the Patriot Act- what's so bad about it?

[masked_marauder]

In other news. I also feel compelled to say my feelings on the recent bomb on plane incident. Suddenly, the govt steps up more security measures for our own protection. My view: something is amiss here. Why? Well, I feel we are no more or no less safer now than after 9/11 and all the security increases. Just people flipping out with the rest of the world laughing at us. Second, his father warned the embassy that he was a danger. He was still let on that flight though his name was on the list. Either A) Someone was really incompetent or B)he was deliberately let on that flight. Very few people who are on those lists even make it to the plane. I suggest a very thorough investigation into the whole thing and not just simply losing our damn minds and upping security measures.

Actually, though the man's father did warn people, and this information was shared with British and American intelligence officials, the man's name was never put on the "No-Fly" list. The passenger manifest of the Northwest/Delta flight was sent from Amsterdam to the US for pre-screening (as is always done with flights entering the United States), and the passenger manifest checked out clear. So the man was allowed to remain a boarded passenger because no one with the airline knew otherwise. The failure comes elsewhere. No Northwest Airlines (in Delta Colors) conspiracy here.

Link here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126184081273605825.html

"A U.S. official said it was unclear why Mr. Abdulmutallab wasn't placed on a no-fly list as a result of his father's warnings. The Department of Homeland Security and the National Counterterrorism Center within the office of the Director of National Intelligence oversee the no-fly list and the U.S. government's broader terrorism watch list."

 

[dj30905]

Actually, though the man's father did warn people, and this information was shared with British and American intelligence officials, the man's name was never put on the "No-Fly" list. The passenger manifest of the Northwest/Delta flight was sent from Amsterdam to the US for pre-screening (as is always done with flights entering the United States), and the passenger manifest checked out clear. So the man was allowed to remain a boarded passenger because no one with the airline knew otherwise. The failure comes elsewhere. No Northwest Airlines (in Delta Colors) conspiracy here.

Link here: Nigerian Charged in Northwest Bomb Attempt - WSJ.com

"A U.S. official said it was unclear why Mr. Abdulmutallab wasn't placed on a no-fly list as a result of his father's warnings. The Department of Homeland Security and the National Counterterrorism Center within the office of the Director of National Intelligence oversee the no-fly list and the U.S. government's broader terrorism watch list."

Thanks for that. I coulda swore I saw somewhere that said it was. Now for the question: Why was his name not put on the no-fly list. It boils back down to either incompetence or deliberately ignoring warnings. Still needing an investigation. No real conspiracy (some of them are rather farfetched, but reality is also stranger than fiction), but simply needing more questions answered. If not warned at the airlines, then the problem can be found further up the chain. Conspiracies and hysteria get me kinda agitated, so I like to research to formulate my own opinions (which can change with the right facts).

 

[masked_marauder]

Thanks for that. I coulda swore I saw somewhere that said it was. Now for the question: Why was his name not put on the no-fly list. It boils back down to either incompetence or deliberately ignoring warnings. Still needing an investigation. No real conspiracy (some of them are rather farfetched, but reality is also stranger than fiction), but simply needing more questions answered. If not warned at the airlines, then the problem can be found further up the chain. Conspiracies and hysteria get me kinda agitated, so I like to research to formulate my own opinions (which can change with the right facts).

Well, the WSJ article mentioned an investigation is in the offing, or, at least, that Mr. Abdulmutallab has been talking to investigators. I'm sure there will be a conclusion to said investigation that will at least give us the information we need to discuss it further. There isn't much else out there to research beyond what has been reported. Further conjecture is somewhat of a waste of time at this point, and may only fuel whatever level of hysteria already exists. Yes, I would like to have the answers, but I'm not gonna worry about it until more is reported on the investigation.

 

[dj30905]

Well, the WSJ article mentioned an investigation is in the offing, or, at least, that Mr. Abdulmutallab has been talking to investigators. I'm sure there will be a conclusion to said investigation that will at least give us the information we need to discuss it further. There isn't much else out there to research beyond what has been reported. Further conjecture is somewhat of a waste of time at this point, and may only fuel whatever level of hysteria already exists. Yes, I would like to have the answers, but I'm not gonna worry about it until more is reported on the investigation.

Trust me, I totally agree on this. Just simply stating opinions based on what is known now, but anxiously awaiting results. :smile: As stated, further speculation only fuels hysteria. Now to sit back and wait.

 

[FuzzyKen]

Throughout history, whenever somebody over-reacts to anything, what comes out is a mess and this is no exception. As has been said and demonstrated the act is long and very complex infiltrating into laws involving the gathering of evidence particulary against U.S. citizens, what constitutes probable cause, seizure without warrant, arrest and detainer (until they find some evidence) and many other abuses of power.

Not all of the patriot act is bad there are a few areas which relate to interagency communication that force by statute better communications by agency and the agencies involved are forced to take responsibility for at least this.

Because I did at one time have some law studies as a part of my life, I did unfortuantely take the time to read a great portion of parts that were of interest to me. There are sections that contradict other sections, parts that contradict the basic Bill of Rights, the violations and then the "secrecy" based on the old scapegoat "National Security" is reinforced and even has the ability to protect the administration of a very bad President because under the Patriot Act many things which used to be released as public information have been moved under "national security" allowing great potential for "cover-ups and unheard of levels of abuse, which are definitely not good and the Party in Power does not matter.

Law Scholars, the American Civil Liberties Union and many other legal think tanks have not had kind words over this one since it was passed under the GWB administration right after the Wold Trade Center and the attack by a group of extremists.

The major problem is that fighting an extremist out to take away our freedom and our rights is not solved by a government that in the name of trying to protect us does exactly the same thing.

Only time will tell where this goes.

 

[dj30905]

Throughout history, whenever somebody over-reacts to anything, what comes out is a mess and this is no exception. As has been said and demonstrated the act is long and very complex infiltrating into laws involving the gathering of evidence particulary against U.S. citizens, what constitutes probable cause, seizure without warrant, arrest and detainer (until they find some evidence) and many other abuses of power.

Not all of the patriot act is bad there are a few areas which relate to interagency communication that force by statute better communications by agency and the agencies involved are forced to take responsibility for at least this.

Because I did at one time have some law studies as a part of my life, I did unfortuantely take the time to read a great portion of parts that were of interest to me. There are sections that contradict other sections, parts that contradict the basic Bill of Rights, the violations and then the "secrecy" based on the old scapegoat "National Security" is reinforced and even has the ability to protect the administration of a very bad President because under the Patriot Act many things which used to be released as public information have been moved under "national security" allowing great potential for "cover-ups and unheard of levels of abuse, which are definitely not good and the Party in Power does not matter.

Law Scholars, the American Civil Liberties Union and many other legal think tanks have not had kind words over this one since it was passed under the GWB administration right after the Wold Trade Center and the attack by a group of extremists.

The major problem is that fighting an extremist out to take away our freedom and our rights is not solved by a government that in the name of trying to protect us does exactly the same thing.

Only time will tell where this goes.

The biggest concerns I see so far deal with changes esp within 50 U.S.C Chapter 36 Section 1802 and Section 1805 which deal with electronic surveilance, probable cause and the rights of the citizens under the 4th Amendment (we should all be familiar with that "No warrants shall issue..probable cause..."). I've got to go talk with my instructors at school today (4Jan) and I'll head to the library where it'll be easier for me to lay out the codes (esp 50 USC, 18USC, 22USC) and I'll get more into what is said within 50 U.S.C. Sec 1802. Anyways, it's late and I'm tired. I still plan to go up to the library and find each of these amendments and produce in another thread exactly what this act has done to each of the Codes involved as soon as I get to it. Probably in a day or two. For now, here is a little of Section 1802:

§ 1802. Electronic surveillance authorization
without court order; certification by Attorney
General; reports to Congressional committees;
transmittal under seal; duties and
compensation of communication common
carrier; applications; jurisdiction of court
(a)(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the
President, through the Attorney General, may
authorize electronic surveillance without a
court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign
intelligence information for periods of up
to one year if the Attorney General certifies in
writing under oath that—
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed
at—
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications
transmitted by means of communications
used exclusively between or
among foreign powers, as defined in section
1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence,
other than the spoken communications
of individuals, from property or premises
under the open and exclusive control of
a foreign power, as defined in section
1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;
(B) there is no substantial likelihood that
the surveillance will acquire the contents of
any communication to which a United States
person is a party; and
(C) the proposed minimization procedures
with respect to such surveillance meet the definition
of minimization procedures under section​

1801(h) of this title; and

Remember, I posted a link to Cornell University's United States Codes references earlier to help find what is posted on here. Section 1802 starts on page 327 (to help locate it faster in a pdf) of 50 U.S.C.. If you use the site link provided. Section 1802 is in Chapter 36 Subchapter I.