What the Tech?! Free tech support Archive
This is a read-only archive. No new posts or registrations. Privacy Page
Discussion

House, Senate strike deal on renewing anti-terrorism law

15 min read

This thread's last reply is from . Advice, software, and links below may be out of date — treat specific steps and download links with caution.

Post #1
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20…triot-act_x.htm

By Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY
"WASHINGTON — Republican House and Senate negotiators reached a tentative deal Thursday to extend the USA Patriot Act, the sweeping anti-terrorism law passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The White House endorsed the compromise, but a bipartisan group of senators attacked it as an assault on civil liberties. A heated debate appears likely when the measure reaches the full Senate and House as early as next week.

….Leahy called for a 90-day extension of the existing law to allow more time for negotiations. "This is a bill that goes into your right of privacy over and over," he said."

What you should be asking yourself right now is - what kind of pressures must the White House have applied to get this thing through the committee, given the stout opposition of many of the committee's leading members to the bill as proposed.

Another thing you should be asking yourself is - why is the government so hell-bent on having it their way, regardless of the public's wishes in regard to the acts' provisions?

The final thing you should be asking yourself is - What am I doing about this?

Go here: http://action.aclu.org/reformthepatriotact/ and use the "Take Action!" link (even if you've used it before);

Go here: http://action.eff.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ADV_homepage and do the same thing

or compose your own FAX or email, telephone message, find your Reps here and here:

http://www.theorator.com/senate.html

http://www.theorator.com/government/house.html and

contact them.

Email your friends about this - point anyone and everyone on other sites that you frequent to this thread - get the word out.

Because if you don't, we're all going to irrevocably lose. Pete
Post #3
The House is expected to vote Tuesday on the extensions to the Patriot Act, the Senate on Thursday.

I wonder if everyone realizes that this single issue ( 'patriot' act re-authorization and strengthening) isn't merely another skirmish in the battle to protect our civil liberties, privacy and freedom from un-warranted government intrusion into our lives - it's the entire outcome of that particular "war".

We stand or fall (the concept and soul of "America", and what it means to be an "American") according to the outcome.

It's a singular point in history where your voice (and only your voice) can make all the difference in the world to what kind of nation your children and your grandchildren grow up in.

I think I'll just leave you alone and let you think about that. Pete
Post #5
Okay, telephone calls are all that're left now that will make a difference in time.

Go here: https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?alert…jp4q40g6.app27a

fill out the form at the bottom completely and call the numbers you'll be given.

All you have to say is this:

"Please tell the Senator to vote against 'patriot' act re-authorization, against cloture and to support the filibuster that's fixing to happen"

That's all that's required to get the message across. Ask for whoever's name that answers the phone and have them read back to you what you said and make sure they get your name and address. Pete
Post #6
http://www.epic.org/

EPIC Documents Show FBI "Bypass" of Oversight Office
EPIC held a press conference on Capitol Hill today to release PATRIOT Act documents obtained in EPIC V. DOJ, a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The documents included internal e-mails (pdf) and memoranda (part 1 | part 2, both pdf) in which FBI officials expressed frustration that the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, an internal check on FBI authority, had not approved applications for Section 215 orders, the so-called "library records" provision. A 2004 memo (pdf) refers to "recent changes" allowing the FBI to "bypass" the Office of Intelligence and Policy Review. The FBI is under court order to provide further information to EPIC about the Patriot Act sunset provisions. EPIC's statement on the disclosure and the significance for Patriot Act renewal is available here (pdf). For more information, see EPIC's PATRIOT FOIA page. (Dec. 13) (Live links on link at top).

And listen - I'm not seeing anything on CSPAN or CSPAN2 about the 'patriot' act re-authorizations Senate hearing being held today. This would seemingly be confirmed by the fact that C.D.T is still urging people to call their Reps: http://cdt.org/publications/policyposts/2005/25 - but I could be wrong. Pete
Post #9
They're back in session now.

If you have the opportunity to watch this, you should do so - it's history in-the-making.

(Nancy Pelosi already seriously drop-kicked the entire Republican party in a prepared statement - WOOHOO and shame on you if you missed THAT!). Pete

TURN ON C-SPAN2!
Post #10
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051215/ap_on_…DMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

Feingold Now Has Numbers on His Side (!)



By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer Thu Dec 15, 6:28 PM ET

"WASHINGTON - In Congress, where numbers are everything, the math on the Patriot Act suddenly seems to be moving in favor of Sen. Russell Feingold.

He was a minority of one four years ago, when the Wisconsin Democrat cast the lone Senate vote against the USA Patriot Act in the traumatic weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks. The law, he said then, gave government too much power to investigate its citizens. Ninety-nine senators disagreed.

Now add more than two dozen senators to Feingold's side, including the leaders of his party and some of the chamber's most conservative Republicans, and the balance of power shifts.

The new Senate arithmetic that emerged this week is enough to place the renewal of major portions of the law in doubt. It was enough to inspire Senate Republican leaders to consider a backup plan in case Feingold's filibuster threat succeeded. Enough to prompt
President Bush to dispatch Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to Capitol Hill twice in two days to lobby on the accord's behalf.

No luck so far, said the chief Senate sponsor.

"We've got a battle on our hands," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., told reporters after Gonzales had departed Wednesday.

Bush weighed in personally Thursday, urging opponents of the renewal to abandon the filibuster threats.

"That is a bad decision for the security of the United States," the president said. "I call upon the Senate to end the filibuster and to pass this important legislation so that we have the tools necessary to defend the country in a time of war."

Moments later, the senior Democrat on the issue, Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), D-Vt., told reporters that more than 40 votes exist to sustain a filibuster in a test vote Friday. White House allies said they would rather see the law's 16 temporary provisions expire entirely than give opponents another three months or more to keep whittling away at them.

"A short-term extension is irresponsible," said House Speaker
Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., a day after his chamber passed the conference agreement, 251-174.

Feingold finds himself with some unlikely allies, including the Christian Defense Coalition. Notably, the National Rifle Association has not endorsed the Patriot Act renewal that was personally negotiated by Vice President
Dick Cheney. The NRA's non-position allows its Senate supporters to oppose renewing the law in its entirety.

"Folks, when we're dealing with civil liberties, you don't compromise them," said Sen. Larry Craig (news, bio, voting record), R-Idaho, an NRA board member.

The breadth of support gives Feingold, a possible presidential candidate, new reason to keep an eye on still other numbers: polls for the 2008 presidential election.

"It's just very gratifying," Feingold said, grinning during an interview this week in his office. "We've stood the test of time. Our concerns were legitimate."

On the eve of the Senate's test vote, Senate Democratic leaders awarded Feingold a coveted seat on the terror-fighting Intelligence Committee, replacing New Jersey Gov.-elect Jon Corzine.

The opposition that began with Feingold's one vote has bloomed into a bloc of Democrats and Republicans concerned about a range of powers the original act gave the
FBI, and how they are used. This group prefers the curbs on government power passed by the Senate but rejected in a compromise with the House. Now, faced with an up-or-down vote on the accord, they say no.

Chief among their concerns are the National Security Letters that the FBI can use to compel the release of such private records as financial, computer and library transactions. The bill for the first time explicitly says the third-party recipients of NSLs — banks, Internet service providers and libraries — can hire lawyers and challenge the letters in court.

Feingold and his allies want more reports from the Justice Department on how NSLs and other tools in terror investigations are used. They also want to set limits on how long law enforcement officials can continue to use NSLs in terror investigations.

In the last week, Feingold has attracted important allies, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record), R-Neb., a possible presidential candidate in 2008. On Thursday he added another to his column: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record) of California, the original Democratic co-sponsor of the 2001 Patriot Act."

Do you have any idea what a phone call to your Senator early tomorrow morning could accomplish?

All you have to say is this:

"Please tell the Senator to vote against 'patriot' act re-authorization, against cloture and to support the filibuster that's fixing to happen"

…and we can finally get this thing fixed!

Go here: https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?alert…Call&s;_src=rtpa for your contact info! Pete
Post #11
Report: Bush Authorized NSA Eavesdropping in U.S.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178893,00.html

Friday, December 16, 2005

"NEW YORK — President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States — without getting search warrants — following the Sept. 11 attacks, The New York Times reports.

The presidential order, which Bush signed in 2002, has allowed the agency to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States, according to a story posted Thursday on the Times' Web site."

All the dirty laundry starts getting aired on the very day of a possible final vote?
Post #13
Please do not underestimate the President.

Right now, tremendous pressure is being brought to bear against all who voted against the cloture motion, and against all those who either haven't voted - or might be persuaded to change their vote.

And while I'm at it, let me point out something - 90% of the 'patriot' act will remain un-touched by the next vote, regardless of how it turns out.

The Republicans in favor of passage have stood up and lied for at least two days now, giving the impression that the whole 'patriot' act will dis-appear if the re-authorization doesn't get approved. (Thus supposedly putting us all at horrible risk from the terrorists').

This is a lie.

The very worst that can happen is that the 16 'sunset" provisions will "sunset" (go away) - that is actually the best thing that can happen at this point.

It would force the administration to re-introduce all the "sunsetted" provisions (knowing full well that they wouldn't fly unless real checks and balances were built in, and that a much higher evidentiary bar was set for their use, along with a whole lot less secrecy attached to the process. Those "accused" of wrong-doing would - ideally - actually get to know about it and have access to the facts (if any) involved in the charges against them so they could defend themselves or correct bad information. Oversight would be hammered in and firmly answered to and dispensed.

It ain't over till it's over.

Witness this letter from the A.C.L.U:

The White House push to short-circuit Patriot Act reform was soundly
defeated in a Senate vote today, with five Republicans joining the
call for real debate.

This vote paves the way for a bipartisan filibuster to restore checks
and balances and protect the freedoms of innocent Americans.

The ACLU has been fighting this battle since the ink dried on the
Patriot Act fours year ago, but we could have never have gotten this
far without the tremendous support of a committed and bipartisan
community of patriots.

We are well on our way to securing real reforms in the reauthorization
bill, but the battle is far from over!

The White House and Senate leaders are working hard to pressure
senators into changing their votes. Please call your senators
NOW! Go to:

http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=9F2ksLFwfRTCby9lJb8v8A..

This vote comes on the heels of today's revelation that President Bush
secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on the
conversations of U.S. citizens and others in the country in violation
of federal law and the Constitution.

Please call your Senators and tell them to oppose any Patriot Act
reauthorization bill that does not include reforms to protect the
freedoms of innocent Americans. Take action now at:

http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=jqWO7xJDkLwDePDfGJLafA..

and this one from the E.F.F:

* PATRIOT Act Renewal Blocked in Senate!

It's the best holiday gift any civil libertarian could hope
for: a bipartisan coalition of Senators has refused to end a
filibuster that is blocking renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act.
The group of Democrats and Republicans are rightly concerned
that the PATRIOT renewal bill lacks meaningful checks and
balances to protect civil liberties from roving wiretaps,
secret search warrants, super-secret demands for private
records, and the many other broad police powers that Congress
granted in haste immediately after the 9/11 attacks. Many of
those PATRIOT powers are set to expire on December 31st–but
Congress is set to adjourn for the holidays today. If the
filibuster holds, and the Administration won't accept a
compromise–a short renewal of all the powers in order to give
Congress a few more months to consider the issue–it appears
that all of those provisions will "sunset" on schedule.

Today's Senate vote comes on the heels of a shocking story in
the New York Times, which reports that President Bush allowed
the National Security Agency to monitor phone calls and email
messages of people inside the U.S. without getting a warrant
– all in the name of fighting terrorism. There was no
confirmation from the Bush administration, but congressional
leaders have already condemned the warrantless surveillance,
with Republican Senator Arlen Spector calling for hearings
after reading the report.

The irony of this shocking revelation is that while the
Administration has been arguing in the PATRIOT renewal debate
against reforms to the foreign intelligence surveillance
process – a process that is severely lacking in meaningful
checks and balances – it has in fact already been bypassing
that process and getting the NSA to do its dirty work with no
checks and balances at all.

Now that the protection of our civil liberties is the focus
of some very public scrutiny, it's time to tell your
representatives in Washington how you feel – especially as
senators on both sides of the aisle say they are interested
in a compromise to keep parts of the PATRIOT Act alive. Check
the roll call and find out how your senators voted today. If
your senators said "nay" to ending the filibuster, please
write to them via our action center to give your thanks, and
encourage their continued opposition to the PATRIOT renewal
bill. Remind them to stay vigilant about civil liberties in
any maneuvering for a last-minute deal. The fight isn't over
yet, and your lawmakers should know how you feel about your
civil liberties.

Check the roll call vote:
http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=546

Visit our Action Center:
https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=di…erAction&id;=192

Our politicians' stand will only be as strong as that of the constituents who call them and encourage and back them in this.

That would be you. (I can only contact my own legislators' - I need you to contact yours). Pete
Post #14
I found it rather amusing how Bush donned a morally-superior attitude during his press conference yesterday:

"My personal opinion is it was a shameful act, for someone to disclose this very important program in time of war.

The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy."

"But it is a shameful act by somebody who has got secrets of the United States government and feels like they need to disclose them publicly."

(From the printed text, here: http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/na…y-top-headlines )

This from a man who could conceivably be in extremely deep squat due to his action of bypassing the F.I.S.A court.

This from a man who will do anything to excuse those same kinds of actions from anyone in his administration who might've, say, "outed" Valerie Plame.

Unless you accept the premise that all terrorists and their handlers are dumber than rocks, it's a foregone conclusion that said terrorists' are well-aware of the fact that telephone calls are subject to tapping - and indeed that those taps are run extra-legally, regardless of any supposed "safeguards" on their use. Given that, it's extremely unlikely that terrorists are stupid enough to use open phone lines to begin with - at least not in such a manner as to aid in their apprehension, or in a way that would help defeat plans-in-progress or future plans.

You will also note that not one specific example was given of the phone taps in question having actually accomplished anything in the way of either catching or thwarting anything terrorist related.

What this episode epitomizes is the attitude of the President who - when confronted by the clear course of using the F.I.S.A court to implement this program (when that's precisely what this body was set set up to do, legally) - with NO "time lag" involved - chose NOT to.

Consider these comments (which was also a prop used by him, knowing he was fixing to be questioned about the above-mentioned situation):
"And after September the 11th, the United States Congress also granted me additional authority to use military force against al-Qaida."

"As I mentioned in my remarks, the legal authority is derived from the Constitution, as well as the authorization of force by the United States Congress."

When did the term "military force" come to mean illegally tapping American citizens phone conversations using the NSA? (Or the F.B.I, or whoever). The "three-letter agencies are not 'military' agencies. The same holds true for his use of the word "force" (and please note that he made sure to make mention of his supposed right to use 'force' and the 'military', apparently in any way - and against whomever he ses fit - regardless of the law).

How about this one: "And you brought up something that I want to stress, and that is is that these calls are not intercepted within the country, they are from outside the country to in the country or vice versa." (I'm still scratching my head over that one).

I'd also like to point out that we have only the President's word on whose phone calls actually got tapped - we'll never know if it was only "of people with known links to al-Qaida and related terrorist organizations."

"First, I want to make it clear to the people listening that this program is limited in nature to those that are known al-Qaida ties and/or affiliates."

"related terrorist organizations" "and/or affiliates" sounds innocuous - but is it?

He did make sure to mention that twice, and one has to wonder given the governments penchant for collecting membership details on domestic organizations that oppose it - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/ - do those people now have to worry about being "tapped", too?.

If this kind of government by Executive fiat isn't reined in - and quickly - what you're going to see is more and more instances of presumed "Presidential power", further and more intrusive use of "Presidential EMERGENCY Powers" - with ZERO accountability - and it will result, ultimately, in total abrogation of the Constitution.

You should really read the entire speech.

Find and CALL your Senator! The message is simple:

"I am calling as your constituent to urge you to let ALL the 'sunset" provisions SUNSET."

http://www.theorator.com/senate.html

It is the only course of action that remains viable in getting the message across.