|
WesternFront America Contributors:
Thor H. Asgardson | Clay Bowler | Judie Brown | Alan Caruba | Dajjal | Denise | Paul Driessen | Doug Edelman | Diane Grassi | David M. Huntwork | Jesse James | Calvin E. Johnson | Left Coast Rebel | Marie Jon | J.D. Longstreet | Joanne Mandel | Ron W. Marr | Jesse Mathewson | Dr. Frederick Meekins | Matt Ross | Michael R. Shannon | Prof. Nicholas Stix | Dr. Ellis Washington | Guest Articles |
A new study by the RAND – Arroyo Center looks at the need for a Special Police Force to be funded by the American people for either foreign or domestic policing in the event of large-scale critical situations.
There have been arguments that this rule is un-necessary. The Republican majority in 1995 attempted to negate this ruling, fortunately for the average citizen this attempt was overturned. Again, in the recent years there have been further attempts by both sides to adjust or take away this Rule. One such attempt was made when the Patriot Act was passed …
According to FBI legal documents they can force asset forfeiture simply by showing that someone may be involved in drug trafficking through someone they know or worse, because they may have received an email from a person who at one time or another through another person viewed a site that has been labeled terrorist. (i.e. Patriot Act allowances and RICO and the IRS as well.)
Quite simply the greatest and easiest arguments to use against the Patriot Act can be found in our very own Constitution. That “piece of paper” that it has been claimed George W. Bush said, whether that is true the more interesting item is the simple fact that the Patriot Act effectively invalidates the Constitutional Amendments Four through Eight.
![Recommend [HansGruen]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/arkayne-media/img/badge/02me.png){kind=icon}
