Slashdot Mirror
U.S. House Votes to Extend Patriot Act
Rick Zeman writes "In the wake of today's 4 dud bombings in London, the U.S. House has voted to extend the Patriot Act by a vote of 257-171. This includes 10-year extensions to the two other provisions set to expire on December 31, one allowing roving wiretaps, and another allowing searches of library and medical records."
Check this webpage for the record of who voted what, whenever they get around to putting it online. That's what I was linked to by my local representative's site.
Download the three episodes from the Internet Archive.org and SEE THEM.
Even if you do not agree with his conclusion, the historical background will give you a far clearer picture of the reality of the situation.
A competing bill also has been approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which would give the FBI expanded powers to subpoena records without the approval of a judge or grand jury. That ensured further Senate talks on the terrorism-fighting measure. The House legislation will also have to be reconciled with whatever emerges from the Senate.
So, let's use this time effectively. Get the word out, and contact your senator. The PATRIOT Act will probably pass, but we can at least try to get ammendments to it that will protect civil liberties while still allowing different law enforcement agencies to work with each other. While I would prefer not to have the PATRIOT act pass, we'd be better off with a bill that protects privacy and prevents racial profiling.
Personally, I think we should allow it to expire and start over. Many bits are useful, but let's have more emphasis on protecting American rights/liberties. And come on - who named this thing? What an awful, divisive name; it implies that anyone who opposes it is unpatriotic, which is complete horseshit. Name the act for what it does, not for cheap political points.
Electric Monkey Pants
I think you are looking for this quote...
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." -- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
Hitler did not say that, one of his right hand men, Hermann Goering said it at Nuremberg. That is a good quote if you use it correctly. Read more here.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
If you're going to troll, you could at least site properly.
"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." - Hermann Goering, not Hitler.
This one has been quoted (and misquoted) a lot these days. Snopes
My Rep voted against it. How did your reps vote?
If they voted differently than you had wished, pick up the phone tomorrow, and let them know. Tell people you meet. Do something. Don't just bitch on slashdot.
(Unless you can't vote in the US, at which point bitching is about all you can do about this latest vote.)
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Link I'll stay silent, but here's just one of many many links.
In Howard Zinn's book "Declarations of Independence," he cites a speech by a student at the Harvard Law School in the early 1960's given to a large group of parents and alumni. The student was speaking about current events, and said,
"The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might. And the republic is in danger. Yes! Danger from within and without. We need law and order! Without law and order our nation cannot survive."
The crowd applauded the words of the young speaker, and when the crowd hushed, he continued.
"These words were spoken in 1932 by Adolf Hitler."
However, whenever anybody is asked to site a case in which some poor schmuck actually got shafted by these laws, they suddenly fall silent.
The first rule of Patriot Act is don't talk about Patriot Act.
Seriously though, the nasty thing about this stuff is that it all goes to an oversight court, the dealings of which are all secret.
For example, when the ACLU sued the government related to these laws, they couldn't even talk about the trial in public, not because it was ongoing, but because it was classified.
So no, you don't hear about the abuses, because they are illegal to talk about, as that would be revealing a secret.
In other news, the government is arresting and holding american citizens on american soil and declairing that they can keep them in jail forever without trial. Not scary at all, keep it moving, nothing to see here.
If you don't like it, here's an idea that isn't "STFU" or "move".
Write to your congressman or senators, who were elected to represent you and can only represent you if they hear from you, and politely tell them that you disagree with this. Ask them to consider changing their minds.
A letter can make a difference.
Ah, you know what? I think we need more links:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. A rebuttal for some sense of "objectivity", whatever that means.
Here's the list.
But here's a summary:
94% of Republicans voted for the act. They have no morals.
21% of Democrats voted for the act. They have no strength.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
"However, whenever anybody is asked to site a case in which some poor schmuck actually got shafted by these laws, they suddenly fall silent."
Actually, no, they don't.
Much of the Guantanamo criticism is related to these laws used to snatch people off the street and hold them without charge - including actual US citizens. And while the courts HAVE stomped on the Feds in a number of specific cases, there has been no real attempt by the courts to control the Feds by declaring much of this stuff unconstitutional.
Also, there have been articles in the press about a number of ordinary criminal cases - and even cases where there was no criminal intent at all - which have nothing to do with terrorism where these laws were inappropriately applied.
OTOH, this has been the trend for decades now, so it's no surprise to me that law enforcement is striving for more and more heavy-handed power. This is the nature of law enforcement (and the state itself), as any one who has done time can tell you, or anyone who has ever read any history or real-life stories about law enforcement.
Cops are assholes. Period. It has nothing to do with "a few rotten apples in the barrel" - the barrel itself is riddled with maggots. Always has been, always will be - until we Transhumans run a nanotech broom handle up their asses.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Yup, we also had a Canadian Citizen(!) being deported from the USA to Syria, where he could be tortured until he confessed to whatever-the-fuck the US wanted him to confess to: http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/10/16/arar021016
Oh well, what the hell...
We also have David Hicks, an Australian being held without trial at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba since he was picked up in afganistan in 2001.
09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
Every time the government uses an excuse like this to restrict the freedom of Americans...
...the terrorists win just a little bit more.
Every time an American citizen is held indefinitely by the courts without trial or proof of guilt...
Every time a hate crime is committed against a Moslem...
Every time the government suspends its laws in the name of the War on Terror...
(Yeah, I know it'll be modded "redundant." It's just something that's been on my mind for awhile, and now seemed like a good time to say it.)
-- The reason it's called the right wing? Irony.
His name is no longer Jose Padilla.
= article&node=&contentId=A28493-2002Jun10¬Found= true
... what the food?
It is Abdullah Al Muhajir. He is an Al Qaeda associate. An associate of his in Pakistan is in jail for terrorist activities (which means he's a serious hard guy). He is alleged to have taken up arms against the US and to conspire with bin Laden to kill Americans with a dirty bomb. Traveling from Pakistan terrorist madrassa to Chicago.
Al Muhajir is a hard core, nasty Islamic terrorist. His avowed aim is to kill millions of Americans.
"A former Latin Kings gang member in Chicago, al Muhajir served time in juvenile hall in connection with a gang killing and other incidents in Chicago. During a later stay in a Florida prison as an adult, he converted to a militant form of Islam, law enforcement sources said. Officials said he is married to a Middle Eastern woman, identified by one law enforcement source as an Egyptian."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename
According to the Washington Post (that conservative anti-liberty rag), he had been under observation in Pakistan by the FBI and CIA for terrorist activity. His buddy is in jail in Pakistan. Google. It's your friend. You might try it sometime. www.bugmenot for WaPo registration info.
So, let's review:
A. Juvie record, involved in gang killing.
B. Converts to Islam in the slam, a militant terrorist-oriented version of Islam.
C. Marries an Egyptian.
D. Hangs out in terrorist madrassas in Pakistan for
Yup. I'd want to get on that guy's side too.
Seriously, does the term "idiotarian" mean anything to you? Google it's your friend you should try it sometime.
The context of that quote, FYI, was that the owner of gwbush.com put up a site criticizing his presidency bid in '99, titled "Just Say No to Former Cocaine User for President." The exact quote is "There ought to be limits to freedom."
2 bush1bushsite.htm
http://www.rtmark.com/more/articles/bushdallas052
you can have my violent video games when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Prime UID Club
Here are a few of my favorites... it's almost as if the founding fathers were speaking of this very bill.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. " Ben Franklin
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." James Madison
"It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad." James Madison
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." Thomas Jefferson
If you want to change things, visit http://www.lp.org/
Anyone who doubts this claim, read Osama's own words on the topic:
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/pport/web/ireland/Ful l_Story/did-sg46g7Ks0cvBEsg7OWirIStPSk.asp
And while where at it, America has had an Australian citizen extrodited to America for pirating software... in Australia!
I suppose you also believe that the USA PATRIOT Act allows the FBI to perform a mass library record search without the approval of a judge. Libraries aren't even mentioned in the entire text of the law, and the language people blow out of proportion would only allow the search of a single person's records on approval of a federal judge with respect to a specific ongoing investigation. Please try to verify things you read on Slashdot before passing it on, including what I just said.
Not that I disagree with you that things could quickly get out of hand. I assume because you feel so strongly on the matter that you have contacted your Congressman to support H.R. 1076: Detention of Enemy Combatants Act , which acknowledges the need to detain enemy combatants who are U.S. citizens, but enacts specific requirements on the duration, conditions, and judicial review of such detentions.
This space intentionally left blank.
So he'd like to silence people who don't want him elected? Wow. That makes the quote even worse.
The Reichstag fire is widely believed to have been started by the Nazis themselves, as a pretext for declaring a state of emergency, reducing civil rights and starting an anti-communist campaign. From Wikipedia:
At Nuremberg, General Franz Halder claimed Göring had confessed to setting the fire: "At a luncheon on the birthday of Hitler in 1942, the conversation turned to the topic of the Reichstag building [fire] and its artistic value. I heard with my own ears when Göring interrupted the conversation and shouted: 'The only one who really knows about the Reichstag is I, because I set it on fire!' With that he slapped his thigh with the flat of his hand."
Some people believe (rightly or wrongly) that the US government were somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks - either by direct action or by lack of action - precisely to have a pretext for 1) reduction of civil rights, and 2) launching a large-scale military campaign in the middle east. I'm not saying this is correct, but it sounds a bit less far-fetched when knowing that stuff like this has happened several times before.
So he'd like to silence people who don't want him elected? Wow. That makes the quote even worse.
Yeah, well, I thought clarifying an incorrect quote in the parent was always a good thing, but whoever modded me overrated is probably feeling pretty good about himself.
you can have my violent video games when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Prime UID Club
Even worse, my representative publically stated that he would vote against renewing the provisions that were set to sunset (even though he originally voted for the Patriot Act), and then he voted to make them permanent. Lying scumbag is indeed how I feel about him at the moment.
Let me tell you, he had better have a very, very good explanation for his actions.
Otherwise, I wonder if there is any provision to impeach or otherwise remove a representative in the House?
Be a PATRIOT--because the only thing we have to fear is the lack thereof.
The Constitution doesn't grant rights; it recognizes them and proscribes limits to government actions accordingly. The Founding Fathers knew that they couldn't explicitly list every right that people have so they provided the Ninth Amendment, which states:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
More info here.
These (article 12). Please realize that everyone does not live in the USA...
"It is a good divine that follows his own instructions" - Portia, The Merchant of Venice
I am hardly "right-wing", and in fact consider myself a "classical liberal", who is pro-gay-marrage and sexual freedom, who is pro-choice (on abortion, but also on just about everything else anyone wants to do to their own body), who is against the war on drugs, against imperialism, against racism, and I want the strictest seperation between church and state. And I am certainly fair minded if you mean that I hate both the "left" and the "right" equally (which is a total false dichotomy... real political thought should not fall on a one-dimential spectrum). But to have me attack the right-wing on Slashdot would be pointless, because the politics on Slashdot clearly lean to the left.
You should have done a point-by-point rebuttal. I would have liked to hear someone on the left say something other than "you just don't understand, do you?". Perhaps it would have waken you up to see that the left has betrayed it's own liberal ideals, and has embrassed statism and totalitarianism. Look for any problem that might exist, and the lefist will give you a solution that involves massive government. Health care? Solution is to put health care under the control of the government. Polution? Massive regulation by the government. Education? A massive centralized government controlled education system. Violent Video Games? We need the government to regulate them. The ideaology of the left nowadays is simply the ideaology of the supreme infallible state.
The left have been creating a leviathan state that has control of almost every aspect of our lives, and want that state control over our lives to increase... and then they want to complain when G. W. Bush uses that state power to his own destructive ends. Power swings back an forth, and the Frankenstien state that you thought you could control is now out of your hands. Had you stuck to a TRUE liberal stance, supporting individual rights, supporting decentralized government, supporting checks and balances and limitations to government power, supporting strict adherence to our constitution, G. W. Bush would not have the tools to do what he is doing, period.