It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House votes to RESTRICT Patriot Act.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Funny, this goes against what everyone's been bit-- er crying about.

www.washingtonpost.com...


House Votes to Limit Patriot Act Rules


WASHINGTON -- The House voted Wednesday to block the FBI and the Justice Department from using the anti-terror Patriot Act to search library and book store records, responding to complaints about potential invasion of privacy of innocent readers.

Despite a veto threat from President Bush, lawmakers voted 238-187 to block the part of the anti-terrorism law that allows the government to investigate the reading habits of terror suspects.

The vote reversed a narrow loss last year by lawmakers complaining about threats to privacy rights. They narrowed the proposal this year to permit the government to continue to seek out records of Internet use at libraries.

.......

Congress is preparing to extend the Patriot Act, which was passed quickly in the emotional aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then, Congress included a "sunset" provision under which 15 of the law's provisions are to expire at the end of this year.


15 provisions to expire, limits on reach, etc.
What's going on??
How's the police state going to establish itself with all that going on!? This has to end.




posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 06:16 PM
link   


How's the police state going to establish itself with all that going on!? This has to end.


Personally, I'd be happier to have them check my library reading habits (lots of trashy romance novels - what a crime!) than I would to have them make me disappear.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Didn't some of the 9/11 hijackers use public library computers to research their plans for 9/11?



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 06:32 PM
link   
There is still a lesson here for paranoid geeks and insurrectionists and dissidents alike to refrain from borrowing out of public libraries and using anything but cash at bookstores.




posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   
good, they should block the whole damn bill.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Didn't some of the 9/11 hijackers use public library computers to research their plans for 9/11?



This was the point to that being originally added into the bill. However, although I support the Patriot Act in some respects, this one makes me a little weary. It could be used by the wrong people to infringe on rights. That doesn't mean it is being used for this purpose at the moment though.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:32 PM
link   
They should just have people show I.D. or something if the want to use the computer. Of course its not fool proof but I think it would be a start.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:39 PM
link   
"The Justice Department said in a letter to Congress this week that the provision has been used only 35 times and has never been used to obtain bookstore, library, medical or gun-sale records. It has been used to obtain records of hotel stays, driver's licenses, apartment leases and credit cards, the letter said."

I think that says it all. You all need to stop listening to liberal scare tactics. They want you to believe that the government is sitting around on a computer going through a huge database to see who checked out a bin Laden biography.

Obviously this provision wasn't established and hasn't been used for the purpose of checking out what John Smith has been reading. It's to check out which motel Akbar Hassan, who just purchased 6 metric tons of fertilizer and rented a Ryder truck, has been staying in. Some of you are fighting the very tools that have been established to protect you. It's these types of barriers that tied the hands of authorities before and on 9/11.

Renew the Patriot Act!!!



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 02:07 AM
link   
Not to mention that the Liberal and Democratic senators and congressman like to preach “the FBI can just storm in and ask for you library records and not have to ask or repot to anyone about it”. Wrong 100% Wrong and they are the ones lying not the administration.

Read the actual Patriot Act it states that tithe FBI cannot just go barge into any library and ask for records, it has to ask a Federal court for permission it has to prove reasonable doubt. The only difference is that this court is a special court where it is designed to be faster moving than an average court.

Now, since this provision has never been used in 4 years, and it cant be issued without the permission or warrant form a judge or grand jury. IMO its just political grand standing, about a no issue topic by the democrats! They are playing politics with our security.



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Read the actual Patriot Act it states that tithe FBI cannot just go barge into any library and ask for records, it has to ask a Federal court for permission it has to prove reasonable doubt. The only difference is that this court is a special court where it is designed to be faster moving than an average court.


Ya, "special courts" don't make people nervous at all.

"Special courts" with no oversight, no public records, and all records sealed due to "national security issues".

Joseph Goebbels would be creaming.


jako



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   
A few points to answer:

1. The power to check library/bookstore records has proven completely useless in the war on terror for four years- and we have people here saying that this shows the legitimacy of that ability?! If in four years of grappling with Al Qaida we have not seen any case in which this tool is helpful, what is it doing for us except sitting around waiting for somebody to come along and abuse it later? By the way, I learned how to make explosives in 10th grade chemistry class- as will anyone who actually understands what he is being taught. If we're going to be paranoid and start surrendering our privacy whenever we seek knowledge for ourselves, perhaps we should consent to having our school children inteviewed by DoHS regularly.

2. How pray tell do you drastically speed the issuance of warrants? Is it not true that the majority of the time taken to get a warrant is consumed by the sometimes difficult task of proving probable cause? (Probable cause, not reasonable doubt West Point- reasonable doubt is what a jury decides after being shown the unconstitutionally obtained evidence that DoHS seizes under the authority of a rubber-stamped search warrant).

3. Although I have a huge problem with how politicized this issue has become, let's not pretend that the democrats are the only one's playing politics on this. If Democrat politicians hadn't established a pattern of making decisions on national security based on their desire to oppose all things Bush, AND if Republican politicians would offer their first loyalty to their constituents (I speak as a republican voter by the way) this would be an apolitical and bi-partisan effort to restrict the Patriot Act, because that act goes against everything this country was founded and made great upon.


4. Fine, they are going to leave our library books alone. I'm now curious what happens to some of the other provisions (such as the rubber-stamped warrants which really lay at the root of that particular problem anyway). My guess is that they hope tooffer us a buck with their right hand while stealing our wallet with their left.

5. Let's not forget that this is the House we are talking about. Wierd stuff is prone to happen there because all you have to do to get in is be the most popular person in your area code. We won't know for sure if this is a ploy, a fluke, or a legitimate effort to make positive changes until we see what happens in the senate and at the white house (of course the Veto threat is a hint at least there).



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
It always appeared to me (and I could be wrong), that the Patriot Act was mostly targetted on American citizens, not foreigners.

So the FBI and the CIA use these new powers to eavesdrop on Americans IN America.

Seems a little 1984 to me.


jako



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
It always appeared to me (and I could be wrong), that the Patriot Act was mostly targetted on American citizens, not foreigners.

Based on what?



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   
ThatsJustWeird: Based on the fact that it targets the civil liberties of Americans, stifles any and all domestic political dissent, religious freedoms, and labor union activism and promotes the use of racial profiling as federal government policy?

That it makes it harder for citizens and legal aliens alike to review or appeal any perceived government wrongdoing. That it allows for the indefinite detention of suspected (SUSPECTED, not proven) aliens and domestic "terrorists", without probable cause of a crime, without a hearing and without any opportunity to defend or challenge the evidence against them, when they have not even been proven to be a threat and have already established a legal right to remain here.

And also that it allows the use of "secret evidence" and testimony in civil court proceedings.

Want more?

zmag.org...


It keeps judges out the process and lets cops do what they want (cops meaning FBI, CIA, etc.).

It minimizes judicial supervision of telephone and Internet surveillance by law enforcement authorities in anti-terrorism investigations and in routine criminal investigations unrelated to terrorism. Unrelated to terrorism—that means anything.

It expands the ability of the government to conduct secret searches—again in anti-terrorism investigations and in routine criminal investigations unrelated to terrorism.

It gives the Attorney General and the Secretary of State the power to designate domestic groups as terrorist organizations and block any non-citizen who belongs to them from entering the country. Under this provision the payment of membership dues is a deportable offense. That means, among other things, that Bush and Ashcroft can decide Greenpeace and Ralph Nader are terrorists, and under this law, it can put them in jail.

It grants the FBI broad access to sensitive medical, financial, mental health, and educational records about individuals without having to show evidence of a crime and without a court order. It means they can do what they want for no good reason, except to persecute and imprison people.

It could lead to large-scale investigations of American citizens for “intelligence” purposes and use of intelligence authorities to by-pass probable cause requirements in criminal cases.

It puts the CIA and other intelligence agencies back in the business of spying on Americans by giving the director of Central Intelligence the authority to identify priority targets for intelligence surveillance in the United States.

It allows searches of highly personal financial records without notice and without judicial review based on a very low standard that does not require probable cause of a crime or even relevancy to an ongoing terrorism investigation.

It creates a broad new definition of “domestic terrorism” that could sweep in people who engage in acts of political protest and subject them to wiretapping and enhanced penalties. This means they can jail anyone who disagrees with them, and keep them in jail for life without a trial.

It permits the detention of non-citizens facing deportation based on the Attorney General’s certification that he/she has “reasonable grounds to believe” the non-citizen endangers national security. While immigration or criminal charges must be filed within seven days, these charges need not have anything to do with terrorism, but can be minor visa violations of the kind that normally would not result in detention at all. Non-citizens ordered removed on visa violations could be indefinitely detained if they are stateless, their country of origin refuses to accept them, or they are granted relief from deportation because they would be tortured if they were returned to their country of origin.

It permits the Attorney General to indefinitely incarcerate or detain non-citizens based on mere suspicion, and to deny re-admission to the United States of non-citizens (including lawful permanent residents) for engaging in speech protected by the First Amendment.



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 03:19 PM
link   
There's a bunch of "It could do this" "It could do that" (as well as some major misinterpetations - i.e. the putting Greepeace or Nader in jail) in that article.
But I want to know, do you have any real evidence that the Patriot Act has been targeting mostly American citizens? (even in the article it says "Non-citizen" more than you'd like)



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 03:40 PM
link   
ThatsJustWeird: Um...


It puts the CIA and other intelligence agencies back in the business of spying on Americans by giving the director of Central Intelligence the authority to identify priority targets for intelligence surveillance in the United States.

It allows searches of highly personal financial records without notice and without judicial review based on a very low standard that does not require probable cause of a crime or even relevancy to an ongoing terrorism investigation.


What do you fail to grasp here?



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Like I said its a special court because would you want to be trying to get a warrant about some guys record in the library and the media covering the story? Good old Akhmed is not stupid he is going to get the F out if he sees on the news the FBI is on to him. All the evidence the FBI present to the court are put on the record.

Your talk about the CIA and FBI, doing this and that are nothing but speculation, you have still failed to provide us with any real fact that the Patriot act is being used on non Americas. So unless your going to give more than conspiracy theories and speculation you should really STFU.



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Jakmo:

Why don't you post an objective article on how it has been used?
Not a biased opinion piece on how it could be used (based mainly on speculations and not enough facts).

[edit on 17-6-2005 by ThatsJustWeird]



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
So unless your going to give more than conspiracy theories and speculation you should really STFU.


I'd like to kindly remind you that it's against the rules to bypass the censors, as well as to make personal attacks on others.

Other members deserve your respect even when they do not deserve your agreement. How long has it been since I've really picked on you or called you "westie"? Veteran members come of age here at ATS eventually and outgrow that sort of stuff- you've been around long enough (and been on the recieving end enough) to know that.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 17-6-2005 by The Vagabond]



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
You already have to show ID at my public library to use the Internet computers.

I say repeal the entire Treason Act. It's unconstitutional and does absolutely squat to fight "them terrorists."



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join