Patriot Act II

anarchyintheUS · 03-21-2006, 01:55 PM

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/...iot2draft.html

For anyone who hasn't read this, this is the draft for the second Patriot Act presented in 2003 also known as the Domestic Security Enhancement Act. This is the scariest piece of potential legislation I have ever seen. If you think the Patriot Act was bad, read this and be amazed.

Katczinsky · 03-21-2006, 06:43 PM

Yeah it is some scary legislation. The only way I know about it is from Alex Jones. Although he has some wild conspiracy theories, he's one of the best informers out there. However, he does do a good critique of the Patriot Act II.

If you take a close look at this peice of legislation, it surely is something that even would give Hitler a hard-on. Its quite possibly just as important to the United States as Hitler's Enabling Act was to Germany. The second Patriot Act, would give the government almost despotic authority over its subjects. Only it would be less objectional than say the straight-foward Enabling Act, because really its filled with Orwellian doublespeak that basically makes the average uneducated or just uninformed American believe its purpose is needed and its out there to protect them; much like the first Patriot Act.

And what's more, is that although this wasn't passed (or at least from what we know as average Americans), much of its provisions are being sneeked in other legislation by law makers.

eahullqu · 03-23-2006, 12:39 PM

That reminds me of a cartoon I drew several months ago...

See more cartoons at my Cartoon Blog.

Eric

.

foundit66 · 03-23-2006, 12:54 PM

I heard a quote the other day about how it's easier to try and make other people live up to our ideals than it is to live up to our ideals ourselves.
Especially when we feel threatened.

I feel we, as a country, are epitomizing this in this day and age.

RidinHighSpeeds · 03-24-2006, 02:03 PM

The Patriot Act has been proven effective as it saved the Brooklyn Bridge...but I think limiting some certain powers is best.

Equally irresponsible is the criticism Democrats are leveling at President Bush for his use of National Security Agency wiretaps to catch terrorists. Before Clinton and Schumer criticize this policy, they'd do well to reflect on the fact that the Brooklyn Bridge might well be rubble, with thousands dead, if Bush did not use these wiretaps.

http://caglecartoons.com/previewColu...CC68BD975F0%7D

foundit66 · 03-24-2006, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ridinhighspeeds

Equally irresponsible is the criticism Democrats are leveling at President Bush for his use of National Security Agency wiretaps to catch terrorists. Before Clinton and Schumer criticize this policy, they'd do well to reflect on the fact that the Brooklyn Bridge might well be rubble, with thousands dead, if Bush did not use these wiretaps.

http://caglecartoons.com/previewColu...CC68BD975F0%7D

The article leaves a huge issue out of the discussion.

"The main difference between roaming wiretaps under current criminal law and the new FISA authority is that current criminal law requires that law enforcement "ascertain" that the target of a wiretap is actually using a device to be tapped. Section 206 contains no such provision. Ensuring that FISA wiretaps only roam when intelligence officials "ascertain" that the subject of an investigation is using a device, before it is tapped, would prevent abuse of this provision. For example, without the ascertainment requirement, it is conceivable that all the pay phones in an entire neighborhood could be tapped if suspected terrorists happened to be in that neighborhood. Bringing FISA roaming wiretaps in line with criminal roaming wiretaps would prevent such abuse and provide greater protection to the privacy of ordinary Americans. "
http://www.abanet.org/irr/hr/winter02/podesta.html

I have no problem with "roaming" wiretaps where John Doe has a court ordered wire-tap against him, and any phone he uses can be tapped.
I DO have a problem with other phones that John Doe MIGHT use being tapped, even to the extent that it is tapped when he IS NOT using it.

There are some issues in the Patriot Act I support.
There are some issues in the Patriot Act that I am very troubled by.

There are some issues that the Patriot Act utilizes as a means of expediency.
There are some issues that the Patriot Act which just plain ignores the REASONS for the checks and balances being in place, and just allows the government to ride rough-shod over our rights.

I really wish we could get some form of "line-item veto" or "line-item voting" in place so that we don't have an entire piece of legislation falter just because of one aspect of it.
But neither the democrats nor the republicans are going to allow that...

hevusa · 03-24-2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ridinhighspeeds

The Patriot Act has been proven effective as it saved the Brooklyn Bridge.

It is PURE speculation to say that the bridge was ever in jeopardy.

NYC is a fucking death trap if you ask me.

RidinHighSpeeds · 03-24-2006, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

I have no problem with "roaming" wiretaps where John Doe has a court ordered wire-tap against him, and any phone he uses can be tapped.
I DO have a problem with other phones that John Doe MIGHT use being tapped, even to the extent that it is tapped when he IS NOT using it.

There are some issues in the Patriot Act I support.
There are some issues in the Patriot Act that I am very troubled by.

There are some issues that the Patriot Act utilizes as a means of expediency.
There are some issues that the Patriot Act which just plain ignores the REASONS for the checks and balances being in place, and just allows the government to ride rough-shod over our rights.

I really wish we could get some form of "line-item veto" or "line-item voting" in place so that we don't have an entire piece of legislation falter just because of one aspect of it.
But neither the democrats nor the republicans are going to allow that...

Well written response; and I also agree with you. Doing away with the Patriot Act completely instead of picking out the problems in my idea is the wrong thing to do.