Obama supports extending Patriot Act provisions

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CannabisInCanada, Sep 16, 2009.

  1. [​IMG]Obama supports extending Patriot Act provisions

    WASHINGTON – The Obama administration supports extending three key provisions of the Patriot Act that are due to expire at the end of the year, the Justice Department told Congress in a letter made public Tuesday.
    Lawmakers and civil rights groups had been pressing the Democratic administration to say whether it wants to preserve the post-Sept. 11 law's authority to access business records, as well as monitor so-called "lone wolf" terrorists and conduct roving wiretaps.
    The provision on business records was long criticized by rights groups as giving the government access to citizens' library records, and a coalition of liberal and conservative groups complained that the Patriot Act gives the government too much authority to snoop into Americans' private lives.
    As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama said he would take a close look at the law, based on his past expertise in constitutional law. Back in May, President Obama said legal institutions must be updated to deal with the threat of terrorism, but in a way that preserves the rule of law and accountability.
    In a letter to lawmakers, Justice Department officials said the administration supports extending the three expiring provisions of the law, although they are willing to consider additional privacy protections as long as they don't weaken the effectiveness of the law.
    Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote Sen. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that the administration is willing to consider stronger civil rights protections in the new law "provided that they do not undermine the effectiveness of these important (provisions)."
    Leahy responded with a statement saying it is important for the administration and Congress to "work together to ensure that we protect both our national security and our civil liberties."
    The committee has scheduled a hearing next week on the Patriot Act.
    From 2004 to 2007, the business records provision was used 220 times, officials said. Most often, the business records were requested in combination with requests for phone records.
    The lone wolf provision was created to conduct surveillance on suspects with no known link to foreign governments or terrorist groups. It has never been used, but the administration says it should still be available for future investigations.
    The roving wiretaps provision was designed to allow investigators to quickly monitor the communications of a suspects who change their cell phone or communication device, without investigators having to go back to court for a new court authorization. That provision has been used an average of 22 times a year, officials said.
    Michelle Richardson of the American Civil Liberties Union called the administration's position "a mixed bag," and said that the group hopes the next version of the Patriot Act will have important safeguards on other issues, particularly the collecting of international communications, and a specific bar on surveillance of protected First Amendment activities like peaceful protests or religious assembly.
    "We're heartened they're saying they're willing to work with Congress," Richardson said, adding that is "definitely a sea change from what we've seen in the past."

    Obama supports extending Patriot Act provisions - Yahoo! News
  2. What a surprise, Obama continuing, oh wait, not just continuing, extending Bush era policy for more years to come.

    If you voted for Obama, now is the time to ask for a refund. Buyers remorse sucks cock, doesn't it?
  3. Wasnt this fucker against the patriot act before he got elected?
  4. Sigh...

    I still would take Obama over McCain, but fuckin' A, his bullshit is becoming more and more apparent.
  5. No, Obama voted for the Patriot Act.
  6. What are the actual 'rules' on the Patriot Act? Is it basically that the gov. can phone tap you at will? Do they need to show any evidence that leads them to believe you are an active terrorist?

    I see the utility of this act in national security interests but there should be no reason whatsoever that a non-terrorist should have to worry about their privacy being invaded.
  7. Terrorist is such a broad term (even in the bill) that it can basically be applied to anyone is who considered a threat to the state. I honestly don't see any legitimate reason for the USA PATRIOT Act. If they were actually wire-tapping terrorists, then it would be pretty easy to get a warrant.
  8. We no longer have a 4th or 5th and they are coming for the 1st and 2nd. Politicians will ram through anything under the guise of security, there is another agenda here, you are the terroist. Welcome to the control grid.
  9. Most of us on this site could be labeled 'terrorist' if they could just figure out who is behind the screen name. Well, really, it would take proving who that person is without violating even more laws and rights than the Patriot Act already allows them to, since I truly believe they already have the resources available to figure out who any of us are.
  10. Have there been many instances in which the Patriot Act ended up damaging the lives of people that weren't doing some seriously ridiculous shit? That's not rhetorical.
  11. Yes, there have been instances in which the Patriot Act ended up damaging people's lives. Now, are you trying to defend the Patriot Act?
  12. Ugh, this is it for me. I'm not one to follow conspiracy stuff, so I haven't been fully on the Obama hate train, but this is just it. Throwing the constitution out the window is, to me, more of a terrorist act than anything al qaeda has done. Fuck this puppet.
  13. this sounds like something a Bush Supporter might have said a few years ago.

  14. that's how apparent it is, that neither party gives a fuck about us.

    isn't the typical democratic response to go the opposite of the republican, or did we all forget why we hated Bush? Is it because Obama never chimed in with his pesky opinion and told us how much he really approved of all his bills. I mean, maybe we'd all love him if we knew our super star had a crush on his policies.

    oh yeah, i forgot, as long as we're the winning party, go blue team!!!!

    i love the mentality of the two party system, i see change 20 years from now.... but it wont be in policies.
  15. I wonder if he comprehends these provisions, I wonder if he even read them. (Or is it just a sign here and here, you're doing a great job, don't worry we will take care of everything kind of deal)
  16. It's not in his hands.

    Whoever paid for his campaign owns his decisions.

    I don't think we'll ever know exactly who contributed.
  17. Why is the media not on this, oh wait there still on ted kennedy along with the other washed up celebs hahaha
  18. well heres just what i found on some shit...haha
    University of California $1,591,395
    Goldman Sachs $994,795
    Harvard University $854,747
    Microsoft Corp $833,617
    Google Inc $803,436
    Citigroup Inc $701,290
    JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
    Time Warner $590,084

    Presidents arent elected to change anything their put in power to keep things the same, no party is different

Share This Page