PDA

View Full Version : The “patriot” Act???


ZupanGOD
11-20-2001, 05:11 AM
Do you know what I’ve done that many of our congressmen and senators haven’t done? I’ve read a summary of H.R. 3162. The long title is “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001” The Congressional Research Service has given H.R. 3162 the short title of USA Patriot Bill.

I hope you’ve learned long ago not to pay any attention to the titles our wonderful legislators give to their legislation. Titles seldom have anything to do with the actual purposes of the bill. Take the “Bank Secrecy Act” for instance. The true purpose of this bill was to make sure that the federal government could keep an eye on your financial relationship with your bank. A more proper title would have been the “Bank Anti-Secrecy Act.”

OK … Back to the Patriot Act. It would seem that some members of congress have done what so many other groups and individuals have done. They have used the terrorist attacks on America as an excuse to pursue long-held goals that have nothing to do with terrorism.

Let’s go back to that Bank Secrecy Act for a minute. Under that law you bank must file a report with the Imperial Federal Government every time you engage in a transaction with the bank involving more than $10,000 in cash. If you deposit $10,000 in cash the bank files a report. If you withdraw ten grand, the bank files a report. Are you told the bank is filing a report? No. Are you given a copy of the report? No. (I guess this is where the “secrecy” comes in.)

Well … Section 365 of the USA Patriot Bill has just expanded this reporting requirement. Now it applies to most businesses in addition to banks. Now, if you go to a business and spend more than $10,000 in cash that business has to report your name, address, social security number and other pertinent information to the feds. It doesn’t matter whether you spend the money on one item, or a whole shopping cart full .. the federal government must be notified.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with international terrorism. The terrorists who attacked the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon did not deal in large amounts of cash. They carried picture ID cards and used credit cards. They NEVER spent $10,000 in cash with any business. In short, they never engaged in any activity that would have to be reported under Section 365.

So --- what’s the deal here? Why these new reporting requirements for all businesses? It has much more to do with the IRS than it does with terrorism. Our tax burden is so onerous in this country that many people prefer to deal in cash as much as they can. The IRS wants to catch these people, and has stepped forward to use our fear of terrorism to open the door. The original Bank Secrecy Act was based on money laundering by drug dealers. Drugs the excuse then, terrorism the excuse now. And all the while the goal is nothing less than to give the federal government more power to pry into the financial affairs of every American.

Remember --- this is the same government that tried to institute the “Know your customer” plan a few years back, and the same government that would like to have access to the computer networks that run ATMs and credit card authorization services.

As for the USA Patriot Bill? Few congressmen even read this bill. Many didn’t even read the summary. In the House, under Republican leadership, debate wasn’t permitted, nor were amendments.

Again ---- this is why I vote Libertarian.

ZupanGOD
11-20-2001, 05:29 AM
More Boortz commentary.. Libertarian!

Are you starting to get that sinking feeling that Michael Shane Lasseter is going to basically walk after his little airport escapade last week? On the one hand it doesn’t seem that he violated any federal laws. On the other hand, State prosecutors don’t seem to be too anxious to file charges other than disruptive behavior.

First --- as for the federal crime status. One the one hand, it seems odd that the federal government would have books of regulations requiring all of this airport security; while on the other hand there are no federal laws making it a crime to attempt to bypass this security. How easy would it have been to include something in the USA Patriot Bill to address this? On the other hand, we need to resist the idea of making every crime a federal crime. That’s what the States are for.

Second --- as to this “disruptive behavior” charge. Lasseter’s attorney is already starting the public relations campaign. He’s saying “He certainly didn’t intend to disrupt anything or anybody --- just to get to his child.” Lasseter’s child was perfectly safe with his great-Uncle. Lasseter made a conscious decision to bypass airport security. If he didn’t understand that this was going to “disrupt anything or anybody” then his attorney needs to work on having a guardian appointed for him.

The way things stand now --- look for a $1000 fine and some community service for a man who cost already-struggling airlines millions of dollars and inconvenienced tens of thousands of people.

But …… smoke just one little joint in the privacy of your own home ……