U.S. Patroit Act 2 (Coad Name)-DOMESTIC SECURITY ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2003

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 8 2003 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Here is the entire document: .....
Enjoy.

www.daily...-------------------------/source-docs/patriot2draft.html



Die bush Die




posted on Mar, 8 2003 @ 03:52 AM
link   
Well I am on, and we've been discussing this so I may as well be the skeptic


I think it's only online, and probably not even real.

Even if it were real, the Constitution in this nation surpasses holiness to even that of the Bible. It's amazing that people do not place their hands upon it instead of a bible, in a court of law.

The Patriot Act can never be used for more then finding a terrorist, because as soon as the government abuses it (and it would most likely be the Democrats, you must understand the fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats want big government, Republicans want small government, hence tax cuts and such...blah blah) if the government ever abuses it the heavily armed people would rise up.

That is if there is a "Patriot Act 2"


Sorry to respond so fast to ya Falcon, didn't even give it a chance to permeate



posted on Mar, 8 2003 @ 04:39 AM
link   
more than someone else's version of the offical document. Say can anyone prove why this legislation is confidental. I have heard the Patriot Acts can't be seen by the public. Isn't that a contradiction to our constitution? Then again what isn't, right?

[Edited on 8-3-2003 by Abraham Virtue]



posted on Mar, 9 2003 @ 11:28 AM
link   
So it is fake? I think it is a intended draft to make it better for the administration, and future rulers to do what they want to those that speak out.

Section 105: Law Enforcement Use of FISA Information.
50 U.S.C. 1806(b) currently prohibits the disclosure of information "for law enforcement purposes" unless the disclosure includes a statement that the information cannot be used in a criminal proceeding without the Attorney General's advance authorization. This provision would amend 1806(b) to give federal investigators and prosecutors greater flexibility to use FISA-obtained information. Specifically, it would eliminate the requirement that the Attorney General personally approve the use of such information in the criminal context, and would substitute a requirement that such use be approved by the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or an Assistant Attorney General designated by the Attorney General.

Section 106: Defense of Reliance on Authorization.
50 U.S.C. 1809(b) and 1827(b) create a defense for agents who engage in unauthorized surveillance or searches, or who disclose information without authorization, if they were relying on an order issued by the FISA Court. However, there does not appear to be a statutory defense for agents who engage in surveillance or searches pursuant to FISA authorities under which no prior court approval is required--e.g., pursuant to FISA's wartime exception (50 U. S.C. 1811, 1829 & 1844), or FISA's presidential authorization exception (50 U.S.C. 1802 & 1822(a)). This provision would clarify that the "good faith reliance" defense is available, not just when

2



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CONFIDENTIAL -- NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
Draft--January 9, 2003

agents are acting pursuant to a FISA Court order, but also when they are acting pursuant to a lawful authorization from the President or the Attorney General.

Please read these above excerts from falcons link, there are many more alarming items, How about Good Faith
Reliance for thier defense to violate your civil liberties, now thats a real kicker isnt it.






posted on Mar, 9 2003 @ 03:33 PM
link   
There was another thread that talked about this at least a couple of weeks ago...I was able to download a PDF copy of it at that time, but I still haven't had a chance to read it thoroughly yet.

Basically, it's not official (yet)...The main controversy about it at that earlier time was that the Justice Dept. was denying that it existed even at the same time that it was circulating around the Justice Dept for review (Supposedly to review for Constitution issues & such).



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 04:40 AM
link   
Confidental or not I will not allow that bastard to do what he wants. I dont care if it says top secret eyes only I will post it or get out the infomation one way or another. At this point even if it falls under nsa and no one will put it out and If I have somthing from them that will effect others It will be posted.

I am comming for you bush you can run but you cant hide.




Falcon



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Hey Falcon,

I cant agree more, but on the serious side, These crazy power freaks that are running the country, are setting it up to get all that oppose them,

Post it say it, but watch yourself, as youve read on this site, there are already storys of arrests due to wearing T shirts, and talking bad about the administration, there is no telling how many go unwritten.

I sure like your attitude





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join