Home | Community | Message Board


Mycohaus
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Anonymous

Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003
    #3414356 - 11/27/04 12:41 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

AKA Patriot II. text of bill available here: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/PA2draft.html#Sec102summ

what do you think are the worst parts?


Edited by Anonymous (11/27/04 12:47 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleYidakiMan
Stranger
Male User Gallery
Registered: 09/29/02
Posts: 2,023
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: ]
    #3416012 - 11/27/04 03:52 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

erk...


Edited by YidakiMan (11/27/04 03:53 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst

Registered: 11/13/04
Posts: 1,690
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: ]
    #3416771 - 11/27/04 07:23 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

I don't really object to any part of it.


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


Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: ]
    #3416785 - 11/27/04 07:27 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

I'm not too well-schooled in legal jargon, so I'd probably have to see an analysis or three of this bill to fully understand the implications of it.


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


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleKrishna
कृष्ण,LOL
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,284
Loc: oakland
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: silversoul7]
    #3416894 - 11/27/04 07:51 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

EDIT: Don't even bother reading this - my memory was faulty, and I incorrectly recalled the passage. Look for my post a few posts down where I found the actual passage and the proper interpretation that I was thinking about! :smile:


well, off the top of my head, i recall there being a line or two slipped in there saying that corporations that the US Federal Government said were "partners in the War on Terror" (not the exact phrasing - but the phrasing is very vague) would be free from public/government investigation into their finances. From my understanding of this, it means that a company like Halliburton could keep it's books closed, even after the fact has come to light that numerous large corporations have been "cooking the books" - because they are working for the "good guys"


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




Edited by Krishna (11/27/04 10:25 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleGreat_Satan
prophet of God
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/05/04
Posts: 953
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: silversoul7]
    #3416975 - 11/27/04 08:09 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

WOW!!! Don't anybody make any threats to any government here. I have a feeling that the hive is down because of something like this.

http://www.geocities.com/milkmandan2003/Hajj.html


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst

Registered: 11/13/04
Posts: 1,690
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: Krishna]
    #3417076 - 11/27/04 08:41 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

Quote:

Krishna said:
well, off the top of my head, i recall there being a line or two slipped in there saying that corporations that the US Federal Government said were "partners in the War on Terror" (not the exact phrasing - but the phrasing is very vague) would be free from public/government investigation into their finances. From my understanding of this, it means that a company like Halliburton could keep it's books closed, even after the fact has come to light that numerous large corporations have been "cooking the books" - because they are working for the "good guys"




Since the message that pops up every time I posts states to post a linke whenever possible and since master was kind enough to provide a link to the entire text, would you please cite that for me from the actual text? I read the entire thing, I think, and I admit it was long and boring but I didn't see that in there.


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


Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleGreat_Satan
prophet of God
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/05/04
Posts: 953
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: SoopaX]
    #3417127 - 11/27/04 08:57 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

Corporations, corporations, corporations, corporations.......


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleKrishna
कृष्ण,LOL
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,284
Loc: oakland
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: SoopaX]
    #3417133 - 11/27/04 09:00 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

i'm looking for the analysis that i read some months ago right now - as well as reading through the full-text to see if i can find it. of course, i'll retract my statement if i can't find the documentation to back it up... but i'll be back with a link once i can find it! :smile:


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




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleKrishna
कृष्ण,LOL
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,284
Loc: oakland
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: Krishna]
    #3417355 - 11/27/04 10:01 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

OK i found the article that i was thinking about... my memory was a bit faulty. The lines I was thinking about aren't about finances - basically, it says that the government wants companies to report on any other companies that they think are related to terrorist-activities. The lines I was thinking about grant the company who reported the "terrorist activity" immunity from being held accountable in the event that the claim of "terrorist activity" turned out to be unsubtantiated.

Here is the ACLU document with analysis (do a ctrl-f for "313" to find the part i'm talking about): http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=11835&c=206

Here is the quote from the actual bill:

"This provision provides protection against civil liability for businesses and their personnel who voluntarily provide information to federal law enforcement agencies to assist in the investigation and prevention of terrorist activities. The purpose of the provision is to encourage voluntary cooperation and assistance in counterterrorism efforts by private entities and individuals. "

The ACLU argument against this (and an argument that I tend to accept) is that it would encourage companies turning in their competition on terrorist charges- even if the crime was shown to be false and the person was cleared of all charges, it would take a lot of time, money, etc - not to mention damage to one's reputation - and by including this protection against civil liability, companies would be free to do this, without any risk of reprieve


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




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst

Registered: 11/13/04
Posts: 1,690
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: Krishna]
    #3417396 - 11/27/04 10:14 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

Quote:

Krishna said:
OK i found the article that i was thinking about... my memory was a bit faulty. The lines I was thinking about aren't about finances - basically, it says that the government wants companies to report on any other companies that they think are related to terrorist-activities. The lines I was thinking about grant the company who reported the "terrorist activity" immunity from being held accountable in the event that the claim of "terrorist activity" turned out to be unsubtantiated.




Their is a great deal of difference in your claim that companies that 'cook the books'would be given immunity if they worked with the government and the reality that they wouldn't be held liable for slander charges if they made an accusation that turned out to be false.
Quote:


Here is the quote from the actual bill:

"This provision provides protection against civil liability for businesses and their personnel who voluntarily provide information to federal law enforcement agencies to assist in the investigation and prevention of terrorist activities. The purpose of the provision is to encourage voluntary cooperation and assistance in counterterrorism efforts by private entities and individuals. "




This isn't even criminal culpability, it's civil law. Again, their is an ocean of difference between the government ignoring companies who falsify their records and the protection from civil law suits for wrongfully accusing a company of supporting and funding terrorism..
Quote:


The ACLU argument against this (and an argument that I tend to accept) is that it would encourage companies turning in their competition on terrorist charges- even if the crime was shown to be false and the person was cleared of all charges, it would take a lot of time, money, etc - not to mention damage to one's reputation - and by including this protection against civil liability, companies would be free to do this, without any risk of reprieve



If a company reported another company with malice aforethough and knowingly lied to the government, the PATRIOT act would have them charged with criminal charges, not just a simple civil act.


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


Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleKrishna
कृष्ण,LOL
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,284
Loc: oakland
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: SoopaX]
    #3417427 - 11/27/04 10:23 PM (12 years, 10 days ago)

Quote:

SoopaX said:
Their is a great deal of difference in your claim that companies that 'cook the books'would be given immunity if they worked with the government and the reality that they wouldn't be held liable for slander charges if they made an accusation that turned out to be false.




Yep, I definitely agree there - I'll edit my prior post to reflect this :smile:
Quote:


If a company reported another company with malice aforethough and knowingly lied to the government, the PATRIOT act would have them charged with criminal charges, not just a simple civil act.




Are you sure about this? I'd like to see where in the PATRIOT act it states this... The ACLU site was talking about some Ashcroft program (Operation TIPS or something like that) that was eventually cancelled because of claims that people were turning in other people on faulty grounds. Now when I re-read the bill (DSEA 2003), I would definitely say that this part isn't that bad (certainly not the worst thing in it) but it also isn't that good.

But does anybody know if they are still even thinking of passing this? I thought that the public-outcry was too much and they just set it aside...


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




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleafoaf
CEO DBK?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
Re: Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 [Re: ]
    #3422522 - 11/29/04 11:54 AM (12 years, 9 days ago)

second verse more worse than the first.


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Patriot Act 2, more plans for a police state Ellis Dee 1,187 16 02/26/03 07:19 PM
by ClosetCase
* Excellent Article on the Patriot Act RonoS 1,002 18 03/02/03 06:58 AM
by Rono
* Patriot Act II, less security, privacy and freedom Ellis Dee 406 1 03/04/03 03:27 PM
by BowlKiller
* Patriot Act II: Final Piece of Police State Puzzle Ready ekomstop 290 0 09/27/04 08:41 PM
by ekomstop
* USA Patriot Act -- the sequel LanaM 393 1 03/07/03 03:51 AM
by Anonymous
* Patriot Act Part Duex!
( 1 2 all )
Jim 996 23 11/27/04 04:31 PM
by usefulidiot
* Welcome to George W. Bush's dictatorship
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 1,444 22 06/13/03 05:33 PM
by mntlfngrs
* America = Police State BowlKiller 848 15 02/14/03 03:31 PM
by RandalFlagg

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
463 topic views. 2 members, 3 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Out-Grow.com - Mushroom Growing Kits & Supplies
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.047 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 15 queries.