The USA Patriot Act in Action (long)

[Rodeo]

This is really disturbing. I don’t care what side of the political aisle you are on, the manner in which the USA Patriot Act is being used by our government today is downright scary.

I had no idea this was hapening. Any FBI Field Supervisor has the power to issue what is called a “national security letter,” demanding access to information on private citizens. A national security letter can be served on a bank, ISP, library, employer, school, etc. It allows the FBI access to “where a person makes and spends money, with whom he lives and lived before, how much he gambles, what he buys online, what he pawns and borrows, where he travels, how he invests, what he searches for and reads on the Web, and who telephones or e-mails him at home and at work.”

There is no oversight of the issuance of national security letters, no judges, no grand juries, no threshold or guidelines for their issuance. Last year, more than 30,000 NSLs were issued against American citizens. The recipients of NSLs are bound to secrecy, they cannot tell anyone, not the target, not their lawyers, not anyone, about the letters. Not one resulted in charges against anyone. Not one.

"The beef with the NSLs is that they don't have even a pretense of judicial or impartial scrutiny," said former representative Robert L. Barr Jr. (Ga.), who finds himself allied with the American Civil Liberties Union after a career as prosecutor, CIA analyst and conservative GOP stalwart. "There's no checks and balances whatever on them. It is simply some bureaucrat's decision that they want information, and they can basically just go and get it."

It gets worse. Prior to last year, records closed NSL investigations had to be destroyed, at least protecting the private information of innocent citizens. This is no longer the case:

“In late 2003, the Bush administration reversed a long-standing policy requiring agents to destroy their files on innocent American citizens, companies and residents when investigations closed. Late last month, President Bush signed Executive Order 13388, expanding access to those files for "state, local and tribal" governments and for "appropriate private sector entities," which are not defined.”

So the status today is that a single FBI Agent can issue a NSL, conduct a complete examination of someone’s private life in complete secrecy, find no wrongdoing of any kind, and then deposit all records from that investigation into a data base for use by state and local governments, and by “appropriate private sector entities.”

The Washington Post has done us all a public service by investigating and writing about this. Now the ball’s in our court. We need to have a national debate over how to balance privacy against security.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501366_pf.html

[kach22i]

Yea, but I feel soooooooo much safer.

[fintstone]

How is this worse than the hundreds of FBI records the Clintons got on their opponents?..or Schumer's illegally getting his opponent's credit records? Both actions were defended by liberals on this BBS.

I guess it is okay when used for partisan politics...but not national defense? As always with liberals...the end justifies the means...and the rules only apply to others

[Rodeo]

Flint, you are off your rocker. Way off.

I'm really surprised that this got so little attention. I feel like chicken little, but to me this is as threatening as the government can get.

The most basic right in our country is the right to be left alone. For the last 200 years, the only way the government could invade that right was upon a warrant signed by a judge, after demonstrating probable cause that a crime had been committed.

Now the government can invade our most private information if some FBI field officer basically feels like it, and we will never know. Then he or she can deposit the fruits of that invasion in some data base to be shared with "private sector entities."

I thought we were fighting Islamic radicalism to preserve our freedoms?

[Mulhollanddose]

What happened to the good ole' days when the ACLU supported FDR rounding up the Japanese and putting them in concentration camps?...What happened to the Clinton years when the Presidency was used as a weapon against the Constitution, political dissenters and private citizens?...when only talk mattered and action was not required?...when Chinese espionage had free reign and ICBM secrets were sold for campaign cash?...when pardons were for sale to the greatest of America's criminals?

[Rodeo]

What am I, a magnet for nutcases?

[gaijindabe]

Elvis was a Special Federal Agent. Never forget that.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Rodeo
What am I, a magnet for nutcases?

No, just a simple tool.

[Superman]

Originally posted by Rodeo
What am I, a magnet for nutcases?

There is no rational justification for what has been happening n Washington DC these last few years, so that's why you're hearing from the folks above.

And we're supposed to believe that Republicans favor "freedom?" Yeah, right!

And it's going to get worse before it gets better. Both the "administration" and Congress are starting to get FRANTIC. Congress just recently failed to pass a budget bill that would have cut funding for medicare and medicaid, student loans, day care and something else, I forget. If this were a movie, it would be called:

"The Three Hundred Stooges Try To Run a Government"

And I am being charitable when I pretend that they are simply incompetent. In many cases, it would be more honorable if that were the problem.

Dubya is back from his victorious Latin America visit. Did he bring back the trade agreement he went there for? Uhh, no. Was he well received there? Not exactly. Did he jump on the opportunity to give another one of his dopey speeches? Sure he did.

The conservatives are reminding the country why we rely on the libs to be in charge of public policy. By 2008, the nation will have been fully reminded.

[notfarnow]

Originally posted by Superman


The conservatives are reminding the country why we rely on the libs to be in charge of public policy. By 2008, the nation will have been fully reminded.

I have a "quote-a-day calendar at my desk, today's is very timely:

"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove crab grass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government dosn't work and then they get elected and prove it. "

P.J. O'Rourke

[Superman]

How true. Hey, I don't trust any of those guys, regardless of what letter is in parentheses behind their names.

But I also notice that the reason we have a government is because we need one. There are things we all depend on the government to do. Commerce is no substitute, and we are going to continue to need certain services from government. So, it does not make sense to throw a wrench in the fan blades just because the mixture needs adjusting.

[Jims5543]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
...when pardons were for sale to the greatest of America's criminals?

Every president does it at the end of their 8 years. Lets see who W pardons at the end of his career. I hate all second term prseidents, its a free for all during those last 4 years to take care of as many friends as possible. Dem or Rep its all the same.

[tabs]

Originally posted by Rodeo
What am I, a magnet for nutcases?

Birds of a feather flock together...

[Rick Lee]

Why do people blame the Patriot Act on Bush, when Dems controlled the Senate when it was OVERWHELMINGLY passed? Pat Leahy was even chairman of the Senate Judiciary Comm. then. John Kerry even supported it.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by tabs
Birds of a feather flock together...

I knew there was a reason you came to visit

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Jim Cesiro
Every president does it at the end of their 8 years. Lets see who W pardons at the end of his career.

Nobody came close to Clinton's pardons for sale and the miscreants he pardoned...including Marc Rich and FALN terrorists and cocaine traffickers.

[911pcars]

I would think the NRA would be in full force against the Patriot Act with statutes as described.

Gun owners fear that if the govt. has information on who is packing what, they can confiscate it. Yet I hear little to no reaction from these same groups when a govt. passes a law like this, call it "patriotic", and has provisions to abridge the freedoms every American has fought for through our history. Are gun owners just worried about their tool or are they really concerned about the unalienable rights of every American (besides the one that says we get to keep and bear an AK47)?

Sherwood

[fintstone]

I don't understand. How can you answer this:

How is this worse than the hundreds of FBI records the Clintons got on their opponents?..or Schumer's illegally getting his opponent's credit records? Both actions were defended by liberals on this BBS.

I guess it is okay when used for partisan politics...but not national defense? As always with liberals...the end justifies the means...and the rules only apply to others

with this:?????????????????????????????

Originally posted by Rodeo
Flint, you are off your rocker. Way off.

I'm really surprised that this got so little attention. I feel like chicken little, but to me this is as threatening as the government can get.

The most basic right in our country is the right to be left alone. For the last 200 years, the only way the government could invade that right was upon a warrant signed by a judge, after demonstrating probable cause that a crime had been committed.

Now the government can invade our most private information if some FBI field officer basically feels like it, and we will never know. Then he or she can deposit the fruits of that invasion in some data base to be shared with "private sector entities."

I thought we were fighting Islamic radicalism to preserve our freedoms?

If you had not addressed me by name, I would have thought you were answering someone else. Do you even read the posts of others that you respond to????????

[Christien]

Originally posted by fintstone
As always with liberals...the end justifies the means...

This is exactly what was said by republicans about the Iraq war.

[Rodeo]

Flint, I make a post about a threat to our liberty through enforcement of a valid and legal law, and you respond by asking how is this different from Sen. "Schumer's illegally getting his opponent's credit records?'

How is it different? One is legal, the other is illegal. Law enforcement authorities will prosecute one; the other is carried out by law enforcement against honest citizens.

There's no parallel, none, nada.

Must you make everything a partisan mudslinging contest?