PATRIOT Act

I don't believe that we can put the issue of "terrorist" to bed quite yet. Speaking about the PATRIOT ACT requires discussion of the enemy to whom it pertains, "the terrorists." We may have to come to an understanding about the use of the word. Elsewhere, elsewhen. For now, I have to lay out some words on the PATRIOT ACT, and I try to choose my words clearly.

First, as was stated in Fahrenheit 9/11 (which, I might add, I was less than happy with) legislators rarely read all of the content in the bills they pass. In the case of the PATRIOT ACT, from inception to signing into law, the bill was virtually unread and passed in three days. Herein lies the DoubleSpeak: It was not responsible legislation, it was a decree from King Bush and his court. As a result of this act, the President and many government agencies -- FBI, CIA, were granted extraordinary powers and given massive funding to undermine the essence of America and threaten peaceful relations with the rest of the world. This is the first failure in critical thinking.

Second, the purpose of the Act is to "deter and punish American terrorists in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes." Consequently, it is an American law that can be -- and is -- applied to non-Americans OUTSIDE of America. Each country makes its own laws and enforces those laws within its borders. For the events and circumstances that transcend international borders there are international laws and treaties. There are international organizations that enforce these laws and treaties; the UN and NATO are the two most prominent. Think critically now, if a law was passed in North Korea that could be enforced on Americans, would America accept it? Keep in mind, America does not live up to its obligations under many of the treaties, including the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, it has signed at the UN. America also refuses to extradite any American to the World Court. Essentially it means, to me, that America does a lot of shit in the world it can't and won't justify to anyone. That may, in fact, be the American way and the American culture in a nutshell.

There are several further problems in the text and application of the PATRIOT ACT

Despite the protections against discrimination stated in Title I of the PATRIOT ACT, when put into practices the statement is meaningless. "Terrorists" are being made out of Islamic people the world over. As a result, law enforcement agencies must discriminate, targeting Arabs and Muslims, to achieve their objectives. DoubleSpeak.

Warrantless wiretapping, electronic eavesdropping, information filtering, and so on; every available resource is being used to combat "the terrorists." The implication is that you too, an innocent, may be investigated without the standard of prima facie evidence or probable cause. Done as a threat assessment, all of these acts are simple and possible.

Non-citizens, traveling in or through the US, can be detained without charge and held indefinitely once charged. That means, as a hub of global travel, America grants itself the right to detain whomever they choose for whatever reasons they choose. And, as in the case of Maher Arar, to deport international travelers to any destination they see fit.

There's a great website that breaks down the problems with the ACT here: http://www.abanet.org/natsecurity/patriotdebates/

It is a paranoid means of behavioural control, paternalism at its worst, very reminiscent of 1984. And, now, perfectly legal. Law abiding citizens have nothing to fear, right? Maybe. You never know when one of your sentiments may be deemed a threat to national security. One further note, a recent audit of warrantless FBI wiretaps, searches, and surveillance requests under the PATRIOT ACT have determined that the FBI is currently abusing their new investigative powers.