Legislators to appeal to Americans used the name “Patriot Act” to market perhaps the most insidious bill in U.S. History. The Act was passed quickly after 9-11 and most Congressman admitted they did not read it. There were so many well written, thought out and deceptive paragraphs in the ACT, one might wonder how the writers constructed the provisions so fast following 9-11. For example, The “Patriot Act” broadly defined supporting "terrorist activity” as any criminal activity that "participates" in "World Markets" that terrorist may use or depend on for their support.
On the face that appears logical until you consider anyone distributing illegal-drugs could be charged with supporting a “ Market” that terrorists use—based on the Act's premise (both criminals and terrorists) use the same world markets, networks and organizations to "distribute" illegal-drugs; and have interests in criminal activity." In that regard the Patriot Act is—logically flawed when you consider an ordinary car thief could be charged with supporting terrorism for selling a stolen car on a "criminal market" that a single terrorist uses—among 500 non-terrorists thieves. The Act's broad use of the work "Market" could as easily allow U.S. Government to claim that because “terrorists” use a specific vehicle to move explosives, that anyone who buys those vehicles supports a "vehicle Market” terrorists depend on for their support.
Alarmingly U.S. Prosecutors can use broad provisions of the “Patriot Act” to charge any commerce is part a world “Market” terrorists depend on for their support, because all legal and illegal “markets” are linked at some point by commerce.U.S. Government tried before to merge lawful and unlawful commerce to forfeit innocent owners’ property. You may read that “Government Concept” in United States v. 92 Buena Vista Ave. (91-781), 507 U.S. 111 (1993) at: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-781.ZS.html