Patriot Act Success....Failure?

Here is one.

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2003/October/03_crm_589.htm

"Faris admitted that upon returning to the United States from Pakistan in April 2002, he researched "gas cutters" - the equipment for severing bridge suspension cables - and the New York City bridge on the Internet. Between April 2002 and March 2003, he sent several coded messages through another individual to his longtime friend in Pakistan, indicating he had been unsuccessful in his attempts to obtain the necessary equipment."
"

The investigation was led by the FBI...correct?
Were they not empowered to follow known terrorists and supervise their activity pre-9/11 and pre-PA?

How could we know? We have access to one squillioneth of the necessary data to really conclude yes or no.

A more answerable question is whether we have reason to trust this administration in its pronouncements regarding the value of it. We don't.

I think the best we can hope for is a change of administration, a serious return to notions of transparency and honesty with a reconstituted congress actually being able to do its oversight job and that congress doing that oversight job.

The argument for the Patriot Act seems to be: There have been no new terrorist attacks in the U.S., so it must be working.

But think for a moment what would happen if there were another attack in the U.S. Would the administration scrap the Patriot Act as useless? Or tighten the screws on civil liberties even more?

It's a perfect strategy for them...

I think there is no validity to the claim that the Patriot Act has effectively prevented further terrorist attacks on US soil.
It just seems odd that the most staunch supporters haven't produced more than one instance where the PA has proven effective.
It's like administering an antibody to a population and cheering at it's success without clinical testing or anecdotal evidence supporting the claim that the antibody is even needed to sustain life...with or without it.

If the PA is, as Bush pumps it up to be, an essential executive act, then what tangible proof has he that it is/has been/is going to be effective in doing anything other than infringing further on the constitutional rights of the American people.

Mind you, seems he doesn't need congressional support to do that.

How would we know indeed.

A more answerable question is whether blatham and his fellow progressives have reason to trust this administration. Considering the fact that blatham and his fellow progressives are fundamentally incapable of trusting anyone to the right of the Rosenbergs (got to use it again!) the answer has to be: They don't.

What's with this "we" **** kimosabe? You may live in New York but when did you become a citizen?

No don't go getting your citizenship on account of me. I'm perfectly happy with you paying taxes and being unable to vote.

dear finnder (pre-adolescent Finnish person)

I never met Julius and Ethel, unless they are the genial couple who take in my hats for blocking.

I shan't be applying for US citizenship. But do recall that last election, my ex-wife who is American, cast her vote following upon my advices.

And I not only don't pay taxes here, I go out late and night and suck the coins from parking meters (an old story from the National Lampoon titled Fishmouth).

I think blatham and other are right, how can you tell and what rational person would want a terrorist act to happen to prove it don't work? Despite what most ultra conservatives in this forum might think, I don't think anyone (rational everyday people) would want that no matter their political outlook.

In any event, it appears that an extension has been granted to consider the more controversial aspects of the patriot act.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051222/ap_on_go_co/patriot_act

dear canuk

I am gratified that you have no plans for becoming a US citizen, as you will be limited to influencing a women who displayed her complete lack of judgment when she married you. Although the fact that she is your ex does perhaps indicate that her cognitive abilities improved over time.

I'm not worried about your failure to pay taxes. The one arm of our government we can always rely upon to doggedly carry out their duties is the IRS. When you least expect it, you will find yourself sitting across a desk from a bespectacled man with a pcoket protector and a short sleeve shirt, and you will experience terror beyond anything that can be produced by waterboarding.

And keep on sucking out those coins, and while you're at it, contemplate all of the hands that have touched them, and what else they have touched.

Now that the transit strike has been broken are you going to continue to walk the frigid streets of NY to express solidarity with your comrades?

I'm impressed.
One tangible instance of the success of the PA.
No wonder the Shrub is so horny to have this thing carry over into '06 and beyond.
One careless and slipshod want-to-be terrorist was nabbed on account of surveillance that could have otherwise been done by the FBI.

Is that all the right can produce indicating that trespassing on America's individual and collective freedoms is worthwhile?
...or would you prefer to bicker about Blatham's non-tax-paying-spousal-vote-advising?

I voted by proxy for an ex-pat who couldn't give a damn. Is that what this thread should evolve into?

I'm just curious why there isn't something Americans can put their fingers on that would have given Bush a mandate to encourage the continuation of the PA.
Sounds like it's expiration is well deserved.

The Patriot Act: Justice Department Claims Success

NPR.org, July 20, 2005 · The Justice Department credits the Patriot Act with expanding the government's arsenal of investigative tools, helping it crack several cases.

Law-enforcement officials say the act has greatly enhanced information sharing within the FBI, and with the intelligence community at large. The law helped erode the legal and bureaucratic "wall" that used to separate the intelligence and criminal sides of an investigation. Federal authorities say this wall is at least partly responsible for FBI and CIA intelligence failures prior to the attacks of Sept. 11.

Critics say the Patriot Act made it easier to spy on people. But the law's supporters praise it for correcting what they say were pointless double standards in investigative rules.

A look at some of the Patriot Act success stories the government cites:

Eased Restrictions on Information Sharing

The Justice Department says the Patriot Act facilitated its investigation of the "Lackawanna Six," a group of Yemeni-Americans who traveled to Afghanistan in 2001 to receive training at an al Qaeda-affiliated camp near Kandahar. In the summer of 2001, the FBI received an anonymous letter indicating that the six might be involved in criminal activity and associated with foreign terrorism.

Under previous law, the government says the FBI would have been compelled to pursue two separate investigations: one looking into possible drug crimes, the other investigating intelligence related to terrorist threats. The Patriot Act took down the "wall" between these two types of investigations, allowing case-sensitive information to be shared between the two groups, according to investigators.

Five of the "Lackawanna Six" pleaded guilty to providing material support to al Qaeda, and the sixth pleaded guilty to conducting unlawful transactions with al Qaeda. In 2003, they were sentenced to prison terms ranging from seven to 10 years.

The government characterized the group as a "sleeper cell," but some critics argue that there's no evidence the men posed an imminent threat. Defense attorneys claim the federal government coerced their clients into pleading guilty by implicitly threatening them with indefinite detention.

Secret Surveillance Tools

In a case similar to that of the "Lackawanna Six," members of "the Portland Seven" terror cell attempted to travel to Afghanistan in 2001 to join the Taliban in fighting the United States.

While investigating the case, law-enforcement agents learned that one member, Jeffrey Battle, had previously contemplated attacking Jewish schools or synagogues and had begun casing buildings to select a target for such an attack. Authorities suspected that a number of individuals were involved in the Afghanistan conspiracy, but only had sufficient evidence to arrest Battle.

Prosecutors say sections 218 and 504 of the Patriot Act allowed the FBI to conduct secret surveillance of Battle, in order to ensure that he was not going to go ahead with any terror attacks.

Prosecutors say they were also able to learn the names of the other members of the group. Ultimately, they were able to collect sufficient evidence to charge all seven defendants. Six of the defendants were taken into custody, receiving prison sentences ranging from three to 18 years. The seventh defendant was never arrested; prosecutors said he was killed during a firefight in Pakistan in October 2003.

Access to Records from a Cable Company

Section 211 of the Patriot Act eliminated a potential loophole for terrorists by clarifying that cable companies -- typically protected under the federal Cable Act -- are also subject to federal wiretap and electronic communications statutes. The section aims to ensure that terrorists and other criminals are not exempt from investigations simply because they choose cable companies as their providers for Internet and other communications services.

The Justice Department says Section 211 enabled investigators to obtain information that was crucial to identifying an individual who had sent over 200 threatening letters, laced with white powder, to various government agencies, businesses and individuals in Louisiana. These letters paralyzed the town of Lafayette, La., for several days in 2002, as law-enforcement agencies with a limited number of hazardous material units frantically tried to respond to numerous requests for assistance.

The government says that as a result of information provided by a cable company under Section 211, the perpetrator was eventually arrested, convicted and sentenced to a prison term of 30 years.

Ban on Unlicensed Foreign-Money Transfers

Section 373 of the Patriot Act makes it illegal to run an unlicensed foreign-money transmittal business. Prosecutors say they used this provision to bring charges against Yehuda Abraham, an unlicensed money transmitter, for his role in helping to arrange the transfer of funds in a thwarted arms sale.

The Justice Department says Abraham's services were used by Hermant Lakhani, a British arms dealer. Lakhani was arrested in August 2003, after attempting to complete the sale of a shoulder-fired missile to a government cooperating witness who was posing as a member of a terrorist group.

The Justice Department says the Patriot Act allowed prosecutors to quickly bring a case against Abraham, bypassing the issues that have typically plagued similar cases in the past. Abraham pleaded guilty to running an illegal money-transfer company in March 2004.

Expanded Use of Pen/Trap Devices

Section 216 of the Patriot Act modified existing legislation to indicate that pen/trap devices -- typically used to track the phone numbers of incoming and outgoing calls on a telephone line -- could be used to apply to the full range of communications media, including Internet and e-mail records.

According to the Justice Department, this new provision was critical in disrupting a plot to use cocaine to purchase Soviet bloc weapons for the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, which has been designated as a terrorist organization by the State Department.

Investigators used pen/trap devices, as well as a wire intercept, to gather evidence against several of the targets. Four individuals were charged with conspiring to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, as well as conspiring to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine.

Access to Internet Records Without a Court Order

Section 212 of the Patriot Act allows an Internet service provider to disclose electronic communications directly to law enforcement, without waiting for a court order, if there's an immediate danger of physical injury. The Justice Department credits the provision with allowing it to apprehend Jared Bjarnason in April 2004.

Bjarnason had sent an e-mail to the El Paso Islamic Center in Texas, threatening to burn the center's mosque to the ground if hostages in Iraq were not freed within three days. The government says FBI agents used Section 212 to investigate the case, allowing them to quickly identify and arrest Bjarnason before he could harm the mosque.

Very Impressive- McGentrix- Thank You. Is there anyone who can say that they are certain that without the Patriot Act there would have been no more attacks on US citizens in the US?

The caterwauling of the left wing is ridiculous. I went to a Professional Football Game last weekend and was patted down along with everyother person who entered the stadium.

NO ONE COMPLAINED.

My grade 9 class thought it was idiotic to have a wall put up in between the two premier law enforcement agencies in the United States.
TRhe Patriot Act, in this instance, heeded to common sense.
This is barely a point to champion.



Perhaps I am mistaken that the purpose of the fourth amendment was to pretect Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures...and that the accused were legally permitted to see the affidavits the FBI filed with FISA court showing the reasons for granting the secret warrants in the first place.
Given the premises under which the surveillance began for Battle et al, it would seem reasonable that all the facts were considered, and the post 9/11-Patriot Act knee jerk reactions don't allow xenophobic, paranoid, locals to call the shots.
Would it bother you McG if you were placed under secret surveillance, followed 24/7, and your personal effects searched without sound reasoning? How un-American.
There is and has been protocol in place int he past that allowed law enforcement agencies to place under surveillance individuals of suspicion, or with just cause. The PA just allows said officials to side step the constitution in the name of national security.
It just seems frightening that you've become more paranoid of the "terrorists" and anti-Americans than you are of your own government trampling the rights of countless innocents.



Well, things have changed since the Cable Act was implemented in 1984...and needed a revamp. But what happened to subpoenas and other legally/constitutionally recognized avenues?
Side-step the legalities and push through another clause that infringes on the rights of the individual.
I wonder if anyone on A2K is being watched?



<clap clap>
Common sense prevails.
Isn't it illegal to sell alcohol without a license...lottery tickets without a license, or homes without a realtors license?
Does this really make the PA and essential act?



Big Brother is watching.



If you don't see what's wrong with this McG.....

candidone may have a point. He feels that our precious liberties have to be preserved and that the Patriot Act is overkill.

Everytime I begin to think like that I remember some of my classmates demosrating with banners that read: BETTER RED THAN DEAD.

Of course, candidone would not have agreed with them!

I don't oppose the fight against global, local or territorial cells of terrorism. It would be absurd to assume that I would side with the terrorists with regards to the safety of our loved ones.
But there is such thing as hysteria (post-9/11 for example) and overkill (side-stepping integral constitutionally guaranteed rights) that defy common sense and common national ideals.

Hysteria? Overkill?

Ask the Brits and the Spaniards about hysteria and overkill.

And I don't oppose the fight against heroin usage, even if I favor the distribution of "clean" needles.

Your description of the national reaction to 9/11 as hysteria is interesting.

What do you suppose was the proper reaction, and what do you think the proper reaction should be if and when there is another 9/11?

The Patriot act made all the above possible. Like it or not, it has eased the rules in dealing with terrorism. It has been effective in doing what it was set out to do.