Ashcroft - Anti-Patriot Act 'Hysteria'

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Associated Press | September 16, 2003

Attorney General John Ashcroft denounced as "hysteria" the contention by some librarians and civil liberties groups that the FBI can use a new anti-terror law to snoop into Americans' reading habits.

...... Ashcroft said people are being wrongly led to believe that libraries have been "surrounded by the FBI," with agents "dressed in raincoats, dark suits and sunglasses. They stop everyone and interrogate everyone like Joe Friday.

"Now, you may have thought with all this hysteria and hyperbole, something had to be wrong," Ashcroft said. "Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading? No."

.........................

The main reason an FBI agent would want library records is to track use of its publicly available computers, which terrorists have been known to use to communicate, Justice Department officials say. They say use of the power is extremely infrequent.

"The hysteria is ridiculous. Our job is not," Ashcroft said.


http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9867

[Mr Manifesto]

AP September 17, 2003

Ashcroft Comes Clean

In what is believed to be a first from any politician, Attorney General John Ashcroft described the Patriot Act as a 'draconian blow to civil liberties'.

"Frankly, we want to know what dissident groups are thinking, and 9/11 provided us with the ideal opportunity to be able to pass laws that enable us to to just that."

Asked why he had not come clean about the purpose of the Patriot Act sooner, Ashcroft replied, "Well, the voters would never go for it, would they? You have to give them spin about how (the government) would never abuse a power like that, how we could never keep track of everyone even if we wanted to, and blah, blah, blah, otherwise we'd be paying the riot police overtime in front of the White House for weeks."

So why come clean now? "Well, frankly, I'm sick of the ************. I like to tell the truth now and again just to see if I can do it."

Meanwhile, it's believed that this revelation will have no effect on die-hard government supporters like Nie Trink Wasser, also known as the Boy of 1000 Links. Mr Wasser was not available for comment.

"He just sits in his room and mumbles 'crossdress... goad... crossdress' all day," his mother explained.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
:D LOL

Ya know, we Missourians elected a dead man over Ashcroft. And I think Carnahan would still do a better job than Ashcroft, even given his current status.

Now that I think about it, I don't care for Gephart either. Man, Missouri produces some of the worst politicians...

[corplinx]

I think there was a lot of hysteria over the patriot act and much of it was partisan based.

HOWEVER, I hope Mr. Ashcroft seriously considers installing even more oversight for patriot I. With great power comes great responisibility. We need to make sure some terrorist who gets indefinitely confined due to his threat to the nation doesn't turn out to be Joe Schmoe! Even one innocent person is too many.

[Reager]

Originally posted by corplinx
I think there was a lot of hysteria over the patriot act and much of it was partisan based.

HOWEVER, I hope Mr. Ashcroft seriously considers installing even more oversight for patriot I. With great power comes great responisibility. We need to make sure some terrorist who gets indefinitely confined due to his threat to the nation doesn't turn out to be Joe Schmoe! Even one innocent person is too many.

Tell that to the hundreds of Muslem men who are currently being (indefintiely) detained without access to an attorney or their families, or even having charges filed against them.

Mike

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by mfeldman


Tell that to the hundreds of Muslem men who are currently being (indefintiely) detained without access to an attorney or their families, or even having charges filed against them.

Mike


yeah. the hundreds and thousands of them screaming from torture because they didnt do ANYTHING suspicious at all.

[Nyarlathotep]

I think Ashcroft just demolished a great big strawman and he should be very happy with himself. It is quite true that the government doesn't, for the most part, care what people are reading. And for the most part I wouldn't care if they did know.

That, however, isn't really the argument as I understand it. The problem is that the law has a lot of potential for abuse. There really isn't a way to prevent, for example, some justice department official somewhere from deciding that he dislikes some particular book (for example, a book highly critical of the Justice Department) and investigating people based soley on their checking out of that book from the library. All this hypothetical offical has to do is sign a document that the investigation is terrorist related. He doesn't have to show probable cause and the judge that he files the document with has no authority to deny him his request. It doesn't take much imagination to see where this could be badly abused.

[jj]

An interesting anecdote:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zOm

Posted in accordance with photo.net statement allowing hyperlinks to material.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
It doesn't take much imagination to see where this could be badly abused.
Nope. Not much imagination at all. One only need to imagine the Department of Homeland Security being abused by sending them to try to search down boycotting Texas state congressmen.

[jj]

Originally posted by Tricky

Nope. Not much imagination at all. One only need to imagine the Department of Homeland Security being abused by sending them to try to search down boycotting Texas state congressmen.

Could it be? Tom Ridge
Would use law enforcement to
Republican ends?

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by Tricky

Nope. Not much imagination at all. One only need to imagine the Department of Homeland Security being abused by sending them to try to search down boycotting Texas state congressmen.

Exactly. Just because a law has good intentions doesn't mean that some politician somewhere won't twist it to their own ends. And many parts of the Patriot Act are very easy to twist indeed.

[pgwenthold]

Didn't someone just the other day report instances where new "terrorism" laws are being used for things like drugs instead?

Nah, no one would ever try to abuse the capabilities the authorities are given...

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by pgwenthold
Didn't someone just the other day report instances where new "terrorism" laws are being used for things like drugs instead?

Nah, no one would ever try to abuse the capabilities the authorities are given...

Of course, our leaders would never do that that would be wrong

*Cough*Richard Nixon *cough

[Reager]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser



yeah. the hundreds and thousands of them screaming from torture because they didnt do ANYTHING suspicious at all.


If you're suggesting that merely being Muslim should be enough to arrest someone and detain them indefinitely on suspicion of being a terrorist, then you're more racist and ignorant than I thought, if that's possible.

Mike

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by mfeldman



If you're suggesting that merely being Muslim should be enough to arrest someone and detain them indefinitely on suspicion of being a terrorist, then you're more racist and ignorant than I thought, if that's possible.

Mike


No Im not suggesting that.

The mere fact that you assume this based on what I wrote shows me a hint of your own racist thought patterns.

I'm sure the people who have been arrested are being held for more than just being Muslim, regardless of how bad you want to believe that.

Having said that, most if not all of the terrorist activity that is happening concerns Muslim extremists, may they be white, black, brown, or albino. So my thought is that this is probably a wise thing to consider when observing people who make strange moves (as the hijackers did before 911).

[Reager]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


The mere fact that you assume this based on what I wrote shows me a hint of your own racist thought patterns.


Err, k.....



Mike

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser

Having said that, most if not all of the terrorist activity that is happening concerns Muslim extremists, may they be white, black, brown, or albino.

You mean like the IRA?

The South African right-wing terrorists?

The FARC?

Any left-wing terrorist group around the world?

Can you back your statement up with facts? Oops, sorry, forgot how much you hate the 'f' word.

[Shinytop]

What America do we want to be? Are we giving up the America we have always thought we were?

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
I know that many want to say the rights of the Constitution do not extent to POW’s and I concur. And I know than many say the protection of the Constitution do not extend to non citizens. I am not as comfortable with that. Why? Look back at the times the Constitution was written. Why did we feel that the rights in these two amendments were so necessary to be included in the Constitution? Because of the excesses of the Crown during our Colonial Days. Let’s think about that. The crown was locking up people without charges for long periods of time. Why? Because they could. Were we Englishmen? Were we citizens of England. No, but we still felt these basic rights were due all mankind.
So we include amendments in our basic Bill of Rights. But, just for the sake of argument, let’s say these rights are not due all mankind, but only those anointed by birth as US citizens. Around the world we are claiming the moral high ground. We are claiming we liberated the oppressed people. And we are even saying we will give you your own government, let you choose your own government as befits free people everywhere. Of course, we will decide who you may elect. At the same time that we are claiming to be the bastion of democracy and defenders of free people everywhere we have a group of people locked up in Guantamano Bay for over a year. Is that speedy? What are the charges? Have they confronted their accusers? Have they representation?

And now we are ready to charge 6 of these people and try them secretly in a military tribunal. And that is probably the correct path for these six, I don’t know because my government has become that of 18th Century England. But what of the other prisoners? How long til they are given rights we thought were important over two hundred years ago. I have to ask, “Is this the America we want to be?”
But hey, that is them foreigners, right? After all you cannot trust them, they speak a different language.
But what else is going on. Oh, yes, the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act allows the law enforcement agencies of our government to go to a judge and describe you as a terrorists or one aiding terrorists and they can lock you up. They can lock you up without charges and without legal representation and without proof to the judge. On their word. ON THEIR WORD. Funny how our Founding Fathers, in an era when there was no protection from anything, felt that the right to charges, a speedy trial and representation were so important that they were made part of our Constitution, understood that mankind needed checks and balances in the exercise of their power and yet our current President, AG and a running scared Congress do not understand that.
I ask again, “Is this the America we want to be?” Is your security worth so much to you that you would surrender your freedoms without even a political fight?
The message we must present in the 2004 elections needs to be more than Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative. It needs to be that we will be the America intended by the Founding Fathers, it desperately needs to be that we not only support the citizens of America, but that we support the rights of all mankind to these rights and when it is in our power we will grant them to all who come under our power.

[nightwind]

Hysteria, or not, I still think that John Ashcroft would love to have a webcam in every room of your house to make sure you didn't get too sexually adventurous, a tracker on your car to make sure you went to church on Sunday, and no strip clubs on Saturday, and a bug in your computer just in case you get a hankerin to look at any of those girly movies.

And none of these have anthing to do with terrorism. :rolleyes:

[muckraker]

Any time the limits of a law are set at the discretion of the government, and not by statute, that law will be abused, and applied to situations that it was never intended.

Remember RICO (sp?). That law was originally designed to fight organized crime; now it is being used for all sorts of things it wasn't intended for, like going after suspected insider traders on Wall Street. (An approach pioneered by Rudy Guiliani when he was a prosecuter).

The fact that, AS OF RIGHT NOW, the justice department doesn't care what I'm reading doesn't make me feel any better. I don't like the idea that the only thing protecting my civil rights is the mood of the attny general.

[Ladewig]

I have thought long and hard about Ashcroft's comments and I think I finally have a way of describing the situation that he will understand.

"Mr. Ashcroft, imagine these powers under a Democratic administration. Now do you understand the fear that people have about these powers?"


Let's pop into the Wayback Machine, Sherman, and set the dial to June of 1996. The main story in the news that month was the manner in which the Clinton White House obtained more than 400 such files from the FBI between December of 1993 and February of 1994. In a written statement, FBI Director Freeh said, "The prior system of providing files to the White House relied on good faith and honor. Unfortunately, the FBI and I were victimized. I promise the American people it will not happen again on my watch." Director Freeh also went on to describe the requests as "egregious violations of privacy."

Hmmmm, maybe we should not rely on the administration's "good faith and honor" when it comes to protecting people against "egregious violations of privacy."

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by muckraker

Remember RICO (sp?). That law was originally designed to fight organized crime; now it is being used for all sorts of things it wasn't intended for, like going after suspected insider traders on Wall Street. (An approach pioneered by Rudy Guiliani when he was a prosecuter).



Good example. Don't forget civil RICO actions, which can be brought by anybody. They also provide fertile ground for abuse.

I once defended a 75-year old lady who sat on the board of a bank against federal civil RICO charges. The plaintiffs were shareholders in the bank whose shares had tanked, and they accused the board of racketeering in their alleged mismanagement of the bank. This was ridiculous, as the factual allegations were simply that the bank had made some risky loans that defaulted, and the board had allowed the president and the loan officers to make them. Voila! Gangsters!

AS

[jj]

Has anyone looked at the anecdote I cited?

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by jj
Has anyone looked at the anecdote I cited?

I just read it, jj. Pretty outrageous. It's similar to an incident I posted about 2 months ago about a kid in Atlanta who was questioned by the FBI at his workplace because he had been seen in a coffeeshop carrying a set of papers with the headline, "Weapons of Mass ......" [The additional wording was unknown to the FBI agents who questioned him extensively about his reading habits and why he was at the coffeeshop in the first place. They also searched his car top to bottom. Earlier, they had stopped at his house, only to learn he was at work].

As it turns out, the guy was reading something his dad had directed him to on the internet, an editorial piece entitled "Weapons of Mass Stupidity," about hysterical reporting concerning Iraq.

Of course, he was suspected of being a terrorist because of what they thought he might have been reading.

We really are becoming something of a police state. Why are you photographing? What are you reading? That's none of the government's business under any circumstances.

It's not a big step until "Let me see your papers" becomes commonplace for anyone in public. The really sad thing is that lots of people think this is a good thing. They think it represents vigilance on the part of law enforcement. For Christ's sake, doesn't anyone care about a reasonable expectation of privacy, the right to be let alone by the government anymore? Who cares if you feel secure if you're not free anymore? Give me terrorism any day if its the only way to live in a free republic.

AS

[Zep]

Well, I'm hoping to visit the USA early next year. So I hope I'm not stopped and "interrogated" by these hup-hups for any reason - I might get deported back to Vienna... :D

[WildCat]

Uh-oh, it gets worse: (http://www.theonion.com/3936/)
WASHINGTON, DC—President Bush spoke out Monday in support of a revised version of the 2001 USA Patriot Act that would make it illegal to read the USA Patriot Act.
:wink:

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Zep
Well, I'm hoping to visit the USA early next year. So I hope I'm not stopped and "interrogated" by these hup-hups for any reason - I might get deported back to Vienna... :D

Yeah, don't you Austrians make cuckoo clocks?

:D

AS

[Zep]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
Yeah, don't you Austrians make cuckoo clocks?

:D

AS Only for cuckoos that can tell the time in analogue mode. :D

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser

Having said that, most if not all of the terrorist activity that is happening concerns Muslim extremists, may they be white, black, brown, or albino.



Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


You mean like the IRA?

The South African right-wing terrorists?

The FARC?

Any left-wing terrorist group around the world?

Can you back your statement up with facts? Oops, sorry, forgot how much you hate the 'f' word.

Ever notice that as soon as you ask Trinky to back up his claims, he bows out of the conversation?

[Hazelip]

The problem that I have with this particular portion of the Patriot Act (the reading habits thing) is that it is not solely restricted to libraries. It covers retail bookstores as well.

Furthermore, it comes complete with an automatic gag order. Once a library or bookstore is served a subpoena, they cannot notify their patrons or customers they have been served.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto

Ever notice that as soon as you ask Trinky to back up his claims, he bows out of the conversation? [/B]


you call it 'bowing out because I can't back up my claims'.

I call it 'disinterest', because it'll be just another case of me v/s 30 liberal learning disorders and spinsters and quite frankly thats getting rather boring here, lately. But I know how you enjoy the fine art of political complication, it's just more boring to me now.



Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


You mean like the IRA?

The South African right-wing terrorists?

The FARC?

Any left-wing terrorist group around the world?

Can you back your statement up with facts? Oops, sorry, forgot how much you hate the 'f' word.



oh wow, Mr Man. You must feel big and strong because you know the name of various foreign terror groups.

Muslim extremist terrorists flew 2 huge jets into 2 heavily populated government/economic buildings inside the US and currently (as the US is concerned) Muslim extremist groups are the most furious enemy.

none of the groups you mentioned are so heavily involved in terrorism today in this country if at all.

you're response was simply annoying and I ignored it like most of the intelligent people who dont post here and just read the blab.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser

Muslim extremist terrorists flew 2 huge jets into 2 heavily populated government/economic buildings inside the US

Thanks for reminding us, I'm sure everybody's forgotten about 9/11 by now. I mean, it's not like it's mentioned anywhere or anything.

Of course, I suppose it's just knee-jerk liberalism, "spinsterism," and--of course--a "learning disorder" to point out that there were 3 planes and buildings, not 2. (Two WTC towers plus one Pentagon.) I guess counting's just a liberal thang. ;)

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser

oh wow, Mr Man. You must feel big and strong because you know the name of various foreign terror groups.

Muslim extremist terrorists flew 2 huge jets into 2 heavily populated government/economic buildings inside the US and currently (as the US is concerned) Muslim extremist groups are the most furious enemy.

none of the groups you mentioned are so heavily involved in terrorism today in this country if at all.

you're response was simply annoying and I ignored it like most of the intelligent people who dont post here and just read the blab.

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


Having said that,--> most if not all of the terrorist activity that is happening concerns Muslim extremists<--, may they be white, black, brown, or albino.


I'll forget your stupidity this time, because it was just too easy. Now try again.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Cleon


Thanks for reminding us, I'm sure everybody's forgotten about 9/11 by now. I mean, it's not like it's mentioned anywhere or anything.

Of course, I suppose it's just knee-jerk liberalism, "spinsterism," and--of course--a "learning disorder" to point out that there were 3 planes and buildings, not 2. (Two WTC towers plus one Pentagon.) I guess counting's just a liberal thang. ;)

no it's not just a liberal thing, it's the predictable thought of a moron.

I didnt mention the 3rd plane because it didnt complete its mission.

your mentioning of the 3rd plane only boosts the fact that these particular terrorists are the most furious threat to people's lives in this country.

yeah...9/11....what a yawn eh ?

so cliche 9/11 is.


:rolleyes:

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto




I'll forget your stupidity this time, because it was just too easy. Now try again.


you're being a troll and a frustrated lefty.


you understand what I meant by that statement, you're just trying to hard now to make something out of nothing. typical.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


no it's not just a liberal thing, it's the predictable thought of a moron.

I didnt mention the 3rd plane because it didnt complete its mission.

your mentioned of the 3rd plane only boosts the fact that these particular terrorists are the most furious threat to people's lives in this country.

yeah...9/11....what a yawn eh ?

so cliche 9/11 is.


:rolleyes:

The 3rd plane didn't complete it's mission? You mean it didn't hit the pentagon? Well, you'd better explain that to the US government, because they're spending millions on contractors to repair a non-existant hole in the side of the building!

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


no it's not just a liberal thing, it's the predictable thought of a moron.

I didnt mention the 3rd plane because it didnt complete its mission.


Actually, the one that crashed in Pennsylvania makes FOUR. I didn't mention it either.

But hey, I guess basic math is just the "predictable thought of a moron." This must be why everybody takes you so seriously.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


The 3rd plane didn't complete it's mission? You mean it didn't hit the pentagon? Well, you'd better explain that to the US government, because they're spending millions on contractors to repair a non-existant hole in the side of the building!

troll


now you're putting energy into the specifics of which plane should be called 1,2, and 3.


2 planes cause major damage and completed their missions.

1 plane failed the terror mission.

I'll call that plane the 3rd plane for my own pleasure and you can type some more irrelevant text in response.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


troll


now you're putting energy into the specifics of which plane should be called 1,2, and 3.


2 planes cause major damage and completed their missions.

1 plane failed the terror mission.

I'll call that plane the 3rd plane for my own pleasure and you can type some more irrelevant text in response.

Keep digging, Trinky.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Cleon


Actually, the one that crashed in Pennsylvania makes FOUR. I didn't mention it either.

But hey, I guess basic math is just the "predictable thought of a moron." This must be why everybody takes you so seriously.



okay...strike my statements, because I committed an error.

replace the idea/term 'planes' with 'completed targets'

this is annoying.

2 planes hit ny
1 plane hit dc
1 plane didnt complete the mission.

forgive me for my sins, dear goons.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


troll


now you're putting energy into the specifics of which plane should be called 1,2, and 3.


2 planes cause major damage and completed their missions.

1 plane failed the terror mission.

I'll call that plane the 3rd plane for my own pleasure and you can type some more irrelevant text in response.

In-freaking-credible. I thought it was just a simple mistake and I was making fun of it--but you, for some inexplicable reason, really think there were only three planes involved.

I'll spell it out for you:

1 plane hit WTC 1
1 plane hit WTC 2
1 plane hit the Pentagon
1 plane crashed in Pennsylvania

1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4. Call them whatever you like.

I just find it amusing that someone who's appealing to the memory of 9/11 doesn't seem to know what the hell happened...And yet calls the rest of us morons. :)

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Cleon


Actually, the one that crashed in Pennsylvania makes FOUR. I didn't mention it either.

But hey, I guess basic math is just the "predictable thought of a moron." This must be why everybody takes you so seriously.
No, you moron. It was the third plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. The fourth plane hit the Pentagon. You liberals are so bad at math!
:roll:

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tricky

No, you moron. It was the third plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. The fourth plane hit the Pentagon. You liberals are so bad at math!
:roll:
LOL. I posted this before I saw NTW's "accounting" I can't believe he would actually TRY that excuse to cover up for his own stupid mistake. I guess I should have known better.

And BTW, Mr Manifesto, I would appreciate it if you would stop calling him "Trinky". I truly don't want to be mistaken for him.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

here we go.

lefties jump on Nie because Nie kept saying 2 planes instead of 2 completed targets.

lefties find enlightenment in such trivial things, so let them huddle and yell together.

it helps the lefty diaper rash to crowd up and yell.

Nie will take spanking for making dumb mistake with grammar.

lefties will consider it a major victory.

but Nie's point still valid.

lefties will sweep that under the rug.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser




okay...strike my statements, because I committed an error.



You mean, you shot your mouth off without thinking first? NO! :jaw:

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Cleon

I just find it amusing that someone who's appealing to the memory of 9/11 doesn't seem to know what the hell happened...And yet calls the rest of us morons. :) [/B]


just a bit of an exaggeration eh ?

Im quite sure you understand my blooper, but hey, what are lefty goons for ?

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
here we go.

lefties jump on Nie because Nie kept saying 2 planes instead of 2 completed targets.

lefties find enlightenment in such trivial things, so let them huddle and yell together.

it helps the lefty diaper rash to crowd up and yell.

Nie will take spanking for making dumb mistake with grammar.

lefties will consider it a major victory.

but Nie's point still valid.

lefties will sweep that under the rug.
From The Woo-Woo Credo (http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html)
41. Refer to yourself in the third person.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


You mean, you shot your mouth off without thinking first? NO! :jaw:

:roll: as if you dont do this on an hourly basis here.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser



just a bit of an exaggeration eh ?

Im quite sure you understand my blooper, but hey, what are lefty goons for ?

Oh, cool! I've been promoted to "goon!"

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Tricky

From The Woo-Woo Credo (http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html)


I made a mistake, admitted it and now you're committing yourself to an irrevant derail of the thread.

keep that irrelevant ball rolling !

I'll hold my spot on the hill until you're reading to come back up and continue the original conversation that is being swept under the rug.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser

but Nie's point still valid.


Which point is that? First, you said that the majority of terrorist attacks are commited by Muslims. I pointed out that you had no evidence to support that, and listed several non-Muslim terrorist organisations in the (vain) hope that you would realise you were just being an idiot. Again.

But no. You simply tried to change the goal posts. Now you're saying the majority of terrorist organisations 'heavily involved in terrorism today in this country... ' are by Muslims.

You're still flapping your gums. What about the Christian abortions clinic bombers? Timothy McVeigh? The Atlanta bomber? How many right-wing terrorist organisations are operating in the US? You're the one with the supposition, no, make that speculation, you come up with the evidence.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Which point is that? First, you said that the majority of terrorist attacks are commited by Muslims. I pointed out that you had no evidence to support that, and listed several non-Muslim terrorist organisations in the (vain) hope that you would realise you were just being an idiot. Again.

this is another interesting point. The subject of the thread concerns terror in the US.

you've chosen to ignore that detail and act as if I was saying terror all over the world is Muslim extremists.

Your blab, it's rather boring, Mr Man.



What about the Christian abortions clinic bombers?


murder happens everyday. those murders dont concern the planned overthrowing of the US government and the mass destruction of its cities and citizens.


Timothy McVeigh?


a sole nutcase who holds the same nutcase ideals as many psychotics in the country, but not a case of continual Jihad. McVeigh is dead and so is his mission. The Muslim extremists will continue through their children until someone can stop the vicious circle.


The Atlanta bomber? How many right-wing terrorist organisations are operating in the US? You're the one with the supposition, no, make that speculation, you come up with the evidence. [/B]

no one is ignoring these terror groups and sole terrorists.

the main focus is to prevent jihad in this country and at the same time save lives from other psychotics.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


blah blah blah overthrowing of the US government and the mass destruction of its cities and citizens.



yak yak yak , but not a case of continual Jihad. McVeigh is dead and so is his mission. The Muslim extremists will continue through their children until someone can stop the vicious circle.

blah yakety-yak

no one is ignoring these terror groups and sole terrorists (except me).

quackquackquackquackthe main focus is to prevent jihad in this country and at the same time save lives from other psychotics.quackquackquack

(edited for brevity)

Now you're just rambling. You really should try to learn about other cultures one day. You'd be amazed at what you would find out. You might even scare yourself. Maybe that's why you sit in your dark little cave with your blinkers tied on tight.

You've done enough pseudo-thinking for one day. Go to Goad's site and find out what your next opinion will be.

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Now you're just rambling. You really should try to learn about other cultures one day. You'd be amazed at what you would find out. You might even scare yourself. Maybe that's why you sit in your dark little cave with your blinkers tied on tight.

You've done enough pseudo-thinking for one day. Go to Goad's site and find out what your next opinion will be. [/B]


keep playing make believe with yourself about me.

Maybe one day you'll be more of an inspiration or a more productive person in a mental home or lunch line.

[Ladewig]

We seem to have strayed from the topic of subversive hysteria vs. appropriate concern. I'll ask you, Nie Trink Wasser, would you be comfortable if all of Mr. Ashcroft's powers were in the hands of a Democratic administration? If Janet Reno and Bill Clinton had the power to secretly check the reading habits of any person residing in the United States?

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Ladewig
I'll ask you, Nie Trink Wasser, would you be comfortable if all of Mr. Ashcroft's powers were in the hands of a Democratic administration? If Janet Reno and Bill Clinton had the power to secretly check the reading habits of any person residing in the United States? [/B]

yes I would.

there are certainly imperfections in the system this Admin has produced and these will be worked out over time as we form a method for finding mass murderers before they commit.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser


yes I would.

there are certainly imperfections in the system this Admin has produced and these will be worked out over time as we form a method for finding mass murderers before they commit.

And to think that I shall never see
A more credulous poster than thee.

[gnome]

Guys,

consdering how much we complain about people who refuse to admit they are wrong, I for one am glad that NTW was willing to submit a correction. It's more than JK ever did.

[Zep]

NTW, in summary, it seems you are happy to have Big Brother watching over my shoulder what I read, in case I should be planning a Muslim/leftie/socialist/pinko terrorist campaign, provided Big Brother is "conservative". If Big Brother was "liberal" you would have problems with that arrangement.

Would that bean accurate summary of your position so far?

Just asking...