Father: Why Isn't Facebook Keeping My Kid Off Its Site?
Kellogg's Stakes Claim To Toucans, Mayan Imagery; Issues Cease-and-Desist To Guatemalan Non-Profit

Wasn't The PATRIOT Act Supposed To Be About Stopping Terrorism?

Privacy

from the oh-look dept

Thu, Sep 8th 2011 10:30am — Mike Masnick
The PATRIOT Act was all about stopping terrorism, right? We were told that special provisions that ate away at our civil liberties were needed specifically to catch dangerous terrorists -- and that the reason for such an abdication of our rights had nothing to do with simply giving the government more useful surveillance powers. Aaron DeOliveira points us to a fascinating chart that shows how often law enforcement has been using "sneak-and-peek" warrants. These warrants let officials search private property without letting the target of the investigation know. Again, we were told that these expanded powers were needed to stop terrorism. So what have they been used for? Take a look:
Yup. They're all pretty much being used in drug cases. Now some might make the argument that it's important to go after drug dealers -- but that's not how the PATRIOT Act was supposed to be used.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: drugs, law enforcement, patriot act, sneak and peek, terrorism

116 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

The First Word

“

What you see is what you get Provision

I believe there should be a WYSIWYG provision in every law like the PATRIOT act that basically goes like this:

1. Law is created that gives the police insane powers for catching leprechauns

2. Time passes (2 years as a suggestion)

3. Mandatory dialog between Police and fellow citizens:

Publicly appointed person:

Excuse me Mr. Police Officer, how's that law working out and how many leprechauns did you catch?

Police type person:
OMG it's sooooo great! I was able to catch 1,300 smurfs!!!

Publicly appointed person:
Oh, I see; that law is now null and void. If you want to catch smurfs *AND* leprechauns, you're going to have to write the law that way. This one is done, go back and try again.

Another idea would be to have the law with a mandatory sunset. For example after 5 years, if you've not caught all the terrorists with these new powers, then they aren't working the way you thought they would. Give us back our rights.

Of course Law Enforcement would want to extend these powers, and I believe the law should let them. However it should function like this:

1. 5 years is up and the Law Enforcement folks come to renew the law

2. We happily allow this but we automatically cut the time in half before the sunset occurs again.

In addition to this, the Law Enforcement folks who benefit from this law (which is all of them) lose 10% of their budget which is then to be used for social welfare. That or a really big block party. Either one.


/shrug. It could work
—Motheius
 ”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:33am

    I have to ask: Mike, what country has the largest production of poppies?

    Afghanistan.

    Drug money fuels terrorism.

    Nice try though.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      blaktron (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:36am

      Re:

      Which Afghani political group was responsible for the eradication of the heroin trade? Oh right, the Taliban.... troll dumber!

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:48am

        Re: Re:

        Are you kidding? They profit from it greatly. They push to grow as much as they can, paying higher prices, to assure loyalty to the cause.

        If you are going to call troll, at least know what you are talking about.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          blaktron (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:55am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I would suggest you learn something my friend. The Taliban was very anti-drug, in fact by 9/11 they had almost completely wiped out Afhanistans production of heroin. Do some reading, my god, stop reinventing history.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Andrew Norton (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:55am

          Re: Re: Re:

          That's why the poppy harvest had been all but eradicated in 2001, and mysteriously grew back AFTER the US led invasion.

          Taliban couldn't stand drugs. Fact checking = win!

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:03am

          Re: Re: Re:

          See:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Trafficking

          Warning: image content might be unsuitable for minors

          Quoting:

          "The cultivation of opium in Afghanistan reached its peak in 1999, when 350 square miles (910 km2) of poppies were sown. The following year the Taliban banned poppy cultivation, a move which cut production by 94 percent. By 2001 only 30 square miles (78 km2) of land were in use for growing opium poppies. A year later, after American and British troops had removed the Taliban and installed the interim government, the land under cultivation leapt back to 285 square miles (740 km2), with Afghanistan supplanting Burma to become the world's largest opium producer once more. Opium production in that country has increased rapidly since, reaching an all-time high in 2006. War in Afghanistan once again appeared as a facilitator of the trade. Some 3.3 million Afghans are involved in producing opium."

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:44am

          Re: Re: Re:

          you'd have a better time trolling if you didn't say things that make people laugh at you.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Dark Helmet (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:21pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "you'd have a better time trolling if you didn't say things that make people laugh at you."

            No, no, let him keep tripping over his own illogical testicles. It is soooooo fun to watch....

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Michael, 8 Sep 2011 @ 3:22pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          No, they used to go in and kill the farmers and burn the fields when the Russians were in Afghanistan... the myth that the taliban grew the stuff is one propagated by the US and Britain.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 4:01pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          production has increased since the US lead invasion, in large part because we want to keep the farmers happy, and not destroy their income streams, sending them into the arms of the taliban.

          the other plus side to this, besides lowering the number of extremists produced in the region, is the continued war on drugs at home (supplied by a country we occupy), and the continued availability of law enforcement to use the patriot act for purposes it was not intended for. All cheer lead by uniformed folks such as yourself.

          we are the cause and cure of the disease, and there is no reason to believe that continued production benefits the taliban more then our government's own self-serving interests.

          liberty, who needs it right?

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 9 Sep 2011 @ 5:17am

          Re: Re: Re:

          your right, but forget trying to convince Mike's minions of that !!!!..

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PaulT (profile), 9 Sep 2011 @ 8:49am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Funny how the only person agreeing is an AC who can't even spell. Yeah, that'll convince us despite all the cited facts to the contrary above, alright!

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Knowitall (profile), 10 Sep 2011 @ 8:55am

        Re: Re:

        Troll: Just so you know, the Aghani is Afghanistan's currency- not people. Your argument loses credibility when you don't know the basic terms.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        callousdisregard, 14 Sep 2011 @ 8:28am

        Taliban

        Which religious group is more than willing to employ drug gangs in 2011 ?
        The Taliban
        Stuff your troll

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:46am

      Re:

      You mean like the CIA black ops?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:49am

      Re:

      Don't be silly. The CIA and DEA own those poppy fields, not the Afghans.

      And hey, the PATRIOT Act worked, people are now far more afraid of their government than they are of any (other) terrorist group.

      So, mission accomplished. Way to go team. Let's all go home for some burgers & beer.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Greevar (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:54am

      Re:

      [citation needed]

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Another Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:45am

      Your comment is not the total picture either. Who's protecting those drug crops in Afghanistan? That's right... AmeriKan troops! You've bought into the farce of "terrorism". It was and remains a sham that was used to pass this load of tripe called the "Patriot Act". The "law" is for US Citizens. Don't be such a sheeple... try a little critical thinking.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      theDude, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:56am

      Re:

      Oil Money fuels terrorism.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      rooben (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:40pm

      Re:

      of course, so do charities, right so we should allow warrantless wiretapping of charities, cause, you know - some of them siphon money to terrorists.

      Hey, goes what? I heard that parents sometimes give birth to kids that grow up to be terrorists. So - having parents fuels terrorism. Lets go after all families, too.

      If the investigation is drugs, they are using it for drugs, not terrorism. Because some drug dealers fund terrorists, does not mean DEA are focused on battling terrorists. They are looking for drug dealers, because that in itself is a crime.

      Tying it to terrorism is just another way to weasel more rights away from you. Last I checked, drug dealers can be American citizens, and have access to the same constitutional rights as you do. I know this statement is way overused by people that don't know the difference...but this is ACTUALLY anti-constitutional. Have a right to due process. If the agency is using sneak-and-peak, that means they don't have any evidence, or enough evidence to call it probable cause...its a way to get evidence enough to obtain an actual, constitutional warrant.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Urza9814, 8 Sep 2011 @ 1:34pm

      Re:

      No, our government fuels terrorism. This is just another way in which they are doing so.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 1:53pm

      Re:

      "Mike, what country has the largest production of poppies?

      Afghanistan."

      Can you point to examples of the PATRIOT act being used to prevent poppy cultivation in Afghanistan?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Fickelbra (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 1:58pm

      Re:

      That would be a great point if the majority of that wasn't used on marijuana busts.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 2:31pm

      Re:

      you are completely missing the point. This is a case of a law being "creatively" applied in a way it was never intended to be used.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 4:37pm

      Re:

      poppy fields under the taliban: 0
      poppy fields under US Rule: Over 9000

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Hans, 8 Sep 2011 @ 8:30pm

        Re: Re:

        "poppy fields under the taliban: 0
        poppy fields under US Rule: Over 9000"

        Can you seriously be this far down in the comments, and a TechDirt reader, and still confuse correlation with causation? Don't waste our time.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Sep 2011 @ 1:41pm

      Re:

      9/11 was an Inside Job.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      A guy, 9 Sep 2011 @ 3:03pm

      Lol you idiot. Its in the US's best interests to make sure those poppy fields keep running, because they get used to make opium in Russia - where the use of opiates is a massive problem.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_production_in_Afghanistan

      Just read the first paragraph of that. Educate yourself.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      IDIOT ALARM, 9 Sep 2011 @ 9:32pm

      WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP

      EEEEEEEEE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Sep 2011 @ 10:42pm

      Re:

      LOLOLOL do some research you moron.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Jules, 9 Sep 2011 @ 11:38pm

      Re:

      "drug money fuels terrorism"

      I don't think I've ever heard a more naive claim.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Elias, 9 Sep 2011 @ 11:40pm

      Re:

      And how come US troops are guarding those poppy fields instead of erradicateing them?

      If it was realy about terrorism they would stop the flow of drugs at the source instead of going to peoples houses.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Chris, 10 Sep 2011 @ 12:14am

      Re: Drug Money

      Yea the pharm corps have to get their dopamine somewhere... Not too mention they grow that shit because it's been grown in that region for 2000 years. Oh and i suppose you forgot the part where poppy production went up 90% after we destroyed the Taliban.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2011 @ 12:51am

      Re:

      If you had any idea how easy it is to grow poppies, you'd understand this is not the case.

      The statement "Drug money controls terrorism" is quite possibly the most ignorant statement I've heard toward the "war on drugs"

      Tell me, what part of making a plant, not even a plant, a WEED illegal?

      Protip: If the plants were not illegal, then no one has to go to harms way to obtain it.

      Go back to the 80's with that Reagan Anti-Drug bullshit.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2011 @ 1:46am

      Re:

      i have to ask kid: who had forbid growing poppy and nearly wiped out opium production in Afghanistan refusing to profit from it.

      The Taliban

      nice try though.

      Also you might want to look into the meaning of the word drug because yes there are other drugs in the word other than opium.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2011 @ 2:53am

      Re: Your ignorance is showing

      What do poppies have to do with drugs in the US? Is there Heroin outbreak that I am unaware of.

      Trying to use prohibition to make something that 30$ of population takes part in (drugs) is ludicrous. The only reason the war on drugs continues is the lobby money that comes in year after, election after election.

      If they really wanted to stop the violence they would legalize the minor/harmless/beneficial drugs. then the cartels would have to find another way to finance their shenanigans.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      anon, 10 Sep 2011 @ 3:04am

      Re:

      Which is why you would go after the drugs in THEIR country not ours dumbass.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2011 @ 3:50am

      Re:

      Any losses that the police may cause for drug business will only affect the local middle mans. Unless you can stop drug trafficking entirely no measure will hinder farmers in Afganistan.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2011 @ 6:39am

      Re:

      So the patriot act was created to charge people in Afganistan?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Palu lupa, 10 Sep 2011 @ 6:48am

      Re:

      That's retarded for so many reasons. Is Afghanistan a large funder of terrorism? No. Terrorism funding (Islamic, at least) mainly comes from the middle east. Second, any country that IS a large contributor to terrorism will draw money from whatever economically successful industries prevail in that country. In the middle east its oil, in Afghanistan it's opium. Third, most drug money is centered around South America, which doesn't give two shits about terrorism.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Ample, 10 Sep 2011 @ 6:55am

      Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 8th, 2011 @ 10:33am

      You are an idiot. That argument is invalid, an overwhelming majority of drug users do not buy heroin and therefore the trail of funds stops in america or mexico.
      So think before you post things you only know about from commercials.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Mikchael, 10 Sep 2011 @ 9:06am

      Re:

      Sure it does, but they aren't trying to stop people from growing poppies here in the U.S., and I highly doubt all of the searches mentioned were for heroin either

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Joe, 10 Sep 2011 @ 11:25pm

      Re:

      Why doesn't the US destroy these fields? We have hundreds of troops that guard these fields (google for pictures and articles).

      Marijuana is mostly domestic now a days, so less money for terrorists. Which gives me an idea. Why don't we regulate drugs and decrease a major source of profits for terrorists?

      By the way when we take out big drug dealers all it does is increase prices and therefor profits for the other surviving dealers. There will always be someone who is willing to take risk and gain massive profits.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      dead tree, 12 Sep 2011 @ 12:21am

      Re:

      Why would the police be in afghanistan

      This is about domestic searches

      Nice try though.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 12 Sep 2011 @ 12:46am

      Re:

      No, drug prohibition-ism funnels drug money to terrorists.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      kingtodd (profile), 14 Sep 2011 @ 10:15am

      Re:

      What country had all but eradicated the production of poppies under the Taliban government?

      Afghanistan.

      What country had oil executive Hamid Karzai installed as a puppet president by business owners George W. Bush and Salem bin Laden?

      Afghanistan.

      What country became the world's leading producer of poppy within 6 months of the overthrow of their government by the United States?

      Afghanistan.

      http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/dyinginafghanistan.php

      Drug money fuels terrorism? Well who is harvesting the poppy in Afghanistan?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Vince, 14 Sep 2011 @ 12:09pm

      Anomymous Coward, how appropriate

      You're name is quite appropriate. Considering that you pose a false response to a rational question.
      "I have to ask: Mike, what country has the largest production of poppies?

      Afghanistan.

      Drug money fuels terrorism."

      Uh-huh. Actually, the Far East/Southeast Asia produce more Opium than Afghanistan. Afghanistan reduced their poppy production to instead become the number 1 producer of hash to Europe. Look it up, douchebag. And why IS it that Afghanistan produces poppies? Because they are valuable. And why is that? Because, no-talent-ass-clowns(like yourself) have tampered with the market causing an artificial price spike making it more profitable. Your comment is false for another reason. Your statement is the claim that you fund criminals by purchasing from criminals. But, YOUR POLICIES PUT THESE PRODUCTS INTO THE SOLE DOMAIN OF THE CRIMINAL. If drugs were legal then they wouldn't fund criminals because law abiding businesses could handle these products. Another, reason your wrong is that the "drugs" that these warrants are used for have NOTHING TO DO WITH HEROIN. They don't even have anything to do with cocaine. The 1,618 searches are all almost exclusively for marijuana. Oh yeah! That "most foul" herb that's grown all across the US! Yep, that's worth losing our Rights! Well, I'm glad you're happy giving up your liberty and I hope your children enjoy their indentured servitude...

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 28 Nov 2011 @ 1:42pm

      Re:

      In 2001, before 9/11, 0% of the worlds heroin supply cam from Afghanistan. Now that the US military occupies it, 90% of the worlds heroin supply comes from Afghanistan.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      yep, 6 Mar 2012 @ 3:54pm

      Re:

      Tell me why we have US soldiers guarding poppy fields?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 18 Jul 2012 @ 1:14pm

      Re:

      flamer

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Scott MITTING, 27 Oct 2012 @ 6:44pm

      Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 8th, 2011 @ 10:33am

      I hope you're being sarcastic. Afghanistan didn't have any significant crops until after our invasion. The Taliban was strongly against the drug trade and shot farmers that grew them.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ima Fish (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:34am

    "Now some might make the argument that it's important to go after drug dealers..."

    ... but that's why we have drug laws.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Doe, 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:53am

    It all started with the war on drugs

    The so called drug war started the mass erosion of our civil liberties. The feds realized that all they have to do is tack the word war onto something and they can pretty much get away with anything they do. Look at what has been done in the drug war, then the war on terror and soon the cyber war.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Travis, 8 Sep 2011 @ 4:55pm

      Re: It all started with the war on drugs

      It's been going on longer that that. During the "War on Fascism" (WW2), our government placed most Japanese Americans in concentration camps of our own (no where near as bad as the Nazis). During the "War on Communism" (Cold War)many Americans were arrested simply for thinking that the basic principals of communism (not the specific execution) wasn't that bad of an idea.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    aikiwolfie (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:55am

    Drugs and Priracy Fund Terrorism

    Drugs and Piracy fund terrorism. So clearly we must cut off the funding. So expect for searches of everybody's houses. Terrorists blend in and are thus indistinguishable from people. So every body is now guilt until proven not guilty yet. Innocent has been dropped as a verdict. We're all guilty of something.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 10:59am

    Typo...

    Rights, not rites.

    Feel free to delete this.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:11am

    Arresting heroin users, heroin dealers, and even heroin producers will not decrease demand for heroin.

    The "drug war" is a fool's errand whose primary function is to syphon public money to private entities.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Terry Hancock (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:12am

    Little typo...

    Actually, new "rites" is what they're forcing onto us with the security theater business. "Rights" is what we've been abdicating. :-)

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:22am

    something about the fact that those who give up rights for security end up with, and deserve, neither.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    brandon (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:29am

    RE: anonymous coward

    yes drug money has been used to fuel terroism. but using our laws in a way they were never intended to be used; ie: thwarting civil liberties, is NOT acceptable even IF it reduced the amount of $$ terrorists received. doing wrong for the overall good has ALWAYS been a losing proposition.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      blaktron (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:06pm

      Re: RE: anonymous coward

      Actually, its difficult to prove drug money fuels terrorism, unless you count all violence as terrorism. Most drug related violence is profit-protection, not ideological in nature. When you start saying anything that causes terror is 'terrorism' then you've muddied the term enough to basically include anything under that label. Terrorism is violence with the only goal as the creation of fear, a particularly vile brand of violence that procludes profit.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:13pm

        Re: Re: RE: anonymous coward

        I think its fair to assume that money from the drug trade spills over into terrorism. Just because of the payoffs and protection type of graft that gets moved around, its not ideological in nature. The Oil funding however I would think is largely ideologically driven and is also a much much much much much larger percentage of terrorist funding. I also bet that not once has the patriot act been used to violate the privacy of a Saudi prince or other similar Arab oil barons. Or thier corporate and banking representatives in the US.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          blaktron (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:23pm

          Re: Re: Re: RE: anonymous coward

          I agree its fair to assume, but 'fair to assume' is far from proof, and a statment of fact like "yes drug money has been used to fund terrorism" is not worded as assumption. It might be 'fair to assume' that drug money funds terrorism, but right now, at least, most drug money would be spent fueling the cartel war in Mexico, not travelling halfway around the world into the middle east.

          Also, the vast majority of cartel leaders are catholic, so just because the american media paints both terrorists and drug dealers as 'brown people', doesn't mean the 2 VERY different groups have anything in common other than the rough shading of their skin.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:31am

    Orientation

    Hold on...just had to change my monitor to portrait view to see the whole graphic.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    HothMonster, 8 Sep 2011 @ 11:52am

    Trick question, drug users are terrorists, duh

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      heyidiot (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:18pm

      The government is terrified of drugs. Duh.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Motheius, 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:21pm

        Re:

        The govt. is also against prostitution because they like to fuck everyone and if there is going to be some fucking, then it damn well better be the govt.

        Doesn't this make them anti-competitive?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Motheius, 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:08pm

    What you see is what you get Provision

    I believe there should be a WYSIWYG provision in every law like the PATRIOT act that basically goes like this:

    1. Law is created that gives the police insane powers for catching leprechauns

    2. Time passes (2 years as a suggestion)

    3. Mandatory dialog between Police and fellow citizens:

    Publicly appointed person:

    Excuse me Mr. Police Officer, how's that law working out and how many leprechauns did you catch?

    Police type person:
    OMG it's sooooo great! I was able to catch 1,300 smurfs!!!

    Publicly appointed person:
    Oh, I see; that law is now null and void. If you want to catch smurfs *AND* leprechauns, you're going to have to write the law that way. This one is done, go back and try again.

    Another idea would be to have the law with a mandatory sunset. For example after 5 years, if you've not caught all the terrorists with these new powers, then they aren't working the way you thought they would. Give us back our rights.

    Of course Law Enforcement would want to extend these powers, and I believe the law should let them. However it should function like this:

    1. 5 years is up and the Law Enforcement folks come to renew the law

    2. We happily allow this but we automatically cut the time in half before the sunset occurs again.

    In addition to this, the Law Enforcement folks who benefit from this law (which is all of them) lose 10% of their budget which is then to be used for social welfare. That or a really big block party. Either one.


    /shrug. It could work

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      heyidiot (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:20pm

      I don't get it...

      So, you're saying that smurfs AREN'T just blue leprechauns???

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      kirillian (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 2:12pm

      Re: What you see is what you get Provision

      The Patriot Act did and still does have a mandatory sunset...it has been re-passed every time the sunset came up.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 2:25pm

      Re: What you see is what you get Provision

      Well, there are no smurfs or leprechauns around so it must be working.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ArkieGuy (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:19pm

    Benjamin Franklin

    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

    Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    heyidiot (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:23pm

    "It's the drugs..."

    "It's ALWAYS the drugs."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jimr (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:26pm

    Any act that is un-american, as determine by a secret council, is obviously terrorist in nature and to question such policies is a sure fire sign that you are a terrorist or a supporter of terrorist.

    Based large on the same principle tests to see if you are a witch. We drown, burn, etc you. If you are not a witch then you shall simply die (but your soul will be saved) and if you do not die then you must be a witch.

    The witch hunting standards have just been updated and the Patriot act 'helps' .

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    BeeAitch (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:31pm

    Quick! Someone remind me again how PROTECT IP won't be 'more sweeping than necessary'.

    C'mon ACs (you know which ACs I'm talking about), help me out.

    I need you to tell me again how it will have no unintended consequences for the rest of the internet.

    Please tell me it won't break the internet.

    Not all at once now...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bill Hicks, 8 Sep 2011 @ 12:43pm

    "George Bush says 'we are losing the war on drugs'. Well you know what that implies? There's a war going on, and people on drugs are winning it! Well what does that tell you about drugs? Some smart, creative motherf*ckers on that side."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Thomas (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 1:47pm

    The patriot act...

    was really written just to give law enforcement a blank check to snoop on anyone they wanted to, with or without any real reason.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      BeeAitch (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 2:45pm

      Re: The patriot act...

      No, it was intended to protect americans from TERRORISM!!11!1

      And that's exactly (and only) what it has been used for.

      /sarc

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    MJ, 8 Sep 2011 @ 3:34pm

    I would be interested in seeing a breakdown of drug warrants by drug. I would be willing to bet that a majority of them are marijuana related and have nothing to do with opiates, Taliban related or not.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Overcast (profile), 8 Sep 2011 @ 3:55pm

    Yep, it was always about control.. you could say it applies to terrorism, but mostly 'domestic government provided terrorism'..

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    DR. LIH YOUNG, 8 Sep 2011 @ 4:26pm

    patrot-act, terrorism, and what else

    RESOLVE SOCIO- POLITICAL ISSUES, BALANCING BUDGET. OPPOSE SO CALLED "FAIR ELECTION ACT" PUBLIC FINANCE MATCHING SMALL DONORS FUND- DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD, RESOUCES BENEFIT "BAD GUYS" AS USUAL. TASKS: TOP PRIORITIES: Society in vicious cycles as in need of revolution, we MUST act:
    (1). Prosecute, eliminate “MURDER- fraud- crime- injustice networks”= cruel tyranny= robbery machine = ROBBER- ISM; destroying essences of democracy, capitalism; continuing, on-going; relaying, penetrating every segment of our lives (inc. civic non- profit organizations); expanding here domestically to overseas- foreign countries; with threat, coercion, victimization, deprivation, discrimination; unjust practices, manipulation, influence; bad legislative bills; unjust hidden agenda with false/ misleading excuses (inc. private- public partnership, economic development, housing, school construction, transportation, abandonment of properties, maintenance of “paper roads”, nonsense grants, programs; …, whatever) to benefit/ facilitate “MURDER-fraud- crime- injustice networks” (inc. officials, judges, developers, lawyers, employees, etc.); expand further unjust operation; endless unlawful- immoral acts; rob/destruct resources (rights, land, properties, home, buildings, assets, accounts, income, pension, documents, evidences; public, private; business, civic, political); frivolous litigation, levies, foreclosures, garnishment, guardianship, power of attorney; improper processing of complaints, procedures, proceedings, docketing, bookkeeping, accounting; cause vicious cycles: socio- political- election-media- budget- legislative- system problems; civil-human rights backwards; people-slave. Examples of problems are provided below: **
    (2). Restore: principle, fairness, cost-effectiveness, accountability, reliability, capability; fair election, justice, peace (including civic, non-profit organizations), “check and balance”; Restore: TRUE essence of democracy, fair election process; easy access to government, files, records, transcripts; not unjustly manipulated, influenced, misled by wrong person, information, or “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” = serious causes of socio- political – election –media- budget- legislative problems, which destroy people, families, society, peace, justice, democracy. Based on merits, justification; NO double standards, improper processing of complaints, procedures, proceedings; falsification, false records, tampering of evidence, data; harassment, intimidation (complainant, witnesses); false charges, citation, bond, imprisonment; disparities and improper treatments, etc.; abuse of laws, power, authorities.
    (3). Promote democracy, fair election, quality, competition, people input (policies, issues, officials, judges); televise public hearings, citizen/candidate forum/debate; maintain, disseminate meaningful accurate information, records, capability, reasoning, good sense of justice, public interest, endurance. Objective screening by meaningful rigorous examinations, evaluations for quality, capability, endurance and public interest.
    * To capture extended serious problems of “MURDER-fraud- crime- injustice networks” with official misconduct- government gang, please incorporate the following: (A). complaints/ cases: administrative and judicial levels; (B) frequent testimonies before government bodies, official, legislators, law enforcement, committees, public hearings; local – federal; (C) spin-off complaints, improper processing of complaints, procedures, proceedings, accounting, bookkeeping, docketing, etc.; (D) Candidate statements, see Webs and archives. Urge to re-open and investigate Congress.org, DNet (by League of Women Voters), links, etc.; (E) complaints and reports to police, law enforcement, consumer affairs, other authorities/agencies against “fraud- crime- injustice networks”; (F). Numerous TV programs on social issues (Dr. Lih Young: producer, host, speaker).

    (G). Frequent recommendations/petitions to officials, agencies, law enforcement, local - federal; as individuals or with civic organizations. ** EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMS - “MURDER- FRAUD- CRIME- INJUSTICE NETWORKS”- with official misconduct, government gang- endless unlawful immoral acts:
    (A): OPM, IRS, DHHS, SSA, DOJ, FBI, DOD, USDA, DOC, USCIS (US citizens/ neutralization services), custom services, various agencies, law enforcement; 3 branches, local – federal- global; National Park Service (Prettyman?), Library of Congress (Neil Gladd); many financial/brokerage/ accounting/ bill-payment processing/ collection institutions/agencies; insurance, car related businesses, utilities…, more; dealers Lakeforest Oldsmobile; phone/utilities/cable, judges, legal/court personnel, detective/ process server/ impersonators, with phony names, or would not provide names even in the court cases (Complainant could not get access to court files; could not even make copies); Leslie Gradet, Tamera Jones, William D Roessler; Offices of Treasury, Comptroller, Attorney Gneral: Joel Jacob/Jacobson, Gail Malle-Davis, Sylvia J. Brokos, Mary Hawse, Linda Tanton, Gerald Langbaum, John Barry, Pamela Porter, Leo F. Partridge, Mark Vulcan, Jamis Riley, James Britt, Audrey Thomas, Jeanne Lippy, Jesse Rosenburger, Ralph Lepson; transcribers Margaret Bauer, Senators: Walter Baker, Barbara Hoffman, Thomas Middleton, Trooper: Marty Sealey, Vincent Mass, State Election Board Ross Goldstein; Maryland DOEd Susan Page, Barbara Smith(?), SSA employees and supervisors (especially in Rockville, Md), and Bullivant (?, probably in N. J.; or other states). Lobbysts/ municipal attorneys/lawyers/affiliates, Paul Glasgow, David Venable, Joseph Stoltz, Jr., Barry Gordon, Stephen Perouka, David Steinberg, Wolpoff & Abramson, Richard D. Mirsky, Poppleton, Garrett & Polott, P.C., accountant Hilda K. Matijevic; Marc Sliffman (Silver Spring, Wheaton area), Samuel White and his law firm and lawyers Shawn Bartley, Daniel Pesachowitz, Laura Jolly (phony person, named as "substitute trustee", but can never be found or contacted even through official agencies); many court personnel and judges (District Court – Court of Special Appeals). Court Auditor Robert Romero. State, county health services organizations/ agencies, Department of Health and Human Services, Montgomery County Crisis Center, Jean Burgess (white, female), Marsha Aaron; Department of Aging; Adult Protective Services, Sherry Davis, Suzanne Lord (?), Odick Esq., Bonnie Klem, etc.; Suburban Hospital, physicians, emergency staff; social worker Jody Crecensi (?), case manager Patricia Grafferty (?), Robert Rothstein, M. D. (?), Tipp Woodward; Manor- Care in Potomac Maryland: Cheryl Paulson (?, administrator) and nurses, etc.; forensic services, Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene: Jolie Smith; numerous psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, etc.: Potomac Ridge Steven Israel, Collin, Gabriel (?); social worker Tracy Lewit; Springfield Hospital Center: forensic services, Kevin Knight, Dr. Valadez (refused to give full name, despite repeated requests); Carla Craville, Francoise Reynolds, Roxanne Heyman, Amy True; Judges James Sasfield, Gary Crawford, Cheryl McCally, etc., prosecutors/government attorneys, e.g., John McCarthy, Nunylny (?), Peter Mitchell (Montgomery County Office of Human Rights); District Court Commission (Rockville, Md) M. Dickerson; Court Personnel T.M. (only initials, no full name available); many judges, clerk of the courts (Jeffrey Ward, Loretta Knight, Bettie Skelton, Molly Rhul, etc.), other court personnel, various counties, states; local – federal; law enforcement, FBI; police e.g., in Rockville, Md. Sgt. Cowell (first name not available), C.P. Sadleson; officer Davis (MCPD); Denis Lewis (Baltimore County); sheriff: R. Lewis (Female, White, Montgomery Countym Md.), K. Naff (white, male, Montgomery County, Md); fire and rescues (abuse, even no fire; conspiracy).

    (B): The problems are interrelated horizontally and vertically, among all issues, local- global. Clerks of the Circuit Court (Montgomery County, Md.) Loretta Knight, Bettie Skelton, Molly Rhul; District Court Clerk Jeffrey Ward, Administrative Judge Cornelius Vaughey, Sheriff Elliot Tolbert, etc. government attorney John McCarthy, Kristen Bender, court personnel, attorneys (public, private), law enforcement (FBI, sheriff, police, fire/rescue, etc., contractors) are part of the “:fraud- crime- networks: with spying, surveillance, harassment, unlawful search, stealing, robbery, injuries; false arrest, imprisonment, citation, trespass, testimony; withholding witnesses; destroy information, documents, evidence, etc.
    ( C). False/ unjust/ frivolous levies, liens, garnishment, guardianship, power of attorneys, foreclosure, tenant-hold-over- eviction, etc. Thousands of cases are pending in the court systems for years or even decades; believed to be filed by “fraud- crime- networks” to victimize people; without due process, proper services, proceedings; cause homelessness, poverty; not because of the problems of homeowners/citizens, but because of unjust judicial/court/legal personnel, court auditor Robert Romero as part of “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”. Judges (unjust, irresponsible, judicially disabled) include Warren Donohue, John Debelius, Durk Thumpson, Ann Harrington, Louise Scrivener, Lawrence De Beard, Eric Johnson, James McKenna; District Judge Gary Everngam, Judge Gary Crawford; court personnel/ sheriff, attorneys, affiliated law firms; Sheriffs Earnest Turner, R. Lewis, K. Naff, etc.
    (E). Problems of privatization, irresponsibility, disabilities of government attorneys and judicial/legal/court personnel are very serious, expanding, local- nationwide- global; exporting injustice overseas; Rockville city, Montgomery County, Maryland state; New Jersey Monmouth County, Judge Robert McLeod (private attorney), Judge Patricia Bueno Cleary, Prosecutor (private attorney) Patrick Healy, police David D’Arcy.
    (F) Other people committed, conspired with police and fraud- crime- networks: Private attorneys: Robert McCarthy (Bethesda, Md.), Olivia Cammack (Silver Spring, Md.), David Slacker (Bethesda Md.); Ria Rochvarg (assigned as legal assistance provider to certain counties by Md. Department of Health and Mental Highgiene, but she went around the state for various abuses with Sherry Davis, Police Davis, etc. attorneys (public and private), Timonthy Adelman, Esq., (?) and law firms Adelman, Sheff and Smith(?, in Annapolis, Md), Robert McCarthy, Suburban Hospital, etc. Landlord/ landladies e.g., Jiewen Tan (Rockville, Md.) and Chia Yao (Gaithersburg, Md.) had been unjustly influenced/ conspired.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 6:55pm

    I've seen reports of this year after year. It's always the same statistics.

    The patriot act is not about stopping terrorists.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2011 @ 8:20pm

    One can see that that law is not used for terrorrism and most probably is used against US citizens since most of drug dealing is done by Americans.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      darryl, 9 Sep 2011 @ 6:18am

      Re:

      yes, US citizens dealing drugs grown in the middle east under the control of the taliban, the US are the 'end users' of the drugs not the producers of it. Like everything else (including money) you have to import what you need.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    darryl, 9 Sep 2011 @ 6:07am

    Terrorist to one person is a freedom fighter to another.

    Fraud, drugs and terrorrism, well you first have to define a bit more clearly what terrorrism is.

    It has been put in such broad terms that it is really just like everything else, being a crime.

    I am sure that seeing the huge drug trade that would terrorise some people.

    As would theft, fraud, and undue enforcement of 'laws', it would be hard to say that the US has not conducted it's own campaign of terror with Rumsfeld stating "we have to fight them the same way they are fighting us".

    all that chart shows is that there are A LOT more people in the drug trade then in the terror trade.

    Obviously a single terrorist can do alot more damage than a single drug dealer, but there are far more drug dealers than terrorists, does not mean you dont bother with looking for them.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    darryl, 9 Sep 2011 @ 6:15am

    the lie about WMD's caused great terror. deliberatly

    An interesting doco this week, where a reporter was with some troops in Afganistan and the reporter had a bunch of photo's of 911 and the towers falling, they everyone in the country village if they recognised the pictures and if they know anything about it.

    ONLY ONE PERSON in the entire town had ANY clue as to what the pictures were of !!! that was the police chief.

    they had NO idea what '911' was or what effect it has, and have never even heard about it let along seen a picture of it.

    and yes, it is clear with absolute proof that terrorism is largely financed by the drug trade.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      ts, 9 Sep 2011 @ 8:21am

      Re: the lie about WMD's caused great terror. deliberatly

      citation?? Even if you can prove terrorism is largely financed by the drug trade, what do you propose we do to stop it? We've already proven without a doubt that you can't make people stop doing drugs by passing new laws. But you can control where they buy the drugs by legalizing and regulating. Just sayin'..

      My biggest bitch about these stats is that a lot of the drug arrest have been people growing medicinal marijuana.. complying with their state laws. Apparently states have no rights, and the federal government needs to control everything and everyone. And to those who say marijuana is not medicinal, maybe you should watch the documentary "Run From the Cure" (it's on youtube).

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Bill Surowiecki (profile), 9 Sep 2011 @ 6:49am

    Well you see the best thing about the word "terrorist" is that it can be manipulated to fit almost anyone we don't like, or more specifically a group that the government does not like.

    This has become a magical word that acts as a skeleton key for the cage containing the dogs of war. Michele Bachmann just the other night at the Republican Debate changed the topic of Border Patrol dealing with illegal immigrants to Narcoterrorism. She may have a point, there are some major problems with cartels and violence in the area. However, the idea that she slipped it into a debate about illegal immigration shows how the vagueness of the Patriot Act is twisted to suit ones needs. Now we can think about treating the entire situation, immigration and drugs as one problem that will fall under the scope of the Patriot Act. All this thanks to the inclusion of one little word.

    The single biggest argument against The Patriot Act, has always been that its scope is far too broad and its definition on who it can be used against are far too vague. Set aside the obvious breach it causes for our privacy and look at what it actually does to our right to dissent. We now have a set of laws that, on a politician whim, can be used to label us domestic terrorists.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Bruce Brown (profile), 9 Sep 2011 @ 7:37am

    Intent

    The first time I came up against something like this was the RICO law. We were all told that it was necessary to go after the Mafia. It could be used for a lot more, but they were only going to use it on the Mafia. They promised and crossed their hearts.

    The first charge of RICO I saw was a Doctor that was defrauding Medicare.

    It is a fairly common charge now for any business that the government wants to harass.

    Never believe when supporters of a bill say "Yeah but we are only going after..."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Sep 2011 @ 3:58pm

    The government wants us to believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by foreigners. They also want us to believe that the Patriot Act was passed in response to 9/11. So, if the government is to be believed, their response to an act perpetrated by foreigners is to pass a law that primarily affects Americans.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Evan, 9 Sep 2011 @ 9:33pm

    References

    I agree that they are using it falsely but where did this information come from?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    toksi kvast, 10 Sep 2011 @ 12:56am

    i'm not sure, but the most probable thing drug money would fund, I would expect to be MORE drugs

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Noxx, 10 Sep 2011 @ 7:56am

    really???

    people really believe buying drugs is funding terrorism?

    the US governement funded terrorism retards during their civil war. But that's the one thing the government loves about the internet. We're told it's a wealth of information, which is just wool over our eyes. It's a wealth of CONTROLLED information.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Dr.Frost, 10 Sep 2011 @ 2:00pm

    My friend did 3 1/2 years in federal prison under the patriot act for using a cell phone to commit a felony. He was a medical marijuana care provider who had been raided by the DEA several times. He never had enough plants for them to do anything serious to him and eventually they took him in for giving someone grow tips over the phone. They threatened him with 10 or more years for various organized crime and conspiracy charges and his lawyer got them to drop it down to just the cell phone charge. He did 3 1/2 years for telling someone how to grow a plant over the phone. When are we going to make them give us back the constitution that so many people have fought for. Ben Franklin said "those who would trade their freedom for security deserve neither."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 11 Sep 2011 @ 8:58am

    The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    yeknomgod.com (profile), 28 Nov 2011 @ 1:48pm

    Yeah, let's stop these Commie SOBs!

    They're poisoning our children by putting homosexuality-causing chemicals in the water and they're either making us smoke cigarettes or quit smoking, I can't tell yet, but whichever one it is will cause birth defects in genetically homogeneous children, meaning only mixed-race babies will survive the coming Apocalypse!

    What?... What's a 'terrorist'? I thought we were still fighting commies....

    Yeah... those terrorists are... uh... aborting 9-month old babies and selling crack to 5 year olds! (Someone please get me evidence backing me up... or just fabricate it. Thanks!).

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Mack, 28 Nov 2011 @ 5:12pm

    How do I turn in Homeland Security for terrorism against the citizens of the USA?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]


Father: Why Isn't Facebook Keeping My Kid Off Its Site?
Kellogg's Stakes Claim To Toucans, Mayan Imagery; Issues Cease-and-Desist To Guatemalan Non-Profit
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

19:39 Important Announcement: Techdirt Is Migrating To A New Platform (0)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.