The devil of it is, it is progress that we can identify that these are unhealthy, rather than eating it without ever questioning.Originally Posted by malice2501
How do you know it hasn't prevented terror? After all, I have here a rock that keeps away terrorists. How do I know it works? Well, I don't see any terrorists here, so it must be working.Originally Posted by malice2501
And a brief synopsis, though probably not exhaustive, for Josh. In addition, section 215 is quite infamous as the so-called "library provision," which permits the government to issue warrants to open any consumer record (medical, legal, financial, or even library, hence the name) based on reasonable suspicion, rather than probable cause (which happens to be the basis for common law, from which both American and English legal systems are derived - note the 4th Amendment in the US Constitution for a subtle reminder of how warrants are supposed to be issued without another amendment). Oh, and section 805 (classifying any "expert advice or support" as terrorist support) was ruled unconstitutional due to vagueness (anything could be construed as advice or support, whether it directly related to terrorism or not), and section 505 was similarly ruled unconstitutional due to the fact that it let the government issue national security letters to bypass all judiciary oversight over law enforcement, like warrants.
Thankfully, those sections weren't exactly under the sunset provisions, as far as I know. In essence, they weren't going to expire. And the majority of the Patriot Act's questionable sections aren't required to support interagency support infrastructure. You can't use them as a blanket statement to prop up the sections I already listed above. Makes me wish for a line veto rather than the present system, even if Bush wouldn't have used it...Originally Posted by Sprung