Patriot Act update - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

essendoubleop · 06-10-2004, 02:09 PM

So last I heard, it was being declared unconstitutional in California (at least portions of it were). So when is its sunset period, and does it look like it's going to be put into effect for another year?

nanofever · 06-10-2004, 02:30 PM

"President Bush on Tuesday evening called for the renewal of the USA Patriot Act, the controversial law that has expanded Internet surveillance powers for police and partially expires next year.
Using the pageantry of his third State of the Union speech, Bush set in motion a battle over privacy and security that will continue through the presidential campaign and will likely climax before the law's Dec. 31, 2005, partial expiration date.

"Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year," Bush said. "The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. Our law enforcement needs this vital legislation to protect our citizens--you need to renew the Patriot Act."

One section that will expire permits police to conduct warrantless Internet surveillance with the permission of a network operator. A second section permits police to share the contents of wiretaps or Internet surveillance with the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and other security agencies. Another section makes it easier for prosecutors to seek search warrants for electronic evidence. A fourth, Section 215, became well known after some librarians alerted visitors that it permits the FBI to learn what books a patron has read and what Web sites a patron visited--and prohibits the recipient of such an order from disclosing that it exists.

Keeping those portions of the law intact will permit "federal law enforcement to better share information, to track terrorists, to disrupt their cells and to seize their assets," Bush said.

Enacted a month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Patriot Act became a target of criticism for giving police broad powers and allegedly curbing civil liberties in the process.

Democratic presidential candidates have criticized it to varying extents, with Sen. John Kerry saying last month that he would take a hard look at the Patriot Act. "We will put an end to 'sneak and peak' searches, which permit law enforcement to conduct a secret search and seize evidence without notification," said Kerry, who acknowledged that he voted for the measure in 2001. "Agents can break into a home or business to take photos, seize property, copy computer files or load a secret keystroke detector on a computer. These searches should be limited only to the most rare circumstances."

After Bush's speech, ABC News asked Kerry whether he would keep the law intact. Kerry replied: "I think there are good parts to it and bad parts to it."

Fellow Democrat Howard Dean has taken a similarly cautious stand, saying in a letter to MoveOn.org PAC members that he would seek to repeal only "parts" of the Patriot Act and not the entire law.

Many portions of the Patriot Act have no expiration date. One part makes it much easier for police to learn the identities of a target's e-mail correspondents and Web pages visited; another permits police to learn information about an Internet subscriber, such as credit card or bank account numbers and temporarily assigned network addresses, without seeking a judge's approval first. The section that permits "sneak and peek" warrants, which authorize surreptitious searches of homes and businesses, also does not expire."

http://news.com.com/2100-1028-5144203.html

I think that answers you question.

Date the Banana · 06-10-2004, 04:26 PM

God that's creepy.
I don't do anything illegal (well, aside from downloading vast amounts of anime...) with my computer, but I would hate to have someone tapping into my connection just to "sneak and peak" if I was doing something illegal.
I love the anonymity of the internet, I would hate to lose that because of the "terrorist" threat.

pan6467 · 06-10-2004, 05:34 PM

Bush wants to renew the Patriot Act but still cuts cities funds which takes cops off the street.

Methinks Bush is getting ready to unveil a national police department and absorb the cities and counties departments.

MSD · 06-11-2004, 06:22 AM

I wavered on the issue of whether or not some parts of it were good. Then, I mentioned impeaching the President oon my phone, and almost instantly heard a tap click in. Trust me, I know what a phone tap sounds like, and that's what it was. I'm a law-abiding citizen, There is no reason to tap my phone. This is just fucked up.

seretogis · 06-11-2004, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrSelfDestruct
I wavered on the issue of whether or not some parts of it were good. Then, I mentioned impeaching the President oon my phone, and almost instantly heard a tap click in. Trust me, I know what a phone tap sounds like, and that's what it was. I'm a law-abiding citizen, There is no reason to tap my phone. This is just fucked up.

Heh, sorry, but I don't buy that story, and I won't trust that you know what a phone tap sounds like. How about some evidence supporting your implication that random law-abiding citizens' phone lines are being "listened to" and tapped based on what they say?

onetime2 · 06-11-2004, 06:52 AM

if it's declared unconstitutional it will hold no power so it doesn't matter whether it's "renewed" or not.

Again, it sounds like the system is working. Laws were put in place, they were and are being challenged. If ruled unconstitutional they will be repealed. Convictions due to unconstitutional laws will be overturned.

Rekna · 06-11-2004, 07:01 AM

And the people being held illegally will go home happy?

This can't be overturned soon enough...

onetime2 · 06-11-2004, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rekna
And the people being held illegally will go home happy?

This can't be overturned soon enough...

Until it's declared unconstitutional they are not being held illegally. Additionally, no system is perfect and some level of suffering can not be avoided.

Bill O'Rights · 06-11-2004, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
Additionally, no system is perfect and some level of suffering can not be avoided.

Agreed. However, I don't believe that this fact justifies increasing that suffering, by inflicting these tactics on the general population.

onetime2 · 06-11-2004, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill O'Rights
Agreed. However, I don't believe that this fact justifies increasing that suffering, by inflicting these tactics on the general population.

That's the way the system works. Laws go into effect without being tested first. Trying to run it the other way (through the Supreme Court before Congress) would be a cf to the nth degree.

pig · 06-11-2004, 08:19 AM

So much for "There's nothing to fear but fear itself." In my opinion, the measure of the consitutionality of this law or any other shouldn't be how it affects so-called "average everyday good old law-abiding 'Merican citizens," but how it affects the people who are the easiest to take advantage of. It seems to me that the spirit of these laws is that if you're of a questionable background, then it's not "presumed innocent until proven guilty," but more like "we aren't presuming jack shit anymore." I don't much care for that. Acceptance of these laws, in my opinion, requires that you trust your government way too much, because it provides the basis for some pretty broadbased powers - I just don't trust the guys with all the money and guns that much.

filtherton · 06-11-2004, 10:12 AM

Some of this is even more disturbing in light of the muslim lawyer from washington who was arrested and held due to the fbi's haphazard fingerprinting abilities. He could have been held indefinitely because the fbi fucked up. This isn't directly related to the patriot act. It is more an example of the fact that it is only a matter of time before innocents have their lives interrupted or torn apart by a mixture of an overreaching government and incompetent law enforcement officials.

Anyways, when speaking of wire taps, the government has in place something called echelon. Be careful what you say.
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html

A brief quote:

Quote:

Executive Summary

In the greatest surveillance effort ever established, the US National Security Agency (NSA) has created a global spy system, codename ECHELON, which captures and analyzes virtually every phone call, fax, email and telex message sent anywhere in the world. ECHELON is controlled by the NSA and is operated in conjunction with the Government Communications Head Quarters (GCHQ) of England, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) of Canada, the Australian Defense Security Directorate (DSD), and the General Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) of New Zealand. These organizations are bound together under a secret 1948 agreement, UKUSA, whose terms and text remain under wraps even today.

The ECHELON system is fairly simple in design: position intercept stations all over the world to capture all satellite, microwave, cellular and fiber-optic communications traffic, and then process this information through the massive computer capabilities of the NSA, including advanced voice recognition and optical character recognition (OCR) programs, and look for code words or phrases (known as the ECHELON “Dictionary”) that will prompt the computers to flag the message for recording and transcribing for future analysis. Intelligence analysts at each of the respective “listening stations” maintain separate keyword lists for them to analyze any conversation or document flagged by the system, which is then forwarded to the respective intelligence agency headquarters that requested the intercept.

But apart from directing their ears towards terrorists and rogue states, ECHELON is also being used for purposes well outside its original mission. The regular discovery of domestic surveillance targeted at American civilians for reasons of “unpopular” political affiliation or for no probable cause at all in violation of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution – are consistently impeded by very elaborate and complex legal arguments and privilege claims by the intelligence agencies and the US government. The guardians and caretakers of our liberties, our duly elected political representatives, give scarce attention to these activities, let alone the abuses that occur under their watch. Among the activities that the ECHELON targets are:

Political spying: Since the close of World War II, the US intelligence agencies have developed a consistent record of trampling the rights and liberties of the American people. Even after the investigations into the domestic and political surveillance activities of the agencies that followed in the wake of the Watergate fiasco, the NSA continues to target the political activity of “unpopular” political groups and our duly elected representatives. One whistleblower charged in a 1988 Cleveland Plain Dealer interview that, while she was stationed at the Menwith Hill facility in the 1980s, she heard real-time intercepts of South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond. A former Maryland Congressman, Michael Barnes, claimed in a 1995 Baltimore Sun article that under the Reagan Administration his phone calls were regularly intercepted, which he discovered only after reporters had been passed transcripts of his conversations by the White House. One of the most shocking revelations came to light after several GCHQ officials became concerned about the targeting of peaceful political groups and told the London Observer in 1992 that the ECHELON dictionaries targeted Amnesty International, Greenpeace, and even Christian ministries.

Commercial espionage: Since the demise of Communism in Eastern Europe, the intelligence agencies have searched for a new justification for their surveillance capability in order to protect their prominence and their bloated budgets. Their solution was to redefine the notion of national security to include economic, commercial and corporate concerns. An office was created within the Department of Commerce, the Office of Intelligence Liaison, to forward intercepted materials to major US corporations. In many cases, the beneficiaries of this commercial espionage effort are the very companies that helped the NSA develop the systems that power the ECHELON network. This incestuous relationship is so strong that sometimes this intelligence information is used to push other American manufacturers out of deals in favor of these mammoth US defense and intelligence contractors, who frequently are the source of major cash contributions to both political parties.

While signals intelligence technology was helpful in containing and eventually defeating the Soviet Empire during the Cold War, what was once designed to target a select list of communist countries and terrorist states is now indiscriminately directed against virtually every citizen in the world. The European Parliament is now asking whether the ECHELON communications interceptions violate the sovereignty and privacy of citizens in other countries. In some cases, such as the NSA’s Menwith Hill station in England, surveillance is conducted against citizens on their own soil and with the full knowledge and cooperation of their government.

This report suggests that Congress pick up its long-neglected role as watchdog of the Constitutional rights and liberties of the American people, instead of its current role as lap dog to the US intelligence agencies. Congressional hearings ought to be held, similar to the Church and Rockefeller Committee hearings held in the mid-1970s, to find out to what extent the ECHELON system targets the personal, political, religious, and commercial communications of American citizens. The late Senator Frank Church warned that the technology and capability embodied in the ECHELON system represented a direct threat to the liberties of the American people. Left unchecked, ECHELON could be used by either the political elite or the intelligence agencies themselves as a tool to subvert the civil protections of Constitution and to destroy representative government in the United States.

onetime2 · 06-11-2004, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by filtherton
Some of this is even more disturbing in light of the muslim lawyer from washington who was arrested and held due to the fbi's haphazard fingerprinting abilities. He could have been held indefinitely because the fbi fucked up.

You fail to mention the fact that an independent expert hired by this man's own attorney agreed that the fingerprints were his. And that there was an Al Qaeda cell known to have attempted to build a terrorist training camp in that area. Mighty big coincidence that the FBI should have ignored, ehh? Let's see, a lawyer who has converted to Islam living in an area targeted by Al Qaeda to train terrorists apparently has his finger print show up on the bomb materials used in the train bombing in Spain. It would have been unthinkable for authorities to have ignored that.

filtherton · 06-11-2004, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
You fail to mention the fact that an independent expert hired by this man's own attorney agreed that the fingerprints were his. And that there was an Al Qaeda cell known to have attempted to build a terrorist training camp in that area. Mighty big coincidence that the FBI should have ignored, ehh? Let's see, a lawyer who has converted to Islam living in an area targeted by Al Qaeda to train terrorists apparently has his finger print show up on the bomb materials used in the train bombing in Spain. It would have been unthinkable for authorities to have ignored that.

You forgot to mention that Spain, whom the fbi was working in conjunction with told them that their match was probably wrong. It certainly wasn't unthinkable for them to ignore that, because they did ignore it. In any case, despite all of your circumstantial evidence, and innocent man was arrested on charges of planting bombs in spain. He could have been held indefinitely because the fbi jumped the gun. His reputation is probably damaged and the fbi's was definitely damaged. Making excuses doesn't change that one bit.

tecoyah · 06-11-2004, 01:37 PM

My homeland....is making me feel very insecure.

onetime2 · 06-12-2004, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by filtherton
You forgot to mention that Spain, whom the fbi was working in conjunction with told them that their match was probably wrong. It certainly wasn't unthinkable for them to ignore that, because they did ignore it. In any case, despite all of your circumstantial evidence, and innocent man was arrested on charges of planting bombs in spain. He could have been held indefinitely because the fbi jumped the gun. His reputation is probably damaged and the fbi's was definitely damaged. Making excuses doesn't change that one bit.

"Could have been" but wasn't. To ignore the overwhelming circumstantial evidence would have been derelict. While "making excuses doesn't change that" creating imaginary "could have beens" doesn't change what actually happened.

The man had bad luck because of all the circumstantial evidence. In the end he was cleared. Sounds like a good outcome to me. But hey, why not take it to the next imaginary level and say "he could have been executed as a traitor"? There more evidence of how evil our law enforcement system is.

Sun Tzu · 06-12-2004, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
Heh, sorry, but I don't buy that story, and I won't trust that you know what a phone tap sounds like. How about some evidence supporting your implication that random law-abiding citizens' phone lines are being "listened to" and tapped based on what they say?

Do a search for Echelon. (I think you choosing which sources your going to consider valid is better then me just posting links)

Trigger word technology has actually been around longer than most think.

filtherton · 06-12-2004, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
"Could have been" but wasn't. To ignore the overwhelming circumstantial evidence would have been derelict. While "making excuses doesn't change that" creating imaginary "could have beens" doesn't change what actually happened.

The man had bad luck because of all the circumstantial evidence. In the end he was cleared. Sounds like a good outcome to me. But hey, why not take it to the next imaginary level and say "he could have been executed as a traitor"? There more evidence of how evil our law enforcement system is.

It was bad luck for him, incompetence on the part of the fbi. It shouldn't have happened. The only people who took it to an imaginary level were the fingerprint analysts at the fbi and they're probably going to get a well deserved black eye because of it. Circumstantial evidence should be irrelevent when your only direct evidence is flawed, especially when the people who gave you that evidence tell you that you've got a false match. In the end, justice prevailed, but don't pretend for a minute that law enforcement arrogance can't go a lot farther than it did with this fellow especially in tense times such as these.

06-10-2004, 02:09 PM	#1 (permalink)
essendoubleop Psycho	Patriot Act update So last I heard, it was being declared unconstitutional in California (at least portions of it were). So when is its sunset period, and does it look like it's going to be put into effect for another year?

06-10-2004, 02:30 PM	#2 (permalink)
nanofever Huzzah for Welcome Week, Much beer shall I imbibe. Location: UCSB	"President Bush on Tuesday evening called for the renewal of the USA Patriot Act, the controversial law that has expanded Internet surveillance powers for police and partially expires next year. Using the pageantry of his third State of the Union speech, Bush set in motion a battle over privacy and security that will continue through the presidential campaign and will likely climax before the law's Dec. 31, 2005, partial expiration date. "Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year," Bush said. "The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. Our law enforcement needs this vital legislation to protect our citizens--you need to renew the Patriot Act." One section that will expire permits police to conduct warrantless Internet surveillance with the permission of a network operator. A second section permits police to share the contents of wiretaps or Internet surveillance with the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and other security agencies. Another section makes it easier for prosecutors to seek search warrants for electronic evidence. A fourth, Section 215, became well known after some librarians alerted visitors that it permits the FBI to learn what books a patron has read and what Web sites a patron visited--and prohibits the recipient of such an order from disclosing that it exists. Keeping those portions of the law intact will permit "federal law enforcement to better share information, to track terrorists, to disrupt their cells and to seize their assets," Bush said. Enacted a month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Patriot Act became a target of criticism for giving police broad powers and allegedly curbing civil liberties in the process. Democratic presidential candidates have criticized it to varying extents, with Sen. John Kerry saying last month that he would take a hard look at the Patriot Act. "We will put an end to 'sneak and peak' searches, which permit law enforcement to conduct a secret search and seize evidence without notification," said Kerry, who acknowledged that he voted for the measure in 2001. "Agents can break into a home or business to take photos, seize property, copy computer files or load a secret keystroke detector on a computer. These searches should be limited only to the most rare circumstances." After Bush's speech, ABC News asked Kerry whether he would keep the law intact. Kerry replied: "I think there are good parts to it and bad parts to it." Fellow Democrat Howard Dean has taken a similarly cautious stand, saying in a letter to MoveOn.org PAC members that he would seek to repeal only "parts" of the Patriot Act and not the entire law. Many portions of the Patriot Act have no expiration date. One part makes it much easier for police to learn the identities of a target's e-mail correspondents and Web pages visited; another permits police to learn information about an Internet subscriber, such as credit card or bank account numbers and temporarily assigned network addresses, without seeking a judge's approval first. The section that permits "sneak and peek" warrants, which authorize surreptitious searches of homes and businesses, also does not expire." http://news.com.com/2100-1028-5144203.html I think that answers you question. __________________ I'm leaving for the University of California: Santa Barbara in 5 hours, give me your best college advice - things I need, good ideas, bad ideas, nooky, ect. Originally Posted by Norseman on another forum: "Yeah, the problem with the world is the stupid people are all cocksure of themselves and the intellectuals are full of doubt."

06-10-2004, 04:26 PM	#3 (permalink)
Date the Banana Insane Location: Japan	God that's creepy. I don't do anything illegal (well, aside from downloading vast amounts of anime...) with my computer, but I would hate to have someone tapping into my connection just to "sneak and peak" if I was doing something illegal. I love the anonymity of the internet, I would hate to lose that because of the "terrorist" threat. __________________ all work and no play make Date something something

06-10-2004, 05:34 PM	#4 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	Bush wants to renew the Patriot Act but still cuts cities funds which takes cops off the street. Methinks Bush is getting ready to unveil a national police department and absorb the cities and counties departments. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

06-11-2004, 06:52 AM	#7 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	if it's declared unconstitutional it will hold no power so it doesn't matter whether it's "renewed" or not. Again, it sounds like the system is working. Laws were put in place, they were and are being challenged. If ruled unconstitutional they will be repealed. Convictions due to unconstitutional laws will be overturned. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

06-11-2004, 06:22 AM	#5 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	I wavered on the issue of whether or not some parts of it were good. Then, I mentioned impeaching the President oon my phone, and almost instantly heard a tap click in. Trust me, I know what a phone tap sounds like, and that's what it was. I'm a law-abiding citizen, There is no reason to tap my phone. This is just fucked up.

06-11-2004, 07:01 AM	#8 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	And the people being held illegally will go home happy? This can't be overturned soon enough...

06-11-2004, 08:19 AM	#12 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	So much for "There's nothing to fear but fear itself." In my opinion, the measure of the consitutionality of this law or any other shouldn't be how it affects so-called "average everyday good old law-abiding 'Merican citizens," but how it affects the people who are the easiest to take advantage of. It seems to me that the spirit of these laws is that if you're of a questionable background, then it's not "presumed innocent until proven guilty," but more like "we aren't presuming jack shit anymore." I don't much care for that. Acceptance of these laws, in my opinion, requires that you trust your government way too much, because it provides the basis for some pretty broadbased powers - I just don't trust the guys with all the money and guns that much. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

06-11-2004, 01:37 PM	#16 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	My homeland....is making me feel very insecure. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha