Originally Posted by Dom1

Not only was Congress sleeping, but you have been also. I'd say for about 16 years or so! Were you sleeping when Bill Clinton approved of warrantless searches and other things like you mentioned above? See, I think if you have a problem with what is being done you should have a problem with what is being done no matter who is in charge, but you obviously are not one of those poeple. That tells me that you are more cared about partisan politics than you are about any perceived rights that you may or may not have lost.

Speaking of rendition, maybe you should do a bit of research on it, as you obviously don't know all that much about its history.

Originally Posted by pjwky

Well All, for all of my life, up until several years go, I would have quickly responded that "no individual branch of our government had the sole authority to sweep us up and imprison us." After all we had things like "warrants" & "habeous corpus" & "due process" firmly imbeded into the law-of-the-land. Then along came GWB & administration, and their ideas of protecting "we the people" by the Patriot Act, and by declairing certain individuals as "foreign combatants" and thus not subject to Constitutional protections.

Of course, the sleeping-lazzy-terrified Congress did not do their assigned task in safe-guarding "we the people" and so GWB et al got away with this. Stupid me, I was not really aware of how far this autocratic action had taken our government: then I read the book about Rendition called "Ghost Plane". I challenge anyone to read this and still feel safe from the whims & rummors that might come to our government's attention.

The documentation within this book is extraordinary: if any information can be considered reliable, I would suggest that "Ghost Plane" documents such information in a very solid manner.

Once lost, I suspect our individual rights will be very dificult to regain: and the entire concept of a "slippery slope" effect on our freedoms should be terrifying to all of us. ...pjwky

Originally Posted by pjwky

**********************************************
Well "Dom", you sure told me. My concern with this is the lack of due process, and warrants, and habeus corpus, regardless of who the Executive is: you know those things that those old Founders thought was so critical to the preservation of a democracy.

I believe NOT abiding by all the due process requirements may be at times convenient, but the risk to democracy far out-weighs any advantages that may come by autocratic actions: ignoring due process on occasion may be convenient but it surely leads to a terrible "slippery-slope".

Your post seems to indicate your expertise on the "rendition" topic, I wish you would share some of your knowledge with the rest of us so that we could become as enlightened as you on this topic, because to me it sounds like a BIG violation of the right to due process and also a black mark on our Constitution.

I am aware that President Clinton & probably other presidents have used rendition: and I am equally opposed to that. If we are a nation of laws, then we should adhere to those laws: if some law is not beneficial to our safety then we should change the law, but in accord with our Constitution. ...pjwy

Originally Posted by wow

Dom1,

On Tuesday, National Review Online reported the testimony of Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick before the House Intelligence Committee in July 1994. Gorelick told lawmakers that the president had the authority to order physical searches — break-ins — for national-security reasons without having to get a warrant from anyone. Gorelick said the Clinton administration would go along with Congress's desire to give the authority to pre-approve those searches to the FISA court, but did not retreat from the position that the president held such authority himself.

Byron York on Bill Clinton & Warrantless Searches on National Review Online

Originally Posted by wvpeach

Certainly any president now has the right to imprison anybody with out charges . Bush saw to that.

All they have to do is say you are suspected of terrorism.

And who defines terrorism? the president of course.

You could be guilty of terrorism economically because you advocate more regulation on business . which Bush deems as a terrorist act against the economy.

Presidents that follow Bush will have the same powers.

Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45

advocating more regulation on business is not just a terrorist act against the economy, its a terrorist act against humanity. Anyone advocating more regulation on business, knowing full well the results of any regulations is to drive business away from the regulations, is guilty of attempting to derail the economy, what other explanation could there be?

Originally Posted by Dom1

He signed an EO which allowed for warrantless searches . . . . this is all on record and people like pjwky didn't say a word - therefore making this a partisan issue to them.

Originally Posted by Noibn

ROTF,LMAO!!!

Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45

advocating more regulation on business is not just a terrorist act against the economy, its a terrorist act against humanity. Anyone advocating more regulation on business, knowing full well the results of any regulations is to drive business away from the regulations, is guilty of attempting to derail the economy, what other explanation could there be?

Originally Posted by pjwky

Well All, for all of my life, up until several years go, I would have quickly responded that "no individual branch of our government had the sole authority to sweep us up and imprison us." After all we had things like "warrants" & "habeous corpus" & "due process" firmly imbeded into the law-of-the-land. Then along came GWB & administration, and their ideas of protecting "we the people" by the Patriot Act, and by declairing certain individuals as "foreign combatants" and thus not subject to Constitutional protections.

Of course, the sleeping-lazzy-terrified Congress did not do their assigned task in safe-guarding "we the people" and so GWB et al got away with this. Stupid me, I was not really aware of how far this autocratic action had taken our government: then I read the book about Rendition called "Ghost Plane". I challenge anyone to read this and still feel safe from the whims & rummors that might come to our government's attention.

The documentation within this book is extraordinary: if any information can be considered reliable, I would suggest that "Ghost Plane" documents such information in a very solid manner.

Once lost, I suspect our individual rights will be very dificult to regain: and the entire concept of a "slippery slope" effect on our freedoms should be terrifying to all of us. ...pjwky