The Patriot Act

[Barb]

The Senate is expected to vote on passage of the Act (created in the aftermath of 9/11) on or about March 1. The House is expected to add its approval soon.
However, some people who've actually read the Act in its entirely claim that it gives the government leeway where it shouldn't have any and that it stifles dissent, particularly among anti-war groups.

Here are a few provisions of the Act:

• Authorizes wiretaps for anti-terrorism investigations
• Allows immigration authorities (the INS) to exclude or deport foreigners who belong to groups that endorse terrorist acts or undermine anti-terrorism efforts
• Allows detention of foreigners who are believed to pose a threat to national security
• Estabishes information sharing among local, state, and federal agencies
• Allows access to all kinds of records (tax, library, business, medical, school and book customer lists).

The last item on the list is causing some controversy, as seen from this column by Leonard Pitts, Jr.:

The scene is the Little Falls branch of the Montgomery County Public Library in Bethesda, Md. Business is going on as usual when two men in uniform stride into the main reading room and call for attention. Then they make an announcement: It is forbidden to use the library's computers to view Internet pornography.

As people are absorbing this, one of the men challenges a patron about a Web site he is visiting and asks the man to step outside. [My note: keep in mind that nowhere is it stated that this particular man was actually viewing porn.] At this point, a librarian intervenes and calls the uniformed men aside. A police officer is summoned. The men leave. It turns out they are employees of the county's Department of Homeland Security and were operating way outside their authority.

[A]n agent of the government literally read over a man's shoulder, Big Brother like, and tried to prevent him from seeing what he had chosen to see.

Discuss and/or debate freely.

 

[Mozz]

I don't like the gov't using it against drug smugglers.

I don't like the gov't overstepping its bounds.

However, if I had a choice between the gov't having these tools vs. not, I'd vote yes.

 

[MajesticArcanine]

Yeah. I abhor the patriot act in every shape and form. I think it will be passed because every branch of our government is Republican.

I hope whatever president after Bush will manage to somehow to fix most of the mistakes of the past 8 years of his presidency. It can be done.

 

[Trip]

America is so frightened of absolutely nothing that people will give up all their liberty and say nothing.

I find it amazing that people are so scared of terrorists killing (on average) 600 people per year for the last 5 years (3000 in 2001, divided by 5 years...), rather than things like auto accidents that kill 40,000+ a year.

But you ask, what if the Patriot Act helped stop something? I have news--it hasn't. I know a few weeks ago, Bush made up something about Los Angeles, blah blah, but I know that if I was in charge and I'd stopped a terrorist, I'd have put it out RIGHT AWAY to show I was actually doing something, not just when it was politically convenient to get my laws passed.

Of course, it doesn't really matter that much anyway since Bush seems to think he can do whatever the hell he wants anyway (wiretaps anyone?) and our wonderful Congresscritters are busy arguing how best to make it legal instead of questioning it (implying, therefore, that it's NOT legal now, which destroys Bush's argument, which is that it is legal).

Not that the government aiding, if not totally causing, 9/11 helps their credibility. I have yet to see any pictures of a plane hitting the Pentagon, one of the most secure buildings in Washington--covered in security cameras watching every inch of the building. Not to mention the hole in the building is not big enough to have been caused by a plane, nor were any plane pieces seen at the Pentagon in any of the news coverage.

In short, the USA PATRIOT Act (one of the most deceiving names ever, I might add) is a horrid, overreaching breech of Civil Rights that never should have passed in the first place. I am eternally grateful to Russ Feingold for voting against it back in 2001, when it wasn't the popular thing to do.

I, for one, would rather die a free person, than live without liberty.

- Trip

 

[The Big Al]

Mozz, they could always trim it down to only the tools to share information and pass that. If anything, information sharing should have been streamlined years ago.

Though, under Clinton without the Patriot Act, they were still able to stop the Millenium Bombing attempt.

 

[Mozz]

Mozz, they could always trim it down to only the tools to share information and pass that. If anything, information sharing should have been streamlined years ago.

Though, under Clinton without the Patriot Act, they were still able to stop the Millenium Bombing attempt.

I'm sure there are better ways to trim it down, and I would certainly be for that.

Under Clinton, we were attacked numerous times, so that's not a particularly convincing statement.

 

[Archaic]

But you ask, what if the Patriot Act helped stop something? I have news--it hasn't. I know a few weeks ago, Bush made up something about Los Angeles, blah blah, but I know that if I was in charge and I'd stopped a terrorist, I'd have put it out RIGHT AWAY to show I was actually doing something, not just when it was politically convenient to get my laws passed.

And your national security people would kill you for it. Info like that generally needs to be kept under a tight wrap, simply because letting a terrorist opponent know you've taken out one of their cells (which often don't communicate on a frequent basis with other cells, for their own safety and security), and that you know about plans for x, y and z, only allows them to change their plans so that you foil nothing.

 

[Mozz]

And your national security people would kill you for it. Info like that generally needs to be kept under a tight wrap, simply because letting a terrorist opponent know you've taken out one of their cells (which often don't communicate on a frequent basis with other cells, for their own safety and security), and that you know about plans for x, y and z, only allows them to change their plans so that you foil nothing.

Shh... it's easier to believe that the government is lying to you

 

[The Big Al]

Under Clinton, we were attacked numerous times, so that's not a particularly convincing statement.

U.S. interests were attack by Muslim extremists three times.

In '93 it was believed it was an isolated event. They had no way of knowing that an organized campaign of terror as being formed because our intellegence agencies were designed for tracking Russians, not Muslims.

It's like with that one Kerry bashing commercial. They said he voted to cut the intellegence budget. Yes because the cold war was over. We didn't need a massive intellegence net or huge standing army anymore. People easily forget that the atmosphere and the knowledge of that time was very different.

Al Qaeda didn't even show up on the radar until five years later when they attacked the embassies in Africa. They basically came out and said here we are. Finally actions could be taken and they were.

Then there was the Cole diaster which couldn't be helped. A small band of men in a boat came up along side them and blew themselves up. How were we supposed to know that. If you really want to consider that a terrorist attack. Then there have been hundreds of terrorist attacks against America since Bush took office.

The Patriot Act isn't that effective in fighting the war on terror. We technically have everything we needed then. We just didn't use it. Bush sat on his hands when he could have stopped this.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Allows access to all kinds of records (tax, library, business, medical, school and book customer lists).

THAT doesn't bother me. It's the fact that they wouldn't JUST use them to prevent terrorism. I'm not saying the US government is full of boogeymen, waiting to catch people in the act of...whatever...but the entire idea (ESPECIALLY the library stuff) just strikes me as...overkill. That, and it seems like the "to prevent terrorism" tag is being placed on anything that might restrict the rights of people (things that, without said tag, would NOT be accepted by people). I feel the government's trying to scare us into submission. Of course...I'm paranoid and enjoy conspiracy theories, so...

I find it amazing that people are so scared of terrorists killing (on average) 600 people per year for the last 5 years (3000 in 2001, divided by 5 years...), rather than things like auto accidents that kill 40,000+ a year.

I assume by "people" you mean Americans (not a semantics issue, it's just that your numbers would have to increase by QUITE a bit if you just mean "people")?

Though, under Clinton without the Patriot Act, they were still able to stop the Millenium Bombing attempt.

Clinton fucked up royally. In numerous ways. Possibly more than Bush. Clinton was too busy dealing with his own issues to watch the world. He lived in a bubble. Bush fucked up. Clinton fucked up. Clinton's like Buchanan. Bush is like a horribly inept Lincoln, only instead of freeing people, he's trying to lock the up (no, I'm NOT calling Bush racist).

 

[The Big Al]

Clinton never handed control of the ports over the same people who funded the largest terrorist attack on American soi. At least Clinton didn't fuck up on purpose.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Well..."on purpose" is debatable. Look up the phrase "Elohim City" sometime.

 

[Trip]

I assume by "people" you mean Americans (not a semantics issue, it's just that your numbers would have to increase by QUITE a bit if you just mean "people")?

Yes, my mistake.

And you can say what you want, but there are serious questions surrounding September 11, that have yet to be answered.

- Trip

 

[Mozz]

I heard it was the Jews.

 

[Barb]

I'm still trying to work out how wiretapping is now legal. Isn't there a constitutional amendment prohibiting this?

 

[evkl]

I don't know of any amendments prohibiting wiretapping per se, but the CIA and NSA charter prohibit them from domestic espionage. the FISA courts are a way around laws that demand warrants for searches (that's the 4th Amendment, I believe). The FISA courts actually provide the warrants quickly--the issue is that Dubya totally ignored all legal precedent and said something along the lines of "L'etait, c'est moi."

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Yes, my mistake.

And you can say what you want, but there are serious questions surrounding September 11, that have yet to be answered.

- Trip

And I'm the one who's been asking them all along. And making the Hitler comparisons. BELIEVE ME, few people have had the anger towards Bush that I have. I've just realized that Bush isn't the ONLY one to blame for everything. Spread the hate...my new motto.