Talk:Homeland Security Act
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Homeland Security Act article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program.|
- I don't know about Eli Lily page, but this is nothing. Where is the list of powers granted and criticisms of the Act? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 03:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I just noticed there are two of these...
Civil liberties imperiled by the Homeland Security Act include some constitutional rights, namely: the rights to freedom of speech, religion, assembly and privacy; the rights to counsel and due process; and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures.
Already galvanized by the hasty passage of the earlier USA PATRIOT Act, eighteen cities and towns declared themselves 'civil liberties safe zones' within months after HSA's passage, according to a 2002 Village Voice column. Concerns about curtailment of civil liberties by the HSA were given a heightened sense of urgency by media revelations in 2002, about another Bush administration initiative, which created a new Pentagon agency under the direction of John Poindexter, known as the Office of Total Information Awareness.
This is not neutral language. - Ta bu shi da yu 15:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- No, definitely not. As much as I hate Bush, this has to be neutral. And it shouldn't consist solely of criticisms. Twilight Realm 08:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Also, what about some pro- links? The US Govt. is not the only party thats in favor... Limited Moon 03:08 10 April 2006 (UTC)
First post ever to Wiki. Hope I haven't violated local ettiquette.
As written, the article was fatally biased. Don't know how much explanation this requires, because it seems so plain.
If there's anything to talk about, we'll probably hear.
The Autodidactic Polymath 04:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there a reason that ANSI is listed as an official US government link? It is a private organization. I would recommend it be moved to a more appropriate category. DanRP (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Encyclopedia or Rant Page?
Please try to keep this factually based. You may think it is unconstitutional, but until it is declared so, it is not. Even then, until the decision lasts through the appeals process, the decision is tentative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Autodidactic Polymath (talk • contribs) 02:51, 21 May 2008
I made a pass through this short article, add examples of some of the government functions the new department assumed, embedding a "see also" item into the narrative, and limiting external links to those specific to the text of the act (other Wikipedia articles cover the controversy already). I also marked it as a U.S. fed legislation stub. I added two wikiproject templates to this talk page, so perhaps editors interested in the subject as a legislative act will flesh it out. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2008 (UTC).
Removed "Degree Programs
This section is clearly promotional material for a handful of private for-profit schools offering dubiously useful degrees, has little to nothing to do with this article, and lacks RS anyway. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:21, 3 November 2010 (UTC)