PATRIOT Act II = VICTORY Act?

[zakur]

From this story in Wired:

Congress may consider a bill that not only expands the government's wiretapping and investigative powers but also would link low-level drug dealing to terrorism and ban a traditional form of Middle Eastern banking.

The draft legislation -- titled the Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations Act of 2003, or Victory Act -- includes significant portions of the so-called Patriot Act II, which faced broad opposition from conservatives and liberals alike and embarrassed the Justice Department when it was leaked to the press in February.

The Victory Act also seems to be an attempt to merge the war on terrorism and the war on drugs into a single campaign. It includes a raft of provisions increasing the government's ability to investigate, wiretap, prosecute and incarcerate money launderers, fugitives, "narco-terrorists" and nonviolent drug dealers. The bill also outlaws hawalas, the informal and documentless money transferring systems widely used in the Middle East, India and parts of Asia.

A June 27 draft of the bill, authored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and co-sponsored by four fellow Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, has been circulating in Washington, D.C.

Critics say the bill is an opportunistic attempt to link the fight against drugs to the fight against terrorism by creating a new crime called "narco-terrorism." According to the draft, narco-terrorism is the crime of selling, distributing or manufacturing a controlled substance with the intent of helping a terrorist group.

 

[Upchurch]

"Narco-terrorism"?

Narco-terrorism??

ugh. Canada is looking better and better...

 

[Sundog]

"Narco-terrorism"?

Narco-terrorism??

ugh. Canada is looking better and better...

Agreed. I'm about ready to buy a solar-powered Winnebago and head north until the nazis are out of power here.

 

[rikzilla]

The left wing is victorious in JREF!

....but while you guys were partying,....

Judge Moore and the righties are taking America.

...and good for them. The pendulum swings gentlemen. The lefties will only win their way back into power when the righties have gone too far, and the terrorists are all dead or in jail.

IMHO they haven't gone quite far enough yet....but they're beginning to get warm.

-z

Have fun in Canada! Don't let the border gate hit you in the ass.

 

[Samus]

How exactly does some 18-year-old kid selling pot contribute directly to Osama bin Laden and his corps? Trying to link the two, and punishing the kid like he's a terrorist, is a bad idea.

I'm not for the legalization of drugs, but I am against giving the government more power to interfere with my life. Safety at the expense of liberty is not an option.

 

[Pyrrho]

'Vast strategic manoeuvre -- perfect co-ordination -- utter rout -- half a million prisoners -- complete demoralization -- control of the whole of Africa -- bring the war within measurable distance of its end victory -- greatest victory in human history -- victory, victory, victory!'

 

[Upchurch]

The left wing is victorious in JREF!

whatever

Judge Moore and the righties are taking America.

you think the right is for the quite un-American attempt by Moore to establish a state endorsement of a specific religion? I think you need to check out the news... The only ones backing Moore's actions are the fundy Christians.

The lefties will only win their way back into power when the righties have gone too far, and the terrorists are all dead or in jail.

"lefties" or "righties", I think they're both going too far and I don't think it will require all the terrorists to be dead or in jail. Mostly because you literally cannot get all the terrorists either dead or in jail.

No. This act is an unimaginable infringement on the inalienable rights of Americans and not at all in accordance with American principles.

IMHO they haven't gone quite far enough yet....but they're beginning to get warm.

What would you prefer? Camps for those of middle-eastern descent? That citizens be forced to carry identification papers or risk being jailed? Indescriminate monitoring of all our communications for anything that might be considered "inappropriate"?

What do you want to see happen? What is far enough?

 

[rikzilla]

What do you want to see happen? What is far enough?

My tongue was firmly in-cheek there UC.

...but good questions:

What do I want to see happen?
No more terror attacks in the US. GWB gets a big A+ there. The WOT is obviously working as advertised, the terrorists are hiding from the hunters...or attacking soft targets far from the US. This is not because they suddenly think we're great people and they like us now. It's because they have been rendered INCAPABLE. Thank you GWB. Shame on you Bill Clinton.

Score: Doves: 0, Hawks: 1

What is far enough?
Far enough is relative. Since I have love for my fellow man, far enough for me would be when terrorism is punished by the world, and not just the UK/US. I'd like to see an end to terrorism worldwide. It would mean that the rest of the world (including France) stop rewarding terrorism and start implementing remedies that work. They can use the American example.

It's hard to argue with success!
-z

BTW: Would someone please tell the UN that using Ba'athist minders as security guards is not a good deterent to Ba'athist terrorism.

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

BTW: Would someone please tell the UN that using Ba'athist minders as security guards is not a good deterent to Ba'athist terrorism.

What evidence or sources can you cite that this is the case? What is your evidence that all Ba'athists are security risks and recruiting any of them as security guards will compromise security?

 

[chulbert]

What do I want to see happen?
No more terror attacks in the US. GWB gets a big A+ there. The WOT is obviously working as advertised, the terrorists are hiding from the hunters...or attacking soft targets far from the US. This is not because they suddenly think we're great people and they like us now. It's because they have been rendered INCAPABLE. Thank you GWB. Shame on you Bill Clinton.

Score: Doves: 0, Hawks: 1

How is it "obviously working"?

 

[rikzilla]

What evidence or sources can you cite that this is the case?

For evidence/source click here!

What is your evidence that all Ba'athists are security risks and recruiting any of them as security guards will compromise security?

You're kidding right? Tell me you're kidding.....

 

[rikzilla]

How is it "obviously working"?

Things not going boom in US cities.

....an obvious benefit of even an imperfect implementation of a WOT is that the battlefield is quiet on Manhattan and in DC.

...Or is it because we've moderated our foreign policy and now Bin Laden loves us?

-z

 

[Crossbow]

...

BTW: Would someone please tell the UN that using Ba'athist minders as security guards is not a good deterent to Ba'athist terrorism.

Well, if that is really what you think then you may be interested to learn that the USA would rather have more and more Iraqis take over security duties as opposed to sending in more troops. Thus, one should not be surprised if this sort of thing starts happening to Americans.

 

[rikzilla]

Well, if that is really what you think then you may be interested to learn that the USA would rather have more and more Iraqis take over security duties as opposed to sending in more troops. Thus, one should not be surprised if this sort of thing starts happening to Americans.

I rather doubt your crystal ball's accuracy CB. Why don't you leave the fortune-telling to the professionals?

 

[Crossbow]

I rather doubt your crystal ball's accuracy CB. Why don't you leave the fortune-telling to the professionals?

Well, in all fairness, I did not say that these types of attacks would happen, just that one should not be surprised if they do happen.

But maybe you are right and there will be none of these attacks on Americans. Instead, we will just have to deal with the smaller scale shootings and bombings that happen just about every day and which result in at least one more US soldier getting killed over there just about every day.

However if you have a moment, then you may want to review the below article just to see if it confirms your thoughts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29121-2003Aug21.html
General Cites Rising Peril of Terror in Iraq

The top U.S. military commander for the Persian Gulf region said yesterday that terrorism is becoming the "number one security threat" in Iraq, with foreign fighters entering the country through Syria and a revived group called Ansar al-Islam now firmly established in Baghdad.

...

Abizaid [Army Gen. John Abizaid, the head of the U.S. Central Command] said defeating the terrorists should not require increasing the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. Instead, he argued for intensifying efforts to develop new Iraqi security forces and to expand the ranks of peacekeeping forces from other countries. His prescription echoed the strategy outlined earlier in the week by administration officials.

 

[chulbert]

Things not going boom in US cities.

....an obvious benefit of even an imperfect implementation of a WOT is that the battlefield is quiet on Manhattan and in DC.

...Or is it because we've moderated our foreign policy and now Bin Laden loves us?

Or because they're reloading? To claim success you must demonstrate you prevented acts of terror that would have otherwise occurred.

 

[Valmorian]

Things not going boom in US cities.

....an obvious benefit of even an imperfect implementation of a WOT is that the battlefield is quiet on Manhattan and in DC.

...Or is it because we've moderated our foreign policy and now Bin Laden loves us?

-z

Um, aside from the WTC bombing and 9/11, what other major terrorist attacks have happened in those cities? Wasn't there years where no terrorist actions occurred in both of those places? Why are you attributing the lack of such to these policies?

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

For evidence/source click here!


You're kidding right? Tell me you're kidding.....

I am missing something. You obviously know something that I don't and you are not communicating what you know of these connections because I ought to be up to speed on the latest theories and evidence and apparant connections.

I don't see where it is stated that Ba'athists were used to secure the UN building that was targeted by the suicide bomb. It mentions rebuilding an Iraqi police force, it does not say that the said police force has been mandated to include Ba'athist recruits.

There is this vague reference to Iraqi security

Kerik, in Iraq to rebuild the police force, said some of the Iraqi personnel initially refused to cooperate with authorities and were being interrogated.

Most of the building's security guards had been placed in jobs at the U.N. facility by Saddam's security service before the war and reported on U.N. staff movements at the Canal Hotel when it was the headquarters for U.N. inspectors looking for weapons of mass destruction.

Of course, your response was to mock me and attribute either stupidity, ignorance, or an intentional use of comedy to my request for you to support your claims. Then I was to somehow see the connection between your profound insight and the vague references in the article you posted.

No I will not tell you that I was kidding, so that leaves stupidity and or ignorance on my part. Your continuing rhetoric will eventually show me the truth I am sure. I must try harder to draw the obvious connections between your claims and world events.

 

[rikzilla]

Um, aside from the WTC bombing and 9/11, what other major terrorist attacks have happened in those cities? Wasn't there years where no terrorist actions occurred in both of those places? Why are you attributing the lack of such to these policies?

Well, aside from the almost-too-obvious cause/effect, there may well be no real correlation. However, in order to see the whole picture we'll have to look at the past administration's policies.

[Clinton alert]
(forgive me now as I mention the name that sends all liberals into histrionics)

During the Clinton years we had yearly acts of devastating terrorism targeted mostly against American interests overseas. The inept responses made by the Clinton admin (bombing the asprin factory, empty terrorist camps, implementing Desert Fox) did nothing to deter Al Qaida's growth. The first WTC bombing, Khobar Towers, Kenya/Tanzania embassy bombings, USS Cole, all provoked inadequate/inept responses. 9/11 was planned by Bin Laden during the Clinton admin's last years in power, but then he screwed up and implemented it during GWB's first year. The WOT is the result,and since the WOT began, the yearly terrorism we experienced under Clinton has ended.

I don't know if it can last....but even if a bomb goes off tomorrow GWB has still done far more in his few years as president to secure America and defeat terrorism than Clinton did in 8.

[/Clinton alert]

-zilla

 

[rikzilla]

No I will not tell you that I was kidding, so that leaves stupidity and or ignorance on my part. Your continuing rhetoric will eventually show me the truth I am sure. I must try harder to draw the obvious connections between your claims and world events.

Don't worry too much about it,....maybe the UN will hire you as their next security expert.

Things that need no explanation:
Fire is hot
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
Water is wet
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
Mountains are high
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
Seas are deep
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
The Nazis were bad
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
Mother Theresa was good
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
Blind people should not drive
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse
Marriage is between one adult male, and one adult female
The fox should not be used to guard the henhouse

Hey, at least the UN is suddenly relevant again....
...I'll be here all week folks.....


-z