How does it do this? Please explain it to me, as I am interested to know.
Have you read the Patriot Act, from beginning to end? If so where does it threaten your rights as a citizen of this country such that you feel "dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property."?
Perhaps your concern, like the ACLU's is about Section 215. Which despite their words to the contrary does not, in fact, allow them to bypass 4th Ammendment rights given that it specifically states:
(from section 215) `(b) Each application under this section--
`(1) shall be made to-- `(A) a judge of the court established by section 103(a); or `(B) a United States Magistrate Judge under chapter 43 of title 28, United States Code, who is publicly designated by the Chief Justice of the United States to have the power to hear applications and grant orders for the production of tangible things under this section on behalf of a judge of that court; and `(2) shall specify that the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation conducted in accordance with subsection (a)(2) to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.
Or is it the lengthy changes to the weak laws regarding foreign assets and money laundering? Or the section which condemns discrimination on the basis of race (specifically Arab and Muslim Americans)? Or the increased budgetary disbursements regarding anti-terroris branches of the government, including the hiring of more translators?
Just curious. I know you are an intelligent individual, but displaying the flag like that to me means that we as a nation are about to fall apart or be destroyed. You may not like the current administration, or its policies, but just because you do doesn't mean our country is in dire peril. Do we still have free elections? Do we still have right to protest, for example to display the flag in an LJ ormake political commentary? Have soldiers been posted to every street corner, or was it only to government buildings and other likely targets (train stations?) following an attack on the U.S.'s or our allies soil? Does your radio/TV have one station, do you have access to hundreds of news sources at an instant? Are you or your propery in extreme danger? And if so do you believe it is from the US government or from confirmed killers who fly planes into buildings, plant bombs on buses and subways, and pervert the teachings of their own religion?
It's section 216, not 215, and the issue is that the powers granted by judges are granting ex parte search and seizure powers, ignoring the previous standard of just cause.
Also, Provision 213 provides for "surreptitious search warrants and seizures upon a showing of reasonable necessity and eliminates the requirement of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that immediate notification of seized items be provided." Under FISA, that procedure can completely skip the judiciary, and obtain search warrants without a judge's supervision - and those FISA search warrants are not public record, nor do those being searched have to be informed.
Also, section 805 was struck down for violating the first and fifth; later, section 505 was struck down for violating the first and fourth.
Have you read the Patriot Act, from beginning to end? If so where does it threaten your rights as a citizen of this country such that you feel "dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property."?
Perhaps your concern, like the ACLU's is about Section 215. Which despite their words to the contrary does not, in fact, allow them to bypass 4th Ammendment rights given that it specifically states:
(from section 215)
`(b) Each application under this section--
`(1) shall be made to--
`(A) a judge of the court established by section 103(a); or
`(B) a United States Magistrate Judge under chapter 43 of title 28, United States Code, who is publicly designated by the Chief Justice of the United States to have the power to hear applications and grant orders for the production of tangible things under this section on behalf of a judge of that court; and
`(2) shall specify that the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation conducted in accordance with subsection (a)(2) to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.
Or is it the lengthy changes to the weak laws regarding foreign assets and money laundering? Or the section which condemns discrimination on the basis of race (specifically Arab and Muslim Americans)? Or the increased budgetary disbursements regarding anti-terroris branches of the government, including the hiring of more translators?
Just curious. I know you are an intelligent individual, but displaying the flag like that to me means that we as a nation are about to fall apart or be destroyed. You may not like the current administration, or its policies, but just because you do doesn't mean our country is in dire peril. Do we still have free elections? Do we still have right to protest, for example to display the flag in an LJ ormake political commentary? Have soldiers been posted to every street corner, or was it only to government buildings and other likely targets (train stations?) following an attack on the U.S.'s or our allies soil? Does your radio/TV have one station, do you have access to hundreds of news sources at an instant? Are you or your propery in extreme danger? And if so do you believe it is from the US government or from confirmed killers who fly planes into buildings, plant bombs on buses and subways, and pervert the teachings of their own religion?
Reply
Also, Provision 213 provides for "surreptitious search warrants and seizures upon a showing of reasonable necessity and eliminates the requirement of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that immediate notification of seized items be provided." Under FISA, that procedure can completely skip the judiciary, and obtain search warrants without a judge's supervision - and those FISA search warrants are not public record, nor do those being searched have to be informed.
Also, section 805 was struck down for violating the first and fifth; later, section 505 was struck down for violating the first and fourth.
Reply
Leave a comment