Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rickholio
Where 'reasonable cause' is, by the admission of the authors of the law itself, and extremely loose and can be ipso facto justified by whatever 'evidence' is collected.
Additionally, the federal government already HAD the ability to investigate terrorists under the Foreign Intelligence Surveilance Act. The USA PATRIOT extended that to any person, suspect of any crime, at any time, with minimal requirements. Everyday citizens can now be treated with the same disregard as foreign nationals with respects to search and seizure.
And if that isn't enough, how about section 215? The FBI can use Section 215 to demand ?any tangible thing,? including books, letters, diaries, library records, medical and psychiatric records, financial information, membership lists of religious institutions, and even -- as Attorney General Ashcroft himself conceded in testimony before Congress -- genetic information. Again, this is based on the loosest of requirements, with no requirement to disclose, and again not limited to people under investigation for terrorist ties.
How can you reasonably argue that rights have not be diminished by this terrible peice of legislature ram-rodded through by ashcroft on a 7 day schedule?
|
BTW...most of the "extraordinary" parts of the Patriot Act had "Sunset" clauses. Just recently the Sentate Judicial Committee held hearings on the Patriot Act and said "Sunset" clauses. I watched the entireity of the hearings on C-Span.
The head of the CIA...FBI...and the Attorney General were vigorously interrogated about the Patriot Act. I found all of them to be forth coming in their answers...including Attorney General Gonzales. I saw Attorney General Ashcroft when he was before the Senate Committees and he hedged his answers. Attorney General Gonzales did not.
It is immaterial...now...that the Patriot Act was ram-rodded through by the previous Congress...as it has now been fully veted before the current Congress.