Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Protect Libraries From FBI Snoops! (WI Op/Ed)
Wisconsin State Journal ^ | June 20, 2005 | Uncredited

Posted on 06/21/2005 7:58:19 AM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin

The U.S. House of Representatives dealt a blow to Big Brother last week.

The House voted 238-187 to protect our library records and bookstore receipts from willy-nilly government perusal.

The bipartisan vote sent a clear message to the U.S. Senate and to President Bush that the privacy rights of law-abiding American citizens must be respected even as the hard work of fighting and preventing terrorism continues.

Congress and the president are preparing to extend the Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism law quickly approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The president has threatened to veto the measure if Congress makes changes. The Senate should call the president's bluff by accepting the House change.

Libraries and bookstores are not havens for terrorists. They are learning centers for vast numbers of Americans who shouldn't have to worry about which titles or authors they happen to be reading.

Quirky taste in reading material shouldn't prompt or prop up bogus investigations of innocent bookworms. If the Justice Department or the FBI has good reason to suspect someone of terrorism, they should be able to convince a judge that a search warrant for library and bookstore records is warranted. The House change wouldn't prevent that.

A majority of Wisconsin's House members, including all four Democrats and Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Petri of Fond du Lac, voted to block easy government access to our reading records. Those favoring broad government power to peruse our library and bookstore records were U.S. Reps. Mark Green, R-Green Bay - who wants to be Wisconsin's next governor - Paul Ryan, R-Janesville, and James Sensenbrenner, R-Menomonee Falls.

The federal government hasn't even used the provision to obtain library or bookstore records, according to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. If that's the case, why leave this broad, invasive power in place? By the government's own admission, it hasn't done any good and hasn't been needed despite significant and numerous terrorism warnings issued by the government in recent years.

In all likelihood, a potential terrorist would use the Internet to find information for their plot - not the public library or a Borders. And accessing the Internet takes little more than a cheap computer plugged into a phone line at a motel.

Adding to the uselessness of government snooping powers at libraries is the fact that many libraries regularly purge from their computers everything but overdue items.

Even if staunch proponents of a sweeping Patriot Act remain unconvinced, the House threw them a bone. The House version of the Patriot Act carves out permission for government to seek records on Internet use at libraries.

We doubt that power will be any help in terrorism prevention and prosecution, either. But it's less offensive because many libraries limit access to certain Web sites, such as those devoted to pornography.

The Patriot Act may still be needed to make sure our nation is adequately protected. But it's continuation must be coupled with careful thought and concern for the privacy rights of ordinary Americans.

The House vote last week was a welcome step toward protecting people's lives and their liberty.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: aclulist; donutwatch; fbi; govwatch; libertarians; library; patriotact
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last
To: hiramknight

So internet records are public property?


41 posted on 06/21/2005 9:47:58 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mysterio


A PUBLIC library is niether a "person, houses, papers, or effects,"......IT'S PUBLIC!!!!


42 posted on 06/21/2005 9:49:52 AM PDT by hiramknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve

Hoe does anybody know we all didn't have a microchip inserted under our skin at birth at and that everything we do isn't controlled by some giant being as part of an intergalactical board game that only takes 15 minutes in his time to play?????????? HHHHMMMMMM??????????


43 posted on 06/21/2005 9:55:21 AM PDT by hiramknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hiramknight

Good point!


44 posted on 06/21/2005 9:56:41 AM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: hiramknight

People should have free access to information without fear of government reprisals. Do you disagree?


45 posted on 06/21/2005 9:59:22 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

One group of terrorists in New York went to the municipal library and studied the plans of the Lincoln Tunnel, etc., in order to plan how to place their bombs. These plans weren't the terrorists personal property; they belonged to the taxpayers.
Another case, if you believe the ACLU and the NYTimes, involved an attempt to discover who wrote a threat in the margins of a bio of Bin Laden. A later reader reported the writing and the FBI tried to find out who had borrowed the book. I'm not sure that people have a right to make terrorist threats, in library books or elsewhere.


46 posted on 06/21/2005 10:06:21 AM PDT by joylyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
Will any of this help keep video-rentals secret?

It seems to me, that the general public had no right to know which videos Clarence Thomas rented.

47 posted on 06/21/2005 10:07:50 AM PDT by syriacus (1st Michael couldn't stand to live without Terri. Then he couldn't stand to live with her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joylyn
No, but people have a right to read what they want without the government looking over their shoulder at all times.

I think a group of psycho terrorists caused 9/11. I don't think our freedom and liberty was to blame. And I don't see how giving government free reign to snoop and spy as it has always wanted to is going to buy us any safety.

As usual, tyranny is incremental, and as usual, it is greeted with the thunderous applause of those who lack foresight.
48 posted on 06/21/2005 10:10:00 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

As far as the internet goes. If it's an account generated on a "PUBLIC" terminal, in a "PUBLIC" library payed for with "PUBLIC" tax dollars....YES!!

If it's done with your own "PERSONAL" and "PRIVATE" computer.....no

Get it?? PUBLIC versus PRIVATE


49 posted on 06/21/2005 10:12:21 AM PDT by hiramknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

I'm not convinced that a library, even a public one, is
a venue devoid of the expectation of privacy. Since the
issue is not all that clear to me, the error should be
on the side of the BoR.

Let them convince a judge of probable cause, get a warrant,
then conduct the search.

This was a stupid provision, giving ammo to liberals far
in excess of its actual investigative value.


50 posted on 06/21/2005 10:16:33 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

And they do as long as it's not information on bomb making being attained by some guy here on a student visa who's not going to school, has been here for a month, and who's last name Alhashani.


51 posted on 06/21/2005 10:17:19 AM PDT by hiramknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: hiramknight

It's amazing to me that you can support this just because your party is in power.


52 posted on 06/21/2005 10:23:43 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: inquest
"All it did was carve out the narrowest of exceptions in order to please a narrow constituency of liberals."

When did the American Conservative Union become part of a 'narrow constituency of liberals'?
53 posted on 06/21/2005 10:25:52 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hiramknight

And on top of that, they don't have to tell you that they searched your records, and the librarian can be PROSECUTED for telling you. Who can possibly support that?


54 posted on 06/21/2005 10:26:34 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
"It's amazing to me that you can support this just because your party is in power."

Can you imagine how rabid the cries of 'treason' would be if this were being done under the Clinton administration?
55 posted on 06/21/2005 10:28:24 AM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent

I used to lurk here in the late '90s, so yes. And I remember Ashcroft wrote a long article about not sacrificing liberty to the federal government around then. But for the life of me, I can't find it now.


56 posted on 06/21/2005 10:30:27 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

I support this because I am a husband and father who wants people who would like to do harm to my family simply because we are American to be hunted down and killed by whatever means possible by my government....not because my party is in power.


57 posted on 06/21/2005 10:30:29 AM PDT by hiramknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
And on top of that, they don't have to tell you that they searched your records, and the librarian can be PROSECUTED for telling you. Who can possibly support that?

If you did nothing wrong, than you have nothing to hide.

/sarcasm

58 posted on 06/21/2005 10:33:16 AM PDT by to_zion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: hiramknight
Why do you suppose our founding fathers put restrictions on the federal government in the first place?

Will you trust future administrations to not abuse these new powers? Have you read the definition of "domestic terrorism" in the "patriot" act? The "patriot" act turns even our founding fathers into "terrorists."
59 posted on 06/21/2005 10:34:40 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
Can you imagine how rabid the cries of 'treason' would be if this were being done under the Clinton administration?

But they say they are more secure now, yet they have lost the freedom to think and act for themselves.

60 posted on 06/21/2005 10:35:52 AM PDT by to_zion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson