Yes, I know how to Google, too, Anonz : ) hahaha…so let’s talk about that Patriot Act and it’s revisions. It’s gotten so much press I just had to comment : ) tough for me to keep quiet I’m afraid…
(Ed googles ‘relationship’ issues. Also mentioned that he’s an internet dater, not sure I know what that means exactly: e-mail/texting? Is there ever any actual ‘live’ contact?! A good deep voice on the phone line, for starters, would work for me…a date implies an actual meeting still doesn’t it??)
Back to my entry now…
The Patriot Act: the matters’ crux and the ensuing uproar comes down to this: some revisions to the Patriot Act are dramatic and others are not, so much…so let’s do dramatic…
Yes, there are now parts of the act that regulate government conduct that was going, oh um, unregulated? Yes, and that’s a good change I suppose.
Now, on the other hand, some parts of this act totally expand government powers almost exponentially and allow it to spy on ordinary citizens, like me (hmmpht, I prefer to think of myself as extraordinary), in a whole new way. The scary part is the lack of governmental openness in describing its and implementation, not to mention the worst part: no disclosure!
Oh, that is unless you find yourself being hauled off to jail one day…then you’ll know and hopefully you’ll have a good attorney waiting in the wings : )
But, should you be concerned, you might ask, I mean if you have nothing to hide, who cares, right? Hmmm, let’s take a closer look, you decide…
A quickie outline of the revisions in the Patriot Act:
Section 215 deals with private records. 215 extends the FBI the power to conduct essentially warrantless records searches, especially on people who are not themselves terror suspects, with little or no judicial oversight. The government sees this as an ‘incremental’ change in the law, but the lack of meaningful oversight and the ever expanding scope of possible suspects is pretty dramatic. You used to need a ‘warrant and reasonable suspicion,’ hmm, not a bad idea one would think…
Section 218 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act – ‘sneak and peek’ warrants, at the time, 1978, the changes were minor and the usual standard requirement for a police search – yeah – that’d be ‘probable cause to believe a criminal act had occurred’ and a warrant, it seemed minor bc it would only be unnecessary in a ‘teensie’ number of cases, famous last words, those. The teensie number just had mega-growth so now ‘secret’ searches are now authorized by a ‘secret’ court without your knowledge or justice dept accountability, now that’s ’secret’ and here’s the caveat: the government claims there’s an ‘alleged’ basis for said ’search,’ but what might the ‘alleged basis’ be if it’s all done so secretly? Answer: it’s a secret : )
Section 214 deals with “Pen registers” or acquiring phone numbers dialed from a ‘suspect’s’ telephone, that and ‘trap and trace” devices monitor the source of all incoming calls. Neither one reveals the communication content. Patriot removes the warrant requirement for these taps so long as the government can certify that the information likely to be obtained is “relevant” to an ongoing investigation against international terrorism. Lots of loosely used terms being thrown around here, all sounds pretty ambiguous yet all encompassing to me…
Section 206 authorizes ‘roving’ wiretaps: taps specific to no single phone or computer but to every phone or computer the ‘target’ may use. This part doesn’t get as much attention as it should. If the government decides to tap a computer at the Berkeley library, every communication by every user can theoretically be intercepted. That’s big…the use of ‘warrant power,’ troubling.
Section 505 authorizes the use of what’s essentially an administrative subpoena of personal records. The subpoenas require ‘no probable cause or judicial oversight,’ oh nice and nobody argued about all this open freedom and abuse of power? Oh wait, that’s right we’re in a ‘war on terror’ but who are the ‘terrorists’ we’re really talking about here??
And where did ‘probable cause’ disappear to? Of couse, the Dept of Justice site will dispel the ‘myths’ of the Patriot Act and make you ask yourself this: wouldn’t I rather agree to this and spare us all from a terrorist attack in it’s early stages? Or no…?
That’s it from your resident loud-mouth, me, and your thoughts…?
Anonz, just had to respond to your comments…
First a q: do you believe 9/11 was plotted and executed by the US powers that be and Osama Bin Laden or?? I’ve seen a film that infers that there were explosives in the lower levels of the building, etc…
I think you are correct, if you weren’t FOR the Iraqi invasion the perception was that you were unpatriotic. Hey, I was convinced that Clinton ground intel budget cut was the culprit, and that ground spies left in place may have prevented a lot of things…but that’s all old news now, isn’t it…
Repub men are notoriously bigoted, homophobic, and misogynistic not to mention insufferable control freaks with their women in the name of religion or whatever else they can get away with calling it. Repub women are weak-minded male followers, why do you think I’ve been a registered Indie for the past twenty years?? Hahaha…
After he introduced himself and chatted briefly, I asked a handsome man who approached me last friday if he was a republican. He laughed and said, ‘yes, is that a problem?’ I said, ‘only if we’re talking politics.’ Bwahahaha…I told him I was an Indie, didn’t seem to scare him so I’m guessing he’s a liberated sort, he was also young, young men don’t mind strong-minded women.
I don’t get it though, why control women at all, I mean, what’s the point?? We bear the children, you’d think we’d be revered…and treasured just for that. Without us, men are screwed. Is the male ego that incredibly fragile? If it is, why not just cop to it all the while praying you get a good woman that won’t hold that info against you. Just a thought…
Republican women are weak-minded, oh yes, and father knows best types, too. And the ‘father’ part has been deeply indoctrinated at home and at Sunday school, these chicks never stood a chance, kind of sad…air-head’s from birth…
Cheney’s daughter is a woman who is between a rock and a hard place; love of father (and those infamous family values!) and wanting to live her own life, something I’m sure her loving father gave lip service to in private – as long as she supported and campaigned for the party – how her partner put up with that shit I will never know, must be true love : ) the kind worth nurturing, maintaining and making some serious compromises for, I can’t totally berate either of them there, you don’t find that kind of love very often.
The religious right think they’re always right, the pope should’ve had all Catholic priests prosecuted years ago for the amount of child molestation that takes place, but no, people want something to believe in so bad they’d rather risk their kids and let the church save face; totally pathetic in this woman’s opinion.
Hey sweet pea, I’m not stupid and I know BS when I hear it, even if it’s delivered with high-minded platitudes by some TDH, which I admit can be a bit distracting : ) I’m weak at times, but not totally weak ; )
Posted by edgy1 
Posted by edgy1 
