Re: CDR: Re: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
John Young wrote: > USA. USA. > > Remember, do not say out loud, "fuck that." Think abou it, > then decide to self-suppress for a couple of years, then > a couple more, then more after that. It's a long, long campaign > the leaders warn, just like their predecessors said the main > enemy is within. > > > Fuck that. :-) jbdigriz
Re: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
There are numerous changes in PATRIOT from MATA and ATA, and it has over twice their length. It still uses the same obfuscation style of burying dozens of proposals as modifications of existing legislation, making it hard to understand what is being proposed without jigsaw puzzling the pieces into the legislation being modified to see what the whole picture will be when assembled. An underhanded method compared to Leahy's open-book bill. Creepy to read the massive shutdown planned for the Canadian border. Canada is surely to scream economic warfare at the US's pressure to close liberal immigration and civil liberty loopholes -- it doesn't look good for ZKS. What's the assessment within, Ian? To be sure, the US and its iron-maidenish allies are rushing to close loopholes around the world, and one bad effect of PATRIOT is for it to be used as a model for other countries to toe the line and consequent clampdown on security technologies. And pressure to shut Sealand, perhaps to require the Bunkers to allow rummaging the precious data. PATRIOT does just about everything Stewart Baker's Defense Science Board panel recommended for legal policy to protect US national security, in particular the sharing of domestic law enforcement, FBI, DoJ and IRS databanks with the military and the spooks and vice versa. Under the Ashcroft plan anyone can be declared by the Attorney General to be a terrorist or a supporter/advisor of terrorism and with that all civil liberities of the targets disappear. For example, those constitutional rights Tim claimed a hour ago are still in effect in the US. But not if this bill passes. I suspect insulting a cop will become quickly a terrorist's mark of Cain. Much less refusing a National Guard order at the airport. A quick addition of the misbehaver to the US Stasi databank and a lifetime investigation and harassment commences -- or if the target gets Tim-like uppity a hole in the head made by lead or enforced psychotherapy, totally approved by terrorist-drunk courts of jurisdiction. USA. USA. Remember, do not say out loud, "fuck that." Think abou it, then decide to self-suppress for a couple of years, then a couple more, then more after that. It's a long, long campaign the leaders warn, just like their predecessors said the main enemy is within.
Re: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 08:49:34PM +, Ian Goldberg wrote: > Note that (if I'm reading it right) the sunset only applies to Title I > (the Internet surveillance bits), and not, for example, to the "hacking > is terrorism" bits in Title III (section 309). The sunset also applies Ian: I think that's right (based on my reading of it yesterday, so you may not want to treat this recollection as fact). But i think the def'n of hacker-terrorist was also narrowed. -Declan
Re: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:09:50PM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: > It's nice that the proposal has a sunset clause in it, > to limit the amount of time that we're subject to the > various good or bad half-baked suggestions and the various > agencies' requests for powers they've always wanted. > Expect that the worst parts will get extended indefinitely over the years :-) If I recall properly -- read the text of the bill to check me here -- the bill explicitly invites the Prez to submit his request for an extension in 2 yrs. -Declan
Re: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It's nice that the proposal has a sunset clause in it, >to limit the amount of time that we're subject to the >various good or bad half-baked suggestions and the various >agencies' requests for powers they've always wanted. >Expect that the worst parts will get extended indefinitely over the years :-) Note that (if I'm reading it right) the sunset only applies to Title I (the Internet surveillance bits), and not, for example, to the "hacking is terrorism" bits in Title III (section 309). The sunset also applies to the IRS ratting on income generated from terrorist activities in section 405. - Ian
Re: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
It's nice that the proposal has a sunset clause in it,
to limit the amount of time that we're subject to the
various good or bad half-baked suggestions and the various
agencies' requests for powers they've always wanted.
Expect that the worst parts will get extended indefinitely over the years :-)
At 08:48 PM 10/01/2001 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
>
>From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: FC: Congress drafts new "anti-terror" bill -- with expiration date
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 20:32:57 -0400
>X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/
>
>Text of the new PATRIOT ("Provide Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
>and Obstruct Terrorism") Act:
>http://www.well.com/~declan/sep11/patriot.act.100101.pdf
>
>Background on other legislation:
>http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,47199,00.html
>http://www.wartimeliberty.com/search.pl?topic=legislation
>
>-Declan
>
>*
>
>http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,47230,00.html
>
> Eavesdrop Now, Reassess Later?
> By Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> 5:00 p.m. Oct. 1, 2001 PDT
>
> WASHINGTON -- House negotiators have drafted anti-terrorism
> legislation to grant police unprecedented eavesdropping powers that
> would automatically expire in two years.
>
> Leaders of the House Judiciary committee have crafted a new
> anti-terrorism bill, called the Patriot Act, that includes nearly all
> the surveillance abilities requested by President Bush -- but with a
> sunset date of Dec. 31, 2003. A vote on the bill is expected this
> week.
>
> A 122-page draft (PDF) of the Patriot Act, obtained by Wired News,
> says that police could conduct Internet wiretaps in some situations
> without court orders, that judges' ability to reject surveillance
> requests would be sharply curtailed, and that the powers of a secret
> federal court would be expanded.
>
> [...]
>
>
>
>
>-
>POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
>You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
>Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
>To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
>This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
>-
>
>
>- End forwarded message -
