Comments on: Judge deals blow to Patriot Act
He blocks FBI from using national security letters, a controversial surveillance tool that has been misused in the past.
He blocks FBI from using national security letters, a controversial surveillance tool that has been misused in the past.
January 5, 2010 7:48 PM PST
January 5, 2010 6:00 PM PST
January 5, 2010 5:27 PM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
Hopefully the senate and congress are paying attention as it seems our rights and well being take a back seat to profit these days.
Hopefully there are more judges like Judge Victor Marrero out there...
Of course we all have things to hide, it's called privacy. The problem is you can justify and any invasion with that phrase. Let's carry this "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" logic to an extreme. Since you have nothing to hide you won't mind if camera's are installed in your house to cover every angle and every nook and crany and left on and monitored 24/7/365.
A few responses to the assertion "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" and why it's incorrect:
1. If I am not doing anything wrong, you have no cause to watch me
2. Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition.
3. Because you might do something wrong with my information.
4. It assumes that the government is full of good people who are infallible and would never abuse their power (something history tells us is not the case). Even if by some chance it is true at this momment, we can not be sure it remain so in the future. The system of checks and balances serves as protection from such corruption.
"Too much paranoia"
Apparently you have read any of the FBI's history.
When given power without an appropriate check, they've abused it. The Nixon era alone is enough reason to be skeptical of unchecked government power. They've already admitted around 3,000 NSLs were obtained and used improperly.
T
Given the FBI's history of abuse, judical oversight is a must
Luckily in this case study, we have a Judge who grew up in the last era where annual educational funds weren't less than the cost of a single B2 Bomber. Fortunately for the World Bankers, this Judge will be overturned before the drama is over, the Patriot Act will be upheld, and nothing will have ever changed.
You can't stop the World Banks. The run all countries respectively, and control information in all sectors...including this website. The produce the candidates with great resumes and the organizations snap them up not knowing that they are loyal to groups that have been in control for centuries.
Fear not, you have no control, you will never have any control, and that's they way you like it.
In whose interest is it anyway?
I don't recall being asked.
Why bother anyway, the whole debacle unravelled with or without consideration of my rights.
Good on the "Clinton appointed judge", if you don't agree with him, then I think I do.
This whole neo-con thing rolls steadily onwards,
ignorant of the rights of those who do not subscribe to their "world view", and enduring fear of a world that doesn't conform to their blinkered
ignorance.
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Live free or die trying!! Amen.
Go Cows!
Mike
If you're really a patriot, you will defend the constitution. If you're a coward, you'll defend the elite who want to subvert it.
Real men stand up to fascism. Cowardly men become boot lickers.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
This tells me this: no matter how hard the Bush administration tries to pass laws trampling our privacy rights, they are unable to do anything useful with the information they collect. Obviously, these terrorists must be either using old school communication techniques (like oh, smoke signals, invisible ink, etc.) or they are using top-notch encryption technology that even in 50 years no one will be able to crack.
So spying on everyone trying desperately to fish for something is not the way. The few wannabe terrorists that get caught in the process deserve to be caught, but the top-dogs remain at large (unless they get sold-out by disgruntled ex-collaborators).
How about we fix these wide-open borders first??? Why waste everybody?s time with security checkpoints & fingerprinting at airports when every ?terrorist? can walk right in down south? Saying that throwing out the Patriot Act would increase our risk for terrorist attacks is, to me, Bush propaganda, nothing more.
I hope we all remember the last time a mad man wanted the entire world to look the same and have the same religious beliefs.
As far as I am concerned, all of The Patriot Act can stay right where it is for now. We have too many people posting too many messages about the dissatisfaction they feel with this government.
Fighting publicly about your own country is a time of war is just what the enemy needs!
Mr. Bush seems to have to think for the short term to be popular (does not work obviously) and so destroys the founding principles of this nation. OMG it is such a disaster to erode the constitution. Let us live in total safety as robots carefully watched, or let us live at risk with our freedom intact. I am ashamed of my president, and where this country is going. Please shut down the power of this president as the constitution was designed to do. Erosion of the balance of power in the three branches of government is the biggest disaster in our history, eclipsing any 9/11 occurence.
Thank you Judge, may more of us take a stand to protect our privacy. I don't think I have anything to hide, but I reserve the right to.
Ashamed fellow born in the USA
The agency, an unreferenced concept in the constitution plays a greater role in our lives than what most people think.
Common Sense Freedom
Freedom does not require democracy. Outrageous? From the statements made by many politicians on the left and right, you would think that establishing democracy in a nation automatically establishes freedom. According to my understanding of the meaning of the word freedom, that is not true. Just because a majority of a population gets their way does not mean their nation is free anymore than a nation where only the tyrant and his/her groupies get their way is a free nation. Saddam Hussein and Adolph Hitler would probably argue that they have all the freedom in their nation one would need and those who have a problem with the government monitoring them must be doing something wrong! The meaning of freedom can obviously vary with each individual. Freedom's definition is like a box that can contain a few or many different items that determine its meaning. My definition for freedom is the right of all humans to choose to believe, think, communicate and/or act as they choose, unhindered by any other individual, group or government, as long as that freedom does not cause significant physical harm to another human. I leave out psychological harm, not because it is not real, but because it is primarily subjective and is hard to measure objectively. A person can become obsessed for example after finding out that another person has sexual fantasies about them having various kinds of sexual interactions together. This person can choose to make him/herself a victim by obsessing over this knowledge. He/she is not directly physically hurt by the thoughts of the fantasizer but he/she might choose to obsess over it to where they are psychologically damaged and eventually physically damaged. As another example, a parent may not approve of a child because of his/her behavior and the child may continue to feel like they are no good their whole life. Justice is not served by these free will "victims" causing the freedom of the supposed victimizer to be curtailed. I do not believe one human's freedom should be taken away because another human, group or government hates that human's choice and might even believe it is evil, like listening to heavy metal or rap music. For a nation to be truly free, the ruling powers, president or king, majority or minority, must recognize that all humans have been given certain inalienable rights by their creator. Much of the Patriot act would not be supported by our nations original patriots. We need to return to a common sense balanced approach to freedom and security.
- Thank You
- by Claire Gaeta September 22, 2007 12:12 PM PDT
- Right, Wrong or indifferent...this is our country. I watched the footage from September 11, 2001 recently, and it raised some questions.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(55 Comments)Where did the story originate that President Bush ignored terrorist attacks and read to children instead. The replay of the press statement made on that day by President Bush and his apology for cutting his visit short to the students in question seems to lead this back to the likes of Rosie O'Donnell and others.
It seems that common words among the leftists are "me", "my", "mine" and I. There is no consideration of the greater good and decorum and respect have long been lost.
The FBI is not interested in your extramarital affairs, your drug activity or the fact you failed to report $5.00 in interest on your taxes.
Recent arrests of students with pipe bombs right here make a strong arguement for continued security.
I have a pot of coffee on if anyone needs to wake up!