07-09-2004 23:12									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Fortunately SCOTUS has ruled on portions they found unconstitutional. Now the rest of it needs to be tested as well.

	07-09-2004 23:21									#62
	Increase the size of your Attachments

SCOTUS defense against Shrub's assault on our civil liberties has been absolutley pitiful. The system is still guilty until proven innocent whenever the gov't wants (irrespective of citizenship).

	07-09-2004 23:24									#63
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Diss, vote Bush just to shut up the whiners.

quote: That cite I gave you indicates the number of 'unconstitutional' provisions in the PATRIOT Act, because the SCOTUS has declared the right to privacy to be a Constitutional right. You can see that it doesn't deter the current legislature and executive. Hopefully the judiciary puts it foot down.

Yes, well, the right to bear arms is more clearly enumerated in the Constitution than the right to privacy, yet SCOTUS lets all kinds of outright ownership bans in cities and general weapon restrictions (such as the capacity of magazines limited to 8 and the appearance or style of weapon) stand unchallenged.

Furthermore, any information gained by such methods cannot be used in criminal prosecution if it fails 4th Amendment or 5th Amendment muster at trial, which will be interpreted strictly regardless of PATRIOT. Such information has the same weigh as anonymous informers: it can only lead investigators to corroberated evidence.

Diss, vote Bush just to shut up the whiners. (same reason, different whining)

quote: How about the fact that Bush invaded Iraq on false premises. A big part of the argumentation was that Iraq was connected to 9/11… [blah, blah, blah]

No, the administration never said Iraq was responsible for 9/11. Only one rumor of a meeting between a hijacker and an Iraqi intelligence officer was ever mentioned, and it was clearly defined as a rumor. Bush and Powell used 9/11 only to point to vulnerability, and that vulnerability is the same to any motivated enemy.

Saddam was such a motivated enemy, openly supporting and funding Palestinian terrorism, openly celebrating the destruction of WTC, and openly calling for terrorists to act against the US by any means.

More importantly, Saddam's WMD programs and openly stated desires to continue and expand WMD capabilities were the primary reason for kicking his hairy arse out.

WMD programs are not the presence of stockpiles in and of themselves, but the materiel, facilities and personnel to produce them. That's why the African yellowcake connection was important to highlight Saddam's intentions and motivations, not whether attempts were successful.

	07-09-2004 23:25									#64
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: when we structure our entire system of government under the premise that the best way to oppose a law you don't like is by not getting caught? That's a nice attempt at a strawman, but try again. No one has said the best way to oppose any law is to avoid getting caught. Though having privacy may allow a way to circumvent an unjust law which may not be officially changed any time soon, such as the drug laws. It's my private residence, and no one should be able to peek in there.

Certainly I didn't plan on setting up a strawman, it simply appeared to me that all of the value of privacy you had mentioned was in it's value for evading law enforcement, particularly for unjust laws. You went further to say that this value was so important that freedom doesn't exist without it. Put the two together and it seemed reasonable to assume that you saw evasion of law enforcment as the foundation of good government. As to your objection that no one should be able to peek in anybody's private residence I agree that this is a good concept worthy of upholding in most cases just as I think we would both agree that opposing taking property away from others (stealing) is a good concept. Yet IIRC you do not feel that income taxes are incompatible with freedom so you should be able to recognize that something like privacy can be a very good thing without necessarily being an absolutely sacred thing to be valued over our other rights.

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: If we allow people to escape the law by hiding from it then we are short circuiting the democratic process. Good, sometimes the democratic process isn't the best thing. When the Courts decide an issue they may be subverting the democratic process, but that is a good.

The problem here is that privacy doesn't interfere with democracy in any sort of orderly predictible way. It circumvents for some while letting others alone. It discourages opposition to unjust laws by all those who have no prospect of getting caught. This will lead to more and more hypocrisy of the sort where people vote for a candidate whose overall platform they oppose (because there is no chance they will get caught) because they approve of the other bits of the platform while those who are likely to get caught for breaking such laws vote for the other guy who may lose because of the hypocrisy protection from the law via privacy can create. We could also interfere with injust laws by suggesting that every law be assigned a number and at the end of each year a random selection of laws would be repealed. This would block many unjust laws and would also circumvent the democratic process but would that make it a good thing? Perhaps it is not enough to circumvent unjust laws and short circuit the democratic process to be a good thing.

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Arguments for a right to privacy are all based on extentions of the right to liberty, so liberty must come first, and take primacy over any right to privacy. Freedom is, at its base, the right to be left alone. Free speech is about being able to say what you want and be left alone even though you say it. Freedom to work is about working wherever you want and being left alone no matter what that job is. Privacy is a necessary extention.

If privacy is a necessary extension how does my freedom change if that extension is removed?

	07-09-2004 23:27									#65
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Ramo SCOTUS defense against Shrub's assault on our civil liberties has been absolutley pitiful. The system is still guilty until proven innocent whenever the gov't wants (irrespective of citizenship).

That isn't the system actually, rather it is the way the executive is behaving in at least the padilla case and I fear possibly others. Repealing the PATRIOT act would make absolutely no difference in hte padilla case or any other case involving citizens.

	07-09-2004 23:35									#66
	Tired of ads?

quote: That isn't the system actually

Yes it is. The Supreme Court has spoken in the Hamdi case.

quote: Repealing the PATRIOT act would make absolutely no difference in hte padilla case or any other case involving citizens.

I never said it would. But it would make a difference for noncitizens.

	07-09-2004 23:39									#67
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

And the reason why privacy is a fundamental freedom is that information is the ultimate power. If the state can get any information it wants it can blackmail anyone, it can easily persecute those with dissenting viewpoints, and so on and so forth.

	08-09-2004 00:07									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ramo And the reason why privacy is a fundamental freedom is that information is the ultimate power. If the state can get any information it wants it can blackmail anyone, it can easily persecute those with dissenting viewpoints, and so on and so forth.

I only need to think a second or two to refute this. How would the government blackmail me if it knew everything about me? Why would I not continue to dissent? If the government wanted to blackmail me it would have plenty of tools to use but knowledge about my life wouldn't be one of them. The information they automatically posess about all of us is enough to destroy any of our lives as it stands even with total sacrosanct protections on privacy. Just look how hard it is to undue the damage of indeity theft and think how much of the information required for indentity theft the government already automatically posesses.

As to information being the ultimate power, well I strongly doubt that if I knew every last particle of information about our government that I would have any more power over it than I do now.

	08-09-2004 00:51									#69
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

heres all i gotta add before the server crashes from too much text

if the govt is big enough to give you everything, its big enough to take everything away.

	08-09-2004 02:15									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia heres all i gotta add before the server crashes from too much text if the govt is big enough to give you everything, its big enough to take everything away.

I agree. A governement that is unfettered by a guarentee of privacy should be kept small enough that it has to be quite selective on whose privacy it violates. Government with unlimited resources worries me more than government with unlimited knowledge. Especially if the unlimited resources stem from unlimited ability to take resources from others.

	08-09-2004 02:26									#71
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Freedom is, at its base, the right to be left alone.

Liberty is a positive value, and not a negative value. Privacy is truly, the right to be left alone, but is not a positive value.

Liberty is not just the right to be left alone, but is much more than that, the right to be free, the right to do something, the right to speak, the right to practice religion, the right to travel freely, the right to work the job that you want, and to take another job.

This is liberty, yet none of these have anything to do with privacy. What use is it to practice religion, if one can only do so in private? Religion requires public participation in order to be truly free.

The same with speech. What value is freedom of speech, if one can only speak freely in private? Freedom truly means the right to speak freely in public.

	08-09-2004 02:29									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: I only need to think a second or two to refute this.

Try harder, dear.

quote: How would the government blackmail me if it knew everything about me?

If you have sensitive information that you may not want everyone to know. I don't know you, so I can't answer that.

quote: Why would I not continue to dissent?

As I said, the gov't could persecute you for your opinions.

quote: If the government wanted to blackmail me it would have plenty of tools to use but knowledge about my life wouldn't be one of them.

Are you unfamiliar with the concept of blackmail?

quote: The information they automatically posess about all of us is enough to destroy any of our lives as it stands even with total sacrosanct protections on privacy.

And there are specific checks regarding gov't abuse of them.

quote: As to information being the ultimate power, well I strongly doubt that if I knew every last particle of information about our government that I would have any more power over it than I do now.

Eh? Are you kidding? You could get all the money you wanted, you could get whatever you want out of politicians (look at the McGreevey scandal).

	08-09-2004 02:31									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

It is very possible to be private, and not to be free, to be caged in a dungeon, in solitary confinement, without cameras.

You are not free, yet you have all the privacy that you want.

You would also starve and die in such a situation, because to be truly private, would require there to be no guards to monitor your presence, and to give you food and water in order to sustain your life.

In short, this demonstrates that total privacy is not desireable, nor can it be beneficial in a society. Society, by necessity abrogates some of our privacy to encourage a greater benefit.

In another case, just because I have a private life, does not mean that such life is the most beneficial. Man, as a social animal, often benefits more by giving up his privacy to allow others into his life.

	08-09-2004 02:36									#74
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Ramo quote: I only need to think a second or two to refute this. Try harder, dear. quote: How would the government blackmail me if it knew everything about me? If you have sensitive information that you may not want everyone to know. I don't know you, so I can't answer that. quote: Why would I not continue to dissent? As I said, the gov't could persecute you for your opinions. quote: If the government wanted to blackmail me it would have plenty of tools to use but knowledge about my life wouldn't be one of them. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of blackmail? quote: The information they automatically posess about all of us is enough to destroy any of our lives as it stands even with total sacrosanct protections on privacy. And there are specific checks regarding gov't abuse of them.

If the government can illegally persercute me for my opinions then the government could also illegally violate my privacy. So I fail to see how making invasions of privacy legal is going to make persecution more likely. legality only comes into play so far as the government is willing to observe it. Once you assume the government will act illegally regardless then arguing for laws protecting privacy becomes pointless. By invading my privacy alone the government cannot legally persecute or blackmail me.

quote: Originally posted by Ramo quote: I only need to think a second or two to refute this. quote: As to information being the ultimate power, well I strongly doubt that if I knew every last particle of information about our government that I would have any more power over it than I do now. Eh? Are you kidding? You could get all the money you wanted, you could get whatever you want out of politicians (look at the McGreevey scandal).

But that's illegal if the government is going to act illegally it matters not what protections of privacy (or of anything else) have been set up.

	08-09-2004 02:55									#75
	Support Apolyton

quote: If the government can illegally persercute me for my opinions then the government could also illegally violate my privacy. So I fail to see how making invasions of privacy legal is going to make persecution more likely. legality only comes into play so far as the government is willing to observe it. Once you assume the government will act illegally regardless then arguing for laws protecting privacy becomes pointless. By invading my privacy alone the government cannot legally persecute or blackmail me

Look at COINTELPRO. If there are cops planted inside dissenting groups, they can more easily neutralize them. Information gives the gov't extraordinary power.

Now, if there's legal recourse to such information gathering, they can be stopped before the actual suppression occurs. The point is to minimize state abuse, and that starts with limiting the state's information gathering capability.

quote: But that's illegal if the government is going to act illegally it matters not what protections of privacy (or of anything else) have been set up.

That was specifically addressing the power of information.

	08-09-2004 02:56									#76
	Put an end to popups!

quote: all of the value of privacy you had mentioned was in it's value for evading law enforcement

No, the value of privacy is the ability to be left alone and not have people pry into your private information, which you would rather be secret. It may not be illegal, but who knows, it may be considered immoral. I believe that gays in a relgious area of the country would not like their affiliation to be paraded around. That could cause them much difficulties.

quote: The problem here is that privacy doesn't interfere with democracy in any sort of orderly predictible way.

So what? Who says that orderly predictable ways are the best ways to get results? Prohibition was defeated in random ways, but a bunch of unrelated people deciding not to follow the law.

quote: If privacy is a necessary extension how does my freedom change if that extension is removed?

Your freedoms evaporate. Since you don't have any privacy anymore, how can you exist as a private person? Your freedom to act in legal ways may be compromised by the morality of the mob.

quote: Liberty is not just the right to be left alone, but is much more than that, the right to be free, the right to do something, the right to speak, the right to practice religion, the right to travel freely, the right to work the job that you want, and to take another job.

All of those deal with (to varying degrees) the right to be left alone. I'll use your religious example, you have no right to religion if the government will crack down on your for issuing a viewpoint. Your freedom of religion is the right to be left alone in your religious beliefs.

The right to privacy doesn't mean you have to do it in private, it means that you are in " the state of being free from unsanctioned intrusion" (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=privacy - The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition; Definition 2)

	08-09-2004 02:58									#77
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

FOUR MORE YEARS OF JOHN ASHCROFT

	08-09-2004 03:01									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Fortunately SCOTUS has ruled on portions they found unconstitutional. Now the rest of it needs to be tested as well.

SCROTUM

	08-09-2004 03:15									#79
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: all of the value of privacy you had mentioned was in it's value for evading law enforcement No, the value of privacy is the ability to be left alone and not have people pry into your private information, which you would rather be secret. It may not be illegal, but who knows, it may be considered immoral. I believe that gays in a relgious area of the country would not like their affiliation to be paraded around. That could cause them much difficulties.

Ok we are making progress in understanding each other here. A great way to address this concern without making privacy an involate sacred right would be to bar the government from publicizing information it gathers in it's law enforcement activities. We could even bar it from using any such information to prosecute any victimless crime rather than barring it from gathering information on people.

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: The problem here is that privacy doesn't interfere with democracy in any sort of orderly predictible way. So what? Who says that orderly predictable ways are the best ways to get results? Prohibition was defeated in random ways, but a bunch of unrelated people deciding not to follow the law.

Because an unorderly interference in democracy disenfranchises people. You don't regard disenfranchisment as undesireable?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: If privacy is a necessary extension how does my freedom change if that extension is removed? Your freedoms evaporate. Since you don't have any privacy anymore, how can you exist as a private person? Your freedom to act in legal ways may be compromised by the morality of the mob.

Again this is best addressed by not allowing the government to share its information with the public. The mob doesn't have access to my ss# so why would they automatically get to know if the government found out I was an athiest or something?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Liberty is not just the right to be left alone, but is much more than that, the right to be free, the right to do something, the right to speak, the right to practice religion, the right to travel freely, the right to work the job that you want, and to take another job. All of those deal with (to varying degrees) the right to be left alone. I'll use your religious example, you have no right to religion if the government will crack down on your for issuing a viewpoint. Your freedom of religion is the right to be left alone in your religious beliefs. The right to privacy doesn't mean you have to do it in private, it means that you are in " the state of being free from unsanctioned intrusion" (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=privacy - The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition; Definition 2)

If you re-read what you wrote here you will see that you didn't offer any explanation as to why if the government found out what religion he was practicing it would suddenly interfere in his expression of his viewpoints.

FYI I regard privacy as a good thing. I just don't think it is wise to declare it absolutely inviolate and sacrosanct.

	08-09-2004 03:34									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"

-Benjamin Franklin

"I have named the destroyers of nations: comfort, plenty, and security - out of which grow a bored and slothful cynicism, in which rebellion against the world as it is, and myself as I am, are submerged in listless self-satisfaction."

-John Steinbeck

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

-Samuel Adams

"You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free."

-Clarence Darrow

"When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default it can never be recovered."

Dorothy Thompson

"We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home"

Edward R. Murrow

"The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government."

-Franklin Delano Roosevelt

"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."

-John Adams


Patriot Act

	08-09-2004 03:34									#81
	I'm thinking about voting for Bush- talk me out of it Increase the size of your Attachments

If you do, I'll kill you.



There.




Spec.

	08-09-2004 03:35									#82
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui You believe in civil liberties. Bush is the President of the PATRIOT Act. I think it's easy for you.

I used to be like Diss, wiggling back and forth, until I came to my senses and realized what a complete ****up Bush was. Bush isn't right-wing, he's just corrupt and incompetent.

	08-09-2004 03:36									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker I used to be like Diss, wiggling back and forth, until I came to my senses and realized what a complete ****up Bush was. Bush isn't right-wing, he's just corrupt and incompetent.

I think politically he is more than competent. That is the sad part- they know how to play the country like a fiddle.

	08-09-2004 03:37									#84
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar When did you become a communist, Imran?

Since his Newsmax days, duh.

	08-09-2004 03:37									#85
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by GePap I think politically he is more than competent. That is the sad part- they know how to play the country like a fiddle.

This is one of the least partisan things I can remember you saying...feeling okay today??

	08-09-2004 03:37									#86
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Blake Vote Bush to help bring about communist revolution!!! See, things have to get really bad to bring on a revolution, and Bush is just the man for that job!

That's what the German Communists said about Hitler

	08-09-2004 03:41									#87
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by PLATO This is one of the least partisan things I can remember you saying...feeling okay today??

BUSH SUCKS! KILL CHENEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that better?

	08-09-2004 03:41									#88
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by GePap I think politically he is more than competent. That is the sad part- they know how to play the country like a fiddle.

I meant he was incapable of implementing effective policy.

The only good things I can think of that the government did during the Bush admin were invading Afghanistan and establishing the do-not-call registry

	08-09-2004 03:42									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by GePap BUSH SUCKS! KILL CHENEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that better?

Phew!! I was worried for a second! Thanks!

	08-09-2004 03:48									#90
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by PLATO "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -Benjamin Franklin "I have named the destroyers of nations: comfort, plenty, and security - out of which grow a bored and slothful cynicism, in which rebellion against the world as it is, and myself as I am, are submerged in listless self-satisfaction." -John Steinbeck "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -Samuel Adams "You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free." -Clarence Darrow "When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default it can never be recovered." Dorothy Thompson "We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home" Edward R. Murrow "The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." -John Adams

thanks! those are some of my favorite quotes.

quote: Originally posted by PLATO Patriot Act

The patriot act doesnt touch our freedoms. Those quotes are about understanding that Freedom >>>> security

I couldn't agree more. Nice thing about the patriot act is that rather than sacrifice freedom for security it sacrifices privacy. If we wait until another even worse terract stirs up the beehive before doing anything the next emergency legislation passed to deal with the situation almost certainly will erode our liberty and that is what I want to see nipped in the bud. I shudder to think what the government will pass following a successful terrorist WMD terract that kills millions instead of thousands. Only way to head that off is good intelligence and vigiliance.

Patriot Act

Police State running my life