July 10, 2004
These stories will, I'm sure, help feel much more at ease.
It is pretty clear that the bushies have been pretty successful so far in building their culture of fear. So when someone like Washington Representative Adam Smith (D) says:
No, I'm sorry, I actually understand the issue.when asked why he voted against the Sanders amendment I have to believe him and believe he means he supports the kind of behaviour depicted in these two stories. Certainly his broken understanding of the Patriot Act supports this view:
Smith, a member of the Armed Services and International Relations committees, disputed statements by some critics that the law allows investigators to gather sensitive information on suspected terrorists without a warrant or probable cause.Take a quick look at Section 215. Sure it requires a warrant but the only probably cause that is required is that
"If that was true I would vote against it, no doubt," he said. "But it's not true. You have to get a warrant, you have to show probable cause and there's no evidence that this has been abused."
shall specify that the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation conducted in accordance with subsection (a)(2) to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.In other words the alleged probable cause is the word of the investigator. No other evidence is required. I don't think this is what most of us understand by probably cause.
Isn't it time to rise up and say NO??Posted by Steve on July 10, 2004