UK Government could forcibly relocate Terror 'Suspects'

[Destro]

It doesn't matter if they are. It matters that they can. But here's some links for you.


As for the box cutters on planes, that's a pretty obvious confirmation of my assertion that the terrorists will beat the rules no matter what they are. So why restrict law abiding citizens?

I would like to see the CIA shut down, but you're missing my point. I'm not saying that there should be no government surveillance of suspected terrorists. I'm saying that being a Muslim, a Ron Paul supporter, or a gun owner should not be part of the criteria for being a suspected terrorist. It's absurd. There needs to be a real concern for danger. Threats or plans need to have been made, or action needs to have been taken.

you can make the "they could, or they can" argument about anything and everything...the left uses it everyday to attack the 2nd ammenement, remember?

So since according to you the terrorists will always win...why even bother huh?

and you make it sound like sending a $25 check to Ron Paul is going to get some guys in a van sitting on your corner and get you put in the no fly list.

 

[Garb]

you can make the "they could, or they can" argument about anything and everything...the left uses it everyday to attack the 2nd ammenement, remember?

So since according to you the terrorists will always win...why even bother huh?

and you make it sound like sending a $25 check to Ron Paul is going to get some guys in a van sitting on your corner and get you put in the no fly list.

So do you think the government should ignore the fourth amendment? And I never said the terrorists will always win. What I'm saying is that security is an illusion. Especially when we're talking about a city that covers over 300,000 square miles (NYC). You can't ever keep the population 100% secure from terror attacks unless you put the whole city on complete lockdown. Some people have this idea that more surveillance, security, and police makes us safer. It might stop a terrorist attack, but in the process, you're taking freedom away from law abiding citizens. Taking our freedom away is not safe for us. Your misconstruing little details of what I say to try and take away from my argument as a whole. You still haven't responded to my assertion that more police powers makes it less safe for the American people. So again I ask you. How does restricting freedom make people safer?

 

[jsharmon7]

I'm outraged! I won't stand for this! Who is with me?! I'll be on the internet if you need me!

 

[beararms1776]

It doesn't matter if they are. It matters that they can. But here's some links for you.

LiveLeak.com - Patriot Act Being Used Against a 16 Year Old Boy and its Own Citizens!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydkpWHITlBg&feature=related

The 1st video is a result from a tyrant citizen stealing ip addresses and it happened to be this kids. Who knows, could have been someone that didn't like the kid for his patriotism or something petty. Maybe it wasn't deliberate. The fact is, a tyranical citizen took the liberty to sabotage him. The results, The Patriot Act.
The headline should read, "Tyrant steals ip addresses to sabotage and causes a mess and loss of Liberty."

 

[Destro]

So do you think the government should ignore the fourth amendment?

So again I ask you. How does restricting freedom make people safer?

I don't think the government is ignoring the 4th amendment, the Patriot act is non judicial in nature and not subject to the 4th amendment. Are swat teams raiding crack houses without warrants citing the Patriot Act?

What restrictions in freedom do we have now? How you or I less free today than we were on 9/10/01?

 

[Garb]

I don't think the government is ignoring the 4th amendment, the Patriot act is non judicial in nature and not subject to the 4th amendment. Are swat teams raiding crack houses without warrants citing the Patriot Act?

What restrictions in freedom do we have now? How you or I less free today than we were on 9/10/01?

By the constant fear mongering and assertions that we need big brother to protect us. And how is a federal law not subject to the fourth amendment?

 

[Garb]

The 1st video is a result from a tyrant citizen stealing ip addresses and it happened to be this kids. Who knows, could have been someone that didn't like the kid for his patriotism or something petty. Maybe it wasn't deliberate. The fact is, a tyranical citizen took the liberty to sabotage him. The results, The Patriot Act.
The headline should read, "Tyrant steals ip addresses to sabotage and causes a mess and loss of Liberty."

So another citizen steals his ip address and the government needs to use the Patriot Act to lock up the victim?

 

[Garb]

You cant in a Free society even try to prevent Terrorism without trampling on the eternal Rights of Man. You can only react to it and the reaction is far more important than the act of terror. Unity and purpose build more than destruction ever could destroy. React immediately, react swiftly, react absolute. Destroy every man, woman, and child who wishes us harm and you still will not destroy terrorism. Terrorism is not an ideology it is a tactic. Islam and Zionism are ideologues. terrorism is guerilla warfare and it is for gorillas. We cant stop it we can only choose how to prepare for it, and react. Anything else is Tyranny, far worse than any terror.

This is a quote from another thread, and I think it speaks volumes.

 

[beararms1776]

So another citizen steals his ip address and the government needs to use the Patriot Act to lock up the victim?

Thats where I disagree.
They obviously later found out it didn't actually come from his phone or ip but not before the tyrant used the PA against the kid and got him locked up. The tyrant should be prosecuted. We know how that works though.

 

[Destro]

So another citizen steals his ip address and the government needs to use the Patriot Act to lock up the victim?

I can't access youtube with the computer im on, but im hoping your not talking about the creep Ashton Lundeby who pled guilty?

 

[Destro]

By the constant fear mongering and assertions that we need big brother to protect us. And how is a federal law not subject to the fourth amendment?

fear mongering? that you proof that our liberty is being taken away? isin't fear mongering kinda subjective?

lots of federal laws are not subject to the 4th ammendment...The Military comes to mind first

 

[Garb]

Thats where I disagree.
They obviously later found out it didn't actually come from his phone or ip but not before the tyrant used the PA against the kid and got him locked up. The tyrant should be prosecuted. We know how that works though.

That's beside the point. The kid had a right to due process under the law, and according to the video, he's not getting it.

 

[Garb]

I can't access youtube with the computer im on, but im hoping your not talking about the creep Ashton Lundeby who pled guilty?

Yes it was him. After reading a little more on it, it seems he may have been involved in some phony bomb threats. Regardless of whether or not he was guilty, he was denied his right to legal counsel under the Patriot Act. What about innocent until proven guilty?

fear mongering? that you proof that our liberty is being taken away? isin't fear mongering kinda subjective?

lots of federal laws are not subject to the 4th ammendment...The Military comes to mind first

Fear mongering is subjective. The Patriot Act is not. I just gave you two examples of how the Patriot Act has infringed on our liberties. And the fourth amendment is supposed to apply to interactions between police and American citizens. In both examples I gave, (which you asked for) the Patriot Act is being used against American citizens by the police.

 

[beararms1776]

The kid had a right to due process under the law, and according to the video, he's not getting it.

I totally agree with you there especially after finding nothing suspicious at the home but I still blame the action on the tyrant. That's where it started.

 

[Garb]

I totally agree with you there especially after finding nothing suspicious at the home but I still blame the action on the tyrant. That's where it started.

If his IP address was indeed stolen, then there are two tyrants in this story. The person who stole his IP address, and the government who denied his rights and imprisoned him over nothing. Even if his IP address wasn't stolen, his right to legal counsel and due process was denied.

 

[Destro]

Yes it was him. After reading a little more on it, it seems he may have been involved in some phony bomb threats. Regardless of whether or not he was guilty, he was denied his right to legal counsel under the Patriot Act. What about innocent until proven guilty?



Fear mongering is subjective. The Patriot Act is not. I just gave you two examples of how the Patriot Act has infringed on our liberties. And the fourth amendment is supposed to apply to interactions between police and American citizens. In both examples I gave, (which you asked for) the Patriot Act is being used against American citizens by the police.

the PA was not even part of the case, they had a warrant for him, and his MOM is the one who claimed he was being held under the patriot act, and Alex Jones ran with it because he knew "some people" would get all worked up...guess it worked just as planned

Bloggers, TV, Go Nuts Over Misleading ‘Patriot Act’ Arrest Claim | Threat Level | Wired.com

 

[Destro]

If his IP address was indeed stolen, then there are two tyrants in this story. The person who stole his IP address, and the government who denied his rights and imprisoned him over nothing. Even if his IP address wasn't stolen, his right to legal counsel and due process was denied.

all of this has just been proven to be a lie

 

[Garb]

the PA was not even part of the case, they had a warrant for him, and his MOM is the one who claimed he was being held under the patriot act, and Alex Jones ran with it because he knew "some people" would get all worked up...guess it worked just as planned

Bloggers, TV, Go Nuts Over Misleading ‘Patriot Act’ Arrest Claim | Threat Level | Wired.com

I don't even like Alex Jones. I think he is a sensationalist. However, he was denied his right to legal counsel. I don't know if the Patriot Act was part of that or if the police were just ignoring the fourth amendment illegally , but again that's beside the point.

 

[Destro]

he was denied his right to legal counsel. I don't know if the Patriot Act was part of that or if the police were just ignoring the fourth amendment illegally , but again that's beside the point.

no he was not, and they HAD A WARRANT!...unless valid warrants are a violation of the 4th ammendment.

 

[Garb]

all of this has just been proven to be a lie

I just read multiple sources that stated that he was denied legal counsel on the night of his arrest, and that his mother was not allowed to access information which would have helped his defense.

New information on Patriot Act detention of Ashton Lundeby - Charlotte gun rights | Examiner.com

The Curious Case of Ashton Lundeby by William Norman Grigg

Due process my ass. Btw, I'm not saying he's not guilty. I'm arguing that even guilty people have rights, which the Patriot Act conveniently ignores.