By now you probably know the Patriot Act has been challenged in the U. S. Senate. Rather than permanently extending it, a combination of Democrats and five Republicans have extended it for only six months.

Ostensibly, this continues temporary protection against terrorists while providing time for senators concerned about constitutional liberty to work with the Bush administration to craft a mutually satisfactory act which addresses the protection of our citizens without compromising Fourth Amendment protections.

As you may have noted in previous commentary, I have become more than somewhat interested in this legislation as I believe it represents the old "foot in the door" approach to revising our Constitution and protection against illegal searches and seizures.

This has caused my inquiring mind to rely on some of the best authorities around, former members of the largest intelligence network we have, defense Intelligence and retired FBI intelligence folks.

I have no deep secrets. I wouldn't ask for them, nor would they give them. I do have a better understanding of what is universally described to me as the most compartmentalized set of programs it is hard for even those involved to know what is happening.

Those Americans who are concerned about big brother spying on them can look at some confusing scenarios. First, there is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, (FISA) It has been in effect since the Carter administration. It was designed to eavesdrop, among other things, on suspected enemies of the U. S.

There has always been some question as to whether U. S. citizens are due Fourth Amendment protection under this act. Non citizens do not. This involves phone calls overseas, travel and communications overseas, etc.

Part of the original intent of the law requires probable cause for a wiretap or search or seizure to be issued by a court. A special court has been set up for this purpose, meaning action can be taken in a short time. The federal judges involved are all in different circuits throughout the country. They are directed to act almost instantly and they have done so. Out of around 1800 requests in 2004, all were approved but four, three of which were withdrawn and one revised and approved.

More recently it has been determined the Attorney General or his designate may approve a verbal request for a wiretap or search or seizure, subject to a delayed filing and confirmation by the special court. (Bet you haven't learned about this in the mainsteam media.)

Looking at the potential dangers down the road think of President Hillary and Attorney General Shumer or his designate, Teddy Kennedy, wielding this power.

After the various blunders of our current Attorney General, Senor Gonzales, I wonder which is worse. For reference, note how yesterday the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals turned down the request of Gonzales to try one of the top terrorist suspects named Padillo in a criminal court as opposed to a military court where he was originally petitioned by the Justice Department. The court said you can't have it both ways. Score: Terrorist l, Gonzales, 0.

Part of the current debate centers around just how long before a judge is required to enter the picture. The Bush administration wants it to to be a longer term. weeks or months, while the advocates of Constitutional liberties are resolute on no more than 72 hours.

Considering these items, and others, I keep hearing El Presidente Bush on national TV saying "The Constitution is a living document." That's the reason I'm on watch and you should be too.

Now we come to another confusing part of this big brother business. Another totally separate compartment operated by our government. It's called Echelon. It too, has been around for a for a while. Essentially, it can scan telephone and computer activities anywhere in the world. It operates on daily changed key words.

Not to be further confused there is all types of non-government spy-ware in operation. Some by corporations spying on each other. There are firms specializing in gathering personal information for a price. Some of it is absolutely legal. Some not.

Let me end by saying we support the essential ingredients in the Patriot Act. We object to only a few aspects that disrespect the rights The Founders endowed us to maintain and protect.

We must be forever diligent and speak out against those who place our Constitution in peril and treat it as a 'piece of paper' developed by a group of biased old men.

Contrary to some who maintain otherwise, most of the readers of this column are descendants of real patriots who made a stand for the original Constitution in a second War of Independence. The war against our Constitution has never ended. You and I have been bequeathed a solemn legacy. Let us not miss muster.

“The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” ---Thomas Jefferson