Patriot Act II Monster Hidden In Intelligence Bill

By Jon Christian Ryter, December 18

Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert [R-IL] had the votes to pass the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 fully two weeks before he released the bill to the floor and allowed the House of Representatives an up-and-down vote on the measure. So did Sen. Bill Frist [R-TN] in the US Senate. On Tuesday, Nov. 7, the House voted overwhelmingly—336 to 75 to pass a piece of legislation that every member of the House and Senate who voted for it should be impeached. On Wednesday, the Senate voted 89 to 2, and enacted a very bad and very unnecessary piece of legislation into law. Only Senators James Inhofe [R-OK] and Robert Byrd [D-WV] voted against the measure. Byrd said Congress acted like "...pygmies on the battlefield of history" rushing to judgment and passing a bad piece of legislation "...like whipped dogs in the face of political pressure." Inhofe rejected the legislation because Frist would not include tougher immigration restrictions in the bill. Frist told Inhofe that immigration reform would be taken up independently in 2005. Inhofe has been around long enough to know a 'leadership lie' when he hears it. Too bad House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner [R-WI who was worried about illegals getting American drivers' licenses couldn't tell when he saw Hastert's lips moving, that the Speaker was lying.

After all, part of the justification for enacting the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 was the fact—as we heard reiterated over and over again like a broken record—that the 9-11 skyjackers had 68 American drivers' licenses between them. If State or federal law mandated that you had to be a citizen of the United States to get a drivers' license—and that you have to have a birth certificate proving you are a citizen before one was issued, then those 19 skyjackers would have had "zero" drivers' licenses between them, and they would not have been able to enroll in the jet airliner training schools where they learned to pilot 747s and 757s. It would seem with such a professed concern for enacting this bill that the toughest restrictions possible to make sure that illegal aliens could not secure what amounts to a "passport to everywhere" in this country could not be obtained by those who would do us harm. Inhofe was correct in voting against the bill. Sensenbrenner proved he is nothing more than a White House lackey. I hope the Republicans in Wisconsin find a suitable replacement for Sensenbrenner and vote him out of office in 2006.

Due to the Motor Voter Law enacted during the Clinton years, a driver's license became a "passport" to the voting booth—whether the holder of that driver's license is a citizen of this country or not. To the far left, providing illegals (who will always vote Democratic) with access to the voting booth is far more important than making certain that aliens who might be terrorists cannot get their hands on any form of identification that will help them avoid detection and apprehension.

That was, after all, why so much George Soros money found its way into the left's "527-voter registration drives" in the battleground States in November. The purpose was to register Kerry voters without regard for the age of the registrant or whether or not they were citizens of the United States. Over 5 million illegal voters cast their ballots for Sen. John Kerry in November.

The Christian right put Bush back in the White House. Had the Christians in the United States backed either of the M&M twins, illegal aliens from the Mideast and Mexico—people with no constitutional right to cast a ballot in this country—would have successfully placed Kerry in the White House.

Making certain illegal aliens do not get drivers' licenses is critical to the security of the United States. Bush, however, sees allowing illegals from Mexico and Central America to secure a drivers' license as a necessary evil. First, by providing illegal workers with legitimate identification that will allow them to gain mainstream work from legitimate employers who withhold taxes rather than pay under the table, the government can, and will, collect income tax from them. But more important, the new federally-standardized driver's licenses will contain a biometric datachip that will provide law enforcement with an extensive database on the license holder that will include financial and medical histories, driving record and, if you've ever been arrested, your criminal record as well. In addition—and most important to the utopians who are planning George Orwell's 1984-ish global society—the new driver's license will also contain a GPS tracking chip that will tell authorities precisely where you are unless you leave your driver's license at home. Not carrying your "ID card" could, and very likely will eventually end up as a misdemeanor if you are stopped without it. When Hillary Clinton first proposed a National ID Card in 1993, she suggested burying it in immigration reform legislation (after the Health Security Act of 1993—where the National ID Card was initially concealed—was defeated.) When there was still a glimmer of hope that her healthcare plan might get enacted, she wanted to impose penalties on anyone found without their Health Security Card. (See my book, Whatever Happened To America; pg. 224-225)

Had Congress simply repealed the 1970s-era anti-intelligence community legislation that was enacted by the far left anti-war Democratically-controlled Congress in the post-Nixon era that prohibited any communication between the various domestic and foreign intelligence agencies, there would have been no need for a 9-11 Commission to examine what happened on September 11, 2001. Nor would there have been a need for additional legislation to "repair" our intelligence community.

The Intel shell game—from the 9-11committee meeting to the passage of the legislation—was a smoke and mirrors sham. The smoke screen under which the further abrogation of the Bill of Rights took place was the public "debate" on creating an intelligence czar who would have supra authority over 15 intelligence agencies. When the Homeland Security Act was passed, America was led to believe that all intel collected by the various intelligence and military agencies would be funneled to Homeland Security, and that the "Intel czar"—Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge—would assimilate the data and advise all of the Intel agencies and the president of the data uncovered by all other intelligence agencies. Now we need an Intel czar over the Intel czar with budgetary control over not only the intelligence agencies but Defense and the Justice Departments as well? Now, who's blowing smoke up whose butt?

The Administration which, admittedly, is fighting an unorthodox enemy, needed to get Patriot II enacted. With groups like the ACLU, American Conservative Union, Free Congress Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Initiative, Gun Owners of America, the NRA, Center for Security Policy, and other grassroots ad hoc groups warning the American people when legislation containing extreme Bill of Rights infringements are proposed, Congressmen and Senators—who have been trying to use the 9th Amendment to permanently abolish the Bill of Right— begin to worry about re-election. That's why, when the content of HR 666, the Comprehensive Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997 leaked out, the bill stalled in the House and the legislated suspension of the Bill of Rights was diluted to mere infringements of civil liberty, and it was that watered down version of the House bill, combined with a diluted S.735, that was finally enacted into law. The USA Patriot Act restored some of the civil liberties abrogations found in HR 666, but retiring Attorney General John Ashcroft found even stiffer infringements into the Bill of Rights would be needed to deal with illegals within the United States who, although they are not citizens, have access to the protection of the Constitution through the American legal system.

While America was focused on the Intel czar debate the leadership in the House and Senate (on both sides of the aisle) surreptitiously inserted measures found in the failed Domestic and Security Enhancement Act of 2003 into Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo, when asked, characterized the added measures as "...commons sense reforms aimed at preventing terrorist attacks."

The legislation will greatly enhance the government's ability to spy on American citizens with secret warrants obtained by the use of secret accusers—and to prosecute those accused after lengthy investigations were conducted while the accused remains incarcerated by denying bail to anyone accused of terrorism. The legislation allows the White House and Congress, jointly, to reactivate the War Powers Act of 1917, as amended in 1933, and apply the punative elements of the legislation against citizens of the United States without the need of a declaration of war by Congress. Furthermore, the law "legalizes" any of the measures from the failed Domestic and Security Enhancement Act of 2003 that may have been implemented by any of intelligence or law enforcement agency.

But even worse, tucked into the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 is a new highly classified super spy system that Sen. Jay Rockefeller [D-WV] called "...totally unjustified and very, very...dangerous to national security." A day after making that statement, a Rockefeller spokeswoman, Wendy Morigi, said Rockefeller meant it was dangerous only because it was so expensive that it would strip money from other defense systems that the nation requires and that Rockefeller simply viewed it as a misapplication of funds.

Washington insiders believe the defense system that Rockefeller chastised is George W. Bush's version of Ronald Reagan's Star Wars spy satellite system that will provide a nuclear missile umbrella over North America.