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."

Comments

It's for the children!

[00Monkey]

Gotta love the excuses that cost us our freedoms...

Re:It's for the children!

[bryan8m]

Personally, I care more about my freedoms and privacy rights than I do the FBI's power to perform extensive wire taps and searches without carefully considered warrants.

Re:It's for the children!

[TheWanderingHermit]

However, whenever anybody is asked to site a case in which some poor schmuck actually got shafted by these laws, they suddenly fall silent.

And for an ignorant statement like this, a post is scored insightful?

For starters, here's an obvious case: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8629443/>Jose Pidilla. He is an American citizen, who has been held for 4 years (since 2001). The government says he's a terrorist, but they've never proved it. The government was told to either prove he was a terrorist in a trail or to let him go in 90 days. That was way more than 90 days ago, and he's still being held. The government has appealed that ruling, saying they don't have to prove anything and can hold him forever.

So there's one case: An American citizen, held by his own government, with no way to prove his innocence and the government refuses to prove his guilt. His lawyer has stood before the Appeals Court and literally asked that his client be put on trial.

So how would you, if you were an American citizen, and you were in jail for 4 years (and it'll go on longer), waiting and hoping "that the courts would take the opportunity to sort it out"?

There was another case, the name of which I cannot remember, where a court clerk accidently released the wrong documents and it was discovered there was a John Doe who had been held for months. Nobody knew his name, nobody knew the charges, he had not been given a lawyer, and nobody was notified he was being held. The ACLU tried to get permission to speak to him and represent him. I don't remember for sure, but last I heard, I think they were denied -- so we have a John Doe who may or may not be a citizen, being held without anyone knowing who it is and without any of his family having any idea what has happened to him.

The PATRIOT act is the same thing as the House Un-American Activities Committee. Whenever you hear any politician stumping for something that has such an "all-American" name that there is no way any reasonable American could stand against it, then you know it means nothing but trouble for us. Anytime someone has to wrap a group or law in the flag so they can say anyone opposing it is unpatriotic does not have protecting freedom and the Constitution in mind.

For anyone watching the news, and just keeping up with the headlines, the cases above would have been clear. The PATRIOT act has, and will be used to subvert the Constitution. Do you *really* believe you can give the government that much power and nobody in charge will use it?

Re:It's for the children!

[DrMrLordX]

The Republican party's interest in "state's rights" has been rather arbitrary and limited for years. They will fight empowering the federal government when it suits their constituents. They will empower the government when it suits their constituents. Replace 'constituents' with 'campaign contributors' as you please.

Re:It's for the children!

[TheWanderingHermit]

So you say.

The gov has yet to present proof. At this point, all that happened was that they declared him (a US citizen) an enemy combatent. According to the PATRIOT act, that gives them the authority to hold him forever, without even having to prove he is an enemy combatant.

The point is a US citizen can be declared an enemy combatant without proof and without *any* kind of trial or hearing. Once this is done, it's over -- unless this case is decided favorably by the Supreme Court. As it is now, I could be declared an enemy combatant (maybe because someone in the gov doesn't like my posts), I'd be put in custody. If --that's IF-- I'm lucky, I'll be able to contact my family and tell them what's happened. As it is now, though, they could declare me an enemy combatant, lock me up, and nobody would know where I was or what happened to me.

It's not just about his rights -- it's about protecting the rights of ALL citizens equally, so the gov can't do to him, you, or me, without following the law.

Re:It's for the children!

[LordNimon]

Timothy McVeigh was a real terrorist who was way worse than Padilla, and yet McVeigh got a fair trail. Evidence was presented in a court, he was convicted and executed. What makes Padilla an "enemy combatant" when McVeigh was just a criminal?

Re:It's for the children!

[finkployd]

Feel free to let him go. I know I like dirty bombs going off in my neighborhood.

I happen to have evidence that you are a child pornographer. It is secret evidence, however, and I will not charge you with a specific crime or even let you know what we claim to know about you. Do you think parents want perverts like you roaming the streets their children play on? Of course not. You need to be held indefinitely.

I'm sure some whiner will claim that this is unfair and that you should be let go, but I know I do not want child pornographers getting off in my neighborhood.

See how that works? No evidence needed :)

Finkployd

Re:It's for the children!

[tokabola]

I've tried to tell people about the American citizens being held without due process, but most people simply refuse to believe it. I've even given examples, they claim I got the info from some radical newspaper or website and it's not true - even when I can point to legitimate newspapers and magazines they won't believe.

The current powers, of which the Bush administration is just a part, have realized a sad (to me) truth about the American People. The majority of us will happily settle for the illusion of freedom, eagerly believe any lies told us that support that belief, and disbelieve any truths that threaten that illusion.

We don't really care how screwed up things are as long as we can justify our belief that nothing is wrong (and therefore we don't actually need to do anything about it).

Complacency is easy, cheap, and doesn't cut into our beer and TV time.

The "land of the free, and the home of the brave", is not here in America. Here is the land of the sheeple, and the home of cowards afraid to face any unpleasant truth.

While there are many who are true patriots in this country, most don't actually do anything more than vote, if that. The vast majority has never written their congressmen and senators. Hell, most don't even know who their representatives are.

We complain that voting has become a question of the "lesser of two evils", but wouldn't vote for a truly good candidate if he/she wasn't the official Democratic or Republican candidate. Often, in the two main parties, the best choices are weeded out during the primaries, removed from the ballots not by the will of the people, but by the whim of the party elite.

Tommy

Re:It's for the children!

[mrmeval]

Replace republican with democrat as you please.

Re:It's for the children!

[ultranova]

Reading such books is constitutionally guaranteed. Anonymity is not.

In bad old Soviet Russia, you could go and pee on Lenin's statue while shouting "This is what I think of communism ! Lenin, drink my urine ! Down with Stalin !". You would be executed or sent to Siberia for it, but you could do it.

What I'm getting to is that having a right to do something means that you don't suffer negative consequences for doing it. If you do suffer said consequences, your "right" is no more right than our hypothethical russians right to pee on Lenin. And the only way to ensure that there's no negative consequences (such as being noted as potential terrorist by your government) is to make it both possible and legal to use these rights anonymously.

So this is how liberty dies

[Approaching.sanity]

To cheers and thunderous applause.

Re:Fear Wins Again

[FredAkbar]

I was going to say the same thing. The terrorists have won again, not because they killed 50 people with some bus bombings, or 2,000 people with a few planes, but because their random acts of murder make our leaders think that they can make the world a better place by taking away freedoms.

Our governments have taken away far more freedoms from us than the terrorists ever have. Good job, terrorists: mission accomplished.

Re:Allow me to be the first

[Ravatar]

The GOP died decades ago, enjoy your neo-"conservative" agendas and lack of ability to handle finances.

Re:QUESTION FOR ALL LIBERALS

[GrouchoMarx]

Oh yeah, IT HASN'T. Unless your name is Habib and you wear a turbin to work then nobody gives a fvck what you do. I also know that if 9/11 occurred during the presidency of a Democrat you'd be STFUing right about now, you wouldn't even see 100000 crap articles like this on slashdot.

People named Habib who wear turbans to work deserve the same rights under the Constitution as those named Steve. By denying them that right, we are violating the fundamental principles of our society; of MY society. The laws and principles of MY country are being violated, and my fellow citizens (many of whom are named Habib) being denied their rights as citizens.

That anyone in DC even gives such a concept consideration is apauling and offensive.

As for a Democratic president, there were terrorist attacks under the last Democrat. The Bill of Rights was not violated under him the way it is being now. Instead, we had an impeachment hearing about a blow job.

You're right. Under a Democrat, we'd not be having this discussion. We'd be paying attention to a fake scandal cooked up by political hacks in order to cripple him. Welcome to Modern America.

Re:Allow me to be the first

[onwardknave]

I find your sig...
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -- Goethe"
...amusingly prophetic.

Re:Allow me to be the first

[Xabraxas]

Has anyone here has even read the Patriot Act?

Yes I have, and while it may be useful in some parts it definitely takes away some of our civil liberties, like the right to a trial.

Here's a crazy idea... Come up with a better solution to deal with terrorism in a free and open society

No Patiot Act is just as good as having the Patriot Act when it comes to terrorism. The Patriot Act has done nothing to protect us from terrorists since its inception. In fact, the terrorists from 9/11 should have been caught with the existing infrastructure at the time. There really is no need for The Patriot Act to catch terrorists.

And if you think that the US is no longer a free and open society, remember that in many countries around the world, you would be hunted down, arrested and maybe even executed for expressing the thoughts that you've so thoughtfully shared in this forum

That's irrelevant. If you want to play that game you can tell the Iraqi people that at least they don't live in North Korea. You can tell Cubans that they're lucky because they don't live in Afganistan. Human rights and civil liberties are not relative, they are absolute. We must constantly safe-gaurd them or they WILL slip away a little at a time.