Posted on 11/13/2002 7:47:59 PM PST by DAnconia55
You Are a Suspect
By WILLIAM SAFIRE
ASHINGTON — If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you:
Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade your receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as "a virtual, centralized grand database."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Recognize this?
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.
Seems to me that we just caught a glimpse of how well this works in the sniper "investigation." They will not find one terrorist, but they will be able to terrorize innocent citizens who exhibit patterns that fit their profiles--profiles that are completely off base.
And what do you think people like Hillary would do with such power? She certainly isn't interested in catching terrorists!
Yep. Such a database, coupled with the general ineptness of the feds, would be worthless as a counter-terrorist tool. But if you just want to do a name search or SSN search, it would work just fine for dishing up a lot of info on the intended target.
You won't wipe out Islam, but you WILL succeed in wiping out what is left of the Constitution.
This database proposal is the EXACT SAME methodology as that used by the gun grabbers. In response to a problem, be it terrorism or the DC sniper, propose a law or program that will do NOTHING to fix the problem but will place the beginnings of a Constitutional restriction on the populace. Then, when that program does not achieve the desired results, claim we have to do more of it - so the Patriot Act provisions for monitoring business transactions in excess of $10,000 will then be dropped to $1,000, then $100, and then all transactions will be included. This of course will make the database even more unwieldy for modeling or investigation, but it will get people accustomed to surrendering their private information for the illusion that it somehow improves security.
The feds don't need this system to improve security. There were State Department guidelines in place that should have denied almost all of the 9/11 hijackers entry into this country. They were deliberately overridden. There was enough information in the FBI pipeline to identify the potential 9/11 threat and act against it. It was deliberately stifled. Malvo should have been deported according to INS guidelines. He was deliberately allowed to stay. There was enough information in the sniper database to clearly indicate the Caprice as a lead candidate for the sniper vehicle. It was deliberately ignored.
The feds do not need more information - they instead need to perform a massive overhaul on their attitudes and methodologies, and use the existing information stream that is already adequate. The fact that they chose to do the opposite may be through incompetence or deliberatation - but the end result is the same - Americans are killed, and the feds, instead of looking to their own problems, use the events as an excuse to demand that private citizens give up more of their liberties.
It is not. Private-sector financial transaction information that is currently provided to the feds consists of cash transactions at finanical institutions in excess of $10,000. The Patriot Act expanded that provision to include ANY business transaction in any form or currency with a value in excess of $10,000. The implementation of that provision has been postponed because the vast majority of businesses in this country were unaware it existed. That is the current state of reporting of financial data to the feds. I have worked in the financial sector for the last eight years, so I am somewhat familiar with this subject.
Allow me. I conduct a credit card transaction, and buy my wife a fur coat worth $11,000. That information is private, and has many FEDERAL protections about how a credit-card company can use or sell that data. However, under the Patriot Act, the credit card company will be required to report that transaction to the feds because it was in excess of $10,000, even though there is NO PROBABLE CAUSE that the transaction was in any way linked to either crime or terrorism.
Now, if the FBI has reason to believe that I am or may be a terrorist, and I am using a credit card, then, by all means, there should be an expidited process where they can obtain a warrant and get my purchase information. PROBABLE CAUSE EXISTS.
That is the issue here.
I Don't Like John Poindexter!
Right...and as mrsmith says:
Do you have any idea what he is talking about?
Does he?
Thanks to dirtboy, we seem to know more about the bill than Safire does, and yes, we should be concerned about what might be buried in it, but, Safire seems a bit off the mark here...
It's worth remembering he's a columnist (opinion) and not a reporter (at least a nod to the facts)...nevertheless, IMHO this piece seems uncharacteristically hysterical...
(and before anyone says "aHA! that's what *they* want you to think!", let me just state that emotions are good, but reality is better when seriousness is required, and "keep up the good work", db!)
The feds, for one. A good example is the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 2001. Made financial instutions around the country implement stringent controls on how they share customer data with third parties.
So privacy is an ongoing concern.
Congress needs to address many of these issues individually. The predilection toward legislation based on sensation, rather than reality needs to stop. So does the monolithic, one-shot, everything-to-everyone, sure-fire, one-size-fits-all, cure-all legislation.
There is no way they can honestly debate something this gargantuan. I’ll bet half of them haven’t even read the bill in its entirety. I am to the point where I think we should require a comprehensive test on each bill before they vote so we can ensure they have, at least read the damn thing!
I believe that only about six Congresscritters bothered to read the Patriot Bill prior to voting on it.
Warrantless searches of one's "papers and effects".
I think both of you are correct. There will inevitably be a lot of unconstitutional garbage that was put there either deliberately or by not considering the full implications of what is being proposed. And 88keys is also right - Safire does the matter no service by running around yelling that the sky is falling when instead he just got nailed upside the head by a paper boy throwing the Sunday Times. Defenders of this bill will be able to point to Safire's column and smugly proclaim that, since he has a couple of details wrong, his entire argument can therefore be rejected.
Yet, we have people running around here calling us anti-American because we simply want congress to do its job. If that is anti-American, then throw me in jail now!
Yet, we have people running around here calling us anti-American because we simply want congress to do its job. If that is anti-American, then throw me in jail now!
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.