Patriot Act


Patriot Act in Action?

Looks like the feds are using the Patriot Act to watch and evaluate you in many ways:

When Rebecca Foster offered to serve on the board of her homeowners association, she figured the biggest sacrifice involved her time.
But because of the requirements of the Patriot Act, the Las Vegas resident feels her volunteerism could come with a steeper price — her privacy.
Foster first became perturbed two months ago when her association’s new bank sent each board member a letter. Community Association Banc, a division of First National Bank of Nevada, had requested the dates of birth and Social Security and driver’s license numbers for any board members with check-signing privileges on the account.
The personal information was necessary, the bank said in the Aug. 27 letter, “to look for any derogatory banking information” and “to check them against the government’s terrorist list.”

Just say no and use cash.
Via Hit and Run.


Interview with the Patriot Act

Dong Resin interviews the Patriot Act:

DR: Right, yeah. Now, I thought your name was an attempt to sell you as, you know, “good for American citizens”, yet another big pander from the current administration, as in”no child left behind.” Not the case?
PA: Yeah, a lot of people have taken it that way, but really, if you think about it for even half a second… exactly who needed to be sold? Where was the big scary resistance that I had to push through?
Face it, I could have been named “The Let’s Knife-Rape Dakota Fanning For Satan Act”, and no one would have twitched. I passed though congress like greased shit through a goose with nary a peep. Nobody really had the stones to open their cry-holes after 9/11, did they.

There is more. Laugh or cry as it suits.
Via Gregory Harris at Planet Swank.


ashcroft: once a civil libertarian?

The American Bar Association Journal has an interesting article on Cyber-Libertarians which focuses primarily on EPIC, the Elecronic Privacy Information Center.
I was somewhat surprised by this comment by David Sobel, EPIC’s co-founder and general counsel:

�We were actually guardedly optimistic when [Ashcroft] became attorney general,� says Sobel. �As a senator he used some of the most stridently anti-federal-law-enforcement rhetoric I�d seen come out of the Senate�just a step short of calling them �jackbooted thugs.� �

Talk about power corrupting someone. Or maybe he hasn’t changed at all and it is ok if they are his ‘jackbooted thugs.’
I suspect the latter is the case. In answer to the opening question: probably not.
Via beSpacific.


Secret Trials

What is the justice department hiding? It is inconceivable to me that there is anything that justifies completely hiding a legal proceding from public scrutiny:

Yet this seemingly phantom case does exist – and is now headed to the US Supreme Court in what could produce a significant test of a question as old as the Star Chamber, abolished in 17th-century England: How far should a policy of total secrecy extend into a system of justice?

Dan Gilmour argues:

If the Supreme Court rules, as I suspect it will, that the White House is free to tear up the Bill of Rights under the guise of fighting terrorism (or fighting illegal drugs, the pretext that was used to basically destroy the 4th Amendment under previous administrations), then no one is safe from the predations of a rogue government in the future

Hmmmm, what about a rogue government in the present?
Via Secrecy News.


Who are the Terrorists?

Leah Roffman, a freshman at Tufts University closes an essay on the Patriot Act with this:

Americans fear a terrorist takeover because terrorists would repeal our rights, threaten our safety, and disregard accountability to citizens. But our current government is doing all of those things right now. I might even become a victim of the USA governmental spying team just for saying so.

’nuff said.