Mom says Patriot Act stripped son of due process

[JBond]

Mom says Patriot Act stripped son of due process

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5049867

Oxford, N.C. — Sixteen-year-old Ashton Lundeby's bedroom in his mother's Granville County home is nothing, if not patriotic. Images of American flags are everywhere – on the bed, on the floor, on the wall.

But according to the United States government, the tenth-grade home-schooler is being held on a criminal complaint that he made a bomb threat from his home on the night of Feb. 15.

The family was at a church function that night, his mother, Annette Lundeby, said.

"Undoubtedly, they were given false information, or they would not have had 12 agents in my house with a widow and two children and three cats," Lundeby said.

Around 10 p.m. on March 5, Lundeby said, armed FBI agents along with three local law enforcement officers stormed her home looking for her son. They handcuffed him and presented her with a search warrant.

"I was terrified," Lundeby's mother said. "There were guns, and I don't allow guns around my children. I don't believe in guns."

Lundeby told the officers that someone had hacked into her son's IP address and was using it to make crank calls connected through the Internet, making it look like the calls had originated from her home when they did not.

Her argument was ignored, she said. Agents seized a computer, a cell phone, gaming console, routers, bank statements and school records, according to federal search warrants.

"There were no bomb-making materials, not even a blasting cap, not even a wire," Lundeby said.

Ashton now sits in a juvenile facility in South Bend, Ind. His mother has had little access to him since his arrest. She has gone to her state representatives as well as attorneys, seeking assistance, but, she said, there is nothing she can do.

Lundeby said the USA Patriot Act stripped her son of his due process rights.

"We have no rights under the Patriot Act to even defend them, because the Patriot Act basically supersedes the Constitution," she said. "It wasn't intended to drag your barely 16-year-old, 120-pound son out in the middle of the night on a charge that we can't even defend."

Passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S., the Patriot Act allows federal agents to investigate suspected cases of terrorism swiftly to better protect the country. In part, it gives the federal government more latitude to search telephone records, e-mails and other records.

"They're saying that 'We feel this individual is a terrorist or an enemy combatant against the United States, and we're going to suspend all of those due process rights because this person is an enemy of the United States," said Dan Boyce, a defense attorney and former U.S. attorney not connected to the Lundeby case.

Critics of the statute say it threatens the most basic of liberties.

"There's nothing a matter of public record," Boyce said "All those normal rights are just suspended in the air."

In a bi-partisan effort, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., last month introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives a bill that would narrow subpoena power in a provision of the Patriot Act, called the National Security Letters, to curb what some consider to be abuse of power by federal law enforcement officers.

Boyce said the Patriot Act was written with good intentions, but he said he believes it has gone too far in some cases. Lundeby's might be one of them, he said.

"It very well could be a case of overreaction, where an agent leaped to certain conclusions or has made certain assumptions about this individual and about how serious the threat really is," Boyce said.

Because a federal judge issued a gag order in the case, the U.S. attorney in Indiana cannot comment on the case, nor can the FBI. The North Carolina Highway Patrol did confirm that officers assisted with the FBI operation at the Lundeby home on March 5.

"Never in my worst nightmare did I ever think that it would be my own government that I would have to protect my children from," Lundeby said. "This is the United States, and I feel like I live in a third world country now."

Lundeby said she does not think this type of case is what the Patriot Act was intended for. Boyce agrees.

"It was to protect the public, but what we need to do is to make sure there are checks and balances to make sure those new laws are not abused," he said.

Reporter: Amanda Lamb
Photographer: Chad Flowers
Web Editor: Kelly Gardner

[sacase]

Its hard to comment without knowing all the facts, but based what was presented the did the right thing so far.

First this woman has no idea of what it is like to live in a third world country. The FBI came and got her son with reason to believe that he committed the acts. Even without the Patriot act, they could have still came and got him with guns drawn. I find it interesting that as soon as the agent come to get her son she offers up a story about how her son's IP address was hacked. She also fails to understand that there doesn't have to be bomb making equipment for her son to be charged. The act of making a bomb threat, whether real or fake is illegal.

[BrAinPaiNt]

The patriot act strips an american citizens of their rights and you think it is the right thing to do?

Stripping away an American Citizens rights granted to them under the constitution seems to be the direct opposite of a Patriot Act.

[JBond]

The patriot act strips an american citizens of their rights and you think it is the right thing to do?

Stripping away an American Citizens rights granted to them under the constitution seems to be the direct opposite of a Patriot Act.

I posted this story with you in mind. The Patriot Act is something that needs to be reviewed, but I am not sure Obama is the right guy to do it. I would have preferred to have the Supreme Court overturn parts of it, but that has not happened.

[ConcordCowboy]

I believe I saw this in another thread...;)

"One person described the administration as the most shocking "end justifies the means" group they have ever encountered."

And this was said about Obama's Administration?

Like I said there...obviously they never encountered the Bush Administration.

And here's the Patriot Act as Proof.

[trickblue]

I believe I saw this in another thread...;)

"One person described the administration as the most shocking "end justifies the means" group they have ever encountered."

And this was said about Obama's Administration?

Like I said there...obviously they never encountered the Bush Administration.

And here's the Patriot Act as Proof.

This happened under Obama's watch, my friend...

[WoodysGirl]

This happened under Obama's watch, my friend...
Under a law enacted under Bush, so the point is moot.

When can folks get past assigning blame and discuss the merits of an issue? Very few threads on here can go long without the tit for tat. It's tiring.

It's been said on this board before, I forget by who, that once the gov't gains power, it's not like they'll easily give that up.

This is another one of those cases..

[trickblue]

Under a law enacted under Bush, so the point is moot.

When can folks get past assigning blame and discuss the merits of an issue? Very few threads on here can go long without the tit for tat. It's tiring.

It's been said on this board before, I forget by who, that once the gov't gains power, it's not like they'll easily give that up.

This is another one of those cases..

Hey... all I know is that it happened under Obama's watch...

[WoodysGirl]

Hey... all I know is that it happened under Obama's watch...
Alrighty then.

I guess that's all there is left to discuss.

[ScipioCowboy]

I deplore the Patriot Act, and I'm still waiting for Obama to overturn it.

Sadly, I doubt he ever will -- this criticism isn't directly solely at President Obama. It's simply the nature of government; whenever a government is allowed to usurp rights, it seldom returns them and often views them as precedent for taking more rights in the future.

I'm quite certain the Patriot Act was passed with the best possible intentions. The same is probably true for many gun laws. But what happens when a group that isn't so well-meaning seizes power?

Consider, for instance, the Nazi's rise to power. Many of Germany's gun laws were in place prior to Hitler taking control, yet he still took full advantage of them. I venture it was much easier to round up defenseless Jews than armed Jews.

Let me be absolutely clear: I'm NOT comparing Obama to Hitler. I'm simply expounding upon the dangers of surrendering rights.

[trickblue]

Alrighty then.

I guess that's all there is left to discuss.

I guess you fail to see my logic here... ;)

I saw that time and again after 9/11... "It happened under Bush's watch"... many times absolving Clinton...

I'm just playing the card that was dealt me...

The old "turnabout is fair play" schtick...

I'll admit... it IS fun... :D

[Bob Sacamano]

I deplore the Patriot Act, and I'm still waiting for Obama to overturn it.

Sadly, I doubt he ever will -- this criticism isn't directly solely at President Obama. It's simply the nature of government; whenever a government is allowed to usurp rights, it seldom returns them and often views them as precedent for taking more rights in the future.

I'm quite certain the Patriot Act was passed with the best possible intentions. The same is probably true for many gun laws. But what happens when a group that isn't so well-meaning seizes power?

Consider, for instance, the Nazi's rise to power. Many of Germany's gun laws were in place prior to Hitler taking control, yet he still took full advantage of them. I venture it was much easier to round up defenseless Jews than armed Jews.

Let me be absolutely clear: I'm NOT comparing Obama to Hitler. Although you could make a case for him being the Devil. I'm simply expounding upon the dangers of surrendering rights.

fixed

[WoodysGirl]

I guess you fail to see my logic here... ;)

I saw that time and again after 9/11... "It happened under Bush's watch"... many times absolving Clinton...

I'm just playing the card that was dealt me...

The old "turnabout is fair play" schtick...

I'll admit... it IS fun... :D
I get it now.

Well, I'm new to the whole political discourse on these here boards. I don't recall participating in the old PZ, so I missed all the arguments back then.

And if all the arguments pertained to bashing Bush then that would've annoyed me, too. I liken it to bashing Jerry Jones for everything. It's easy, but doesn't have much substance, because after awhile the horse dies.

[ScipioCowboy]

fixed
:lmao2:

I thought Bush was the devil. Any man who can control the weather...

[Bob Sacamano]

sarcastic enchanter

my arse

[JBond]

fixed


What is the story with your location below you name? 14/F/Anaheim?

Just curious....

[Bob Sacamano]

What is the story with your location below you name? 14/F/Anaheim?

Just curious....

it's my a/s/l

you ever see To Catch a Predator on MSNBC?

[BrAinPaiNt]

I posted this story with you in mind. The Patriot Act is something that needs to be reviewed, but I am not sure Obama is the right guy to do it. I would have preferred to have the Supreme Court overturn parts of it, but that has not happened.

I doubt many politicians will want to get rid of all of it, they just want to claim they do.

[ScipioCowboy]

it's my a/s/l

you ever see To Catch a Predator on MSNBC?

So, you wanna meet somewhere? Preferably dark and secluded....

:laugh2:

[JBond]

:lmao2:

I thought Bush was the devil. Any man who can control the weather...

I'm still waiting for Obama to drop the sea levels.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/__2z1Sv_T4JU/SXPqp1IKnBI/AAAAAAAAAa8/rA3dtYH_wak/s320/Moses-parting-red-sea.jpg

[Bob Sacamano]

So, you wanna meet somewhere? Preferably dark and secluded....

:laugh2:

as long as you bring me some Mike's Hard Lemonade

and condoms

[ScipioCowboy]

as long as you bring me some Mike's Hard Lemonade

and condoms

To Catch a Predator on MSNBC?

Wait a minute...

Is this really Keith Olbermann?

[Bob Sacamano]

To Catch a Predator on MSNBC?

Wait a minute...

Is this really Keith Olbermann?

I'm not the cops, I swar

[BrAinPaiNt]

To Catch a Predator on MSNBC?

Wait a minute...

Is this really Keith Olbermann?

Can't be keith...his noggin is too large to fit on this forum.

[ConcordCowboy]

Can't be keith...his noggin is too large to fit on this forum.

Damn...you were Almost right.

http://www.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2008/05/80839490.jpg

[Rogah]

There are definitely aspects of the Patriot Act that I do not approve of. American citizens should never lose the right to due process. But with all due respect to the accused, I just can't really take the statements of an upset mother telling us all that he's really just such a good boy as any sort of evidence that truly exonerates him.

The FBI seized his computer and it would not take long to determine whether or not those threats truly originated from his IP address or not. Perhaps I am being foolishly naive, but I don't think they would detain him for an extended period of time if they found the threats came from another source and he really is just a completely innocent 16 year old that has no idea what is going on.

[JBond]

There are definitely aspects of the Patriot Act that I do not approve of. American citizens should never lose the right to due process. But with all due respect to the accused, I just can't really take the statements of an upset mother telling us all that he's really just such a good boy as any sort of evidence that truly exonerates him.

The FBI seized his computer and it would not take long to determine whether or not those threats truly originated from his IP address or not. Perhaps I am being foolishly naive, but I don't think they would detain him for an extended period of time if they found the threats came from another source and he really is just a completely innocent 16 year old that has no idea what is going on.


He is the ring leader of an Al Qaeda sleeper cell. Don't let them fool you.
He was responsible for the attacks on the power grid and pentagon last month. Don't let his age and size trick you. He is a killer.;)

[Rogah]

He is the ring leader of an Al Qaeda sleeper cell. Don't let them fool you.
He was responsible for the attacks on the power grid and pentagon last month. Don't let his age and size trick you. He is a killer.;)Obviously neither of us believe any of that :) But all kidding aside, his guilt or innocence will certainly impact how we view the case.

If he is completely innocent then this is an textbook example of what's wrong with the Patriot Act and he should be released and cleared immediately. But if he did send some bomb threats from his home computer... well, I am not saying he should go to jail for the rest of his life, but all of a sudden I feel a lot less sympathy towards him for being detained a couple months.

[JBond]

Obviously neither of us believe any of that :) But all kidding aside, his guilt or innocence will certainly impact how we view the case.

If he is completely innocent then this is an textbook example of what's wrong with the Patriot Act and he should be released and cleared immediately. But if he did send some bomb threats from his home computer... well, I am not saying he should go to jail for the rest of his life, but all of a sudden I feel a lot less sympathy towards him for being detained a couple months.

Agreed!

Not the scariest look kid, is he?
http://wwwcache2.wral.com/asset/2009/04/29/5046747/1241042076-PatriotActTeen-220x165.jpg (http://cowboyszone.com/rs/image/5046747/?ref_id=5049867)

[joseephuss]

He is the ring leader of an Al Qaeda sleeper cell. Don't let them fool you.
He was responsible for the attacks on the power grid and pentagon last month. Don't let his age and size trick you. He is a killer.;)

Agreed!

Not the scariest look kid, is he?
http://wwwcache2.wral.com/asset/2009/04/29/5046747/1241042076-PatriotActTeen-220x165.jpg (http://cowboyszone.com/rs/image/5046747/?ref_id=5049867)

You don't have to be a part of Al Qaeda or a foreign sleeper cell to impose terror on the U.S. Look at Timothy McVeigh.

You also don't have to look imposing. Those kids from Columbine certainly didn't have that menacing look.

I agree with you that there are some aspects of the Patriot Act need to be reviewed and changed.

[arglebargle]

Obviously neither of us believe any of that :) But all kidding aside, his guilt or innocence will certainly impact how we view the case.

If he is completely innocent then this is an textbook example of what's wrong with the Patriot Act and he should be released and cleared immediately. But if he did send some bomb threats from his home computer... well, I am not saying he should go to jail for the rest of his life, but all of a sudden I feel a lot less sympathy towards him for being detained a couple months.

The scary thing is, whether he did it or not, this can happen to him. Or anyone else. Sorta like the 'no fly' list, where you can get on it for any number of mysterious reasons, but try getting off it....

Law written under crisis conditions is often filled with 'We didn't realize it would do that" regrets.

[masomenos]

as long as you bring me some Mike's Hard Lemonade

and condoms

Oh dear, something tells me that Summer has a little kink to him...

JerryAdvocate ------->:spanking: <------- Scip

[Bob Sacamano]

Oh dear, something tells me that Summer has a little kink to him...

JerryAdvocate ------->:spanking: <------- Scip
mason...

[masomenos]

mason...

What? I'm not judging, honest!

:D

[ScipioCowboy]

Oh dear, something tells me that Summer has a little kink to him...

JerryAdvocate ------->:spanking: <------- Scip

Well, when I get to wherever Summer is, I better find a teenage girl or I'm taking my Mike's Hard Lemonade elsewhere -- probably to Brainpaint's house because I'm quite certain he's a teenage girl.:D

[Bob Sacamano]

Well, when I get to wherever Summer is, I better find a teenage girl or I'm taking my Mike's Hard Lemonade elsewhere -- probably to Brainpaint's house because I'm quite certain he's a teenage girl.:D

I heard she's butch

what with living in the backwoods of WV

[ScipioCowboy]

I heard she's butch

what with living in the backwoods of WV

No way.

She hates Bush.

Huh? What? W?

[masomenos]

Guys, I'd like to congratulate you. I don't think that there is anyone who can hijack a thread quite as effectively (or as disturbingly) as us. Well done.

:toast:

[Bob Sacamano]

Guys, I'd like to congratulate you. I don't think that there is anyone who can hijack a thread quite as effectively (or as disturbingly) as us. Well done.

:toast:

:laugh2:

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well, when I get to wherever Summer is, I better find a teenage girl or I'm taking my Mike's Hard Lemonade elsewhere -- probably to Brainpaint's house because I'm quite certain he's a teenage girl.:D

BP rarely drinks anymore, but even when he did, he thought Mikes Hard Lemonade sucked.

And I am only giddy like a school girl on the weekends.

During the week I am just a mean SOB.:laugh1:

[Rogah]

The scary thing is, whether he did it or not, this can happen to him. Or anyone else. Sorta like the 'no fly' list, where you can get on it for any number of mysterious reasons, but try getting off it....

Law written under crisis conditions is often filled with 'We didn't realize it would do that" regrets.This is taking place in my neck of the woods (I live in the Raleigh area) and I admit I did some looking into things. He is accused of making multiple bomb threats, including the specific charge that involved one against Purdue University.

I have sympathy for law enforcement and the difficult job they have. Whenever we have an Oklahoma City or Virigina Tech, everyone looks at all the warning signs that were in place and says "why didn't anyone do anything before hand..?!?" So a bomb threat has to be treated very seriously.

Which brings us back to this case. I have a sneaking suspicion that he did what he is accused of. The various alibis given seem weak. But whether he did it or not, he is still an American citizen, he should have the right to legal representation, the right to a speedy trial, etc, etc. He should be formally charged with a crime or released from custody.

There are various bills being introduced to try to limit the scope of the Patriot Act. They'll probably pass and then when some other tragedy hits our country, the Patriot Act will be strengthened again. Rinse, repeat, etc.

[jrumann59]

I believe I saw this in another thread...;)

"One person described the administration as the most shocking "end justifies the means" group they have ever encountered."

And this was said about Obama's Administration?

Like I said there...obviously they never encountered the Bush Administration.

And here's the Patriot Act as Proof.

Wasn't it renewed by the DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, just saying. A President can't just sign stuff into law without Congressional approval. Remember the Patriot Act has been approved twice once after 9/11 and in March of 2006. Since Obama was a member of the Congress that passed it it is highly unlikely he rolls it back considering he is taking hits in the national defense arena these days.

[ConcordCowboy]

Wasn't it renewed by the DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, just saying. A President can't just sign stuff into law without Congressional approval. Remember the Patriot Act has been approved twice once after 9/11 and in March of 2006. Since Obama was a member of the Congress that passed it it is highly unlikely he rolls it back considering he is taking hits in the national defense arena these days.

While you are right...we all know who wanted it, came up with it and pushed to get it passed.

After 9/11 the Dems had no balls to go against Bush...because then they would have been seen as Unpatriotic or Un-American...and of course didn't want to be see as soft on National Security...and the rest.

Basically Ball less.

But the Patriot Act is all Bush/Cheney and we all know it.

[jrumann59]

While you are right...we all know who wanted it, came up with it and pushed to get it passed.

After 9/11 the Dems had no balls to go against Bush...because then they would have been seen as Unpatriotic or Un-American...and of course didn't want to be see as soft on National Security...and the rest.

Basically Ball less.

But the Patriot Act is all Bush/Cheney and we all know it.

So Democrats are a bunch of gutless wonders unless they have filibuster proof majorities and a dem president. Thanks for clearing that up.

[BrAinPaiNt]

So Democrats are a bunch of gutless wonders unless they have filibuster proof majorities and a dem president. Thanks for clearing that up.

They indeed were a bunch of gutless individuals when it came to the patriot act and other areas.

I have said it before...actually I think I said Spineless to be more precise.

[ConcordCowboy]

So Democrats are a bunch of gutless wonders unless they have filibuster proof majorities and a dem president. Thanks for clearing that up.

When it came to the Patriot Act...yeah...they were gutless.

[Rogah]

While you are right...we all know who wanted it, came up with it and pushed to get it passed.

After 9/11 the Dems had no balls to go against Bush...because then they would have been seen as Unpatriotic or Un-American...and of course didn't want to be see as soft on National Security...and the rest.

Basically Ball less.

But the Patriot Act is all Bush/Cheney and we all know it.Come on, CC, that's pretty weak. The original bill passed by something like 99-1 in the Senate and, according to Wiki, it was reauthorized several years later by a vote of 89-2. So it is pretty lame to try and pin it on just one party when it received overwhelming bipartisan support.

I think most politicians feel that this is legislation with good intents but, like any other piece of legislation, we just need to be extra vigilant against the potential for abuse. It might not be a bad idea to narrow the scope a little. And the ball is in Obama's court.

[ConcordCowboy]

Come on, CC, that's pretty weak. The original bill passed by something like 99-1 in the Senate and, according to Wiki, it was reauthorized several years later by a vote of 89-2. So it is pretty lame to try and pin it on just one party.

I think most politicians feel that this is legislation with good intents but, like any other piece of legislation, we just need to be extra vigilant against the potential for abuse.

I'm blaming Bush/Cheney.

I knew the vote count was coming.

I said they were ball less and gutless...do I have to drive over them too.

They voted for things they knew damn well they shouldn't have.

Like I said after 9/11 now WAY were they going to be seen as soft on National Security and you know that's no BS.

[Rogah]

I'm blaming Bush/Cheney.

I knew the vote count was coming.

I said they were ball less and gutless...do I have to drive over them too.

They voted for things they knew damn well they shouldn't have.

Like I said after 9/11 now WAY were they going to be seen as soft on National Security and you know that's no BS.This argument would hold more weight if that one vote taken in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was the only one we had but, as mentioned before, there was a reauthorization vote several years later.

You can choose to look at this bill through your partisan filter, but fact remains that both the original bill and the reauthorization received overwhelming bipartisan support. And fact also remains that Obama is perfectly positioned right now to make any changes he so desires. So it is pretty weak to blame just one party.

[ConcordCowboy]

This argument would hold more weight if that one vote taken in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was the only one we had but, as mentioned before, there was a reauthorization vote several years later.

You can choose to look at this bill through your partisan filter, but fact remains that both the original bill and the reauthorization received overwhelming bipartisan support. And fact also remains that Obama is perfectly positioned right now to make any changes he so desires. So it is pretty weak to blame just one party.

Both Democrats and Republicans are at fault for passing it...yes...no question.

BUT Bush/Cheney came up with it...that's what I'm saying...Congress didn't come up with the Patriot Act the White House did.

[the kid 05]

Well, when I get to wherever Summer is, I better find a teenage girl or I'm taking my Mike's Hard Lemonade elsewhere -- probably to Brainpaint's house because I'm quite certain he's a teenage girl.:D

Lives close enough to watch the Ravens Redskins game i know that much ( might have been Redskins Ravens though) good luck with your search

[Rogah]

Both Democrats and Republicans are at fault for passing it...yes...no question.

BUT Bush/Cheney came up with it...that's what I'm saying...Congress didn't come up with the Patriot Act the White House did.And that, folks, is how sometimes a bill becomes a law :rolleyes:

[jrumann59]

This argument would hold more weight if that one vote taken in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was the only one we had but, as mentioned before, there was a reauthorization vote several years later.

You can choose to look at this bill through your partisan filter, but fact remains that both the original bill and the reauthorization received overwhelming bipartisan support. And fact also remains that Obama is perfectly positioned right now to make any changes he so desires. So it is pretty weak to blame just one party.

DING DING we have a winner. They were Ok to stand in his way when he wanted other things but this thing was a political landmine when they had control in Congress in 06 makes sense.

[ConcordCowboy]

And that, folks, is how sometimes a bill becomes a law :rolleyes:

Yeah and when you present that bill it's YOUR bill...like I said all along....Bush/Cheney own it.

Just like the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 otherwise known as the McCain–Feingold Act...it was a Bill intoduced by McCain and Feingold and voted on in Congress...and signed in to Law by Bush...but McCain and Feingold will always own it.

The Patriot Act was a bill that should have never became a law the was it was presented.

That's why when it was voted on the second time the Senate wanted all kinds of changes to it...because they thought it was flawed.

But yet again even though they had concerns about civil liberty they allowed those changes to be taken out and passed it again.

You think somethings wrong and think it will infringe on peoples Civil Liberties but you pass it anyway?!

Without the changes you want?

Pathetic and Gutless

"Many of the act's provisions were to sunset beginning December 31, 2005, approximately 4 years after its passage. In the months preceding the sunset date, supporters of the act pushed to make its sunsetting provisions permanent, while critics sought to revise various sections to enhance civil liberty protections. In July 2005, the U.S. Senate passed a reauthorization bill with substantial changes to several sections of the act, while the House reauthorization bill kept most of the act's original language. The two bills were then reconciled in a conference committee that was criticized by Senators from both the Republican and Democratic parties for ignoring civil liberty concerns. The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 9, 2006."

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yeah and when you present that bill it's YOUR bill...like I said all along....Bush/Cheney own it.

Just like the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 otherwise known as the McCain–Feingold Act...it was a Bill intoduced by McCain and Feingold and voted on in Congress...and signed in to Law by Bush...but McCain and Feingold will always own it.

The Patriot Act was a bill that should have never became a law the was it was presented.

That's why when it was voted on the second time the Senate wanted all kinds of changes to it...because they thought it was flawed.

But yet again even though they had concerns about civil liberty they allowed those changes to be taken out and passed it again.

You think somethings wrong and think it will infringe on peoples Civil Liberties but you pass it anyway?!

Without the changes you want?

Pathetic and Gutless

"Many of the act's provisions were to sunset beginning December 31, 2005, approximately 4 years after its passage. In the months preceding the sunset date, supporters of the act pushed to make its sunsetting provisions permanent, while critics sought to revise various sections to enhance civil liberty protections. In July 2005, the U.S. Senate passed a reauthorization bill with substantial changes to several sections of the act, while the House reauthorization bill kept most of the act's original language. The two bills were then reconciled in a conference committee that was criticized by Senators from both the Republican and Democratic parties for ignoring civil liberty concerns. The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 9, 2006."

This is an interesting view to me CC. I don't necessarily disagree with you. I'm OK with this being FP Bush's bill, per say. However, I do think it's interesting that the current administration is basically undoing many of the things the Bush administration did but somehow, this is not one of them.

[ConcordCowboy]

This is an interesting view to me CC. I don't necessarily disagree with you. I'm OK with this being FP Bush's bill, per say. However, I do think it's interesting that the current administration is basically undoing many of the things the Bush administration did but somehow, this is not one of them.


Well it ain't over yet. :p:

[ABQCOWBOY]

Well it ain't over yet. :p:

I'm pretty sure it is but I suppose time is the ultimate judge.

[ConcordCowboy]

I'm pretty sure it is but I suppose time is the ultimate judge.

Well as you say time will tell...but I'm pretty sure that we haven't heard the last word on the Patriot Act yet.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well as you say time will tell...but I'm pretty sure that we haven't heard the last word on the Patriot Act yet.

If you think the current dems are going to gut the Patriot act, you are in for a shock. I doubt they make too many changes at all to be honest.

[ConcordCowboy]

If you think the current dems are going to gut the Patriot act, you are in for a shock. I doubt they make too many changes at all to be honest.

You're probably right.

[DIAF]

If you think the current dems are going to gut the Patriot act, you are in for a shock. I doubt they make too many changes at all to be honest.

Well, everytime they go over bush-era doctrine to supposedly reverse it, they end up keeping more than they reverse it seems....i'd expect the patriot act to be no different.

[Rogah]

Well, everytime they go over bush-era doctrine to supposedly reverse it, they end up keeping more than they reverse it seems....i'd expect the patriot act to be no different.+1. Seriously, President Obama is a lot more pro-Bush than Candidate Obama ever was.

[DIAF]

+1. Seriously, President Obama is a lot more pro-Bush than Candidate Obama ever was.

Shhh. Don't let conservazone hear you say that.

[JBond]

+1. Seriously, President Obama is a lot more pro-Bush than Candidate Obama ever was.

Only on certain issues. He is also loony tune left on many issues. Bush, as we all know, was a left leaning moderate on most issues but he was tame compared to Obama.

[Rogah]

Only on certain issues. He is also loony tune left on many issues. Bush, as we all know, was a left leaning moderate on most issues but he was tame compared to Obama.Yes, I agree that it is in regards to only certain issues. I should have qualified my remarks because I didn't mean it with regards to (for example) Obama's domestic or fiscal policies.

But with regards to National Security issues and the War on Terror, I certainly stand by my statement :D

[arglebargle]

.....Bush, as we all know, was a left leaning moderate on most issues but he was tame compared to Obama.

Man, more funny quotes.