Patriot Act

Is the privacy of your patrons a sacred trust? According to Nate Anderson, "Librarians want to turn us all into privacy fiends."

Here we go again.

The Internet Archive protested the receipt of a National Security Letter from the FBI back in November. Today it won its case.

The Internet Archive, a project to create a digital library of the web for posterity, successfully fought a secret government Patriot Act order for records about one of its patrons and won the right to make the order public, civil liberties groups announced this morning.

Kelly writes "Amazing accounts from writer Naomi Wolf, who is finding out that, in her travels throughout the US, people are waking up to the encroaching darkness. Here's her book-related observations, "Someone else says that his friend opened his luggage to find a letter from the TSA saying that they did not appreciate his reading material. Before I go into the security lines, I find myself editing my possessions.

mdoneil writes "A United States District Court Judge has ruled that parts of the USA PATRIOT Act unconstitutional. The parts which amend the FISA were reviewed by the Oregon District Court Judge in the Mayfield et al case.
You may recall Mayfield as the lawyer who was arrested because his fingerprints were found in Spain after the bombings of the Metro in Madrid before their last national elections. Well, in case you were wondering it was a mistake — neither he nor his fingers were there.

Kelly writes "Looks like the next time I want to read Edward Abbey's "The Monkey Wrench Gang" or something by Noam Chomsky, I will need to listen to an audiobook version of it on my pod. Because, as it turns out, "The U.S.

In October 2001, a man was kicked off a flight because of what he was reading. In 2003, G-Men paid a visit to someone's house after they were caught reading anti-invasion materials. Then the FBI warned us to be on the lookout for persons reading almanacs.

Seemingly acceptable though he may be to Republicans and Democrats alike in Congress, President Bush's new appointee for the position of Attorney General, Michael B. Mukasey, is a strong supporter of the Patriot Act. The International Herald Tribune reported that Mukasey said in a speech in 2004, "That awkward name may very well be the worst thing about the statute."More cautiously, The Capitol Times of Madison, WI reports "For instance, in a May 10, 2004, op-ed, which was published as the debate about fixing fundamental flaws in the Patriot Act was heating up, Mukasey defended some of the act's most extreme excesses and dismissively told critics to avoid what he termed "reflexive" or "recreational" criticisms of it." The paper calls the candidate "something less than a rule-of-law man when it comes to constitutional matters. As a contributor to the right-wing editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, the retired judge has written several articles that suggest he would have trouble balancing civil liberties and national security concerns." The Wall Street Journal, endorses Mukasey thusly "Earth to Washington: You finally have the right man for the right job at the right time. Try not to screw this one up." New York Times reports on Mukasey's close connection to Republican Presidential Candidate Rudy Guiliani and others in the New York legal community. Here's today's NY Times editorial on the nominee, which refers to statements Mukasey made in 2004 denouncing the "hysteria" of Patriot Act critics, and lashing out at the American Library Association for trying to protect patrons' privacy..

More on the Patriot Act ruling by Judge Marrero.Yes, there is a stay, according to Information Today (thank you mdoneil for pointing this out). The article elaborates: "The court could not identify a solution to these concerns within the PATRIOT Act and enjoined the entire NSL provisions from being enforced. However, recognizing the "implications of the ruling and the importance of the issues involved," the court agreed to stay its ruling pending appeal. There has not been an appeal as yet.