Biometric I.D.s

WildBlueYonder76 wrote:

"The word 'paranoia' may not be the word you're looking for here,
unless you characterize a citizen's real loss of the right to judicial
due process as a delusion."
No, but I consider a terrorist's loss of due process an obligation.

It's easy when you know the guy's a terrorist. The real issue when judging
laws and/or policies is whether or not it protects an _innocent_ person.

And there is plenty of justification for people to be 'paranoid' when it
comes to mandated identity cards and such. They were (are?) after all, one
of the overt differences between free and repressive societies.

--
Frank....H

"WildBlueYonder76" wrote in message
oups.com...
"The word 'paranoia' may not be the word you're looking for here,
unless you characterize a citizen's real loss of the right to judicial
due process as a delusion."
No, but I consider a terrorist's loss of due process an obligation.

What - guilty until proved innocent?

Chris wrote:

What - guilty until proved innocent?

Not the way the Patriot Act is written. Just guilty. There's no trial, so
there's no opportunity to "prove" innocence. And no requirement to prove guilty.

Basically, if the government accuses you of being a terrorist, the accusation
itself is a life sentence.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Chris wrote:

What - guilty until proved innocent?

Not the way the Patriot Act is written. Just guilty. There's no trial, so
there's no opportunity to "prove" innocence. And no requirement to prove
guilty.

Basically, if the government accuses you of being a terrorist, the
accusation
itself is a life sentence.

It would be interesting to imagine what the founding fathers would have made
of the Patriot Act after all they got rid of one tyranny, King George and
now have got another "King" George.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:31:39 -0000, "Chris" wrote
in ::


"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...

Chris wrote:

What - guilty until proved innocent?

Not the way the Patriot Act is written. Just guilty. There's no trial, so
there's no opportunity to "prove" innocence. And no requirement to prove
guilty.

Basically, if the government accuses you of being a terrorist, the
accusation
itself is a life sentence.

It would be interesting to imagine what the founding fathers would have made
of the Patriot Act after all they got rid of one tyranny, King George and
now have got another "King" George.


If you found the Patriot Act repugnant, at least you could take solace
in its sunset clause which eliminates much of the law in 2005. But
"King" George has other ideas:
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/Safe...ID=11835&c=206

Patriot Act II contains no such sunset clause, and seeks to remove the
sunset clause from the original Patriot Act in addition to granting
sweeping additional unconstitutional government powers.

Welcome to the 21st century. :-(