Attorney General John Ashcroft has repeatedly rebuffed requests by Congress and public interest groups for basic information about how the Patriot Act is being used. Now – in a cynical public relations ploy – Ashcroft has released a thirty-page piece of propaganda wrapped in the guise of public disclosure. The document does not contain information needed for members of Congress to make an informed decision about whether to extend provisions which expire in 2005. Instead, it avoids key issues, distorts basic law and presents a self-serving selection of Patriot Act "successes." Sign the petition calling for the removal of John Ashcroft.
...The central claim in the Justice Department report is that – presumably with the assistance of the PATRIOT Act – the Department has charged "310 defendants with criminal offenses as a result of terrorism investigations" since 9/11 "and 179 of those defendants have already been convicted." The carefully chosen language deftly avoids the central question, which is not how many people were convicted of routine criminal offenses, but how many were convicted of terrorist crimes. Without that information there is no way for Congress to evaluate whether the Patriot Act is an effective tool against terrorism.
...The report entirely avoids some of the most controversial sections of the Patriot Act. Specifically, there is no mention of Section 213 (which permits "sneak-and-peak" searches and seizures), Section 215 (which allows the government to seize any tangible thing from any person pursuant to a terrorist investigation) and Section 505 (which allows the Justice Department to compel the production of documents). With other controversial provisions, such Section 214 (which eased restrictions on wiretaps for non-terrorists), the report praises the value of the provisions but provides no information as to how or how often they have been used. Likewise, there is no actual information about how Section 206 (which permits vague authorizations for wiretaps) is being used – but the Justice Department does helpfully provide a hypothetical example of how it might be used.
...The report repeatedly implies our choices are to either extend the Patriot Act exactly as it exists now or revert back to the law as it existed before 9/11. But this is a false choice. There are legislative proposals that would preserve the provisions of the Patriot Act that are effective against terrorism while protecting civil liberties. Our favorites: The Civil Liberties Restoration Act and the SAFE Act.
Source: Progress Report
...The central claim in the Justice Department report is that – presumably with the assistance of the PATRIOT Act – the Department has charged "310 defendants with criminal offenses as a result of terrorism investigations" since 9/11 "and 179 of those defendants have already been convicted." The carefully chosen language deftly avoids the central question, which is not how many people were convicted of routine criminal offenses, but how many were convicted of terrorist crimes. Without that information there is no way for Congress to evaluate whether the Patriot Act is an effective tool against terrorism.
...The report entirely avoids some of the most controversial sections of the Patriot Act. Specifically, there is no mention of Section 213 (which permits "sneak-and-peak" searches and seizures), Section 215 (which allows the government to seize any tangible thing from any person pursuant to a terrorist investigation) and Section 505 (which allows the Justice Department to compel the production of documents). With other controversial provisions, such Section 214 (which eased restrictions on wiretaps for non-terrorists), the report praises the value of the provisions but provides no information as to how or how often they have been used. Likewise, there is no actual information about how Section 206 (which permits vague authorizations for wiretaps) is being used – but the Justice Department does helpfully provide a hypothetical example of how it might be used.
...The report repeatedly implies our choices are to either extend the Patriot Act exactly as it exists now or revert back to the law as it existed before 9/11. But this is a false choice. There are legislative proposals that would preserve the provisions of the Patriot Act that are effective against terrorism while protecting civil liberties. Our favorites: The Civil Liberties Restoration Act and the SAFE Act.
The Progress Report questions AssKKKroft's "sincerity" in testifying before the Worthless Commission. Perhaps he didn't think they were sincere in their concerns about the PATRIOT Act. After all, they didn't read it before they voted to enact it.
....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. There may be some delay before your comment is published. It all depends on how much time M has in the day. But please comment!