On October 24, 2001 The Patriot Act was enacted by the Senateand House of Representatives of the United States of America.

The Patriot Act was supposed “to deter and punishterrorist acts in the United States and around the world, toenhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for otherpurposes.” America’s response to terrorism made law inless than two months.

The truth of the Patriot Act is that students have little ideaof what comprises this terrorist fighting legislation. The mostcommon student response to the question was, “It’ssupposed to fight terrorism, right?” A few said somethingabout it “taking away rights.”

The Patriot Act was drafted to protect us from terrorism. Theact does little to fight terrorism, and more to take away from ourcivil liberties and rights.

The ignorance about the details of this act is frighteningbecause we don’t know exactly what Congress gave HomelandSecurity agencies the right to do.

The Patriot Act expanded existing anti-terrorism laws to include”domestic terrorism.”

This could chill open discussion of political organizations thatare now subject to more open-ended surveillance, wiretapping andharassment. The checks and balances between the three branches ofgovernment are undermined.

The Bush administration has worked to keep the American peoplefrom criticizing its ways. They exclude reporters with negativeopinions of the administration from press conferences at the WhiteHouse and the Pentagon. Open channels of communication are vital tounderstanding all the dangers we face.

Opposition to the current administration could be monitored onthe insinuation that they are engaged in terrorist activities. Thisis scary in that it threatens the First Amendment of the Bill ofRights – freedom of speech.

The courts are granted limited say in what the government canand can’t do only after information has been accessed.

The Patriot Act goes on to give the government wide powers ofphone and Internet surveillance and access to highly personalmedical, financial, mental health and student records with minimaljudicial oversight. Even some normally privileged legal informationcould be accessed by “Big Brother.”

No amount of safety is worth reducing freedoms and rights. It ishard to balance freedom and safety, but the Patriot Act is goingtoo far. Bush and his cabinet have used the attacks on the WorldTrade Center to justify unconstitutional spying.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation now has the power toinvestigate American citizens for criminal matters without meetingthe standard of probable cause if for “intelligencepurposes.”

Whatever investigation doesn’t qualify as seekingintelligence is beyond me.

Non-citizens are permitted to be jailed based on mere suspicionand can be denied re-admission to the US for engaging in freespeech. Freedom of speech is now a luxury afforded only to citizensand not all human beings.

Spying on college students and listening on random telephoneswill not stop terrorism. Not allowing human beings that are herelegally to speak their mind in opposition to injustice legally iswrong.

Sacramento’s City Council recently passed a proclamationurging the repeal of questionable provisions in the Patriot Actthat infringe upon the rights and liberties of the Sacramentoresidents.

More than 200 other states and local governments have passedresolutions condemning the federal anti-terrorism legislation.

Federal Agencies have no plans to repeal this law. Patriotism isnot only for those who agree with the war on terror. Those whodisagree are patriots too.

“Those who would give up essential liberty. to purchase alittle temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”said Benjamin Franklin at the dawn of this great society.

His words should guide our decisions about and support of thisact.

Is Big Brother all in Taylor’s imagination? Send commentsto [email protected]