Skip to comments.
WITH A WHISPER, NOT A BANG (Patriot Act II signed by President on December 13, 2003)
San Antonio Current ^
| 12/24/03
| David Martin
Posted on 12/28/2003 9:02:32 PM PST by Marianne
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-259 next last
To: Marianne
(Patriot Act II signed by President on December 13, 2003) He should've waited a couple more days and signed the damned thing on Bill of Rights Day, just for effect.
41
posted on
12/28/2003 9:45:22 PM PST
by
Mr. Mojo
To: Marianne
Conservatives, rally to the Constitution Party now.
http://www.constitutionparty.com Don't just consider voting for them, seek them out and join up.
Do not be dissuaded about any threats of what may happen if you don't back the GOP regardless of how quickly they dismantle the Constitution.
42
posted on
12/28/2003 9:45:44 PM PST
by
Ahban
To: KantianBurke
The author's protests about the timing of the signing are unreasonable, as is the anti-Bush innuendo that suffuses this article. A number of congressional representatives, both Republicans and Democrats, raised a stink about the language that was inserted "in conference" before the bill was voted on. That was at least three weeks before Bush signed it, over three weeks before Saddam Hussein was captured, and over three weeks for the press to cover the issue before the Bush signing. This was not a Clinton-like executive order issued in the dead of night without public scrutiny, it was language in a much larger bill that was approved by the Congress. If it didn't get wide publicity in the press, blame the press, don't blame it on Bush trying to hide it under the cover of the capture of Saddam Hussein.
To: LPM1888
i see no evidence that his judicial appointments will be sellouts, considering the Senate is blocking so many of them, that tells me the left is desperate to stop them. The judiciary IS THE LEFT in this country, its where their power base resides, its how they make laws on everything from abortion to guns to gay marriage to logging and now the war on terror, you name it. And they have 5 votes on the SCOTUS now for just about anything.
To: LibertyAndJusticeForAll
the feds don't suspect their involvement in crime or terrorism. This is what I mean.
45
posted on
12/28/2003 9:46:44 PM PST
by
Lower55
To: Mr. Mojo
Yeah, it would point out how precious our rights are... that is precious FEW.
To: MissAmericanPie
LOL, you guys always say something like that when you can't face the truth about some other outrage Bush has committed.It's no big deal, mamacita.
47
posted on
12/28/2003 9:47:11 PM PST
by
sinkspur
(Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
To: sinkspur
IOW, no big deal.Yeah, it's a "big deal" if you happen to have a desire to protect your wealth.
To: Lower55
Supply your vaunted "context" that shows that this does not write a blank check to the FBI for non-terrorism investigations.
To: deport
Thanks, Do you know if it is available in Spanish?
50
posted on
12/28/2003 9:49:09 PM PST
by
Pro-Bush
(Homeland Security + Tom Ridge = Open Borders --> Demand Change!)
To: GluteusMax
Or to not have the FBI come crashing down on you based on nothing more substantive than a wild hair.
To: GluteusMax
Yeah, it's a "big deal" if you happen to have a desire to protect your wealth. LOL!!! Where on earth did that come from?
52
posted on
12/28/2003 9:50:34 PM PST
by
sinkspur
(Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
To: sinkspur
It's no big deal, mamacita.Now if it had been legislation that infringed ever so slightly the unalienable and sacred right to sodomy, it'd be a REAL big deal, right sinkspur?
Nice to see your priorities are straight.
53
posted on
12/28/2003 9:50:59 PM PST
by
Kevin Curry
("When I was growing, we didn't even treat the servants like servants." Andree Dean, Howie's mom)
To: HiTech RedNeck
"Senate committee staffers said the investigative tool is not new and was used in the past for money-laundering investigations."Here's one.
54
posted on
12/28/2003 9:51:15 PM PST
by
Lower55
To: HiTech RedNeck
What, you've encountered a set of jackboots you don't want to lick??? I don't kiss anybodies boots and I have an intense aversion to anyone who pulls sneaky tricks to take my freedoms away.
55
posted on
12/28/2003 9:51:20 PM PST
by
LPM1888
(What are the facts? Again and again and again -- what are the facts? - Lazarus Long)
To: HiTech RedNeck
Or to not have the FBI come crashing down on you based on nothing more substantive than a wild hair. "Wild hairs" are high on the FBI's list. Yep. Sure are.
56
posted on
12/28/2003 9:51:43 PM PST
by
sinkspur
(Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
To: sinkspur
I wonder if I can pay my bills with checks written on a Swiss bank.
To: LPM1888
You kissed the boots of the FLoriDUH legal system not too long ago.
To: Pro-Bush
If a financial institution breaches the gag order, it faces criminal penalties. And finally, the FBI will no longer be required to report to Congress how often they have used the National Security Letters. Hmmm. I don't see anything in the legislation which does either of these things.
To: Lower55
Maybe this administration would only use the Patriot Act to check-up on a suspect.
But (God forbid) if the Hildebeast or someone like her is ever elected, how will this law be used in those hands?
(Don't forget the 1000+ missing FBI files of those she & her husband considered to be their domestic enemies. And, while you are at it, don't forget Billy Dale.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-259 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson