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.

 

NEWS: House Votes to Remove Part Of Patriot Act Powers

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   
The legal powers that gave the Justice Department and FBI the right to view American citizen's library records has been removed from the Patriot Act. The House voted 238-187 to remove this segment of the Patriot Act from law. The vote reversed a previous defeat against the measure and President Bush had threatend to veto this vote. "This is a tremendous victory that restores important constitutional rights to the American people" said Bernard Sanders, I-Vt. He said the vote would help "rein in an administration intent on chipping away at the very civil liberties that define us as a nation."
 



news.yahoo.com
WASHINGTON - In a slap at President Bush, lawmakers voted Wednesday to block the Justice Department and the FBI from using the Patriot Act to peek at library records and bookstore sales slips.

The House voted 238-187 despite a veto threat from Bush 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 concerned about the potential invasion of privacy of innocent library users. They narrowed the proposal this year to permit the government to continue to seek out records of Internet use at libraries.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Thank God for that. It seems santity is breaking out in American politics. Even with a Republican majority this Patriot Act is being limited and watered down.

I can guarantee you that this limitation will not hinder terrorist investigations. Any one that says it does clearly has a hidden agenda to see to it that unlimited executive power resides in the Worlds greatest democracy.



[edit on 15/6/05 by subz]




posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Good! another victory for the american people and a lost for bush and his corporate buddies! seems that they have change this war on terrorism of his to war on freedom...

btw-i vote yes! on the submission


[edit on 15-6-2005 by ulshadow]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I dunno about this.. has anyone read the Patriot Act? There's a lot more scary stuff in it than the library/bookstore checking issue. I think the politicians just knew that they had more to gain from one segment of society than they feared to lose to another in this. It smells like a publicity stunt, an almost insignificant portion of the Act being limited. A few voters will be happy and a few politicians will sleep a little better thinking they did "the right thing," but in reality nothing has been changed so far.

-koji K.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:07 PM
link   


I dunno about this.. has anyone read the Patriot Act? There's a lot more scary stuff in it than the library/bookstore checking issue. I think the politicians just knew that they had more to gain from one segment of society than they feared to lose to another in this. It smells like a publicity stunt, an almost insignificant portion of the Act being limited. A few voters will be happy and a few politicians will sleep a little better thinking they did "the right thing," but in reality nothing has been changed so far.


Boy, you think like I do!


That's exactly what I thought when I read about it. What I want to see is them limiting the whole thing. If they want to use it to go after terrorists, then it needs to have something in there that specifically says 'if there's EVIDENCE of a suspect's involvement in terrorism and membership in Al Qaeda, then ...."

And I think anyone detained by it should be made public - even if their identity is hidden and they're referred to with just a number or something. Charges should be filed. But having people go off into la la land to be held forever, and no one knows who they are or where they're at or when they'll be brought to trial, etc.

Well, heck. There's a whole lot of stuff in there I object to.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Koji read my mind. This is a very small victory - like taking a piece of pepperoni off of the whole pizza.

I have said it before and I'll say it again, when congress Does The Right Thing, they deserve no pat on the back. That is like patting a murderer on the back for Not Murdering Today.

Zip



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I disagree Koji. Ive been watching the Judiciary Commitee hearings about the Patriot Act renewal and those guys are on the money. Apart from Coble who reminds me of some Star Wars villain


The power that was removed today was a wide ranging law that could of been used to obtain records for more than just library habits. Its a law that could of been used against any one that came in contact with a suspected terrorist i.e. sat next to them at starbucks and exchanged pleasantries, sat next to them on the bus etc. Then the FBI or DOJ could of sought any records for you they wished including credit card usage, phone call list, library records and on and on.

Thats gone. Its a tame first start at repealling the major flaws in the Patriot Act. From watching the Judiciary Committee hearings I've learned that there was many safe guards and oversight written into the Patriot Act that was approved by it. Only for the provisions and oversight to be removed in the dead of night and voted for at the last minute in the aftermath of 9/11.

This is a baby step, granted, but I dont think it will end here.

What a day it's been. This, a former Bush senior official claiming the official story of the WTC collapsing was "bogus" and Congress hearing from Republicans how badly Guantanamo detainees are being treated! Have I woken up in an alternate reality? Or does it seem the good guys are finally kicking some goals?



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:20 PM
link   
I think a lot of you are jumping to conclusions. Just because the house voted to leave it out, does not mean it is out. The president can still veto the whole thing and it is back to square one.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:24 PM
link   


I think a lot of you are jumping to conclusions. Just because the house voted to leave it out, does not mean it is out. The president can still veto the whole thing and it is back to square one.


If they have enough votes, they can override the veto. IMO, it's a positive first step. Not enough by any means, but it's a step in the right direction.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   
ok here is what i am thinking... it either one of these 2 options.

1. Bush is trying to lead america to an economic slave/ police state. or-

2. Or, knowing the enemies the rebulicans have in congress/senate that anything they tried to pass would be give and take...its a negotiation. Right now the Republicans "High-Balled" There demands in order to achieve what they really feel in neccessary to keep us safe from terrorism.


just my 2 cents



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   
I doubt that Bush would veto this. He hasn't vetoed anything yet and I don't think he would risk having a veto reversed. He has too much to lose - i.e. - the remaining 46% approval rating.

EDIT:



Right now the Republicans "High-Balled" There demands in order to achieve what they really feel in neccessary to keep us safe from terrorism.


It takes a politician to say with a straight face, "This is what we feel is really necessary to keep us safe from terrorism."

In my opinion, there is no risk whatsoever of Americans at home being affected by (this magical word) "terrorism."

We are at a much greater risk of being car-jacked, raped, murdered, robbed, etc., by domestic criminals. Check your local jail. Do a head count. How many people there are foreign terrorists? Domestic criminals?

If you do the math, where

a = domestic criminals
b = foreign terrorists
c = the whole threat to Americans on American soil,

a + b = c.
a = c.

Zip

[edit on 6/15/2005 by Zipdot]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zipdot
I doubt that Bush would veto this. He hasn't vetoed anything yet and I don't think he would risk having a veto reversed. He has too much to lose - i.e. - the remaining 46% approval rating.


He doesn't need to worry about that........he can't have another term.....

.....wow.....library and book store reciepts.......I feel that the government is truly on my side and that these breaths I take truly are blessed because they taste like, oh my lordy, that's pure freedom!!!!!!

Hhhhhmmmmm........does anyone know how many people actually read books these days? Just a thought.......



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Book and newspaper readership is steadily down for something like 50 years, the last publishing head to see increasing book sales retired in the mid 80's if I'm not mistaken. Nobody knows if the numbers will ever reverse.

That being said, I'm glad they did the right thing on this. Maybe they'll go the rest of the way and plug the hole in the ship of state. There's no reason to give up liberty for safety, it's a losing proposition. You have only as much liberty as you retain for yourself, anyone promising to make you safer in exchange for some of your liberty, they're preying on fear, pure and simple.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Book and newspaper readership is steadily down for something like 50 years, the last publishing head to see increasing book sales retired in the mid 80's if I'm not mistaken. Nobody knows if the numbers will ever reverse.


Precisely my point......and newspaper readership, it can be argued, doesn't even count. A couple of stats I dragged up from a report by the National Endowment of the Arts in 2004:

* Less than half of the adult American population now reads literature.

* The 10 percentage point decline in literary reading represents a loss of 20 million potential readers.

* Only the strong growth in overall U.S. population of nearly 40 million adults from 1982 to 2002 allowed the actual numbers of readers to remain flat at 96 million.


*

Originally posted by David W. of WW forums
In fact, only 46.6% of adults read any book (down from 54.0 in 1992). This decrease is most pronounced among younger readers (18-24 and 25-34 year olds). Like it or not, this will have a significant impact on our ability to sell work.
wwforums.com...
www.nea.gov...

The letting go of the library and bookstore section of the Patriot Act is lip service.........with the iincreasing emphasis on video entertainments, the reading habits of the youthful American is drastically different than the older generation, and that will be relevant the boomer generation has been replaced in the workforce.

This has Media Ploy all over it.........



[edit on 15-6-2005 by MemoryShock]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
he can't have another term.....


He might soon.

"House Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.)has sponsored legislation to amend the Constitution by repealing the 22nd Amendment, which confines the President to two terms."

www.conspiracyplanet.com...

I'm not sure if that's true or not, and if it is, I doubt it ill even be taken seriously. But isn't crazy how muh the Repubs want a crazy man in office?

- Fallen One



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by FallenOne
"House Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.)has sponsored legislation to amend the Constitution by repealing the 22nd Amendment, which confines the President to two terms."


Sorry......uh......no......went over your link and it is very unlikely for anything like that to occur. The only way you're going to see anything remotely like that happening is if a police state were to occur.........



[edit on 16-6-2005 by MemoryShock]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Just making sure it got in there. I hope this nation doesn't become a Police State. It happen very quickly in Germany before WW2. No one saw it coming. Well, they did, but they couldn't stop it.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz

The power that was removed today was a wide ranging law that could of been used to obtain records for more than just library habits. Its a law that could of been used against any one that came in contact with a suspected terrorist i.e. sat next to them at starbucks and exchanged pleasantries, sat next to them on the bus etc.
Thats gone.


Exactly.

Several of our more "forward thinking" allies still have in place legislation that has just such a thing legal - even though most of their population is unaware or don't care because "it's different in the US." We illiterate, sheeplish, warmongering, peons, us.

I laugh at you.
(that would be: the UK, France, Canada, and Australia).

It's okay to lock up Muslims. Just as long as Americans don't dare do it.

UK Criticized Over Human Rights


C-36

Many more can be found.

Thankfully, I live in a nation that most of the population doesn't expect the government to provide for our well-being. I'd live in a messed up police state otherwise. Fortunately, I just live in a semi-police state.

You progressives aren't so friggin' lucky, huh?



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Hhhhhmmmmm........does anyone know how many people actually read books these days? Just a thought.......


Probably the members of the House that voted this down.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Hehe, so true. MemoryShock, obviously I base my opinion on the fact that he is in his second term. Re-election be damned, I think Bush does not want to commit himself to the history books with such a bad records AS IT IS, let alone with a failed veto for a bill that redacts American liberties.

Zip



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   
.
I like this, but as others do I worry that other provisions that invade personal privacies may be kept.

Undoing this particular clause probably in truth frees up law enforcement to focus on more fruitful inquiries and uses of time. What a person reads is more like inuendo rather than the concrete actions they do or do not take.

Can we say the absolute hysteria of 911 is over and now we can begin to return to some kind of centrist sanity? I sure hope so.

The real problems with our intelligence agencies are their competive turf battles for prestige and recognition. I realize glamorous and sensationalist cases that get headlines are what encourage people and the congress to increase/sustain budgets, but the American people and congress have to have the will and self discipline to fund these agencies especially for the many necessary yet unglamorous jobs they do and can never tell about. We also have to demand of these agencies that they get their houses in order. But how you demand accountancy and yet secrecy is a very old and difficult problem.

The so-called 'patriot act' did nothing to halt the competive turf battles/animosities between agencies and that is the root problem.

So the patriot act is 90% useless anyway.

Save those few bits that help and throw away the rest of that police state trash.
.

[edit on 16-6-2005 by slank]




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join