Seriously, I'd love to see some talk-show radio conservative spin this as no-big-deal.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/09/security.letters/index.html


---

the patriot act is just not a good idea

I don't understand how people EVER thought it was a good idea.

They might as well have sold it with Bill of Rigbhts doormats so we can walk all over it like the government did.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

The initial draft was radically altered from the one that was passed.

There were house and senate republicans that found out only after the sunset clause was moved back that found out it actually violated the Bill of Rights.


(Before anyone gets up in arms, it has prima fascia been found to violate ammendments, and this was the instance that civil rights attorneys were waiting for.)



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

The i nitital draft violated the bill of rights...the revision made a doormat out of them.

If i wanted security, i'd buy a blue blanket.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

The draft that was more or less agreed upon before Pat.Act was not the one that was passed into law, and it didn't trample on the BoR quite like this one.

And it had nowhere near the steam-rolling power that PA II would have had.

I haven't found the bill drafts yet (they're not kept in Congress' legislative DB), but this is an interesting compendium: http://www.eff.org/Censorship/Terrorism_militias/




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Just my two cents here, but as someone who will be deploying on a regular basis for what will hopefully be a long career (granted that nothing will happen to me) my view on it is this: it can be misused, and probably will be, this is after all human beings we are talkin about. However, if you have no family, business or friendship connection with certain people or countries, and you have consistent communication through e-mail, phone or snail-mail with said people/countries, I want to know why. I want to know what is being said, why it is being said, and what your connection or need to communicate with these people is. These connections are a big deal. I was denied a top-secret classification ability simply by being related to someone I have not come in contact with or spoken to in several years. National security is a big deal, and I would give my life for it. Misusing legislation is inexcusable, by all means it is, however information on certain subjects must be obtained in order to live freely in our nation.

National Insecurity is a bigger deal.

It sucks that you got denied TS clearance (wait until you have to get compartmentalized security clearance... just pray they use lube... don't ask). But it's none of anyone else's business how my communications are routed. I can get clearance to whatever I need to get, and unless I agree to be surveilled (such as at work), or, a court of law warrants that I should be surveilled including my communications, the gov't can just butt the hell out.

I use PGP and encryption when I send emails to people like my stock broker, or someone that I trust or someone that I feel I want to talk to without everything I say able to be scrutinized.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
It was true in 1755, it's true today.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

DJ: I'll take my chances with the terrorists. It's tyranny that gets my goat.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

Anyone that is worried about the Patriot Act is for lack of a better word, ignorant. I wholeheartedly mean absolutely NO offense to anyone on here and I am not trying to make this a big thing, but if you have any worries about the Patriot Act then you really just don't know anything about it. I didn't even look at the website but if it is what I am thinking it is, the National Security Letters, there were something like 25 indescrepancies......out of something like 250,000. The media doesn't broadcast that, but if you do a little research you will find the truth. This is much more reasonable, i mean out of that many you are bound to have a few mix ups.

Secondly, the Patriot Act allows federal agencies to do NOTHING that they couldn't do before. Look back to 1979 and you will find some interesting legislations on government procedures for wiretaps and such. The Patriot Act simply restates these as ACCEPTABLE means, and also outlines an intergovernmental distribution of the information that is obtained so that those working on a domestic case can see if there are any international cases that may have something in common. Don't believe me? Do some research and READ THE DAMN PATRIOT ACT. Please don't bitch about something when you have NO clue what it even says and you don't know the background information. The media twists and turns the Patriot Act into something its not. AGAIN, IT SIMPLY RESTATES PREVIOUSLY OUTLINED METHODS FOR INFORMATION GATHERING AND OUTLINES NEW PROCEDURES ON HOW THAT INFORMATION IS TO BE SHARED BETWEEN AGENCIES.

What's more, the FBI, CIA, NSA MUST ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY have a court order to do wiretaps, read e-mails, CHECK LIBRARY RECORDS (thats a big one that makes me laugh because i hear people talk about it like it actually happens to them, like the government has enough agents to send out to do that kinda @!#$). What is needed for a court order? A little thing called PROBABLE CAUSE. Again, fully outlined in the Patriot Act, go ahead and read it like I did, then go take a class on it and talk to FBI agents (also as i did) before you say anything about it.

One thing I MAY be able to give you is that agents ARE allowed to put a stop to an immediate threat without a court order. However, said agent has only 48 hours after their actions have been committed to submit all neccessary documents to the court for approval. Should this not happen there are serious repercussions. So just so you know everyone should research any and everythign they hear, see, read and come up with their own findings, this is not only true for this, but even for al gore's utility bills. I just thought id throw that in there so everyone would know that im not just some conservative @!#$...

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/

This was 1978, i originally said 1979, oops. Anyway...they could always get you, now its just in view of public and in writing and people misunderstand it...

Anyone who feels the Patriot Act is a good idea and does not violate the most basic principals this country was founded on is completely ignorant and probably mentally retarded.

Any person who freely gives up there liberty for security deserves neither.


sig not found

Harrison Crow wrote:Anyone that is worried about the Patriot Act is for lack of a better word, ignorant. I wholeheartedly mean absolutely NO offense to anyone on here and I am not trying to make this a big thing, but if you have any worries about the Patriot Act then you really just don't know anything about it. I didn't even look at the website but if it is what I am thinking it is, the National Security Letters, there were something like 25 indescrepancies......out of something like 250,000. The media doesn't broadcast that, but if you do a little research you will find the truth. This is much more reasonable, i mean out of that many you are bound to have a few mix ups.

Secondly, the Patriot Act allows federal agencies to do NOTHING that they couldn't do before. Look back to 1979 and you will find some interesting legislations on government procedures for wiretaps and such. The Patriot Act simply restates these as ACCEPTABLE means, and also outlines an intergovernmental distribution of the information that is obtained so that those working on a domestic case can see if there are any international cases that may have something in common. Don't believe me? Do some research and READ THE DAMN PATRIOT ACT. Please don't bitch about something when you have NO clue what it even says and you don't know the background information. The media twists and turns the Patriot Act into something its not. AGAIN, IT SIMPLY RESTATES PREVIOUSLY OUTLINED METHODS FOR INFORMATION GATHERING AND OUTLINES NEW PROCEDURES ON HOW THAT INFORMATION IS TO BE SHARED BETWEEN AGENCIES.

What's more, the FBI, CIA, NSA MUST ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY have a court order to do wiretaps, read e-mails, CHECK LIBRARY RECORDS (thats a big one that makes me laugh because i hear people talk about it like it actually happens to them, like the government has enough agents to send out to do that kinda @!#$). What is needed for a court order? A little thing called PROBABLE CAUSE. Again, fully outlined in the Patriot Act, go ahead and read it like I did, then go take a class on it and talk to FBI agents (also as i did) before you say anything about it.

One thing I MAY be able to give you is that agents ARE allowed to put a stop to an immediate threat without a court order. However, said agent has only 48 hours after their actions have been committed to submit all neccessary documents to the court for approval. Should this not happen there are serious repercussions. So just so you know everyone should research any and everythign they hear, see, read and come up with their own findings, this is not only true for this, but even for al gore's utility bills. I just thought id throw that in there so everyone would know that im not just some conservative @!#$...

You can't call anyone ignorant when you didn't even bother to read the link. THAT's called willfull ignorance.

You typed three paragraphs for nothing because none of what you said actually is relevant to hows or the whys it was misused. If you did, you might of noticed the FBI director already admitted they screwed up big time in the article...

"Mueller took responsibility for the FBI's problems and said steps had been taken to eliminate them.

"I am the person responsible, I am the person accountable, and I am committed to ensuring that we correct these deficiencies and live up to these responsibilities," he said."

Talk about blindly defending things. Geez!!


---

like i said, do some research, there were only 23 discrepancies out of hundreds of thousands. What he is saying is that there were problems but he is takign responisibility for htem. Its all taken out of context. He is talkign about problems, yea, 23 problems out of thousands, big @!#$ deal. Wow, i cant believe you people, the same hippie liberal bastanrds that will be bitchign the next time we get hit hard and saying we didnt do enough...lol wow, you people are placed precisely where the media wants you. I know what the link is about though, its about those national security letters for one bc thats the hot topic right now, and even if it wasnt the general information i provided stands as a testament to the general population concerning the patriot act...

As for the other three paragraphs that i typed, that was for people like protomec, do some research, what liberties exactly does the patriot act violate? They cannot simply watch any person they feel like watching just because they feel like it. There has to be proof that there is SOME connetction with a terriost or terrorist nation...You should me where it says they can do otherwise...you show me where your basic constitutional rights are violated...how can they get you and i promise ill be able to prove to you that its just not true...

Talk about blindly defending things, wow, again, go read the actual patriot act script before you blindly defend your ignorant position

^^^And you don't believe that can't be fabricated? Hell, for all I know i could be Talking to my g/f when she's overseas, and she calls Bush's latest bad descsion "Idiotic", and then i could be claimed to be in contact with a terrorist.

I have much less to fear from terrorists than I do against our government. The sad state of affairs is that it's the same everywhere.

Even so, i don't believe the bill of rights or Habeus corpus should be preemptively suppsended for the white elephant of "security".

Oh, and before you call me a "liberal hippie", Do i think we could have prevented 9/11? nope. Do i think we didn't do enough? yes. I think Bush should have extricated his texican ass out of that elementary school and *gasp* DONE HIS @!#$ JOB!!!!! Everything besides that is IMHO window dressing for just the faults of this, or any government. I seriously doubt that Canada would have done better if they flew it into the CN tower...but I think Jean Chrétien would have extricated himself from whatever or whoever he was doing and wouldn't done his job.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

its not that i dont see what youa re saying, i truely do, but i mean i think this is at least a step in the right direction. He and others are trying to open up the lines of communication so eradicate the breakdown that happened last time. And i understand people are scared that htey are going to violated as far as their rights, but the levels this stuff must go through, the levels of security, checks, balances, and finally elected judges making the final call on who can be tracked is extreme. One of the agents i talked to said "If you are being watched you will know it because you will know you are doing something wrong, to the point where you would think its insane if we werent watching you. " And my point moreso is not the the partiot act is the end all, but more that the media distorst almost everything like my point with al gore. He is having solar panels installed and he also usesother resources which are more expensive because they are reuseable. I just get irritated when people outright bash something and dont knwo what its all about.. Being skeptical such as you are is one thing, but to compeltely trash it and to not know anything is another as some other have done. Not so much on here but just people in general.

I completely agree that things such as the patriot act open up doors that could make it easier for the government to invade our privacy and take away our liberties, thats why i feel so strongly that people should read the patriot act, and completelyunderstand what can and cant be done. If it is not fully understoon then noone wins. We dont gain the intelligence on the terrorists or we lose civil liberties. We MUST find a happy medium inbetween.

Harrison Crow wrote:the same hippie liberal bastanrds

Seriously. Do you guys read from a script? Is this standard for you?

Seems to me your favorite talk-show radio host misrepresented the facts to you.

1 - The FBI itself reported 26 violations.
2 - The FBI underreported the # of letters used in total, the inspector general said. There were 22% MORE requests than the 143,000+ plus the FBI claimed to use.
3 - The inspector general, in an inspection of just a sample of 293 letters, found violations in 17 of them.
http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/s0703b/final.pdf
(^^ that's the Department of Justice Website, btw)

Again, you can attempt to downplay all you want. Arlen Specter doesn't agree with you..

Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the FBI's apparent misuse of national security letters was "part of an ongoing process where the federal authorities are not really sensitive to privacy."





---

You are looking at the numbers of those indescrepanices and percentages, but not where they come from. There were indescrepancies on how they were logged, not how they were used...

No, #3 is the Inspector General using a sample of 293 and finding 17 violations. That is a separate issue from the under reporting of their use the IG also found. The FBI under reported the use AND misuse.

Let me put it to you this way. The FBI self-reported 26 violations out of 143,000. The IG found 17 violations out of 293.

Huge, huge difference.


---

Still, do we even want to open a door for a reduction of liberty? Do we want to give a group of people who will do what they can to stay in power a loophole to get a tighter stranglehold on it?

I don't. Even if the Patriot Act is just restating laws and policies already passes, those laws and policies should be revoked due to going against the constitution. Simple. The last thing I want is my g/f's and my conversation taped last night and being listened into without a warrant and the excuse being, "we were looking for terrorists."

Your agent buddy, while correct and stating policy, obviously has to see that this can, and has, been abused.

The only thing i could hope for would be if a citizen was unlawfully targeted by this, that there would be a justifiable, jet extreme form of punishment for the one that made the call to harrass them.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

the thing is though that there are such a deep system of checks and balances that you arent goign to be taped talking to just ur gf for being overseas. It has to be a known terrorist or a KNOWN TERRORIST NATION. there is no way that they would intentionally liisten to you and your girlfriend is what im saying. There just arent enough agents to go around and do thigns like that. THere are really only a little over 3300 agents for the whole country, not counting cia, nsa, or jttf agent, but fbi is the main leader. Also, i dont wnat it used unlawfully against me either, but as i said, we have to understand the law and be willing to find a happy medium so that we may maintain the way of life we have today. If we dont know exactly what is being done we waste our time following things that really dont matter instead of pushing the imporatnt stuff....

also, I still say that those numbers are reporting different things...i finally went back and red that report, it even SAYS that there were not intentional misuses of the letters. Like i said, those discrepancies you are talking about Origninally the media was making this all out to be something like "there were flagrant misuses of these letters on prupose to hurt the general american public"...thats all i was tryign to point to is that this is nto at ALL the case. There are indescrepancies between how things were logged, and procedures taken, but look at it this way, you are a great driver but every once in awhile you forget to use your turn signal. That doesnt mean you are a horrible person and should have your license revoked, it just means you need to tighten up the belt and start watching mroe carefully. This whole situation with national security letters is still evolving. THe patriot act has allowed many more people access to these letters and there is something of a learning curve...watch the nubmbers go down in coming years

also, sorry about spelling, i just had lasik the other day and im in a hurry lol have a great day guys...

Harrison, have you ever read the text of the USA PATRIOT Act? You do realize that the checks and balances that are supposed to be there have been removed?

- Pen Registers/Trap and Trace device proof burdens more or less removed
- No warrant phone taps/roving wire taps,
- "Delayed Notification" (sneak and peek) Search warrants
- FISA requirements for international wire taps effectively nill.

These are the top 3 offenders, there are more. The fact is not that they would decide to listen in, it's that they have the power to do so, and bypass legal protections and burdens of proof, as well as have greater protections against legal recourses that you have to gain reparations.

As for not intentionally misusing powers, no one ever intentionally exceeds the speed limits... ever. Everyone is a good little driver at all times, and when they happen to go over the limit it's the wind's fault. Intentions mean very little in the case of violations or bypassing diminished burdens of proof, the simple fact that they have happened (in any number) is something that should NEVER have happened.

With the utmost gravity, I urge you to read (when you get up to it ) the full text of the patriot act, and weigh it against the pre-patriot act protections you had. Things got done, and were beyond constitutional reproach before Patriot Act when you understand that the agencies most at fault for the lapses that led to 9/11/01 didn't have legal hurdles to go through, they refused to share information of their own accord. The HSA was created to become an information clearing house, but they're just another layer to an already thick and complicated legal morass. One of the big things you didn't see pre-Patriot Act was the unprecedented use of Extraordinary Rendition.





Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Point taken about intentionally misusing powers, actually i kinda thought i alluded to that in a previous post, but if i didnt then im saying it now, i get that part. But i have read the whole patriot act and understand the framework it sets up. When were warrants for phone taps removed? can you please show me wwhere a legislation was passed that says that an agency doesnt need a warrant, and thus some proof of wrongdoing, to obtrain a warrant for a phone tap. I spoke of delayed notification in my first post. THis doesnt mean that they can just do whatever they want, there are strict guidelines within which they may be done. It isnt like say the fbi can just go listen in on a phone call because they feel like it. It works like this:

Should an agency get information of an imminent danger to an american citizen they are allowed to intervent to stop the situation. HOWEVER, within 48 hours the same paperwork that would have been needed should the situation had not been imminent and time had been available to allow the paperwork to be processed, it must still be submitted to a court for approval. Thus an individual agent would be held resposible for their actions. Do you think these people WANT to lose their jobs? Im not sure what you mean by the pen registers/trap and trace but the last one, the FISA requirements....this is true, most of those have been effectively removed, FOR KNOWN TERRORISTS, CELLS, OR NATIONS. Ive said this three times now. An agency has an easier time now than they did before to track those consorting with KNOWN terrorits or terrorist nations. The same checks and balances still appy here though. The individual field agents still have a superior and have a set of guidelines to follow. They do so because they do not want to lose their job.

with all due respect, i have read the whole patriot act and i have never see "that they have the power to do so, and bypass legal protections and burdens of proof, as well as have greater protections against legal recourses". again, please show me where this is stated. I am not sure what you mean by telling me to read the actwhen im up to it, ive read it...and like i said, i undersatnd the background and framework behind it. You are right abou tone thing, there were problems within individual agencies. The international task force member and the domestic task force member in many cases sat right next to one another, but were not allowed to share the information they each had. This is what the patriot act aims to eliminate, those types of barriers.

Again, im terribly sorry that i cant type, i still cant see very well lol,

Warrants are not removed for phonetaps, but Roving Phone taps (meaning you tap one phone #, and then the connecting phone # also gets tapped) are the problem. The originating warrant can be for a suspected terrorist, but if they call for a pizza, and then someone at the pizza place calls his bookie to place a bet, the last call is able to be legally tapped because it's an on-going investigation and that info is able to be passed along.

The delayed notification warrant is fine, but if they don't find anything, they're not required to produce the warrant.. this is the kind of thing that the Gestapo and KGB (and even the current FSB) did... The burden of proof for these warrants are diminished as well. The problem is: if you're a terrorism suspect or person of interest, and you are doing something else that is illegal (even if it's as simple as selling things without paying the owed tax) all materials with regards to any ongoing criminal activities are legally obtained. Whereas before the patriot act became law, it was required that a new investigation regarding each separate criminal activity be created because the interpretation of the search and seizure laws were very narrow, you couldn't have a drug investigation encompass illegal betting and a pimping investigation.

The Patriot act is a great idea, when used for the intent of rooting out terrorism, but realistically: Terrorism suspects can burrow underground at the mere whiff of an investigation, so realistically, the only people the law is useful against is Americans. The thing is that Patriot act's main text is intentionally cryptic... when you change "AN" to "ANY" you open up a gigantic morass (for phone taps), the sneak and peak warrants were created with one short paragraph. There's more, but, I'm a little pressed for time right now I'm about to go on a cruise, and just checking my email and posting before we ship out.

I'll check back on Sunday




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.