Slashdot Mirror
Senate Passes Patriot Act Renewal
IAmTheDave writes "The Senate has passed a renewal of the Patriot act, 89-10, after two extensions caused by months of negotiations. The only thing standing in the way of a full renewal is a House vote, expected to pass next week. The renewal comes with some privacy protections attached, however, some worry they are only cosmetic. Some lawmakers who voted for the package acknowledged deep reservations about the power it would grant to any president. "Our support for the Patriot Act does not mean a blank check for the president," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who voted to pass the bill package. Certain lawmakers supported passing the bill even though they were still wary about it - Arlen Specter urged his colleagues to pass it even as he promised to introduce a new measure and hold hearings on how to fix it. Terrorism aside, the bill also includes new legislation that has almost nothing to do with terrorism, like one measure, which would make it harder for illicit labs to obtain ingredients for methamphetamine by requiring pharmacies to sell nonprescription cold medicines only from behind the counter. I know that people like Arlen Specter promise further hearings - but why pass what you know is flawed?"
Think of it as the beta release.
Ha! Gotcha. I meant you, over there burning that DVD torrent you've been downloading for 6 hours. And YOU, you SOB. Stop moving those CD's to your Ipod, thief. Oh, and not to mention YOU, who told you that it was fine to tamper with that TiVo? You say you learned to do it at the Library? NO, NOT THE LIBRARY!!!
All of the crap when purchasing certain cold meds makes me want to start a methlab just out of spite.
I like how the patriot act gets renewed virtually without any coverage, cause Dick Cheney accidently shooting some guy is a much better story than covering an act that restricts our civil liberties. This isn't a troll, i'm just pissed off.
I'm no political science student, but I can assume that it's because of the political consequences that would come with not voting for passing the act - could you imagine how easy it would make life for the campaign manager for a candidate running for office against one of the people who voted against it?
"[Insert Senator Name] hurt American security by not voting for the absolutely vital PATRIOT Act"
Or some nonsense like that.
Not that it makes it right.
In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
Oh wait...
This is already the case in Australia, although its a good idea a lot of pharmacists love to treat you like a criminal when you go in with a head cold to buy a pack of cold and flue tablets. Last year one of them refused to hand my drivers license back and I had to go to collect it from the police station after a few questions, turns out another guy with a name similar to mine had bought a few packets recently from that same chemist. All I wanted was bloody cold and flue tabs!!!!
You know what this means? This is muuch worse than I originally thought. At first I thought the lawmakers were just incompetent last time for not reading the bill, but now I know that the majority of them are downright fucking evil for renewing it.
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
It must be nice to live in a Utopia where all the laws passed are fair and just, and that everyone in the nation agrees with them 100%. Let me know when you find such a place. Our flawed Republic is not it--only better than all the other alternatives.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
...the Senate rules you!
I doubt 10% of Americans understand the Constitution in any depth. This is why our elected officials can take away our freedoms and usurp power.
There are 10 true patriots out there.
ID: the nose did not occur naturally, how would we wear glasses otherwise? (apologies to Voltaire)
Sadly, it's more like 0.1% (although most citizens seem to be pretty familiar with the Simpsons).
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
TV Watches You!
Damn them all. How 'bout this shit!
Feingold reads constitution on Senate floor
t itution_on_Senate_floor_0301.html
http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Feingold_reads_cons
BS. The US government showed incompetence, from the top on down. How easy everyone forgets the information that was available to the government before 9/11:
There were clear signs that Osama Bin Laden was planning an attack in the US, including a presidential briefing.
The above briefing discusses the failed "millenium plot" which was successfully prevented, which was linked to Bin Laden, and which showed the terrorist's interest in airplanes.
The FBI office in Phoenix, AZ received a memo regarding Bin Laden supporters taking flying lessons.
A month later, the FBI actually arrested Moussaoui in Minnesota, but didn't find it necessary to search his computer.
All of this was accomplished without the PATRIOT Act, and nothing in the PATRIOT Act would have made a difference if the same mistakes were made.
Also, the attacks in Madrid and London happened while the Patriot Act was in full force (and the illegal wiretapping was already going on). How come they were not prevented?
This is not a crime-enforcing bill, it is a counter-terrorism bill.
Keep lying to yourself, hopefully one day you will wake up...
The Patriot Act provides the same tools for counter-terrorism officials that anti-narcotics officials have been using for years.
Anti-narcotics officials have been able to conduct secret reconnaissance of what books I've been reading?
Perhaps some of you don't remember 9/11.
No, considering how many times the TV news has delighted in replaying those horrific images, I doubt anyone could possibly forget.
This is not a crime-enforcing bill, it is a counter-terrorism bill.
Look, Stargate SG-1 isn't a good show by any stretch of the imagination (except for that hottie Capt. Carter), but I think it's a bit of a stretch to call it terrorism.
Sure, I may be inconvenienced by the Patriot Act, but nothing is more inconvenient than getting blown up on your way to work, like what tragically happened just this last summer.
You were blown up on your way to work this summer?
I mean, one of the government's few purposes is to keep the people safe. The US government failed to do that on 9/11.
Boy, you got that right. The one piece of advice that the Clinton adminstration gave the incoming Bush adminstration was to watch out for bin Laden. The government doesn't need new tools; they just need to learn how to use the tools they already have.
(This is what I honestly think, don't just down-mod me because you don't agree.)
I'm glad that you assured us that you honestly believe this otherwise I would have thought you were trolling. As for modding you down because someone disagrees with you, that's not necessary. Your arguements are so weak, they deserve to be modded down on their own merits, independent of the political opinions of the moderators.
GMD
watch this
How would the votes be different if they changed the name to something less suggestive than the PATRIOT act? Are the people who use this tactic, or the ones too afraid to stand up to it more pathetic?
President Bush's Signing Statement: All Your Base Are Belong To Us
(His advisors advised him to leave out "You are on the way to destruction. You have no chance to survive, make your time")
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Perhaps some of you don't remember 9/11
Oh, yeah, that was so long ago...
But not as long ago as the famous Ben Franklin quote
Oh! Oh! I know! I know!... because Spain and England aren't subject to US Legislation?!?!
"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
Check out the senate roll call [www.senate.gov] for the vote breakdown. Here's the only 10 senators with enough guts to stand up for america's civil liberties: Akaka (D-HI) Bingaman (D-NM) Byrd (D-WV) Feingold (D-WI) Harkin (D-IA) Jeffords (I-VT) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Murray (D-WA) Wyden (D-OR) I realize some other senators were trying to compromise and we don't live in a perfect society and blah blah blah. But this was just too important of a vote to play political games. If you're against the Patriot Act, these 10 people are the only incumbents who deserve your vote this November!
Which leads me to wonder; where is the disrepancy between what the people want and what the politicians do, the largest; Autharitan China or Democrazied West? Personally, I think the answer is really, really scary.
"" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
------ ACLU press release available here
I think most people going hysterical actually have not read up on what the Patriot Act does in a SERIOUS and ACADEMIC way. Before passing judgement, I recommend you do.
This site has a tremendous amount of quality, specific information. And for those too lazy to read, there's some interesting video at c-span at this link: rtsp://cspanrm.fplive.net/cspan/project/ter/ter071 805_discourse.rm Go about 49 minutes in and listen to Stuart Taylor, a fellow at the Brookings Institute (yes, a left of center policy think tank).
Once you start reading with an open mind, I think that most people will find that extending the Patriot Act provisions is quite a good idea, and that maybe this is why it passed in the Senate 89-10.
It was passed by an overwhelming majority because an overwhelming majority in both parties agree wholeheartedly with pushing the US further towards a fascist state ... and they don't have far to go.
... and those people aren't ordinary workers.
The Democrats are absolutely pathetic. They handed the 2000 election to the Republicans on a silver platter. They rolled over and played dead in the last elections. They made a point of pretending that there was NO opposition to the wars in the middle east. They pushed strong anti-war candidates and slotted in a pro-war candidates. They attacked Bush from the right in arguing that he wasn't doing enough to protect the world from terrorism, win the war in Iraq, etc, etc.
The problem is that the Democrats are a party that defends big business interests - just like the Republicans, only a litle less competent. This is why less than 50% of Americans vote - they realise that it doesn't matter who you vote for, the same people keep winning
Americans should take a good look at their 2-party system, and ponder what democracy is supposed to be about, and consider the difference between the two. It's a huge gap, and it's increasing at an alarming rate. Thank God the US hasn't been so successful at exporting their brand of democracy to the rest of the world.
How many Amendments to the Consitution have not been ignored in the last 6 years?
Name three things that this Administration has done that didn't do exactly opposite of what they were called!
For extra credit: Which hurts more - being shot in the face by Cheney, knowing that you've just been sold down the river, McCarthy-style...or that in some windowless cube farm, someone is being paid by your taxes to determine if your Slash-o-dot post is a threat to this country?
For the win: What is the name of my Investigating Agent?
Answer quick, they're at the door - I want to surprise them.
Some nerds have been on WOW all night and haven't heard this. Thankfully, they're smart and will catch on quick - we'll probably only have to dupe this story once.
welcome our old Overlords
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Everyone here is moaning and groaning about our elected officials and how corrupt they have all become. Out of 100 senators, only 10 had the balls to stand up to this piece of filth and vote no.
I have many other friends who say there is no longer any choice. Democrats or Republicans -- it's all the same thing, they are corrupt and represent their own self-interests, or the interests of corporations or those organizations that can afford to put politcians in their pockets.
But there is another choice. The 2nd amendment allows the American people to throw out their government and replace it with one that works. That's what the right to bear arms is about -- it's about keeping the government from getting so powerful that they take the guns away, because only at the point of a gun can you establish a new government.
The whole point of maintaining a militia is to keep the government honest. When the government is corrupt, WE THE PEOPLE are allowed to overthrow it.
Remember that the President is supposed to protect us from threats foreign and domestic -- that includes protection from the corrupt government itself. When the government isn't of the people, by the people and for the people, it is time the government was replaced with one that is.
If the president has failed in his duties to uphold the Constitution, then he too, must be replaced.
It is time the American people rose up and took back what is theirs.
WE THE PEOPLE, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility.
It is time WE THE PEOPLE joined together and tell King George that we will not be dictated to any more. Shall we lay supine while essential rights and liberties are forever pilfered? No! Give me liberty or give me death!
It is time to take back the country from the hands of criminals.
It is time for the second American Revolution.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Sure I do. Have a got at these features, taken from http://www.omnicenter.org/warpeacecollection/faci
Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
Disdain for the importance of human rights.
Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
Rampant sexism.
A controlled mass media.
Obsession with national security.
Religion and ruling elite tied together.
Power of corporations protected.
Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
Obsession with crime and punishment.
Rampant cronyism and corruption
Fraudulent elections.
Sounds like America to me.
Oh bullshit! I'm not hysterical. I'm just pointing out that your country is fucked up. Deal with it without namecalling.
I think this might apply to you before me. As for standing next to fascists, I tried to when Emperor Dubya came to Canberra, but the fucking police wouldn't let me get anywhere near him. Next time
Well, I think that the part about banning butter knifes to prevent impressionable youngsters from flipping out and committing seppuku is a bit pointless; they'll just use frisbees instead. Also, the part where dropping a spoon in the restaurant is considered as legally same as killing the whole town might be just a little over-pumped.
I guess Bush now has the real ultimate power in the US.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
I will read as much of it as Congress did when it was passed in 2001, i.e. none.
I shouldn't have to read a 200 or however many page bill/law to find out what it is.
If it were 10 pages maybe but I doubt Congress ever reads most of any bill, not just that, that are so long.
Yes I know this is a different law than the older one but I doubt it is much shorter. If you can tell me it will take an hour for the layman, who it affects, to read and understand it I will do so. I don't care what judges will say as I generally won't pass a law using that criteria.
I will vote on it according to if it is moral.
The fact that laws are in legalese, or I assume so as all I have ever seen are in that way, makes it hard to read.
I know I have some trouble with olde English books like Shakespeare or Chaucer.
Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
Protect your country by giving up the civil liberties that the US stood for, once upon a time. Uh. Do you realize that the hypocrisis of the PATRIOT act is one of the reasons why US politics are now so despised in the world, when they were used to be a role model for a free society?
Joachim
People don't write Manifestos any more -- what's going on in this world? [Frank Zappa]
Thinking of that, why isn't there a single republican in that list? You would think that a party that is supposedly about small government and staying out of people's affairs would have at least a few members opposed to the PATRIOT act. Doesn't the republican party contain ANY classical consevatives anymore? Is it really all neo-conservatives (AKA Fascists, in the Mussolini sense of the word)?
Um, no one is every going to look for people that checked out Winnie the pooh; its books say on islam that tend to attract attention. People have a right to be informed and to make their own decisions and you shouldn't come under suspesion just because you read a book the majority doesn't like. Popular speech doesn't need to be protected, its the unpopular speech that does.
It's attitudes like that which terrify me for the future of society. Two world wars and other more local ones were fought with many millions killed from many countries and the one saving grace, that many of us are immensely proud of and justifies that many deaths, is that these people fought and died to protect our rights and way of life.
Now 3000 people are killed on American soil and everyone is running scared saying "Here take my rights away! What do I care if the government monitors me, I'm not doing anything wrong. They can do anything they want and take away any freedoms that I'm not really using regularly; just please don't let any more people die."
I've never seen such a bunch of self-centered scared wimps. It's a disgrace and disrespectful to those who died in the past to protect these rights and freedoms. The American Founding Fathers would have a fit. Ben Franklin too would probably just hang his head in shame:
We have a new police force, this for the homeland security department. They have the power to arrest and detain anyone seen as a threat to the United States of America. That's an awfull lot of power, don't you think?
Scanning the comments, and seeing READ THE BILL, I thought you were propping the Read The Bills Act. Might be the only thing to slow down this avalanche of legislature. Unlike other proposed bills, this one means just what the title says: Every bill must be read, out loud, and every congressional voter must sign her name that she has read or heard every word of it.
The lobby behind this last ditch effort to stop the toboggan-to-hell is http://downsizedc.org/. Give them a minute of your eyeballs, and maybe everyone's blood pressure will come down around here.
Before I part with'em: two pennies weigh ~4.996+/-0.014g, have a zinc core, and the face of Lincoln. You can keep 'em.
Just call 9/11 a gasoline tax. If you want to stop terrorist acts at home, it's real simple. Stop playing the global bully.
Quizzes. Don't forget quizzes. Anyone who scores too badly gets replaced.
Actually, the Secret Service Uniformed Division has been around for decades (it adopted that name in 1977). It has long had the power within the District of Columbia to conduct warrantless arrests for crimes that they witness. For example, if they witness a mugging in front of the White House, or an embassy (which the SSUD has responsibility over), then they have the authority to arrest the criminal without a warrant, just like any other police officer can do within their jurisdiction.
The provision in question simply extends that jurisdiction for the SSUD to cover the entire US, rather than just DC.
News Flash, we had enough information to stop the attack on the WTC on 9/11. The problem was not collecting information, or even processing it; the problem was acting on the information. Given the performance of DHS responding to last years hurricanes, I don't have much faith that there had been any improvement in their ability to act on information. The problem seems to be in the vast beuracracy, increasingly made up of political appointees.
As presented by the President, the WTC style attack was foiled in Asia. A more accurate portrayal of the announcment would be "a plot was foiled" not "a plot was foiled by the White House." The President made no direct claims that U.S. policy or personnel played any role in the those arrests. Given this administrations willingness to reveal and even manufacture classified information for the sake of scoring political points, it seems likely that if the Patriot Act or NSA played any major role in those arrests, they would have specifically pointed it out.
Perhaps you remember shortly after 9/11, and shortly before the passing of the Patriot act, there were anthrax attacks targeted against memebers of the media and leaders within the opposition party? Appearantly, the abilities to monitor all communications, break into any residence, and to steal any property have not been sufficient to bring those attackers to justice. Last I heard, the strain of anthrax was traced back to a U.S. weapons lab. Perhaps we should just round up everyone who has had contact with that strain, send them off to secret prisons, and torture them until somebody talks. I know I'd feel safer.
The Patriot act and the war powers of the President seem insufficient to the task of keeping us safe. They clearly need to be expanded. All these rights and liberties are so "anti national security", they just might be un-American. Personally, I favor "equiping" all people under U.S. control with collars which allow for tracking, surveilence, interrogation, and termination. Maybe then we can be "safe". Oh, by the way, did I mention my uncle has a company which makes such security devices? He likes the name "Freedom Collar", but I think "Patriot Collar" would be an easier sell.
Perhaps some of you don't remember 9/11. But don't you remember the March 11th train bombing in Madrid or the attacks just this last summer in London?
If you fear terrorism, you are a coward plain and simple. You are more likley to die because of a drunk driver. Even if 9/11 happened every day for a year more people would have died to car accidents, yet we don't see more laws being passed in the name of public saftey for the "War on Drunk Driving"
Secondly, you are just plain ignorant to think it requires new powers to government.
9/11 happened because the pilots didn't lock their doors like they do is Israel.
To prevent 9/11 again, we simply have to require more common sense on the airlines. We do not... I repeat... We do not need to pass more laws in order to prevent more terrorism. Killing people and conspiring to kill people is illegal right? There ya go. Go catch those terrorists. You don't need to trample on the Constitution in order to do so.
Lastly, laws will not prevent terrorism. I'm more right wing than probaly you, but I know the reason why we haven't caught Bin Laden is not because we haven't passed another Patriot act but it is our leaders or incompentant or cowards.
Or perhaps there is a reason Pakistan hasn't caught him yet. Maybe we are paying them too much money to find him and they wouldn't want a good deal to go away. Maybe they have nukes and we don't have the balls to stop terrorism once and for all.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
You know, the only guy that had the brass to vote against USA PATRIOT the first time? I'd vote for him based on that alone.
Very well said. Even after 9/11, America has suffered far fewer casualties to terrorism than many countries yet we are shoveling our rights away faster than anyone else.
I fully believe in and support Ben Franklin's quote. Liberties are worth far more than a little (mostly illusory) security.
At the current rate of change, I give it about a decade before China and the US switch places (with China being the democracy and the US being the fascist state).
Yes the whole obcession America has with war is dispicable. I'm Canadian and when I went on a trip with a whole bunch of Americans all they could talk about is there army. If I said something about Canada they would mostly end up saying that atleast America's army was the best. I should hope so spending billions of dollars on it annually.
I always thought that collective security was the way to go. I would say that is roughly what Canada is doing. We help other countries, mostly opur army is used for humanitarian and peacekeeping/making missions. If anyone attacked us we probably wouldn't do that great by ourselves but think about the people who would back us up. Most likely every country on the UN Seceraty Counsel and others as well.
So yes you guys are obsessed with your military and that is probably bad. The other thing is that most likely this whole patriot act is designerd to give the government more power. Just like the whole war on terrorism is just to get that passed and other such things, and the terrorist attacks were probably just there to start the war. I would suggest watching this video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-777269653 0684663669&q=9%2F11+loose+change.
After watching that tell me you don't have some doubts. The fact that they are hiding so much is unsettling. And even if the attacks were caused by Al Quaeda, what if they are just doing what the U.S. said? On the other hand they could just hate the U.S. and be extremists like most people believe. Even so they have all those weapons because you gave them to them during the Cold War. Back when Russia was occupying Iran I beieve.
If America was smart all of it's citizens would unite and demand an explanation, because I think the Government could shed alot of light on this that the don't want to. What happened to "...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."(Abraham Licoln, The Gettysburg Address [1863])? As you may notice of the people, by the people, for the people. There doesn't seem to be alot of that happening.
Hold on a sec. I am not butchering anything. I obtained and confirmed the quote from several independent sources. You only provide one. While yours does look like it has been researched (or copied) by that wiki author in a little more detail, that doesn't guarantee it is more accurate. For the sake of argument that yours is correct since it really isn't important at all to the point.
What is perhaps more important than the actual wording of the quote is the point: that trading rights and freedoms for security is generally not a good idea. I don't think anybody would have interpretted it as mean any right or freedom starting from 100% no restrictions. That's just silly.
But you are completely bypassing the point I was making for the sake of trying too be geekier about the correct quote. Millions died protecting the rights to not have government monitoring them over reading books on Winnie the Pooh, or Islam, or whatever (as an example). That 3000 more have died and everyone turns 180 degrees on these issues, without even requiring the government to demonstrate the necessity or usefulness, is a travesty and says a lot about the self-centeredness of today's society in America and the ability of propaganda to scare the crap out of them and just start handing over their rights.
I'd rather live with a 1/100,000 chance (3000 out of 300 million) of being killed by a terrorist on American soil than have 300 million people lose rights like this. And that terrorist risk also doesn't take into account the bungling of the intelligence under the existing system in 2001 nor in the increase in security that could be done without reducing rights and freedoms. It hasn't been demonstrated that these measures are even necessary. In some cases, the response security measures (and potentially violations of rights) are even counter-productive towards securing against terrorism.
I bet 98% of people posting here can't name two provisions in the Patriot Act.
1) Warrantless wiretaps
2) Warrentless detainment by the government without arrest or right to legal council
I'm rather tired of people going nuts over the Patriot Act when their only source for information is the Daily Show with John Stewart. To have an informed opinion, do at least some of the following:
(1) Read the bill
(2) Read analysis by law PROFESSORS (not tv-journalists)
(3) Read analysis by lawyers nationally regarded as experts.
Name me two senators that did more than one of the above, if that.
I saw the Daily Show where a Democratic senator said that he was against the USA PATRIOT Act (see signature for acronym expansion). His main reason he was against it was because he did read it.
To expect an average american citizen to do the 3 things listed above is ridiculous. The average american works hard, makes a moderate amount of money, has 2 kids, has only a HS education, believes Saddam did 9/11/01 stuff, thinks Brittney Spears was good before she got married and pregnant, and has NEVER heard of the patriot act.
Since when does reading illegal and unconstitutional legislation supersede reading and abiding by the constitution? If our elected leaders cannot do these things, how can the average american be expected to do them?
Show me the evidence that the government has been spying on US citizens and not on foreign terrorists? Got any?
No?
Gee, I wonder why.
Have you missed all the flak about domestic spying recently?
Anyway, it's very difficult to get information about a secret spy program when it's, you know, secret.
If all these "freedoms" Liberals crow about were so important to the Founding Fathers, why were they in a Amendments to the Constitution instead of in the Constitution itself?
Thomas Jefferson (at least) thought the Constitution was good except for two things: no bill of rights and the lack of a term limit for the President. The Bill of Rights was added in 1791.
Russia never occupied Iran. We gave those weapons to Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. The whole "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of thing. Iran was our enemy, Iraq was Iran's enemy, so Iraq is our friend.