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.

 

Patriot Act...My Congressman's response to my E-mail

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:41 AM
link   
I wrote my Congressman in response to his vote of "yes" on HR 514, the extension of certain provisions of the Patriot Act. This thread can originally be found HERE

Here is my original e-mail to my Congressman...


Mr. Rigell (actually the staffer who will read this and then discard it without Mr. Rigell ever seeing it),

I am a Conservative, and I believe in the Constitution and it's original intent and meaning as the founders wrote it, but it would appear that you do not. I voted for you in last November's election, although I must admit that I was hesitant to do so. I feared that you were just another "establishment RINO Republican", mainly because you did everything to dodge a question about social security being unconstitutional on a local radio show, but I still voted for you. Your vote of "yes" on the recent Patriot Act extension confirms to me why I hesitated. You are in gross violation of your oath of office, and because of that you will no longer get my support. Not only have you lost my support, but I will work tirelessly and diligently to see to it that this current term is the only one that you will ever serve.

Your vote of "yes" on the Patriot Act extension will help to destroy whatever is left of the 4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and for that you are no better than the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and your predecessor Glenn Nye. You are an abomination to Constitutional Conservatives everywhere. I knew that I was right about you when you were campaigning last year, and this is one of the few times in my life where I wish that I had been wrong. The next time you are sitting around with all of the other freedom hating, progressive, elitist, ruling class degenerates that you call peers, have a round of 100 year old scotch on me.


and here is his response....



June 2, 2011



Dear Mr. *******,

Thank you very much for contacting me to express your concerns with H.R. 514, to extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to access to business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until December 8, 2011. I value and give careful consideration to the good counsel that I receive from you and all those whom I have the privilege to represent in Congress. I refer to that good counsel as the "wisdom of the district."

As you may know, Rep. James Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 514 on January 26, 2011. This bill would extend two expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and one provision from the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act allows the FBI to request access to tangible third party business records, such as library circulation records, firearms sales records, and tax records. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court (FISA Court) must approve these requests after the government establishes that the records are connected to cases of international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. The FISA Court judges who decide the merit of these requests are district court judges well versed in criminal and constitutional law. Further, the Chief Justice of the United States appoints FISA Court judges.

Section 206 of the Patriot Act authorizes multipoint, or roving, wiretaps. This provision allows a single wiretap to be applied to an individual, and covers any communication device that the individual may use. This prevents the need to get a separate order for every different device used by the target of an investigation. A FISA Court judge is the only person who can authorize roving wiretaps and supervise the wiretap as long as it is in effect. Further, the government is required to alert the FISA judge who authorized the wiretap when it is applied to a new phone or computer.

Section 6001 of the Intelligence Reform Act amends the definition of "agent of a foreign power" to include individual foreign nationals planning or participating in terrorist activity regardless of whether they are directly affiliated with a known terrorist group. As many terrorists in recent years have acted without being a member of a terrorist organization, this provision closes the loophole that would prevent an individual who meets these criteria from being surveyed simply because they operated on their own. It is important to note that the authority provided by section 6001 cannot be used against American citizens or legal permanent residents, only foreign nationals.

I support H.R. 514, and while we disagree on this issue I appreciate the opportunity to explain my position. On February 9, 2011, I had the opportunity to question the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Michael E. Leiter, as he testified before the House Committee on Homeland Security, on which I serve. When I asked Director Leiter about the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act, he responded, "From my perspective to have the Patriot Act expire on February 28 would be extremely problematic. It would reduce our ability to detect terrorists." Clearly, these provisions are still a major component of our homeland security strategy, which has not allowed an attack on American soil since September 11, 2001.

While I believe we must take the necessary precautions to combat terrorism, I share your concern with the protection of our civil liberties, and privacy. For this reason, during the same Homeland Security Committee hearing previously referenced, I questioned the systems in place to ensure that federal agencies do not abuse the authority granted to them by this bill. H.R. 514 is only a temporary extension, and I look forward to investigating our shared concerns of civil liberties and privacy during upcoming hearings.

It is important to me that I keep you fully informed on how I am representing you in Congress, so please visit my website rigell.house.gov and sign up for my e-newsletter. I also encourage you to join our Facebook page facebook.com/RepScottRigell. Both sites feature timely video updates on the votes I am taking on the House floor.

Mindful that I work for you, I remain

Yours in Freedom,

Scott Rigell
Member of Congress



Thoughts on how I should respond.....?




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

Thoughts on how I should respond.....?


Why respond? You'll just get another form letter like the above one. Any chance of seeing him face-to-face? He can't send a form letter then. But he can give you a canned response, I guess. Or have you arrested as a terrorist. Maybe you should just be quiet and docile like he wants you to be.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Maybe best to leave it as is, and not respond.

You are in his head now, let him think whether he kept a voter or not.

It may help him with his next descision.

S&F for getting off your butt and doing something.


All I got from an email to obama, was to be added to the whitehouse email list (and i am in OZ)
edit on 3-6-2011 by CitizenNum287119327 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

Thoughts on how I should respond.....?


Why respond? You'll just get another form letter like the above one. Any chance of seeing him face-to-face? He can't send a form letter then. But he can give you a canned response, I guess. Or have you arrested as a terrorist. Maybe you should just be quiet and docile like he wants you to be.

/TOA


I'm sure the response he sent was the common, generated e-mail he sends everyone. I know I'm not important enough for him to actually take the time to write. I will, however, be attending his next townhall meeting, and I'm going to let him have it if given the opportunity.

edit- By stating that I will "let him have it, I in no way am referring to violence in any way, shape or form... I will verbally let him have it.
edit on 3-6-2011 by OptimusSubprime because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Thoughts on how I should respond.....?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You're fired !!!

that's not meant in a threatening manner of course

it just means you won't be voting for him anymore.
But what your congressman has done is completely
taken the word of a higher congressman as the truth
without investigating it for himself. This is how
politicians can vote along party lines from the top
to the bottom. The bottom has no clue what they
are voting for. If he doesn't know this, then he
doesn't need to be in congress.


edit on 6/3/2011 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

Thoughts on how I should respond.....?


Why respond? You'll just get another form letter like the above one. Any chance of seeing him face-to-face? He can't send a form letter then. But he can give you a canned response, I guess. Or have you arrested as a terrorist. Maybe you should just be quiet and docile like he wants you to be.

/TOA


I'm sure the response he sent was the common, generated e-mail he sends everyone. I know I'm not important enough for him to actually take the time to write. I will, however, be attending his next townhall meeting, and I'm going to let him have it if given the opportunity.


Oh [snip] yeah! Film it if you can. But at the very least, let us know how that goes!

/TOA



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

I'm sure the response he sent was the common, generated e-mail he sends everyone. I know I'm not important enough for him to actually take the time to write. I will, however, be attending his next townhall meeting, and I'm going to let him have it if given the opportunity.


Being that these are touchy times, I strongly advise you to rephrase that last sentence.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


if you catch him in the town meeting. dont tell him your name.
that will make 2 who disagree instead of 1



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


Dear if you are willing to take what comes with the "bothering" of the elite, be my guess and respond, my husband and I were audited for the three years that I was sending letters to my congressman for the bad policies that they were making against my state and the nation.

Each time I got very generic letters from them, as you know this letters are made in advance so they are the same to all the recipients.

We didn't care about the audits eventually they has stop since I stop sending letters.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 



Thoughts on how I should respond.....?


Maybe ask him if he actually read the bill in it's entirety before he voted on it..
Though I doubt you'd get an honest answer..



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Dear if you are willing to take what comes with the "bothering" of the elite, be my guess and respond, my husband and I were audited for the three years that I was sending letters to my congressman for the bad policies that they were making against my state and the nation.

Each time I got very generic letters from them, as you know this letters are made in advance so they are the same to all the recipients.

We didn't care about the audits eventually they has stop since I stop sending letters.

But this is exactly what they want: to intimidate and harass, so people stop speaking up. This should be splashed all over the web and offered to any brave news outlet, put on posters, etc. FedGov is a bully and a thug; this is how they control us.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Version100

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

I'm sure the response he sent was the common, generated e-mail he sends everyone. I know I'm not important enough for him to actually take the time to write. I will, however, be attending his next townhall meeting, and I'm going to let him have it if given the opportunity.


Being that these are touchy times, I strongly advise you to rephrase that last sentence.



True, and the sad thing is that something as innocent as my statement could and probably would be used completely out of context and represented as a violent threat.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Mindful that I work for you, I remain

Yours in Freedom


What a jackass.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by CitizenNum287119327
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


if you catch him in the town meeting. dont tell him your name.
that will make 2 who disagree instead of 1


That's a great point



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Respond with... YOUR FIRED. WE ARE TAKING BACK OUR COUNTRY AND YOU, YES YOU >>> WORK FOR ME



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


Yes I know that is intimidation, but I stop sending e-mails and letters because I came to the realization that our politicraps do not listen to us anymore, they are going to do what their masters tells them to do.

We were audited three consecutive years by the Fed and once by the state.

Yes is scary and we even got a lawyer advise, but because the discrepancies were not that big, they actually dig into our records to find a few hundred dollars of misfiled data the lawyer told us to just do the audits the state audit was actually worst, we didn't have to face the fed, everything was done on the phone, but the state they are very bullish, the meetings were face to face with one of the "mob agents".




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


Yes I know that is intimidation, but I stop sending e-mails and letters because I came to the realization that our politicraps do not listen to us anymore, they are going to do what their masters tells them to do.

Sad but true.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 

Thoughts on how I should respond.....?


The best & most fitting way would be a simple

"GET STUFFED"



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


Thanks again for making the time to take a positive step.

I agree with boondock-saint. I would send a short reply to the effect of saying "you won't be getting my vote". I cannot remember the exact statistic but one letter supposedly represents hundreds of constituents. Might give him a moment's pause.

One thing I couldn't help but laugh at from the Congressman's reply was this...



"I value and give careful consideration to the good counsel that I receive from you and all those whom I have the privilege to represent in Congress. I refer to that good counsel as the "wisdom of the district."


Couldn't help but wonder that if he was totally honest in his reply if he might have left out...

"But I don't give a damn about the 'wisdom of the district'. Now if you'll excuse me I have some campaign contribution checks that I need to deposit."



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime

I wrote my Congressman in response to his vote of "yes" on HR 514, the extension of certain provisions of the Patriot Act. This thread can originally be found HERE

Here is my original e-mail to my Congressman...


Mr. Rigell (actually the staffer who will read this and then discard it without Mr. Rigell ever seeing it),

I am a Conservative, and I believe in the Constitution and it's original intent and meaning as the founders wrote it, but it would appear that you do not. I voted for you in last November's election, although I must admit that I was hesitant to do so. I feared that you were just another "establishment RINO Republican", mainly because you did everything to dodge a question about social security being unconstitutional on a local radio show, but I still voted for you. Your vote of "yes" on the recent Patriot Act extension confirms to me why I hesitated. You are in gross violation of your oath of office, and because of that you will no longer get my support. Not only have you lost my support, but I will work tirelessly and diligently to see to it that this current term is the only one that you will ever serve.

Your vote of "yes" on the Patriot Act extension will help to destroy whatever is left of the 4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and for that you are no better than the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and your predecessor Glenn Nye. You are an abomination to Constitutional Conservatives everywhere. I knew that I was right about you when you were campaigning last year, and this is one of the few times in my life where I wish that I had been wrong. The next time you are sitting around with all of the other freedom hating, progressive, elitist, ruling class degenerates that you call peers, have a round of 100 year old scotch on me.


and here is his response....



June 2, 2011



Dear Mr. *******,

Thank you very much for contacting me to express your concerns with H.R. 514, to extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to access to business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until December 8, 2011. I value and give careful consideration to the good counsel that I receive from you and all those whom I have the privilege to represent in Congress. I refer to that good counsel as the "wisdom of the district."

As you may know, Rep. James Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 514 on January 26, 2011. This bill would extend two expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and one provision from the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act allows the FBI to request access to tangible third party business records, such as library circulation records, firearms sales records, and tax records. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court (FISA Court) must approve these requests after the government establishes that the records are connected to cases of international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. The FISA Court judges who decide the merit of these requests are district court judges well versed in criminal and constitutional law. Further, the Chief Justice of the United States appoints FISA Court judges.

Section 206 of the Patriot Act authorizes multipoint, or roving, wiretaps. This provision allows a single wiretap to be applied to an individual, and covers any communication device that the individual may use. This prevents the need to get a separate order for every different device used by the target of an investigation. A FISA Court judge is the only person who can authorize roving wiretaps and supervise the wiretap as long as it is in effect. Further, the government is required to alert the FISA judge who authorized the wiretap when it is applied to a new phone or computer.

Section 6001 of the Intelligence Reform Act amends the definition of "agent of a foreign power" to include individual foreign nationals planning or participating in terrorist activity regardless of whether they are directly affiliated with a known terrorist group. As many terrorists in recent years have acted without being a member of a terrorist organization, this provision closes the loophole that would prevent an individual who meets these criteria from being surveyed simply because they operated on their own. It is important to note that the authority provided by section 6001 cannot be used against American citizens or legal permanent residents, only foreign nationals.

I support H.R. 514, and while we disagree on this issue I appreciate the opportunity to explain my position. On February 9, 2011, I had the opportunity to question the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Michael E. Leiter, as he testified before the House Committee on Homeland Security, on which I serve. When I asked Director Leiter about the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act, he responded, "From my perspective to have the Patriot Act expire on February 28 would be extremely problematic. It would reduce our ability to detect terrorists." Clearly, these provisions are still a major component of our homeland security strategy, which has not allowed an attack on American soil since September 11, 2001.

While I believe we must take the necessary precautions to combat terrorism, I share your concern with the protection of our civil liberties, and privacy. For this reason, during the same Homeland Security Committee hearing previously referenced, I questioned the systems in place to ensure that federal agencies do not abuse the authority granted to them by this bill. H.R. 514 is only a temporary extension, and I look forward to investigating our shared concerns of civil liberties and privacy during upcoming hearings.

It is important to me that I keep you fully informed on how I am representing you in Congress, so please visit my website rigell.house.gov and sign up for my e-newsletter. I also encourage you to join our Facebook page facebook.com/RepScottRigell. Both sites feature timely video updates on the votes I am taking on the House floor.

Mindful that I work for you, I remain

Yours in Freedom,

Scott Rigell
Member of Congress



Thoughts on how I should respond.....?


sure appears to be an automated response to me, bet that exact email has been sent to thousands of people,

take it from someone who was once employed to operate the auto responding tech for emails inbound to wellsfargo bank.

you emailed and got replied to, by a machine, if you email back, i wouldnt expect anything more.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join