at home in Communist
China than in the United States. The fact that Dick
Cheney publicly managed the steamroller passage of the
first Patriot Act, insuring that no one was allowed to
read it and publicly threatening members of Congress
that if they didn?t vote in favor of it that they
would be blamed for the next terrorist attack, is by
the White House?' own definition terrorism. The move
to clandestinely craft and then bully passage of any
legislation by the Executive Branch is clearly an
impeachable offence.

2. The second Patriot Act is a mirror image of powers
that Julius Caesar and Adolf Hitler gave themselves.
Whereas the First Patriot Act only gutted the First,
Third, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and seriously
damaged the Seventh and the Tenth, the Second Patriot
Act reorganizes the entire Federal government as well
as many areas of state government under the
dictatorial control of the Justice Department, the
Office of Homeland Security and the FEMA NORTHCOM
military command. The Domestic Security Enhancement
Act 2003, also known as the Second Patriot Act is by
its very structure the definition of dictatorship.

I challenge all Americans to study the new Patriot Act
and to compare it to the Constitution, Bill of Rights
and Declaration of Independence. Ninety percent of the
act has nothing to do with terrorism and is instead a
giant Federal power-grab with tentacles reaching into
every facet of our society. It strips American
citizens of all of their rights and grants the
government and its private agents total immunity.

Here is a quick thumbnail sketch of just some of the
draconian measures encapsulated within this tyrannical
legislation:

SECTION 501 (Expatriation of Terrorists) expands the
Bush administration'?s enemy combatant definition to
all American citizens who may have violated any
provision of Section 802 of the first Patriot Act.
(Section 802 is the new definition of domestic
terrorism, and the definition is any action that
endangers human life that is a violation of any
Federal or State law. ) Section 501 of the second
Patriot Act directly connects to Section 125 of the
same act. The Justice Department boldly claims that
the incredibly broad Section 802 of the First USA
Patriot Act isn?t broad enough and that a new,
unlimited definition of terrorism is needed.

Under Section 501 a US citizen engaging in lawful
activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown
into a van never to be seen again. The Justice
Department states that they can do this because the
person had inferred from conduct that they were not a
US citizen. Remember Section 802 of the First USA
Patriot Act states that any violation of Federal or
State law can result in the enemy combatant terrorist
designation.

SECTION 201 of the second Patriot Act makes it a
criminal act for any member of the government or any
citizen to release any information concerning the
incarceration or whereabouts of detainees. It also
states that law enforcement does not even have to tell
the press who they have arrested and they never have
to release the names.

SECTION 301 and 306 (Terrorist Identification
Database) set up a national database of suspected
terrorists and radically expand the database to
include anyone associated with suspected terrorist
groups and anyone involved in crimes or having
supported any group designated as terrorist. These
sections also set up a national DNA database for
anyone on probation or who has been on probation for
any crime, and orders State governments to collect the
DNA for the Federal government.

SECTION 312 gives immunity to law enforcement engaging
in spying operations against the American people and
would place substantial restrictions on court
injunctions against Federal violations of civil rights
across the board.

SECTION 101 will designate individual terrorists as
foreign powers and again strip them of all rights
under the enemy combatant designation.

SECTION 102 states clearly that any information
gathering, regardless of whether or not those
activities are illegal, can be considered to be
clandestine intelligence activities for a foreign
power. This makes news gathering illegal.

SECTION 103 allows the Federal government to use
wartime martial law powers domestically and
internationally without Congress declaring that a
state of war exists.

SECTION 106 is bone-chilling in its
straightforwardness. It states that broad general
warrants by the secret FSIA court (a panel of secret
judges set up in a star chamber system that convenes
in an undisclosed location) granted under the first
Patriot Act are not good enough. It states that
government agents must be given immunity for carrying
out searches with no prior court approval. This
section throws out the entire Fourth Amendment against
unreasonable searches and seizures.

SECTION 109 allows secret star chamber courts to issue
contempt charges against any individual or corporation
who refuses to incriminate themselves or others. This
sections annihilate the last vestiges of the Fifth
Amendment.

SECTION 110 restates that key police state clauses in
the first Patriot Act were not sunsetted and removes
the five year sunset clause from other subsections of
the first Patriot Act. After all, the media has told
us: this is the New America. Get used to it. This is
forever.

SECTION 111 expands the definition of the enemy
combatant designation.

SECTION 122 restates the government?s newly announced
power of surveillance without a court order.

SECTION 123 restates that the government no longer
needs warrants and that the investigations can be a
giant dragnet-style sweep described in press reports
about the Total Information Awareness Network. One
passage reads, thus the focus of domestic surveillance
may be less precise than that directed against more
conventional types of crime.

SECTION 126 grants the government the right to mine
the entire spectrum of public and private sector
information from bank records to educational and
medical records. This is the enacting law to allow
ECHELON and the Total Information Awareness Network to
totally break down any and all walls of privacy.

The government states that they must look at
everything to determine if individuals or groups might
have a connection to terrorist groups. As you can now
see, you are guilty until proven innocent.

SECTION 127 allows the government to takeover
coroners? and medical examiners operations whenever
they see fit.

SECTION 128 allows the Federal government to place gag
orders on Federal and State Grand Juries and to take
over the proceedings. It also disallows individuals or
organizations to even try to quash a Federal subpoena.
So now defending yourself will be a terrorist action.

SECTION 129 destroys any remaining whistleblower
protection for Federal agents.

SECTION 202 allows corporations to keep secret their
activities with toxic biological, chemical or
radiological materials.

SECTION 205 allows top Federal officials to keep all
their financial dealings secret, and anyone
investigating them can be considered a terrorist. This
should be very useful for Dick Cheney to stop anyone
investigating Haliburton.

SECTION 303 sets up national DNA database of suspected
terrorists. The database will also be used to stop
other unlawful activities. It will share the
information with state, local and foreign agencies for
the same purposes.

SECTION 311 federalizes your local police department
in the area of information sharing.

SECTION 313 provides liability protection for
businesses, especially big businesses that spy on
their customers for Homeland Security, violating their
privacy agreements. It goes on to say that these are
all preventative measures â?? has anyone seen Minority
Report? This is the access hub for the Total
Information Awareness Network.

SECTION 321 authorizes foreign governments to spy on
the American people and to share information with
foreign governments.

SECTION 322 removes Congress from the extradition
process and allows officers of the Homeland Security
complex to extradite American citizens anywhere they
wish. It also allows Homeland Security to secretly
take individuals out of foreign countries.

SECTION 402 is titled Providing Material Support to
Terrorism. The section reads that there is no
requirement to show that the individual even had the
intent to aid terrorists.

SECTION 403 expands the definition of weapons of mass
destruction to include any activity that affects
interstate or foreign commerce.

SECTION 404 makes it a crime for a terrorist or other
criminals to use encryption in the commission of a
crime.

SECTION 408 creates lifetime parole (basically,
slavery) for a whole host of crimes.

SECTION 410 creates no statute of limitations for
anyone that engages in terrorist actions or supports
terrorists. Remember: any crime is now considered
terrorism under the first Patriot Act.

SECTION 411 expands crimes that are punishable by
death. Again, they point to Section 802 of the first
Patriot Act and state that any terrorist act or
support of terrorist act can result in the death
penalty.

SECTION 421 increases penalties for terrorist
financing. This section states that any type of
financial activity connected to terrorism will result
to time in prison and $10-50,000 fines per violation.

SECTIONS 427 sets up asset forfeiture provisions for
anyone engaging in terrorist activities.

There are many other sections that I did not cover in
the interest of time. The American people were shocked
by the despotic nature of the first Patriot Act. The
second Patriot Act dwarfs all police state legislation
in modern world history.

Usually, corrupt governments allow their citizens lots
of wonderful rights on paper, while carrying out their
jackbooted oppression covertly. From snatch and grab
operations to warantless searches, Patriot Act II is
an Adolf Hitler wish list.

You can understand why President Bush, Dick Cheney and
Dennis Hastert want to keep this legislation secret
not just from Congress, but the American people as
well. Bill Allison, Managing Editor of the Center for
Public Integrity, the group that broke this story,
stated on my radio show that it was obvious that they
were just waiting for another terrorist attack to
opportunistically get this new bill through. He then
shocked me with an insightful comment about how the
Federal government was crafting this so that they
could go after the American people in general. He also
agreed that the FBI has been quietly demonizing
patriots and Christians and those who carry around
pocket Constitutions.

I have produced two documentary films and written a
book about what really happened on September 11th. The
bottom line is this: the military-industrial complex
carried the attacks out as a pretext for control.
Anyone who doubts this just hasn?t looked at the
mountains of hard evidence.

Of course, the current group of white collar criminals
in the White House might not care that we?'re finding
out the details of their next phase. Because, after
all, when smallpox gets released, or more buildings
start blowing up, the President can stand up there at
his lectern suppressing a smirk, squeeze out a tear or
two, and tell us that See I was right. I had to take
away your rights to keep you safe. And now it?s your
fault that all of these children are dead. From that
point on, anyone who criticizes tyranny will be
shouted down by the paid talking head government
mouthpieces in the mainstream media.

You have to admit, it?s a beautiful script.
Unfortunately, it?s being played out in the real
world. If we don?t get the word out that government is
using terror to control our lives while doing nothing
to stop the terrorists, we will deserve what we get -
tyranny. But our children won?t deserve it.

HOW THE PATRIOT ACT COMPARES TO HITLER?S
ERMÄCHTIGUNGSGESETZ (ENABLING ACT):

At http://www.furnitureforthepeople.com/actpat.htm
you can read the following 4 Articles:

1) How the Patriot Act Compares to Hitler's
Ermächtigungsgesetz (Enabling Act)
2) A 21st Century Comparison of The Enabling Act and
The Patriot Act
3) Ten Key Dangers of The Patriot Act that Every
American Should Know
4) Bill Moyers' NOW Comments on the Patriot Act


http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps...powers_bush.htm

Now, i'm not caliming that bush is the new hitler or anything, so don't take it like that,. nor do i claim to be an extreme leftist, or leftist at all. or rightist. Or anything. My political preference is up to you to decide.

But anyway, some of these acts to bother me quite a bit. I want to hear some of your guys' responses before i really say to much EXCEPT to say: The second i see a case of a person speaking out agaisnt the government being deemed a terrorist and thrown into prison without trial..or simply 'disappearing', then i am going to excesize my second amendment rights to the fullest and join me a milita. I'm probably being black-flagged by the gov't for even TYPING that... but if i am... it proves my point.

^ I agree with that statement, it is a very stalinist type of movement. I'm nervous.

That first post was the same old rhetoric about a national ID card that I've read about for twenty years. The only update is the use of more current buzz words.

We do not and will not have a national ID card. There is no legislation that will be on the floor of the House or Senate.


When I read
The Patriot Act II bill itself is stamped "Confidential -Not for Distribution."
I had to laugh. There are no acts, laws or motions that go in front of the congress that Anytime you read something like that, you need to load up on the salt because you'll need a lot of grains.

This one was a hoot
The fact that Dick Cheney publicly managed the steamroller passage of the first Patriot Act, insuring that no one was allowed to
read it
Nobody could read it? Please, tell me you don't believe that! Why were the talking heads going on about provisions of the act if they couldn't read it? Sheesh :grinno:

I cringe to say this, but I've been thinking it for quite some time now.

A second U.S. Civil War is inevitable. :(

Rome collapsed from within...

I don't think so Heep. One of the things that lead to the civil war was the divide between people that could also be found along geographical lines. The divisions now are much more blurred. Though you can see the red/blue division - the reality is the country is mostly purple. http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/

There are many other countries that are closer to a civil war then the US. Canada is closer then we are with Quebec. China has only seen stability the last 40 years and is a much larger threat to fall to pieces.

This forum may be titled Politics, Investments and Current Affairs, but it really is little more then a US bitchfest. More then half the people here don't know much history or do more then read the headlines. Millions have died in Africa because of a multitude of reasons and only a couple of us say anything. Billions are bilked around the globe but unless the US was somehow involved, no discussion is sustained. However, post a thread about a rumor that has been proven false over and over and you'll see a hundred people chime in pissing and moaning (see any of the "draft" threads).

Everyone can voice their opinions, but don't take the doom and gloomers at face value. The US has issues, but we're not falling apart at the seams.

Who will the civil war be against? People vs. Gov't? Republicans vs. Democrats? Christians vs Muslims?

In my opinion Rome collapsed from within because it began turning it's sight inwards only and not outwards. It's focus on the world was lost and it turned into a place of indulgence and became soft.

I don't think so Heep. One of the things that lead to the civil war was the divide between people that could also be found along geographical lines. The divisions now are much more blurred. Though you can see the red/blue division - the reality is the country is mostly purple. http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/

There are many other countries that are closer to a civil war then the US. Canada is closer then we are with Quebec. China has only seen stability the last 40 years and is a much larger threat to fall to pieces.


It is only my opinion, but I can't forsee it being any other way. The U.S. population seems to be more divided now than ever since perhaps the last Civil War, the government and the people seem to be constantly more divided, etc. If the U.S. can keep it up for the next 100 years (? who knows how many), then they deserve my applause. As for geographical lines - with today's communication (phones, internet, etc), geography becomes a much less significant factor than before. People of like mind can be located anywhere. Also, in response to DGB, I have no idea who it would eventually be between - maybe none you listed, maybe all. Again, I'm not saying it's future fact, I just can't see it being any other way.

Also, I realize that most of the scare stories are just that - scare stories. However, certain aspects most certainly come into play - picking up the phone to receive a warning from the RIAA for "anonymously" downloading a song, for example.

I agree with you, Yogs, that there are other countries much closer to civil war than the U.S., however, I fail to see how that effects whether or not it would/could happen to the U.S....

In my opinion Rome collapsed from within because it began turning it's sight inwards only and not outwards. It's focus on the world was lost and it turned into a place of indulgence and became soft.

Agreed, and I don't think the U.S. is yet to that point, but I see the beginnings of it. The government focussing on domestic terrorism? U.S. citizens thinking Canadians live in igloos? (inward sight) I think the U.S. is still in the Roman "World Domination" phase, but no matter which way I look at it, I could not imagine myself wanting any part of the U.S.'s future...

This forum may be titled Politics, Investments and Current Affairs, but it really is little more then a US bitchfest.

That's only because the U.S. keeps giving us stuff to bitch about :D

Actually, most modern historians list the below as the major factors in the decline of Rome. Not a "fall", but a "decline". The economy of the Empire had been declining for two centuries. Rome had grown rich on the spoils of conquest. This source of wealth ended when expansion ceased with the stabilization of the frontiers. Without manufactures and other sources of new wealth, Rome’s capitalistic economy contracted. To pay their armies and other costs of government, the emperors continually debased the coinage. To escape the resulting inflation, the rich invested their wealth in land, which, unlike money, retained its value. Inflation and a crushing tax burden destroyed much of the middle class. Eventually, the rigid economic and social reforms of Diocletian and Constantine created a vast bureaucracy that merely aggravated the existing ills in the western half of the Empire, already far along the road to decline.Anyhow. Back to the subject at hand. As much as you would deny the probability of such acts Yogs, and would love to decry the article above as "bitching", do you deny that the Patriot Act has powers to allow the government to do as such as it outlines?

Actually, most modern historians list the below as the majot factors in the decline of Rome. Not a "fall", but a "decline".

The economy of the Empire had been declining for two centuries. Rome had grown rich on the spoils of conquest. This source of wealth ended when expansion ceased with the stabilization of the frontiers. Without manufactures and other sources of new wealth, Rome’s capitalistic economy contracted. To pay their armies and other costs of government, the emperors continually debased the coinage. To escape the resulting inflation, the rich invested their wealth in land, which, unlike money, retained its value. Inflation and a crushing tax burden destroyed much of the middle class. Eventually, the rigid economic and social reforms of Diocletian and Constantine created a vast bureaucracy that merely aggravated the existing ills in the western half of the Empire, already far along the road to decline.:eek:

It's a bit shocking how much of that applies or is beginning to apply to the U.S....

well its true that pretty much no one read the Patriot Act before it was passed, at least one member of the Senate did. Russ Finegold, and thank god for that man!!!

a place of indulgence and became soft.

This really caught my eye and I see it all around me in the U.S. Its very sad.

well its true that pretty much no one read the Patriot Act before it was passed, at least one member of the Senate did. Russ Finegold, and thank god for that man!!!

What do you mean that pretty much nobody read it? If you mean nobody read it just like nobody reads any other legislation then thats fine. The article on the other hand said that nobody was allowed to read it. There is a big difference.

As to the provisions outlined in the articles. The first one is bubkus. There is no national ID card and no legislation that requires one.

As for the second article. I stopped in http://thomas.loc.gov/ (the house of representatives official site) and did a search for patriot act II (and patriot act 2) as it was called in the thread. The following is what it found. What bill is it? I further tried some of the phrases use in the sections described in the post, but it did not come back with hits.

Its hard to talk about the contents of a bill that I haven't seen the language on. The post above has its take on the content and it may be accurate, but given the language it uses, I would think most people would want to read it for themselves before accepting those conclusions.

1 . Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act (Introduced in House)[H.R.3171.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:1:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
2 . Justice Enhancement and Domestic Security Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.22.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:2:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
3 . PATRIOT Oversight Restoration Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.1695.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:3:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
4 . SAFE Act (Introduced in Senate)[S.1709.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:4:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
5 . Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.384.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:5:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
6 . Information Sharing Improvement Act of 2004 (Introduced in Senate)[S.2599.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:6:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
7 . Combating Terrorism Financing Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.3016.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:7:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
8 . Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.737.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:8:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
9 . Homeland Emergency Response Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1389.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:9:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
10 . Making appropriations for homeland security programs within the Departments of Energy, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005,... (Introduced in House)[H.R.4462.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:10:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
11 . Restoration of Freedom of Information Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.609.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:11:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
12 . Restoration of Freedom of Information Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2526.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:12:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
13 . Restore Open Government Act of 2004 (Introduced in House)[H.R.5073.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:13:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
14 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[H.R.4567.PCS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:14:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
15 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.4567.EH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:15:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
16 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Reported in House)[H.R.4567.RH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:16:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
17 . Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Reported in Senate)[S.1025.RS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:17:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
18 . Crossroads of the American Revolution National Heritage Area Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.230.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:18:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
19 . Tribal Government Amendments to the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Introduced in Senate)[S.578.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:19:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
20 . Tribal Government Amendments to the Homeland Security Act (Introduced in House)[H.R.2242.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:20:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
21 . Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.2417.EAS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:21:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
22 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[S.2537.PCS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:22:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
23 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Print)[H.R.4567.PP] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:23:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
24 . Intelligence Community Leadership Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.190.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:24:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
25 . Domestic Defense Fund Act of 2004 (Introduced in Senate)[S.2021.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:25:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
26 . Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2620.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:26:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
27 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)[H.R.2555.ENR] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:27:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
28 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.2555.EAS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:28:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
29 . Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.4548.EAS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:29:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
30 . Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Introduced in Senate)[S.2386.RIS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:30:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
31 . Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[S.2386.PCS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:31:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
32 . Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (Reported in House)[H.R.2620.RH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:32:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
33 . Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Reported in Senate)[S.2386.RS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:33:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
34 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)[H.R.4567.ENR] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:34:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
35 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (Reported in Senate)[H.R.2555.RS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:35:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
36 . 9-11 Memorial Intelligence Reform Act (Introduced in Senate)[S.1520.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:36:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
37 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Print)[H.R.2555.PP] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:37:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
38 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.4567.EAS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:38:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
39 . Comprehensive Homeland Security Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.6.IS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:39:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
40 . Department of Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[S.2401.PCS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:40:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
41 . Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006 (Introduced in House)[H.R.3036.IH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:41:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
42 . Tools to Fight Terrorism Act of 2004 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[S.2679.PCS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:42:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
43 . Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006 (Reported in House)[H.R.3036.RH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:43:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
44 . National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[S.2400.PCS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:44:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
45 . Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.3036.EH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:45:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
46 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House)[H.R.2555.RFS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:46:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
47 . Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.2555.EH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:47:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
48 . Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006 (Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House)[H.R.3036.RFS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:48:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
49 . Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 (Received in Senate from House)[H.R.1559.RDS] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:49:./temp/~c108epFui8::)
50 . Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.1559.EH] (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:50:./temp/~c108epFui8::)

This really caught my eye and I see it all around me in the U.S. Its very sad.

I see it everywhere. Canada, Europe,......We are not alone.

I see it everywhere. Canada, Europe,......We are not alone.

You're unfortunately very right, but it doesn't fix the problem. :(

BTW, I find it rather ironic that they call these the "Patriot" Acts...

I see it everywhere. Canada, Europe,......We are not alone.

Quite true.

Hurray for big government.

while you are correct yogs, in stating that there is alot of slanted leftist rhetoric in the posted articles, i think you are still choosing to ignore that the government is taking steps to gain further control over our lives.

while all the chicken little BS is a bit much, remove the spin, and its still pretty creepy.

I don't care about carrying a National ID. It will do more good than harm. The only reason one should worry is if you're a criminal and trying to hide something and giving false information to a cop or trying to pull a fraud, like welfare.

The only reason one should worry is if you're a criminal and trying to hide something and giving false information to a cop.

the next time someone uses this ridiculous argument as reason to not worry about our country becoming a police state, i think im going to explode.

while you are correct yogs, in stating that there is alot of slanted leftist rhetoric in the posted articles, i think you are still choosing to ignore that the government is taking steps to gain further control over our lives.

while all the chicken little BS is a bit much, remove the spin, and its still pretty creepy.

I am not ignoring the government as it clamps down on liberties. We've talked about its efforts in restricting guns, restrictions on travel, restrictions on internet purchases of wine and perscriptions.

If someone actually posts the link to the actual bill before the congress that does the things being claimed, we can talk about it. Until then, it looks like little more then rhetoric designed to inflame the deciples.

the next time someone uses this ridiculous argument as reason to not worry about our country becoming a police state, i think im going to explode.


Why is it a "ridiculous argument?" What are you afraid of? So far, I haven't seen or heard of any "rights" that have been lost. I did have one knuckle-head lefty tell me that "her right to threaten the President's life" and her "right to not pay taxes" had been taken away by Ashcroft. I'm not kidding. The remainder of the whining I've heard is by drug dealers whining about tightened border security, and they try to twist it to "losing rights to travel freely." I've yet to hear any legitimate argument about any lost rights, or talked to anyone that has had first-hand experience with the supposed new Gestapo. I've traveled a bit since 9/11, been back and forth across the ocean four times, and have yet to see anything out of the ordinary, other than a meth smuggler that was caught at the airport in Phoenix. So what rights have been lost?

Why is it a "ridiculous argument?" What are you afraid of? So far, I haven't seen or heard of any "rights" that have been lost. I did have one knuckle-head lefty tell me that "her right to threaten the President's life" and her "right to not pay taxes" had been taken away by Ashcroft. I'm not kidding. The remainder of the whining I've heard is by drug dealers whining about tightened border security, and they try to twist it to "losing rights to travel freely." I've yet to hear any legitimate argument about any lost rights, or talked to anyone that has had first-hand experience with the supposed new Gestapo. I've traveled a bit since 9/11, been back and forth across the ocean four times, and have yet to see anything out of the ordinary, other than a meth smuggler that was caught at the airport in Phoenix. So what rights have been lost?
You have to broaden your horizon a bit. Just because it has not happened to you or someone you know does not in any way mean it will not happen at all. Equally it doesn't mean it will but you act as if the system is flaweless.

ive given you answers before...and apparently you've refused to listen, so im not going to waste my time again.

however, what i will address is not a loss of rights, but a troubling change in mentality. the new measures being taken and the mentality that "unless you have something to hide you shouldnt be worried" creates an atmosphere contrary to what america has been and what should continue to be. the reason it is a ridiculous argument is because i shouldnt have to consider whther or not i have something to hide. I should be treated like a human being capable of rational action and thought, not like a criminal, unless i have been proven in the court of law to be a criminal.

there is an underlying belief, in fact a consciousness of our legal system, that someone is innocent until proven guilty. however, this ideal continues to be eroded, not only by our legal system and government, but people in general. look for instance to the scott peterson case.

the point im trying to make is that this is a disturbing trend in american ideology, and pardon me for thinking its a bad trend. whether or not i have anything to hide shouldnt be the issue. treat me like im innocent until proven guilty.

So you havn't lost any rights, correct? You're just worrying that you may?

Rights are like oxygen.You don't notice them until you come to excercise them and they're not there.

So tell me,aloharocky, if someone installed a camera in the toilet stall at your workplace and spied on you every time you took a dump, would that be ok as long as you never knew? how about if that person then decided to share the tape with another government department who may have an interest in what people do in toilet stalls,and passed it on without your knowledge or permission?


how would you feel if a government official knocked on your door and told you that you had been filmed in a bar talking to someone who was known to have links with someone else who was a member of a prohibited organisation?Your best buddy's pal is an Al-Quaeda suspect, rocky, where were you on the night of the 23rd? we know you used your credit card to buy gasoline at the xyz gas station,and we have taped evidence of a phone call to your brother where you said something vaguely Anti-war.....We've decided that we don't like the look of you, and we have the authority to go through your private life until we've got enough information that could be taken to mean that you may be involved in terrorism.Then we're going to lock you up in Guantanamo Bay and deny you legal assistance until you can prove beyond any doubt that we are mistaken..............

At the moment, this kind of shit only happens if you are an arab living in the US.Profiling,aka racism, happens.The Patriot Act and Patriot2 [if it wasn't creepy legislation, they wouldn't have to market it under such a populist name] make no distinction between one US citizen and another, if someone in the spook squad wants to nail you but can't prove enough to go through the courts, these are the bills that allow him to,and you can do nothing to stop him.Even if he is wrong.

First part of your question, It won't happen.
As far as "racism" that is bullshit too. IF I was seen talking to an Al Queda and questioned, I'd tell the truth, that I don't know anything about him and do they want me to put a bullet in his fuckin skull. Otherwise, they are free to waste their time investigating me. I'm not going to worry about some fantasy that paranoid Bush-hating people are having over Big Brother Boogie-Man. None of what you've described has happened, or will happen to any American that isn't up to something. I'm more worried about telemarketers getting info than any government agancy.

paranoid Bush-hating people

So you're telling me, that if it was Kerry pushing this down your throat, you'd be ok right?

I mean, it's not about naive, sheep-like Bush lovers anyhow.

First part of your question, It won't happen.

Glad you have that much faith in your own secret service.

First part of your question, It won't happen.
As far as "racism" that is bullshit too.......None of what you've described has happened, or will happen to any American that isn't up to something.Oh really?

Then how do you explain this: http://www.sr20forum.com/showthread.php?t=76975

First off, why is he in the P.I.? I doubt he's from there. What is his home country? Filipinos don't have names like that. And you equate that with an American losing his rights? It's almost laughable.

First off, why is he in the P.I.? I doubt he's from there. What is his home country? Filipinos don't have names like that.Does it matter what the answer to these questions is if, as you say, there is no racism involved?

And you equate that with an American losing his rights? It's almost laughable.The man is married to US born woman and they have American born children. He has conducted his time in the US as a lawful member of society and many, many people in the SR20 community can and do vouch for him personally.

The fact that you think it can't happen to you would almost be laughable if it weren't just....well....sad. :disappoin

Fact: It will NEVER happen to me. I don't even think about that happening.
Are you stating that he was picked up because of his race? What race is he? Is he black, white, green? I suspect you are confusing race with religion or nationality.

First off, why is he in the P.I.? I doubt he's from there.

Yes. Real knowledgeable there, bub.

The Philippines is a melting-pot country, just like the US. It's ancestry is a mix of the first group, which were black aborigine/pygmy types, then Malaysian, and Indonesian settlers, then Chinese traders, then Indian traders, then Spanish conquerors (who were European, of course), then American, after they defeated Spain. The only occupying group that didn't mix too much were the Japanese, as they were strict about pure blood. There were also a lot of traders from around the world, even Italians, who came, and stayed, because it was the only predominantly Christian country in Asia.

You can find virtually any type of name in the book in the Phillipines. My old Air Force buddy was a Filipino, but with some roots in Germany, can pass as white/Mexican, and his last name was German.

Of course these types of Filipinos weren't sucking up to the Americans in Subic, or Clark, so you wouldn't know.

What race is he? Is he black, white, green?

Does it matter? He's a PERSON, and a decent one, it sounds like.

Oh really?

Then how do you explain this: http://www.sr20forum.com/showthread.php?t=76975

1. This guys wan't an American.
2. He wasn't a legal alien.

He didn't have a green card and he was here for 15 years. Way past his visa limit so he should of been deported.

1. This guys wan't an American.
2. He wasn't a legal alien.

He didn't have a green card and he was here for 15 years. Way past his visa limit so he should of been deported.
Quoted from the link:

I have always stayed legally in the U.S (functioned like any other U.S citizen, went to school, worked legally with working authorization and have been paying taxes since 1993, never been unemployed, until now) when my wife and i got married last 2002, My wife filed for a petition for me to change my status to (Permanent Resident) Green Card Holder. Dec. 1st of 2003 dept. of homeland Security came and knocked at our House in Cypress, CA. and took me in (cuffed and thrown in a van), overlooking that i had a petition pending from my wife and that i had an interview with immigration around February of 2004

I fail to see what the guy did wrong to deserve this. Perhaps playing by the rules was a mistake?

Fact: It will NEVER happen to me. I don't even think about that happening.
Are you stating that he was picked up because of his race? What race is he? Is he black, white, green? I suspect you are confusing race with religion or nationality.
Race, religion or nationality - it's all prejudice.

Prejudice:
A judgment, belief, opinion, point of view-favorable or unfavorable-formed before the facts are known, resistant to evidence and reason, or in disregard of facts which contradict it. Self-announced prejudice is rare. Prejudice almost always exists in obscured, rationalized, socially validated, functional forms. It enables people to sleep peacefully at night even while flagrantly abusing the rights of others. It enables people to get more of what they want, or to get it more easily. It is often sanctioned with a superabundance of pomp and self-righteousness.

Fact: It will NEVER happen to me. I don't even think about that happening.

so if its not going to happen to YOU, your not concerned?

theres this poem, written by a jewish rabbi, about the nazi round up of people they didnt like, goes something like this:

at first they came for the gypsys, and i didnt say anything
i wasnt a gypsy
then they came for the gays, and i didnt say anything,
because i wasnt gay

and it goes from there, surely you've heard it.

its a silly poem, but its point is critical. just becuas eit doesnt happen to you, doesnt mean it doesnt happen. saddam hussien wasnt gassing your town, but you're all high and mighty about saving those people.

your government is making it legally possible to circumvent and even void your constitutional rights. and they are doing it to people in your own country. and yet, because its not happening to you, you dont care.

i've lost rights and so have you, and ive explained this to you before, but like most ignorant conservatives, you appear to enjoy forgetting the past, or altering it to fit your agenda.

There are two different arguements going on. 1. Yes - we should all be leary of laws that put restrictions on freedoms. It doesn't matter what political affiliation you have or the politician has. 2. Its a fair question to ask what rights you have lost that you had before. Its one thing to say that so-in-so wants to do such-and-such but using the slippery slope arguement to support that position without even putting up a reasonable starting position.

I have no sympathy for anyone who gets deported because they broke the law. Its not their choice to pick and chose the times they want to follow it. If a person overstays their visa - get the hell out. If you want to stay then start the process when your supposed to. Law breakers should not be rewarded over the people who follow the proper procedures and laws. My brother-in-law's wife is in the midst of becoming a citizen. She had to wait a year and a half before she could come here on her. We can probably agree that the process is to clumbsy but I damn sure don't agree that somoene who stayed here fifteen years against the law deserves better.

Oh my! Looky here another case of this "pretend-to-lose-your-rights" bs
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6713065/

Lots of comments about breaking immigration laws after the link I posted. Perhaps if people read more carefully they will see that the guy was fully compliant with the law - and he got screwed over anyway - that's the whole point.

Why would immigration schedule an interview with him only to have homeland security deport him 1 month earlier?

Either something in the system got screwed up big-time or else they scheduled the interview with the full intention of never having it.

Oh my! Looky here another case of this "pretend-to-lose-your-rights" bs
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6713065/
This reminds me of the Cat Stevens thing.

It seems that if you are a Muslim who people listen to or may be influenced by - and your publicly stated views do not agree with those of the govt. - then you are a threat to national security.

It's unfortunate that the guy got deported to the Philippines. I hope there was something wrong with his paperwork [not because I wish him ill], because if not I'll be worried that the Department of Homeland Security may be turning into some Secret Police-like organization.

Quoted from the link:

I have always stayed legally in the U.S (functioned like any other U.S citizen, went to school, worked legally with working authorization and have been paying taxes since 1993, never been unemployed, until now) when my wife and i got married last 2002, My wife filed for a petition for me to change my status to (Permanent Resident) Green Card Holder. Dec. 1st of 2003 dept. of homeland Security came and knocked at our House in Cypress, CA. and took me in (cuffed and thrown in a van), overlooking that i had a petition pending from my wife and that i had an interview with immigration around February of 2004

I fail to see what the guy did wrong to deserve this. Perhaps playing by the rules was a mistake?

I fail to see how he could be legal in the US if he was applying for (Permanent Resident). Did he get married just so he could get a green card and stay? He must of had a visa and it expired therefore he broke the law and needed to be deported by law. Or he violated his visa conditions. What kind of 15 year visa did he have? I don't think you can have a 15 year visa, most visa's are granted so people can atend schools and not work a full time job.

Work visas have to be renewed periodically, if he had let his lapse prior to the green card hearing, he was technically illegal, which may be what happened. Hard to tell without hearing the entire story.

Irrespective of expired visa or not, he was taken by Homeland Security - not immigration.

Good point, and one I overlooked. Why was he considered a threat then? We're not getting the whole story.

So Homeland Security helped out Immigration. Big deal. They still didn't violate the rights of anyone.

So Homeland Security helped out Immigration. Big deal. They still didn't violate the rights of anyone.If someone has a hearing scheduled - that is called due process.

The fact that he can be and was deported prior to his scheduled hearing shows that due process in this case is dead.

Some quote's from
here (http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/RelatedArticles.asp?did=811)

Prior to the terrorist attacks of September 11, federal regulations provided that, upon the arrest of an alien by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS),2 the INS was required to make a determination within twenty-four hours as to whether or not there was a legal basis to continue holding the alien in custody.

Those were his rights prior to the Patriot act. Lets see where he stands after 9/11.

However, in an effort to address the national security concerns raised by the September 11 attacks, the Attorney General was provided with additional broad authority to detain aliens. For example, the USA PATRIOT Act provides the Attorney General with the authority to "certify" an alien as a suspected terrorist. The Attorney General then has seven days from the date an alien is taken into custody and certified as a suspected terrorist to release or charge him with an immigration or criminal violation.

According to this little gem, they would've had to first "certify" him as a suspected terrorist, then charge him with something within seven days. Hmmnn....maybe someone heard him listening to a Cat Stevens track, therefore making him guilty by association. :rolleyes:

However, the following tidbit completely voids any protection offered by the one above.

In addition, pursuant to a regulation issued by the Attorney General, aliens who have not been certified as suspected terrorists may be detained for an unspecified period of time, possibly indefinitely, "in the event of an emergency or other extraordinary circumstance."

So, if your are a certified suspected terrorist, you must be charged within seven days or released. But if you are not "certified" as a suspected terrorist, you can be held indefinitely.

Now that's somewhat fucked up, don't you think?

Additionally, in the weeks and months after September 11, as part of the government's efforts to investigate the terrorist attacks, more than 1,000 aliens, both visitors and permanent residents, were detained in INS custody ostensibly because they could be linked to terrorist activity, with their names and locations kept secret. The Attorney General also directed immigration judges to close courtrooms to the public, including to families of detainees, in order to bar disclosure of information that may be related to law enforcement or national security. Pursuant to this directive, immigration judges are ordered to "give appropriate deference to the expertise of senior officials in law enforcement and national security agencies" as to whether "the disclosure of information will harm the national security or law enforcement interests of the United States."

Hmmnn.......permanent residents detained.......closed courtrooms.......judges deferring to law enforcement and national security officials as to secrecy.......hmmnn.

Basically, they can now just make a person disappear and they can do it completely within the law.

Don't take this as an anti-US thing on my part. There have been many other countries in which govt. can and does make people vanish from society. It's dodgy wherever it happens.

In my own country, a man has just been released after a 2 year detainment without being charged with anything. He was detained based on communications from agencies in other countries from which he has been deported because of their embarrasing inability to provide evidence with which to charge him.

Had the existence of this man been kept secret, who knows how long he could've spent rotting in jail. His name is Ahmed Zaoui (http://www.amnesty.org.nz/zaoui)

Since the passage of the laws and regulations referred to herein, the newly created Department of Homeland Security (DHS) took control of immigration services and border security from the Department of Justice. However, the laws and regulations discussed herein remain in effect, and references to the INS are synonymous with the DHS.

I guess this bit explains why DHS picked him up if it was only an immigration issue. But if it was only an immigration issue, why not wait for the scheduled hearing?

Actually, this bit could explain how such a fuck-up could happen if DHS staff are getting confused about what they are supposed to be doing.

Irrespective of expired visa or not, he was taken by Homeland Security - not immigration.

As far as I know the INS falls under the umbrella of Homeland Security.

Oh really?

Then how do you explain this: http://www.sr20forum.com/showthread.php?t=76975

Can you explain to me why this story has never been in the media. It only made the rounds in a couple of online forums. Can you tell my why when I google his name I only get 5 hits and they are all the same thing? You figure the way that other countries jump all over the US that they would of jumped all over this story and it would of made the frontpage of most papers in other countries. Not one source that could even be considered showed up, not even any anti US sites.

As far as I know the INS falls under the umbrella of Homeland Security.Yep it does, see the bottom of my other post above.

Can you explain to me why this story has never been in the media. It only made the rounds in a couple of online forums. Can you tell my why when I google his name I only get 5 hits and they are all the same thing? You figure the way that other countries jump all over the US that they would of jumped all over this story and it would of made the frontpage of most papers in other countries. Not one source that could even be considered showed up, not even any anti US sites.
Nope I can't explain it.

Does it need to be in the media (or anti-US sites) to be true?

I could speculate why, as could anyone, but I won't.

I have spent many years on the forum which is the source of this (same username as here) and have no reason to doubt the people posting there. It is a car forum much like this although more specialised. The people on that forum are great and have banded together in the past to help people in need (such as Jimmy Banach's baby girl who needed an organ transplant). Believe me when I say that the people on that forum would be the first to call BS if they suspected any.

All I know is that I am sickened by the goddamned hypocrites in here, whom I doubt will be even half-way attempting to justify all this crap, had this exact crap been pushed by a Democratic administration.

Fucking hypocrites, that's all I can say.

When one does right...one has no need to fear the authorities. This is GENERALLY true. Once in a while somebody gets is the wrong place at the wrong time. It is the price that we have to pay for homeland security.

When one does right...one has no need to fear the authorities. This is GENERALLY true. Once in a while somebody gets is the wrong place at the wrong time. It is the price that we have to pay for homeland security.

Would you still feel the same way if it were you in the wrong place at the wrong tiime?

2. Its a fair question to ask what rights you have lost that you had before.

i know its late and the argument has progressed, but i need to make a point, ignore it if you must.

i have answered this question, on several occasions, on several other threads, and see no point in repeating myself again, only to be ignored, again. if you arent aware of what rights you have lost, i doubt you were aware of the rights you had in the first place, and if thats the case, i feel i have nothing to prove to you.

and as far as the "if you're following the law, you have no reason to fear authority" argument, id like to stress that yes, as long as the law does not impede my basic freedoms. when laws are being made that prohibit the full practice of my basic liberties, those laws will begin to get broken. as the government continues to create laws that seek to resrict my actions, thats when i start questioning their authority. yes, im not breaking any laws now (with the exception of the local speed limits and the occasion civil disobedience) but i feel that the government is increasingly creating laws that prohibit the freedoms i enjoy. most noticably free speech, and search and siesure freedoms, but i fear it wont stop there.