Apathetic Citizenry and Loss of Civil Liberties

When President Bush signed the H.R. 3199, the “USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 he also included a qualification statement that’s essence is There are numerous provisions of the Act that require the Department of Justice to provide information and documents to congressional committees for purposes of oversight. We will ignore the provisions of the Act requiring oversite when we decide that it will “impair” what occurs in the Executive branch. In other words: The Executive Branch will continue to do what we want, when we want, to heck with the laws and other two branches of government.

How is something like the Patriot Act renewed without much media fan fare or public outcry. Coverage on television was minimal and while blogs and talk-radio activity on the subject rose, it still seems that most American’s are apathetic to laws that hand over their liberties. The provisions of the Patriot Act are permanent. They are not going away with the end of Bush’s term.

The American citizens that do protest are more apt to face the consequences of the Act depending on how it is enforced and how you interpret it.

Dispelling Some of the Major Myths about the USA PATRIOT Act

Department of Justice

Myth: The ACLU claims that the Patriot Act “expands terrorism laws to include ‘domestic terrorism’ which could subject political organizations to surveillance, wiretapping, harassment, and criminal action for political advocacy.” They also claim that it includes a “provision that might allow the actions of peaceful groups that dissent from government policy, such as Greenpeace, to be treated as ‘domestic terrorism.'” (ACLU, February 11, 2003; ACLU fundraising letter, cited by Stuart Taylor in “UnPATRIOTic,” National Journal, August 4, 2003)

Reality: The Patriot Act limits domestic terrorism to conduct that breaks criminal laws, endangering human life. “Peaceful groups that dissent from government policy” without breaking laws cannot be targeted. Peaceful political discourse and dissent is one of America’s most cherished freedoms, and is not subject to investigation as domestic terrorism. Under the Patriot Act, the definition of “domestic terrorism” is limited to conduct that (1) violates federal or state criminal law and (2) is dangerous to human life. Therefore, peaceful political organizations engaging in political advocacy will obviously not come under this definition. (Patriot Act, Section 802)

Title VII
SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED.—Section 2331 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking ‘‘by assassination
or kidnapping’’ and inserting ‘‘by mass destruction, assassination,
or kidnapping’’;
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘and’’;
(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(5) the term ‘domestic terrorism’ means activities that—
‘‘(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are
a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or
of any State;
‘‘(B) appear to be intended—
‘‘(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
‘‘(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
‘‘(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by
mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
‘‘(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction
of the United States.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 3077(1) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(1) ‘act of terrorism’ means an act of domestic or international
terrorism as defined in section 2331;’’.

How do you define domestic terrorism? How does the government?
How do you interpret this section? Do you think American citizens are becoming complacent and take their civil rights/liberties for granted ?

You decide and let me know what you think.