What is Digg?147 Comments
- babbling, on 10/12/2007, -1/+52These librarians are true patriots.
A patriot is not someone who blindly agrees with everything the government does, but someone who cares enough for their country to take personal risks so that their country can be better off. - Araya213, on 10/12/2007, -3/+54Not in the slightest bit surprising.
- zweben, on 10/12/2007, -1/+39Shhh!!
The first rule of the PATRIOT act is *you do not read* the PATRIOT act! What's wrong with you?
It's a matter of national security that you do not know what it says. - KyleRayner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+37Local police probably dont go around threatening jail time for talking about it.
- ComputerGuru, on 10/12/2007, -4/+36you're what makes America so easy for Bush to direct. People that don't give a damn are always the easiest to win over.
- pjevans, on 10/12/2007, -5/+37I've always liked Michael Moore's suggestion: They should place a sign at the counter daily stating "No agency has requested records from us today". If the sign isn't there one day....
- BlurredWeasel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+36"You have no idea what you are talking about. You libs love Cuba and admire Castro who has librarians of private libraries tortured for having material criticizing the state. Hypocrites. Yet here American libs are freely criticizing the government thanks to our freedoms. (Protected by the troops you libs despise)"
Interesting post. Angry, ill thought out, ad-hom full. First the name calling, "Libs". Then a statement without basis about how we are the same as a communist/socialist dictator who tortures people. Then another name... Then you say that we are using American liberties to protest. We'll get back to that in a second. Then again without basis you say we hate our troops. First it's interesting because this article/thread doesn't have anything to do with troops. Second it is totally without warrant. Third, it is false, which party (in general) pushed to send these troops into battle, which one (in general) wants to bring them home, out of harms way? Which group of people cares more in that case?
Anyway, back to the using our rights in order to protest. That's exactly what the patriot act took away. We are terrorists against ourselves. I'm not blaming the current government, because Bush didn't pass the laws, our congress did. The patriot act is all about spying on members of the public by the government, when they claim "National Security". As has been covered by other posts, that is ill-defined, as is the definition of "Terrorist". What is well defined is how the government can collect more and more information about their citizens.
I hope I have sufficiently refuted your argument. Please, if I missed anything, respond. - nwfisk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+36I love librarians - it always seems like they're the first ones to get angry when anyone attempts to violate the privacy of their patrons, regardless of the threats they face. Go librarians!
- titlesaysitall, on 10/12/2007, -2/+34So Amendment 1 no longer applies to us, geuss Amendment 2 is our best friend now
- fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -3/+32And how did you become so sure? It is that sureness, based on nothing, that is a halmark of ignorance. "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts"
- Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+31Under the Patriot Act, you know, in many cases they don't need warrants. "Sneak and Peek" searches are possible, without warrant, and without divulging the fact that the search has taken place, even after a length of time, and even after the investigation comes up empty. Oh, but of course, only terrorists will be searched, so it's okay. How could I be so unpatriotic as to object that we're becoming a right-wing dictatorship?
- Celeron, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29A sign of America becoming a totalitarian state.
- CatfishJones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20I'm sure he has a bias lean and probably has committed a foolish act in his lifetime but that is no grounds to dismiss what he says. (Him without sin cast the first stone?) Like many of us, he's most likely right sometimes and wrong others.
Even a fool speaks the truth every so often. Imagine what you could learn if you didn't disregard everything people you disliked said. - labmouse42, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
~Pastor Martin Niemöller - DCTsunami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15No one in congress read the Patriot Act before they voted on it in 2001....
- benhocking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@Metman - have you read it? Specifically, have you read section 501, subsection (d):
"No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section." - youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15It's called intimidation and hindsight is 20/20.
If a government official came to your house and he threatened to take you away if you didn't hand over your computer would you be the least bit scared? - BlackCat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16The difference being is that a "gag order" is issued by the court. In this case, the threat of imprisonment is not coming from the court, it's coming directly from the policing agency. No more due process via the Patriot Act. Under this type of a system (without the court mitigating law) someone could turn you in, merely as a revenge tactic for just not liking you or your opinions, and you are sent directly to jail. No trial, no right to defend yourself, and then they release you when they feel like it. The US becomes more like China (and vice-versa) every day!
- benhocking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@Metman - you've accused of others of overreacting, but isn't that what you're doing? Or do you think we should be willing to sacrifice all liberties on the off-chance that that it could help pedophiles and/or terrorists? I'm guessing the 2nd amendment is a big help to terrorists. Should we go after that one next? What about the 5th? Who knows how many sickos or terrorists have been let free thanks to double-jeopardy. Number 7? Only those who are trying to pull a fast one need a jury trial.
- GreatBunzinni, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15And how exactly do you know there was a "terrorist cell" in the towns served by those libraries. Moreover, how do you define "terrorist" ?
- BlackCat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14By eliminating due process you fascist goosestepping moron!
- Lyianis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Sigh, The reason this is news is becuase it IS due to the Patriot Act. for all those who are saying "this was just a standard gag order" need to reseach the actaul happenings. The artical does not explain it all.
Under the original USA PATRIOT Act, authorization was given for what amount's to an all emcompassing gag order that (based off the wording) techincally forbid someone served with to from even speaking to a Lawyer about it. Not a normal gag order.
Edit: Swift2 beat me to it, but to rehash again:
In a nutshell, this was an unlimited duration gag order without any judical oversight. That is why it is a problem. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Should we have ever sung that line?? Ask women, ask blacks, ask Japanese-americans during WWII. I doubt they'd sing that line when they didn't have equal rights as "all men"
- benhocking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@Metman, because you've asked multiple times if others have read the act, I must ask multiple times if you have. Specifically, have you read section 501, subsection (d):
"No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section." - panic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Wow, now they can not only break the laws themselves, but they can arrest ppl excersising the 1st amendment to tell ppl about law breakers (the govt). Hell of a democracy.
- Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15These librarians were under a gag order from the first version of the PATRIOT Act. The second version of the PATRIOT Act excludes libraries from most such gag orders, except where the gov't calls it a matter of national security.
But don't worry, that never happens. - BlackCat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Due process isn't a liberal agenda it's what sets us apart from other nations run by dicatorships. It's all about the balance of governmental power, Judicial, Legislative, Executive.
- Metman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Will all due respect, I am not willing to spend my time informing people on how to get information. All of this is a matter of public record.
A good start would be the Congresional Record or researching Federal Court cases regarding 'Gag Orders'.
This is my biggest beef with the current political state of affairs. We rely on someone else to get our information to us. This only leads to people showing information they want you to see (which helps them make thier agenda). Go find out both sides of a story, then react. If you think are upset now. When you realize we do and have done much much worse things and printed it in public record only go to un-noticed because it hasnt made someones agenda that week you will really be pissed off. This isnt a Bush thing its a Goverment Gone Unmonitored thing. - KyleRayner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11"The threat of "jail time" is a legal request called a 'gag order'."
Just out of curiousity, could I get a link to what exactly a "gag order" is, who initiates it, and what its penalties are? I hear about that all the time, but dont know exactly what it is. TIA. - spxiii, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@Metman
If I read a book about computer security, my motives should not be questioned in the event that the FBI goes on a fishing expedition to find some hacker in my area. Yet if the library was the easiest way to dig up some leads, that's exactly what would happen.
The next step would be allowing law enforcement to fabricate evidence if they "know they got the right guy". That isn't how our justice system works. - brianes, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Careful Title... They'll come after you for saying such insurrectionist, anti-statist sort of things. Could be interpreted as a threat.
Damn right, that.
-- B. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I can't stand when conservatives defend this piece of garbage legislation.
- benhocking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@otherland - sure, they do. Did you see the story a couple months back where the government had infiltrated an anti-war group? Any rational person would be able to tell that these scone eating pacifists were not terrorists. Maybe someone else will post a link if they have one readily available.
- Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The "gag order" was issued by a court pursuant to a "national security letter" which was issued by the police agency. The court backed it up because that monstrosity was made legal by the Patriot Act. Why is it so difficult for Bush-lovers to understand that a legal search warrant, with a gag order attached -- for a limited time -- that has been requested by the police and allowed as constitutional by the court, is quite a different thing from the unlimited police powers sought for, and given, in the wake of 9/11? Everybody thinks that al Qaeda members should be wiretapped, just that allowing the NSA free rein without a warrant is a different thing?
Was Jose Padilla a bad guy? Who knows? They said he was up to something terrible, and then locked him away, without trial, for years. When a legal challenge, to force the government to make charges, was likely going to be successful, he was delivered to Rumsfeld, at the last moment, as an "enemy combatant." Supposedly, he will eventually face charges, but I'm not holding my breath.
He's likely a bad guy. But by keeping him away from the courts, he's just as likely a political mistake, or not as important as the government alleges. Now, by keeping him hidden away, who is the government protecting? Us or themselves?
And this is on a tech site because people who know technology know that the issues of privacy and surveillance, security and freedom, will be even more accentuated by all the digital devices we live with now. - mr.hostility, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"and the land of free..."
Nobody in the country should ever sing those words again, until all of these wrongs purpetrated by this corrupt administration are corrected. - allisonaxe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9its about *information* ya goobers. before there was the internet, there was books (and at the library, some people use the internet, too.) one day, when the telcos own the internet and won't let you see what you want to see, you may actually have to go check out a book to get your information, but the government will be watching that, too. oops.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10By the looks of reading the title...they already f'ed up!
- Araya213, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Seems to me like a gag order is a free speech violation... Maybe i'm crazy but doesn't the right to free speech mean that you can say whatever you want, whenever you want? Maybe i'm just a liberal hippie or something but I could swear that FREE SPEECH is not an ambiguous term.
- GlargTheKelfn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11i love big brother.
recently i was at the library in round rock tx, as you walk in there is a big white sign that says
'All transactions at this facility subject to federal scrutiny'. welp, so much for me using a library.
im really glad we live in a country based on personal freedom and self determination, all under government surveillance. - pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10 they gotta keep super good track of us so when they tell us all what to do we are good at our new pinko jobs.
- WorldGroove, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11@BlurredWeasel
Without even reading your whole reply, you get modded up just for intelligent grammer & sentence structure. ;)
If we all wrote & spoke like this everyday, the world would be a different place. - KyleRayner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11The government needs to define in clear and precise terms what exactly "matters of national security" and "terrorism" are. There needs to be a check on the powers they can exercise in regards to those two terms.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Gee whiz... a science student doing research on chemicals... shouldn't be spied on. This crap is not to defend "homeland security", it's to keep an eye on US citizens.
- benhocking, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Did you know that you can check out DVDs (of blockbuster and not-so-blockbuster movies) for free from many public libraries? Maybe that'll change your mind about them!
- benhocking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@Metman, again? Have you read it? See my previous comments to you.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"hostility@ If you hate America so much why don't you leave? Go to one of your lib paradises like Cuba or North Korea."
Just so you know. Those countries are anything but liberal. North Korea and Cuba restrict freedom, and are on the extreme right. Most of what you say is remnant of propaganda from the Cold War where those states are "commies" and must be destroyed. In a real "Commie" state, things would be paradise. Except they are lying to the citizens and imposing totalitarian order and laws in the name of communism. Those countries are more conservative then liberal. get it right - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Mostly the homeless and mentally deranged. At least at the libraries by me.
- chapium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Several Libraries I am familiar with discovered that the federal government could pull their records. Their solution? They no longer keep records of books previously checked out by its patrons. Therefore, there are no records to pull ;-)
- infonography, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!NINE-ELEVEN!!!
Gasp!
I am feeling a bit of a draft, hand me my flag I need to bundle up.....
[These clowns make am ashamed to be an American sometimes.] - Hungryhaney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I agree. And they should make the offense punishable by a high jail time, plus have it apply to everybody that knowingly used that term. This nonsense about using fear ("matters of national security") to justify the breach of rights given to us by the Declaration and the Bill of Rights needs to be curbed.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 147 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is