Go Back to the B3 Home Page
Complaints, compliments, arguments? Email me.
[<< "TBTM Radio #7: 'Bad Week for Whistle Ass'"] [Archive Index] [>>"Well, this is pretty creepy."]
08/25/2003 Archived Entry: "'An Unpatriotic Act'"
'An Unpatriotic Act'
The NYTimes confuses me. How can they have their heads up their asses on the news page, yet publish editorials like this?
When the Patriot Act raced through Congress after Sept. 11, critics warned that it was an unprecedented expansion of the government's right to spy on ordinary Americans. The more people have learned about the law, the greater the calls have been for overhauling it. One section that has produced particular outrage is the authorization of "sneak and peek" searches, in which the government secretly searches people's homes and delays telling them about the search. The House last month voted 309 to 118 for a Republican-sponsored measure to block the use of federal funds for such searches.Congressional opponents of the act, on both sides of the aisle, are pushing for other changes. A Senate bill, sponsored by Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, and Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, addresses many of the law's most troubling aspects. One provision would make it harder for the government to gain access to sensitive data, including medical and library records, and records concerning the purchase or rental of books, music or videos.
Another change would narrow the definition of "terrorism," so the law's expanded enforcement tools could not be used against domestic political protesters, such as environmentalists and anti-abortion activists, with no link to international terrorism. The bill would also require the government to be more specific about the targets of wiretaps obtained under the law, and would restrict the kind of information that could be collected on Internet and e-mail use....
The administration is clearly worried, as opposition to the excesses of the Patriot Act grows across the country and the political spectrum. Instead of spin-doctoring the problem, Mr. Ashcroft should work with the law's critics to develop a law that respects Americans' fundamental rights.
Replies: 4 people speak up
As an associate on mine commented recently, if you have nothing to hide, why would you object to a government search of your house, or Internet usage, or library activity?
If downloading Japanese porn is deemed terrorist activity, I'm gonna' be in a world of shit!
Posted by Metropolitan99 @ 08/25/2003 12:52 PM NY
In answer to your question, it's because the NY Times Editorial Page Editor is the brilliant, insightful,and essentially decent Gail Collins. I've admired her for many years, dating way back to her days as a very witty columnist for New York Newsday.
Posted by Mad Kane @ 08/25/2003 01:00 PM NY
By rights, this missive has to start off with a small confession. Information about the proposed survey is buried within the article, whose hyperlink is found below. Nonethess, recipients shall, for the most part, enjoy the read that precedes and succeeds.
Your Friend A Alexander "Bogey" Stella considered the following article
interesting and wanted to send it to you.
''battleofthepoptarts'' O Corleone
(Date: 2003-08-19 21:32:40)
Topic: A. Alexander Stella
URL: http://www.bcvoice.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=139
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by A Alexander Stella @ 08/25/2003 01:02 PM NY
Metropolitan99, you obviously have never had your house searched. It's an invasion of privacy, that basic right that every person deserves.
And if these right wing psychos continue on the path we are on right now, downloading Japanese porn will be illegal.
Don't support something just because you think it will never affect you. It'll come back to bite you in the ass.
Posted by Neeraj @ 08/26/2003 10:28 AM NY
