Yeah, it sure is arrogant of me to like the Homeland Security Act arming our commercial airline pilots while simultaneously knocking those who post on FR as though the HSA was the end of all freedom. < /SARCASM >
Posted on 11/26/2002 2:29:50 PM PST by Sparta
WASHINGTON — The government agreed to tell the American Civil Liberties Union by Jan. 15 which documents it would release about increased surveillance in the United States under a law passed in response to the terrorist attacks.
In response to a suit brought by the ACLU and other groups, the Justice Department also said it would supply a list of documents that it would keep confidential, citing national security concerns. The ACLU could challenge the decision to withhold any documents.
The agreement was reached Tuesday before U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle, who is hearing the case growing out of an Aug. 21 request filed under the Freedom of Information Act.
The civil liberties group wants to know how the government is carrying out the USA PATRIOT Act, passed in response to Sept. 11. The new law gives the government new powers to obtain personal information about U.S. citizens in an attempt to stop future terrorist attacks.
ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer asked for a specific date for the Justice Department to provide the information, saying that another federal judge set a deadline for the Energy Department to release documents and e-mails concerning Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force. "It's reasonable to ask for a fixed date," he said.
Justice Department lawyer Anthony J. Coppolino said the government needed until mid-January because the ACLU request was being reviewed by several agencies. He said the government had produced 163 pages of information, but needed to check with the various agencies, including the Immigration and Naturalization Service, intelligence and the criminal division to see if the information could be released.
Huvelle said the government was working toward meeting the ACLU's request.
"This is a matter of great public interest," Huvelle said. "I am not unimpressed by the efforts of the government to comply. The government is moving heaven and earth to get what you want."
The ACLU asked the Justice Department for the number of times it has asked libraries or bookstores for lists of purchases or for the identities of those who have bought certain books; how many times law enforcement officials have entered people's homes without letting them know until later; how many times they have approved phone traces of people not accused of any crimes; and how many times they have investigated Americans for writing letters to newspapers, attending rallies or other First Amendment-protected activities.
Yeah, it sure is arrogant of me to like the Homeland Security Act arming our commercial airline pilots while simultaneously knocking those who post on FR as though the HSA was the end of all freedom. < /SARCASM >
Really?
It looks to me that the 4th Amendment has been thrown out, and parts of the 1st.
Oh please. How does the Homeland Security Act specificly forbid you from being secure in your "person"?
How, specificly, did I fail to take that eventuality into consideration?
4th Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Burglarizing a home is OK under HSA.
See if you can find that in the 4th Amendment?
I'm not trying to be nit picking
It's a dangerous precedent
Of course, the Homeland Security Act explicitly BANS the creation of a National ID Card. No wonder you hate that Act so much...
That would be great, if it was retroactive and would eliminate our currently existing de-facto National ID Card, the Social Security Card. Adding that little piece of fluff to the HSA was a placebo, that was tossed out there like a bone to a watchdog, to divert attention away from the 30 pages of Title II and parts of 17 pages in Title VIII of the Homeland Fatherland Security Act, that virtually shreds the 4th Amendment and bores holes through six other Amendments in the Bill of Rights.
In case you haven't noticed, it authorizes and funds a mammoth database that will become a depository for every piece of personal information about you and every other American. The data that will be collected will include, but not be limited to, every credit card purchase that you make, every bank deposit that you make, every check that you write, every web site that you visit, every email address that you send to or receive from, every travel reservation that you make, every toll plaza that you pass through, every magazine subscription that you take, every complaint against you from nosy neighbors and if you have OnStar in your car, the location of your car at certain times of day.
With all that to draw from, why waste money developing a National ID Card. They'll be able to follow your every move without it. Buy some ammo with a credit card and you are identified as a "gun nut". Write a check for a significant amount to your church and you're a "religious wacko". Visit FreeRepublic.com (not even posting) and you're a "right-wing fanatic". Within a few months of that system becoming active, they'll have you ID'ed and categorized (in all likelihood, categorized wrong).
Do anything that is not within the accepted norm and you will find yourself investigated. How long do you think you will keep your job or your clients after the feds show up and start asking questions about you, all because you bought gas in a town 200 miles from your home too often and for no apparent reason, even though you were doing nothing more subversive than visiting your ailing aunt. Of course, what is considered the accepted norm will change from administration to administration. If you are politically active enough to post here, then sooner or later, you'll be the subject of an investigation.
Then there is the problem of having all that information about you made public. Read Title II, Sec. 214(1)(D). Information collected about you "shall not, without the written consent of the person or entity submitting such information, be used or disclosed by any officer or employee of the United States..." Notice that it does not require your consent, but that of the submitter. Furthermore, under the HSA, the submitter is protected from civil suit for granting that permission.
Of the 475 pages of the HSA, only about 60 actually contain provisions that could be considered useful in homeland defense. Most of the rest is fluff that sounds good, but serves no more purpose than to enrich some congressman's district. That much is normal - unfortunate, but normal. It is the 47 pages that covers the Information Awareness Office and their ominous database that more than negates the little good that is in the rest of the act. In those 47 pages, they completely gut the 4th Amendment. Nicolai Ceausescu would be proud.
One of the reasons that I most often vote for Republicans, to prevent this sort of infringement on our rights. But, it seems that now that they are in power, they are proving to be even worse than the Democrats, when it comes to stripping us of our rights.
The time has come to replace most of them in the next primary. Even one of my favorite Senators, Kay Bailey Hutchison, has lost my vote on this one. There is no excuse for such a blatant attack on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, especially since this database does nothing to fight terrorism.
Wow, Jesse represents my state. I think I'd know if I was more conservative than him or not. Let's see I voted for Jesse every election I could vote in, I agree with him on everything except this bill, and I'm not conservative enough for you? I even went along for a short while on the explanation of CFR
So you'll see and hear lots of rubbish from the disruptors about the Homeland Security Act, but all that does is expose the fakers from the true conservatives.
So you'll see and hear lots of rubbish from mindless 'bots who would sell everything they have and live in a box if the Republican party told them to. Nope, sorry, not here, not anymore. After this state elected the saddest possible replacement for the honorable Sen. Helms (considering her power grabbing past), and the administration's capitulation on practically anything conservative, all in the name of safety, I just don't see it anymore. The power should be returned to the people, not turned on them.
I support some Republicans still. Helms, Thurmond, Paul, and some from my state in the House. But I'm having a problem finding anyone in the Republican party that's able to answer a question about the far reaching effects of these bills after the 'war on terrorism'. So which is it? Are you naive enough to believe that this power will sunset like some were here in the past or are you naive enough to believe this 'war on terrorism' will go away. Either case you're mistaken. History has proven time and again, once the government starts one of these unconstitutional wars they never go away (War on Poverty, mid 60s, War on Illiteracy, 70s, War on Drugs, mid 80s, have I forgotten any that are still going on?). And history also proves that once the government tastes the power, it ends up within a few decades rearing its head twice as strong.
I imagine you're going to tell me now Republicans will be in office every day of my life, and as a Christian I won't have to worry about Democrats getting in office and turning this machine on religious conservatives. That's great, but who's going to protect us from Sec. Powell?!?
Show that paragraph to me in the HSA bill.
Of all things....Me Too !!
Rubbish. It isn't even an attack on the Constitution. That information is ALREADY is existing databases and available for sale. That the government would buy or accept donations of that data hardly interferes in your rights.
As for fighting terrorism, an integrated database will permit the flagging of people who purchase dual-use items (e.g. diesel and fertilizer, incubators and certain bacteria, etc.). WalMart has been doing that very thing for years.
How's that War on Alcohol going? Oh yeah, it got repealed. War on Slavery? Jim Crowe War on Civil Rights? War on Pornography?
Yup, they NEVER go away... < /SARCASM >
Don't remember one. I remember a war on state's rights though. BTW, did you realize that at the time of the War of Southern Independence there were less than 200,000 people in the Abolition Party? Out of a nation of 20 million. A percentage that small doesn't start a war. Better look into your history books again. It wasn't over slavery. Missed out on that one
Jim Crowe War on Civil Rights?
Let's see, 13th Amendment passed in the mid 1860s, Civil Rights Act passed in the mid 1960s. Yep, that's about par for our government. 100 years during which most of the time they were involved in the segregation itself? Yep, that was a 'real' war.
War on Pornography?
Don't remember a government led war on pornography. Matter of fact there wasn't one. However there was the introduction of true liberalism and the final destruction of any semblance of what the Founders believed. Do what you want, not what's right.
Fact of the matter is that every one you mentioned either took an inordinate amount of time or it wasn't government led in the first place. Keep preaching safety comrade. Sooner or later we'll all disagree with the government and with the institution established this week, may God have mercy on us
Well, at least you are subtly admitting that you were wrong about government "Wars" lasting forever and never dying.
As for "every one" of them taking too long to end, the Volstead Act was repealed in what, 15 years? That ended the War on Alcohol in a relatively short amount of time. In contrast, Comstock's war on birth control lasted several decades.
But hey, at least one admission from you shows hope and progress for you. Congrats. Your eyes may yet be opened.
assuming they're both insured, that could be a win/win scenario, eh ?
It is. The government has the power to surreptitiously enter a suspects home. If that isn't burglary, what is?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.