May 13th, 2003, 07:22 PM
Ugh
I'm back.....for the most part.....family....ish.
Okay, here goes.
It's sort of long.....
2. Like Hitler, Bush began to curtail civil liberties in response to a well-publicized national outrage, in Hitler's case the Reichstag fire, in Bush's case the 9-11 catastrophe.
First, I believe Van der Lubbe was working for the Nazi party. He was just a patsy who ended up losing his head. Literally. This is indeed a major difference in the Hitler / Bush debate. Hitler, most likely planned the fire. I do not believe Bush planned the 9/11 attacks.
Though Hindenburg signed the law, he was coerced by Hitler along with Papen.
The curtailing of civil liberties however is where the similarities begin. Bear in mind the Enabling Act of 1933 was supposed to be a temporary measure to protect the democracy of Germany from the Communist Threat.
The Enabling Act allows
"Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed."
And here is the long part…..
The Patriot Act allows
The Patriot Act grants the executive branch unprecedented, and largely unchecked, surveillance powers, including the enhanced ability to track email and Internet usage, conduct sneak-and-peek searches, obtain sensitive personal records, monitor financial transactions, and conduct nationwide roving wiretaps.
The Patriot Act permits law enforcement agencies to circumvent the Fourth Amendment's requirement of probable cause when conducting wiretaps and searches that have, as a 'significant purpose,' the gathering of foreign intelligence.
Law enforcement is still required under this provision to obtain a warrant to enter, but it no longer has to give you the timely notice which both the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Fourth Amendment require. The only justification law enforcement now needs to enter without notice is that notice might "seriously jeopardize an investigation or unduly delay a trial."
Under Section 216 of the Act, law enforcement now not only has the authority to intercept transmissions from people suspected of terrorist activity, but also from people under investigation for other crimes as well.
This authority now contains no constitutional safeguards. Judges are now required to issue blank warrants without reference to a location or jurisdiction, as long as law enforcement certifies that the surveillance is "relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation."
The Act doesn't stop there. Section 216 of the Act extends this low threshold of proof beyond the mere "trapping and tracing" of telephone numbers. It extends it to tracing your emails and internet activities.
Section 411 of the Patriot Act purportedly defines foreign terrorist organizations. However, as the ACLU points out, this provision "permits designation [of] foreign and domestic groups," since the provision defines these groups as "any political, social or other similar group whose public endorsement of acts of terrorist activity" - which, of course, under the Section 802 could mean lawful protest - which "the Secretary of State has determined undermines United States efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities." Under Section 412, any immigrant who innocently supports the activities of a designated terrorist organization could be deported or indefinitely detained. Again, the government can detain or deport an immigrant who provides lawful assistance to groups that are not even designated as terrorist organizations.
Criminal investigations and foreign intelligence investigations have historically, and with good reason, been kept separate in our country. The USA Patriot Act blurs the dividing line between these two areas of law, undermining procedural protections inherent in criminal law.
Under the USA Patriot Act, the boundaries between these two territories of law are breached. An immediate and direct consequence of this breach is an immediate and direct loss of constitutional protections for both American citizens and immigrants.
The Patriot Act puts the CIA back in the business of spying on Americans. Section 203 of the Act allows law enforcement to share with intelligence agencies -- including the FBI, CIA, NSA, INS, Secret Service, and Department of Defense -- sensitive information gathered during a criminal investigation. The types of information that could be shared include information revealed to a grand jury (previously prohibited by law), telephone and internet intercepts obtained without court order and without restrictions on the subsequent use of the intercepted information, and any other "foreign intelligence" information obtained as part of a criminal investigation
This, alone, is reason enough to amend the Act. As the ACLU says: "The USA Patriot Act would tear down [procedural] safeguards and once again permit the CIA to create dossiers on constitutionally protected activities of Americans and eliminate judicial review of such practices.”
There is a lot more, but I think my point is made as well.
An interesting difference…where Hitler was upfront about what he was doing, the Patriot Act seems more low key. In some ways that could make it more dangerous. Ignorance of the law is no excuse and all.
|
[/center:472def79ce]
- Does either act have a sunset clause, meaning that these new government powers would automatically end after a certain time or event?
Linear Mode
