yeah but... they asked for the borrowers of the book. All borrowers of that book. Presumably to find out who wrote that in the margin. Now, I find it scary enough that they didn't recognize the quote as Osama's, or google it, but even supposing someone had written "My hero" in the margin they would have been interrogating a possibly large number of people just to find out who out there agrees with bin Laden. Only, no doubt, to discovre it's some disaffected nine-year-old.
Dana On 5/26/05, Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >So what? Trying to get information about Osama bin Laden is hardly > >criminal and should not be the concern of the FBI. Researching someone > >does not mean you agree with him, or I would be a > >frothing-at-the-mouth fundamentalist republican. > > > >So YEAH the Patriot Act should go. Geez. I am astounded that this is > >even debated. They are STILL holding hearings on this. > >Dana > > I can't believe I'm about to tacitly defend the Patriot Act (someplace in > Hell an imp just learned about frost bite)... but here goes. > > To be fair, from the article, it didn't seem like they were after everyone > that "researched Bin Laden". They were given a very specific tip and were > following up on it. The concern seemed focused on the clearly inflammatory > writing in the margin, not on the readship of the book (or similar books) in > general. > > They didn't ask (again, per the artical) for names of lenders of ALL books > about Bin Laden - only that one specific book sent to them by a concerned > party. From the article (which may be leaving out hundreds of important, > opinion-swaying details) it didn't seem at all like a "fishing expedition". > > I am glad that the privacy of the lenders was protected in the end. But I'm > also sympathetic with the FBI. Imagine the public outcry had something > happened and they later admitted that they had such intelligence but did > nothing? > > They were given specific intelligence and attempted to follow up to the best > of their abilities. They clearly did not actually invoke the Patriot Act in > this case - they followed normal, pre-9/11 legal channels. > > This, to me, doesn't seem to be a story about the Patriot Act at all (since > it was never invoked). > > Jim Davis > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:158828 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
