T_J - You do not seem to understand that it is noting against the hard working people in law enforcement, but rather the rules and laws that define and justify their conduct. The Patriot Act is the problem and not the people that enforce it. When the Act is in place, the people are not in the wrong to follow the dictums of the law. A prime example of what I am saying would be the National Guard in Alabama in the 1960's. As you probably know, the Governor of each state is in charge of their National Guard troops, unless the Guard is "nationalized" by the President. In the 1960's, the Alabama National Guard were fighting along side George Wallace and Bull Connor against peaceful Civil Rights protestors. But when President Johnson nationalized the Guard, the same people who were pressure hosing Blacks who were trying to vote were now firing guns AGAINST those who tried to stop Blacks from voting. The Guard did a 180, and I do not blame the Guard at all. They were following their orders and doing their job. The problem was not the Guardsmen themselves, but rather the law (George Wallace). Same analogy applies here.
It may not make him a war hero, but T_J's prolific leg-humping is what has helped him achieve such prominence among his contemporaries, where leg-humping is a way of life.
Unfortunately, some of the worst ones are not under the "sunset" clause at all. In particular, section 805, when combined with section 201 creates a net so ridiculously broad that every self-claimed conservative American should be jumping all over it as the gateway to a potential police state. Additionally, Sec. 213 "Authority for delaying notice of the execution of a warrant" does not expire. Ever. This is crazy. Almost all of these sections as listed are not only overly broad, but also fundamentally opposed to previously established American rights. I dunno - maybe you and I aren't reading the same words - these make me cringe everytime I see them.
Dammit, there goes my lecture tour of terrorist cells in the middle east. Come on. There is no law against teaching social work to Palestinians, just avoid the terrorist organizations. In fact, I would be happy if no one gave any support to terrorist organizations, because they use their benign elements to engender support, support not limited to those helpful activities. I don't think the law against providing aid to terrorist organizations is going to find a tremendous number of detractors, no matter how the ACLU and their ilk try to spin it. In addition to the fact that there is no need to work with terrorist organizations in any way, I would like to see one example of the law being applied to a humanitarian worker. In point of fact, I have not seen one person who was ever wrongly convicted using any provision of either PATRIOT Act, despite them being some of the most hotly contested pieces of legislation in my life time. I am not even for government intervention in peoples lives in most cases, but I have not seen one thing that concerns me in the slightest. I spend about as much time worrying about the P-Act as I do about cloned dinosaurs escaping from their island theme park and spreading death and mayhem across the city.
The problem with this type of "communication prevention" is that "terrorist organizations" is a term subject to serious interpretation. As for wrongful convictions - I think you have it backwards. Over 5000 attempts to use the Patriot act - ZERO convictions. Or put more succintly: The number of terrorists convicted as a direct result of these infractions on our Bill of Rights remains a big 0. Let's look at another part of this fantastic law: "reasonably suspected based on credible evidence of engaging in terrorist acts or money laundering activities." The "or money laundering activities" leaves an open invitation to abuse. This opens the uses of this law up to be used against just about anyone, not just terrorists. Take the abuses in vegas and dope busts. None of this activity will save anyone from any terrorist. While I feel it is important for the US to maintain a sense of law and order, I do not condone such an extreme set of laws to bust pot smokers and adult entertainers for their doings. Need more examples? 1) 16 year-old girls detained for 6 weeks. No real cause. Released without charges. But the defense lawyer is still under a gag order and can't even discuss the freakin' case. 2) Selling counterfeit Rubik's cubes? 3) Photgraphing Cheney's Hotel? 4) Eating Curry? I can give more.... Let me close here quick by quoting a buddy of mine: Now - back to work....
Wow, how could I have been so wrong. Obviously the USA-PATRIOT Act is the ruination of the lives of millions of Americans. I won't even address the examples you gave of actual criminals being arrested. I mean, what defense can I provide for th at.
