FBI abuses patriot act. Surprised? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Poppinjay · 10-26-2005, 04:25 AM

Story here: http://tinyurl.com/8epqo

From the story:

In one case, FBI agents kept an unidentified target under surveillance for at least five years -- including more than 15 months without notifying Justice Department lawyers after the subject had moved from New York to Detroit. An FBI investigation concluded that the delay was a violation of Justice guidelines and prevented the department "from exercising its responsibility for oversight and approval of an ongoing foreign counterintelligence investigation of a U.S. person."

In other cases, agents obtained e-mails after a warrant expired, seized bank records without proper authority and conducted an improper "unconsented physical search," according to the documents.

Thank heavens for another act, the Freedom of Information act, this is coming to light. The justice department had to be sued for this information.

The patriot act has gone so far afield that's it has passed the Twilight Zone and reached the Ludicrous Zone. Did you expect these abuses? Or do you think they are much ado about nothing?

alansmithee · 10-26-2005, 04:30 AM

I don't see the problem. Was someone unjustly arrested? Or is this just about some surveillance? And as for reading e-mails after a warrant expired, I have a secret to tell: in schools across the nation, there are unauthorized searches being performed daily as teachers read student's letters without their students' permission! Oh, the humanity! Where's Amnesty International when we need them?

All FOIA is allow people with too much time on their hands to get worked up about insignificant details.

Poppinjay · 10-26-2005, 04:41 AM

First off, any computer owned by a school or a parent is open to search from that owner. Minors do NOT have the full franchise.

Second, I think an unconsented physical search is bit much. Don't you think? Did you read the entire article?

shakran · 10-26-2005, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alansmithee

All FOIA is allow people with too much time on their hands to get worked up about insignificant details.

A statement that can only be made by someone who is ignorant regarding FOIA or who does not like the idea of liberty. Without FOIA the government could do pretty much anything it wanted and never be held accountable for it. The point of checks such as FOIA is to keep those in power from trying to grab too much power to the detriment of the public.

djtestudo · 10-26-2005, 06:31 AM

I didn't read the whole article, but from what was posted, it sounds like the FBI did some stuff that is against the law, but that means it has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

So, shouldn't the title be "FBI Abuses Law Enforcement Power?" Or would that go against certain agendas?

alansmithee · 10-26-2005, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

A statement that can only be made by someone who is ignorant regarding FOIA or who does not like the idea of liberty. Without FOIA the government could do pretty much anything it wanted and never be held accountable for it. The point of checks such as FOIA is to keep those in power from trying to grab too much power to the detriment of the public.

No, the point of FOIA is to give nosy busybodies a way to obstruct gov't activities. It also helps people who don't have anything better to do make frivolous claims and start rabblerousing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poppinjay

First off, any computer owned by a school or a parent is open to search from that owner. Minors do NOT have the full franchise.

Second, I think an unconsented physical search is bit much. Don't you think? Did you read the entire article?

Actually, there was a case semi-recently (in Washington state, IIRC) where a conviction was overturned because a parent found incriminating information about her daughter's boyfriend on her daughter's computer. The daughter was a minor at the time, but it was ruled that she had a right to privacy.

And also, what form did this "unconsented physical search" take? Did the FBI guys dig through some trash? Did they ransack the suspect's home? Was the guy anal probed?

I read the article, which seems short on details but long on vague suppositions. Also, none of this seems relevant to the Patriot Act directly (as was pointed out above), so it seems this is just another "TeH BuShCo iS tEh SuXx0rZ" rant.

Poppinjay · 10-26-2005, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo

I didn't read the whole article, but from what was posted, it sounds like the FBI did some stuff that is against the law, but that means it has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

So, shouldn't the title be "FBI Abuses Law Enforcement Power?" Or would that go against certain agendas?

No, when an entity is given control over a form of governance and they commit improper activities, that is abuse of that governance. These terms are reserved for situations like this. Just like if some jerk knocks his wife around, he won't be arrested for assault, in almost every community in America, he will be arrested for spousal abuse or whatever the local folks have come up with to make that kind of thing more punitive.

They used the act to open the door, then they put their muddy boots up on the table and started drinking the milk straight from the jug.

stevo · 10-26-2005, 07:16 AM

Where does the patriot act fit it? Is this guy in guantanamo now or something?

Mojo_PeiPei · 10-26-2005, 08:24 AM

Ummm correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm not to big on math... But looking at my desktop in the lower right hand corner my computer says it's 10/26/05. The article here says the surveillance had been going on for AT LEAST 5 years. So that means that the investigation started in AT LEAST 2000. Wasn't 9/11 in 2001? Wouldn't that put the Patriot act in late 2001, early 2002? Don't know if that amazing and complex revelation is that big of a deal really, might not matter at all.

I still don't see what the hubbub is with the Patriot act, I really haven't seen any major abuses that led me to believe that Emperor Bush has fully assumed power and imprisoned congress and all dissidents. As far as I understand it, the Patriot didn't do anything new, it merely extended certain legal tools that were already pre-existing to cover "terrorism" type stuff, and at the same time most of the really bad provisions have been struck down as unconstitutional.

Poppinjay · 10-26-2005, 08:51 AM

The USA Patriot act officially was voted in on this day, in 2001. It expanded the ability for the FBI and others to remain covert on 15 types of investigation. In the case of surveillance, it was legal when started, but would have required dislcosure after a certain period of time. The FBI hid behind the act to continue it.

Like you said, it didn't do anything new. It extended certain legal "tools", like wiretapping at will without disclosure.

stevo · 10-26-2005, 09:00 AM

So what happened to this guy? Club Gitmo? Jail? or is he living his life like every other american?

filtherton · 10-26-2005, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alansmithee

No, the point of FOIA is to give nosy busybodies a way to obstruct gov't activities. It also helps people who don't have anything better to do make frivolous claims and start rabblerousing.

How can you obstruct government activities that have already happened?

kutulu · 10-26-2005, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo

So what happened to this guy? Club Gitmo? Jail? or is he living his life like every other american?

Does it matter? When is it ok and when is it not ok for hte FBI to break the law?

alansmithee · 10-27-2005, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

How can you obstruct government activities that have already happened?

Simple. There's a report about FBI activity that may or may not be beyond the legal allowed limits. Also, later there's a law passed that increases the powers of certain governmental agencies, including the FBI. Rabblerousing liberals who dislike the law (or the people who made the law, at this point it's hard to tell the difference) falsely start trying to show a linkage between said law and said pseudo-illegal activities. They get enough sheep to follow in line to make representatives in certain areas start putting pressure on the gov't to change or investigate actions that the gov't is currently taking, based on a false assumption/bald-faced lie of causality between a law and actions of an agency that benefits from said law. Now the gov't has to waste time and resources showing that there was no relationship between said actions and the law to quiet some of the sheep.

Poppinjay · 10-27-2005, 04:26 AM

Rabblerousing liberals? Sheep? Is this the part where I call right leaning people nazis or neanderthals?

That radical liberal Dick Armey is the man who suggested that USA Patriot should have a sunset provision. All your protest against criticism of this act is akin the Oz saying to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

filtherton · 10-27-2005, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alansmithee

Simple. There's a report about FBI activity that may or may not be beyond the legal allowed limits. Also, later there's a law passed that increases the powers of certain governmental agencies, including the FBI. Rabblerousing liberals who dislike the law (or the people who made the law, at this point it's hard to tell the difference) falsely start trying to show a linkage between said law and said pseudo-illegal activities. They get enough sheep to follow in line to make representatives in certain areas start putting pressure on the gov't to change or investigate actions that the gov't is currently taking, based on a false assumption/bald-faced lie of causality between a law and actions of an agency that benefits from said law. Now the gov't has to waste time and resources showing that there was no relationship between said actions and the law to quiet some of the sheep.

So what you're saying is that because the original poster misrepresented the facts in the title of the thread that this is going to somehow be the butterfly that flaps its wings and whips up a perfect storm of wasted government resources? You honestly think the bush admin is going to look into this? I think you have to much time on your hands.

The foia exist because some people had the idea that in a well functioning republic there might be some use in a certain amount of transparency in the government. Perhaps there are people who attempt to misuse such information. For you to claim that the purpose of the foia is to give nosy busybodies something to do is ridiculous. The existence of homosexuality and abortion will ensure that nosy busybodies are occupied for the rest of eternity.

dksuddeth · 10-28-2005, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

So what you're saying is that because the original poster misrepresented the facts in the title of the thread that this is going to somehow be the butterfly that flaps its wings and whips up a perfect storm of wasted government resources? You honestly think the bush admin is going to look into this? I think you have to much time on your hands.

The foia exist because some people had the idea that in a well functioning republic there might be some use in a certain amount of transparency in the government. Perhaps there are people who attempt to misuse such information. For you to claim that the purpose of the foia is to give nosy busybodies something to do is ridiculous. The existence of homosexuality and abortion will ensure that nosy busybodies are occupied for the rest of eternity.

Or that the founding fathers envisioned an institution that served the people that put it there, not the other way around...although i've come to the conclusion that alan feels that we should be servitors to the government so we can sit under its blanket of protection and be all safe and sound as we're told what to do.

stevo · 10-28-2005, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kutulu

Does it matter? When is it ok and when is it not ok for hte FBI to break the law?

I thought the whole problem with the patriot act was that it infringes on the civil liberties of ordinary americans. So if the patriot act infringed on this guy's rights, what happened to this guy?

Marvelous Marv · 10-29-2005, 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poppinjay

No, when an entity is given control over a form of governance and they commit improper activities, that is abuse of that governance. These terms are reserved for situations like this. Just like if some jerk knocks his wife around, he won't be arrested for assault, in almost every community in America, he will be arrested for spousal abuse or whatever the local folks have come up with to make that kind of thing more punitive.

They used the act to open the door, then they put their muddy boots up on the table and started drinking the milk straight from the jug.

That will (or would) be news to Martin Luther King, civil rights leaders, antiwar protesters, and social activists.

Hint: Google "J. Edgar Hoover," even though the King investigation was started by Bobby Kennedy.

Although I'm certainly no fan of the FBI.

SERPENT7 · 11-08-2005, 05:17 PM

The real problem with the patriot act, is that it makes it LEGAL to do many of the things the FBI has always done in the past. There can no longer be any legal action taken if they step out of line.
(For instance it immunizes the DOD, DHS, and FBI employees from being covered by the Whistle-blower act, which was designed to PROTECT employees from retribution for exposing wrong-doing by the people they work for.)

10-26-2005, 04:25 AM	#1 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	FBI abuses patriot act. Surprised? Story here: http://tinyurl.com/8epqo From the story: In one case, FBI agents kept an unidentified target under surveillance for at least five years -- including more than 15 months without notifying Justice Department lawyers after the subject had moved from New York to Detroit. An FBI investigation concluded that the delay was a violation of Justice guidelines and prevented the department "from exercising its responsibility for oversight and approval of an ongoing foreign counterintelligence investigation of a U.S. person." In other cases, agents obtained e-mails after a warrant expired, seized bank records without proper authority and conducted an improper "unconsented physical search," according to the documents. Thank heavens for another act, the Freedom of Information act, this is coming to light. The justice department had to be sued for this information. The patriot act has gone so far afield that's it has passed the Twilight Zone and reached the Ludicrous Zone. Did you expect these abuses? Or do you think they are much ado about nothing? __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

10-26-2005, 04:41 AM	#3 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	First off, any computer owned by a school or a parent is open to search from that owner. Minors do NOT have the full franchise. Second, I think an unconsented physical search is bit much. Don't you think? Did you read the entire article? __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

10-26-2005, 06:31 AM	#5 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	I didn't read the whole article, but from what was posted, it sounds like the FBI did some stuff that is against the law, but that means it has nothing to do with the Patriot Act. So, shouldn't the title be "FBI Abuses Law Enforcement Power?" Or would that go against certain agendas? __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

10-26-2005, 07:16 AM	#8 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	Where does the patriot act fit it? Is this guy in guantanamo now or something? __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

10-26-2005, 08:24 AM	#9 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Ummm correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm not to big on math... But looking at my desktop in the lower right hand corner my computer says it's 10/26/05. The article here says the surveillance had been going on for AT LEAST 5 years. So that means that the investigation started in AT LEAST 2000. Wasn't 9/11 in 2001? Wouldn't that put the Patriot act in late 2001, early 2002? Don't know if that amazing and complex revelation is that big of a deal really, might not matter at all. I still don't see what the hubbub is with the Patriot act, I really haven't seen any major abuses that led me to believe that Emperor Bush has fully assumed power and imprisoned congress and all dissidents. As far as I understand it, the Patriot didn't do anything new, it merely extended certain legal tools that were already pre-existing to cover "terrorism" type stuff, and at the same time most of the really bad provisions have been struck down as unconstitutional. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. Last edited by Mojo_PeiPei; 10-26-2005 at 08:27 AM..

10-26-2005, 04:30 AM	#2 (permalink)
alansmithee Junkie	I don't see the problem. Was someone unjustly arrested? Or is this just about some surveillance? And as for reading e-mails after a warrant expired, I have a secret to tell: in schools across the nation, there are unauthorized searches being performed daily as teachers read student's letters without their students' permission! Oh, the humanity! Where's Amnesty International when we need them? All FOIA is allow people with too much time on their hands to get worked up about insignificant details.

10-26-2005, 08:51 AM	#10 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	The USA Patriot act officially was voted in on this day, in 2001. It expanded the ability for the FBI and others to remain covert on 15 types of investigation. In the case of surveillance, it was legal when started, but would have required dislcosure after a certain period of time. The FBI hid behind the act to continue it. Like you said, it didn't do anything new. It extended certain legal "tools", like wiretapping at will without disclosure. __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

10-26-2005, 09:00 AM	#11 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	So what happened to this guy? Club Gitmo? Jail? or is he living his life like every other american? __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

10-27-2005, 04:26 AM	#15 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	Rabblerousing liberals? Sheep? Is this the part where I call right leaning people nazis or neanderthals? That radical liberal Dick Armey is the man who suggested that USA Patriot should have a sunset provision. All your protest against criticism of this act is akin the Oz saying to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

11-08-2005, 05:17 PM	#20 (permalink)
SERPENT7 Crazy Location: Gold country!	The real problem with the patriot act, is that it makes it LEGAL to do many of the things the FBI has always done in the past. There can no longer be any legal action taken if they step out of line. (For instance it immunizes the DOD, DHS, and FBI employees from being covered by the Whistle-blower act, which was designed to PROTECT employees from retribution for exposing wrong-doing by the people they work for.)