InvestorsHub Logo

thepennyking

04/07/04 1:50 AM

#39565 RE: brainlessone #39531

Congress is poised to approve new legislation that amounts to the first substantive expansion of the controversial USA Patriot Act since it was approved just after the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and the Pentagon.

Acting at the Bush administration's behest, a joint House-Senate conference committee has approved a provision in the 2004 Intelligence Authorization bill that will permit the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to demand records from a number of businesses – without the approval of a judge or grand jury – if it deems them relevant to a counter-terrorism investigation.

The measure would extend the FBI's power to seize records from banks and credit unions to securities dealers, currency exchanges, travel agencies, car dealers, post offices, casinos, pawnbrokers and any other business that, according to the government, has a "high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax or regulatory matters." Such seizures could be carried out with the approval of the judicial branch of government.

Until now only banks, credit unions, and similar financial institutions were obliged to turn over such records on the FBI's demand.

Shortly after the conference agreement was reached, the House of Representatives approved the underlying authorization bill by a margin of 263 to 163. The measure is expected to pass the Senate shortly.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said it was "disappointed" with the House's approval, but also expressed satisfaction that a number of lawmakers on both left and right decided to oppose the bill because they oppose the records provision, whose inclusion in the bill was discovered by staff aides only last week.

Particularly notable in Thursday's House vote was the defection by several conservative Republicans from the administration's fold.

"This PATRIOT Act expansion was the only controversial part of this legislation, and it prompted more than a third of the House, including 15 conservative Republicans, to change what is normally a cakewalk vote into something truly contested," said Timothy Edgar, ACLU Legislative Counsel.

"One need look no further than this vote to get an effective gauge of the PATRIOT Act's lack of popularity on Capitol Hill and among the American people," he said.

The USA PATRIOT Act – which gives unprecedented powers to the FBI and the federal government as a whole and was rammed through Congress at the administration's behest just six weeks after the 9/11 attacks – has evoked great controversy.

An unusual coalition of liberal, left, and right-wing groups is convinced that the law's expansion of the government's surveillance and investigatory powers threatens individual freedoms and privacy rights.

More than 200 local governments, including some of the country's largest cities, have approved resolutions upholding the full enjoyment of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution and urging a narrowing of the USA PATRIOT Act, while the Senate Judiciary Committee has been holding a series of critical hearings over the past month about the Act's impact.

Members of the Judiciary Committee, including Republican Larry Craig of Idaho and five Democratic senators, sent a letter to the conference committee earlier this week urging it strip the new provision from the intelligence bill so that it could be taken up by their Committee in public hearings. The provision has never been publicly debated.

"I'm concerned about this," Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin, who tried unsuccessfully to limit the life of the new provision, told the New York Times. "The idea of expanding the powers of government gives everyone pause except the Republican leadership."

The government wants these powers in order to more effectively prosecute the "war on terrorism," although critics warn that, once given these powers, the FBI may use them in cases that are not relevant to terrorism in order to gather evidence against other targets of investigation.

Indeed, recent Senate hearings have covered incidents in which information about individuals was obtained by the FBI through the use of its counter-terrorism powers even though the investigations were directed against what the ACLU called "garden-variety criminals."

The provision not only permits the FBI to seize records from more kinds of businesses; it also forbids businesses from informing their clients about the seizures.

In that respect, it is comparable to a particularly controversial section of the PATRIOT Act permitting the FBI to seek an order for library records for an "investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities" and imposing a gag order on librarians, who are prohibited from telling anyone that the FBI demanded the records. Librarians and civil-liberties groups have sued the government to have that section declared unconstitutional.

"The more checks and balances against government abuse are eroded, the greater that abuse," said the ACLU's Edgar. "We're going to regret these initiatives down the road."

Jim Lobe is a political analyst with Foreign Policy in Focus (online at www.fpif.org). He also writes regularly for Inter Press Service. He can be reached at: jlobe@starpower.net



Other Recent Articles by Jim Lobe


* New Leak Smells of Neocon Desperation
* Murder of UN Worker Spotlights Resurgence of Taliban
* Washington's New Sound and Fury Hide Fear and Worry

* Brave Face Belies Administration's Panic

* One Meal a Day for Most Palestinians

* Relaxed US Rules Fuelled Toxic ''Ghost Ships''

* Rumsfeld Takes More Friendly Fire

* Hawks Fleeing the Coop: Does the Departure of a Recent Pentagon Hawk Foreshadow a Policy Shift?

* "What's Gonna Happen With Feith?”

* Postwar Casualties Rise Amid Disarray in US Plans

* Bush Stance on Syria Hit Shows Neocons Still Hold Sway

* We Report, You Get it Wrong

* Cheney's Mask is Slipping

* US Dominates Arms Sales to Third World

* Sharp Increase in US Military Aid to Latin America

* Is the Neocon Agenda for Pax Americana Losing Steam?




goodluck

04/07/04 8:38 AM

#39592 RE: brainlessone #39531

so with thoughts like this flying around, do you really beleive you have any idea what goes through their mind

I'm not the one who claims to know what "they" want--that is the neocon game. "They" want, according to the neocons, the "same" things we do. All except a very few who are jealous or are afraid of losing their priveleges under a Shia regime, and those few evil ones want to kill because they hate life or want to retain their privileges. That in a nutshell is the neocon "analysis" of the Iraqi situation. They are the ones who reduce iraqis to their own abstractions, not me. That is one of the reason I opposed this intervention from the beginning, though not the only one.

Yes, i agree with Kay. Except that I think our universe is parallel to them, too. We've had this conversation before, you may recall. You are the objectivist, and while I have one foot in the objectivist camp, I also think that there are alternative logics that work in those alternative universes that we mostly don't have a clue about. They are "Byzantine" and opaque to us, but not opaque to those who live inside it. I daresay some of your and my ancestors lived in such an opaque world that we would not really understand ourselves if we were directly confronted with it.

re: Kay concluded, "An analyst looks for rational explanations and usually finds them in the technical realm they're used to, but Iraq was almost like a parallel universe. The explanations were driven not by technical reasons but by the moral and personal depravity engendered by the regime. A rational person would look at it one way, and it would be completely wrong, because in this parallel universe there was a different set of rules."