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.

 

Spitzer and The Patriot Act: Real Cause for Concern

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Many of you are now aware that the former Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer, recently faced a major firestorm regarding the solicitation of a high class prostitution ring. While, in the political world, this is nothing new or unheard of, Spitzer was forced to resign due to the fact that he was the candidate that "vowed to clean up corruption".

Now there are stories running about his sexual habits and how many prostitutes he saw and what he did with them. This information, while certainly a trashy news maker, is completely erroneous to this case and it is of dire consequences to our democracy.

Here's why:

The law that brought Eliot Spitzer down is a direct extension found within the US's beloved Patriot Act.


When Congress passed the Patriot Act in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, law-enforcement agencies hailed it as a powerful tool to help track down the confederates of Osama bin Laden. No one expected it would end up helping to snag the likes of Eliot Spitzer. The odd connection between the antiterror law and Spitzer's trysts with call girls illustrates how laws enacted for one purpose often end up being used very differently once they're on the books.

[1]


So how could it be that the Patriot Act, a bill designed to be used to retrieve more information about TERRORISTS, be used to oust a governor? The secret is in the fine print, and it loosens things up just enough to view ALL bank records.

So now, a bill that was designed to protect US citizens from foreign terrorism can be used to incriminate any single US citizen and use the information to smear them out of office or reputation.

I don't agree with what Spitzer did, but the real crime here is that the Patriot Act was used to oust and smear a Governor in the United States.

So, I plead to all of you, to not get carried away with the sexual tidbits of this case and stay focused on the real concern here, because it could happen to anyone of us.






[edit on 24-4-2008 by TruthWithin]




posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Many of the act's provisions were to sunset beginning December 31, 2005, approximately 4 years after its passage. In the months preceding the sunset date, supporters of the act pushed to make its sunsetting provisions permanent, while critics sought to revise various sections to enhance civil liberty protections. In July 2005, the U.S. Senate passed a reauthorization bill with substantial changes to several sections of the act, while the House reauthorization bill kept most of the act's original language. The two bills were then reconciled in a conference committee that was criticized by Senators from both the Republican and Democratic parties for ignoring civil liberty concerns.[1] The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 9, 2006.
en.wikipedia.org...

imo, this act was not implemented to protect americans from foreign terriorist, it was designed to round up americans considered to be terriorist, domestic terriorist, hate groups (churchs), anyone who disagrees with present government.

i believe FEMA is our shadow government, Homeland Security our enforcer and the Patriot Act the new constitution.



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   
You bring up a tremendous point.

What worked for Stalin, Hitler and other dictators was that they didn't have to arrest every single politician that opposed them, or every journalist that criticized them. Indeed, they only had to make examples out of a few people. By doing so, it scares the living daylights out of most and they stop and conform.



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I would love to see a list of people who have been arrested or otherwise legally punished as a result of the patriot act. I would like to see it sorted into 2 columns, a legitimate terrorist activity column and an "other" column.

I would be curious to see how the two compared. Although I know we will never get to see such a list, as it would "embolden" the terrorists.



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 10:08 AM
link   
I completely agree with the premise of the OP. This is just the first of many, many takedowns that will happen because of the Patriot Act. However, good luck getting ATS to see the forest for the trees - many members are distracted by the spectacle and sleazy details and don't get the magnitude or implications. Add to it that Spitzer was a polarizing figure and people are more inclined to dismiss it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I am trying to find the info, but I do recall hearing something about another governor that was ousted via the Patriot Act.

I think it was n one of the souther states. Anyone know anything about this? I am having trouble finding anything.

Thanks.



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthWithin
 


You might be thinking of Don Siegelman (D) Governor of AL who was jailed for like 18 months for a financial transaction that is done everyday by politicians running for office.

Unfortunately for him he crossed paths with Karl Rove and a GOP hit squad and they railroaded him. All the Attorneys General in the U.S. signed a petition or something to have his case reviewed and ultimately he was released.

The MSM has left this case virtually untouched. It's an outrage. The case is a clear use of Fascist bully tactics by the Bush Administration.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 24/4/08 by kosmicjack]



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Also, I don't believe for a second that it was a coincidence or fortunate timing that Spitzers burn out happend just days before the JPMorgan/Bear Sterns baillout. Yes JPMorgan was bailed out as much if not more than Bear Sterns. Spitzer was one of the few people Dem or Repub that was willing to enforce securities laws. He had to be removed before that event could take place. How rapidly events got going after his flameout speaks to how dire the situation was.

We've lost more freedom under this administration than I thought possible in such a short time. The Patriot Act passed to quickly and was to well developed in it's assault on Liberty to have been developed between 9-11 and its passage date. It had to have been on the shelf waiting on a reason to be implemented. I remember hearing a speech by Gen. Wesley Clark (Dem) back in '99 or '00 where he talked about the possibillity of a major terrorist attack that would cause major changes to civil liberties.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthWithin
You bring up a tremendous point.

What worked for Stalin, Hitler and other dictators was that they didn't have to arrest every single politician that opposed them, or every journalist that criticized them. Indeed, they only had to make examples out of a few people. By doing so, it scares the living daylights out of most and they stop and conform.


Adolf Hitler Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future.
www.brainyquote.com...


Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death
quotes.liberty-tree.ca...

i believe our gov'ment has taken the advice of hitler.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Karlhungis
 


Most people who have been charged, or even investigated under the new sweeping powers of the Patriot Act have nothing to do with real terrorism. On the other hand, like Bush said, "if you're not with is, you're with the terrorists." So by that logic, if you spit on the sidewalk, it is an affront to American laws, and you are a terrorist.

I cannot find a link for the story anywhere, but I remember when the Patriot Act first came in, the very first person to be charged under the provisions was not a "terrorist" in the sense that most people thought the Act was to be applied. He was an LA gangbanger. A criminal yes, but he was charged as a terrorist on a manslaughter charge after accidentally shooting someone. Instead of getting fifteen years, the Patriot Act opened the door for him to be sent to prison for life on the manslaughter charge. Now I'm not trying to defend the gangbanger here, but why bother to even make the legal distinction between manslaughter and murder anymore? Push the goal posts far enough, and voicing your opinion could wind up a capital offense.

I came across this as well...

The Patriot Act: Targeting American Citizens



[edit on 5/3/0808 by jackinthebox]



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join