posted on December 30, 2005 04:52:21 PM new
Fighting your OWN battles????? LOL....thanks for the good laugh.
You're always tagging along on someone else's shirt-tails...that way you can keep claiming "I never said that'. No you usually didn't....but you agreed with someone who did....just as you have here with bunni's statement.
No guts to 'fight your own battle'.....had to again rely on bunni's guts to post her thoughts....but you couldn't....and you didn't. UNTIL she posts hers.
So yea, I read twelve say years ago you never could/would take a stand on any serious subject. I sure can see now that he had you pegged correctly way back then.
posted on December 30, 2005 05:29:23 PM new
And all that coming from the board tattletale? The one that threatens to squeal each time someone insults her? The one that changes the subject or runs away or plays victim each time she's backed into a corner?
lindak, did you ever go back to that other board or are you still cowering out over here?
but you agreed with someone who did....just as you have here with bunni's statement.
In fact, I said that what Bunni stated was very well said.
When another is debating I can agree that they are well-spoken even if I may not agree on everything they said.
I then added my own comments.
I apologize for being away for a day and not getting back sooner this morning so Bunni answered before I did.
Next time I will try to log in quicker so as not to get you so upset.
posted on December 30, 2005 07:35:08 PM newJust because one is disabled doesn't mean he can't be anti American.....just as kerry was after VN.
Just because one doesn't agree with the views of their country does not make them Anti-American.
Did you just say everyone is entitled to their own opinion? Which is it Linda? You want it both ways.
It appears to me as you are trying to censor free speach. Unlike Bush, Kerry earned his right to speak out against what he felt was wrong.
LOL.....ANOTHER bush hating liberal that can't defend HIS support of saddam over this Nation's. How sad.
You are just another whining conservative that will give up all her freedoms just to follow Bush, no matter how wrong he is.
You do not mind being spied on, you do not mind your phone be tapped. Come on Linda, what other freedoms are you willing to give you. Are you willing to give up your first born if it will protect America (and I don't mean sending him off to war to die)?
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on December 30, 2005 08:34:33 PM new
LOL more ranting from logansdad.
First , IF you EVER knew what you were talking about...we might be able to have a decent conversation. But you Don't....ever.
No American who is not suspected of talking to terrorists....[I believe the number was 30 times Bush used that special Presidential 'right'] is being spied on you yo-yo.
For ONCE try to learn before you start making a further fool of yourself.
MY RIGHTS....nor the rights of any other none terrorist related American fell under that rule.
So....scream away....don't hold saddam accountable for anything....when your rights or the rights of anyone you know about are EVER affected by this ....THEN come whining about it.
Until then LEARN the FACTS. It was used against suspected terrorists and their friends. ARE YOU ONE WHO NEEDS TO BE CONCERNED THIS WILL APPLY TO YOU?
It certainly won't be used on my phone, computer etc. as I'm not supportive of any terrorist. Including our anti-American, homegrown ones like you.
posted on December 30, 2005 08:36:22 PM new
LD, What freedoms have you given up? I've given up NONE and I don't expect to lose any.
This “lost of freedoms” is just leftist bullsh*t.
If you said “inconveniences” I’d be able to understand. Things like a longer line at the airport or border. Having my overseas calls listened in on doesn’t bother me in the slightest.
Amen,
Reverend Colin http://www.reverendcolin.com
posted on December 30, 2005 09:52:43 PM new
LOL....kiara, don't you THINK you're just oh-so-clever? Devious is more like it. Typical karia game playing.
No, it wasn't yesterday it was THREE DAYS ago, on the 27th.....that I asked the same questions I had asked of all you anti-war folks before....and THREE DAYS AGO you couldn't come up with an answer of your own.
You were too busy telling me how I needed to get some rest.
But now, three days later, AFTER bunni posts....THEN you 'ride' her shirt-tails in agreement. AS I SAID....you're usual MO.
edited to add: page three of this thread.
---------------
Heaven only knows what they 'make' up in their minds. Just review the thread where logansdad is accusing Bush of MORE SPYING....then read the first line of the article HE posted. It'll give you insight as to how he thinks...or comes up with this garbage.
posted on December 31, 2005 06:50:26 AM new
Linda,
Dbl's right.
You can't debate people that live in a fantasy world.
Amen,
Reverend Colin http://www.reverendcolin.com
posted on December 31, 2005 07:13:03 AM newYou can't debate people that live in a fantasy world.
You can't educate the ignorant either so what is your point.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on December 31, 2005 07:16:59 AM new
Colin, happy new year! Are you having a rock n roll rev cermony tonight?
Logans, I think you need to marry a gay millionare! Can you find one anywhere? I hear Elton John is taken...lol!
edit to add: btw, happy new year to you, too! {clink}
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Dec 31, 2005 07:21 AM ]
posted on December 31, 2005 07:22:50 AM newMY RIGHTS....nor the rights of any other none terrorist related American fell under that rule.
Whether they are a terrorist or not, if they are an American, they have the right to every legal procedure that the US constitution provides them.
Long live the King
On last week's test case of the PATRIOT Act -- in which a jury resoundingly vindicated a University of Idaho student, but only after our government destroyed his life
Last week, at the same time that John Ashcroft was busy in D.C. declaring to Congress that the President was above the law, a jury in Idaho did its best to rein in the excesses of the PATRIOT Act.
And failed.
The case in question was that of Sami Omar Al-Hussayen, a University of Idaho graduate student and Saudi national accused of terrorism under the PATRIOT Act. Last year, in February 2003, an FBI SWAT team descended on the sleepy college town of Moscow, Idaho, raiding Al-Hussayen’s home and hauling him off. Al-Hussayen was charged with three counts of terrorism, four counts of making false statements, and seven counts of visa fraud.
Al-Hussayen, the son of a former Saudi education minister, was a Ph.D. candidate who had studied in the US for nine years. A husband and father, he hardly fit the profile of terrorist, and the town rallied behind him -- particularly when the details of his case emerged. He had volunteered his time to a Michigan-based group, the Islamic Assembly of North America, to set up a website that promoted the study of Islam. The website contained a link to another website set up by a group the US government had listed as a terrorist organization. Another link pointed to a site that, among a huge volume of postings, contained four short documents written by radical clerics discussing the war in Chechnya and the conflict in Palestine. One of these documents sanctioned suicide attacks and mentioned flying airplanes into buildings.
That was it. Al-Hussayen was charged as a tertiary “terrorist” -- giving help to a group whose web site linked to a group that published, among its library of documents, writings that advocated terror. Al-Husaayen’s case did not even amount to an assault on freedom of speech, because he hadn’t been the one speaking; indeed, he didn’t even know the links and documents were on the site. The visa violations and false statement charges against Al-Hussayen involved his work with a nonprofit organization; his visa lists him as a student, and the government claimed that a student visa did not allow volunteer “work.”
Al-Hussayen's case was a major test of a provision in the USA PATRIOT Act that targets so-called "secondary players" in the war on terrorism -- those who give aid to groups or individuals who later carry out terrorist attacks.
Even under such provisions, the case against Al-Hussayen was exceedingly tenuous. It didn’t matter. He spent nearly a year and a half in jail before being acquitted by a federal jury last week. The case against him was so thin that his lawyers called only one witness, former CIA Near East division chief Frank Anderson, who testified about terrorist recruitment methods and questioned the FBI's notion that people give up their jobs and family connections to go join a jihad in Chechnya or Palestine after simply reading a few postings on the Internet.
After Al-Hussayen's acquittal, Anderson said, "I take satisfaction in the verdict. But I am embarrassed and ashamed that our government has kept a decent and innocent man in jail for a very long time."
But it was a little more than that. A major test case of the PATRIOT Act was rebuffed, but the government accomplished what it wanted: destroying a life as an example to other foreign nationals in the U.S. Al-Hussayen’s wife and children have been deported, his studies interrupted, his friends and associates alienated, and his liberty and sense of personal security taken completely away from him. How many other foreign nationals, living or studying or working in the U.S., will take comfort from the fact that he was acquitted -- and how many will take this and other cases as a warning to step very, very carefully in The Land of the Free?
In all likelihood, Al-Hussayen himself will return to Saudi Arabia, to rejoin his wife and children and rebuild his life. And in all likelihood, John Ashcroft’s men will prosecute more PATRIOT Act cases with little or no substance in the future -- secure in the knowledge that, just as they consider their Commander-in-Chief above the law, the law itself can be used to harass innocent people, and nothing will be lost.
Nothing, that is, except our tax dollars, a few innocent lives, and the notion of liberty that we’re supposedly defending in our War On Terror. A jury struck down a PATRIOT Act prosecution, resoundingly, but the government won anyway. The king is dead. Long live the king.
if the Patriot act does not infringe on the civil rights of individuals, then why have so many cities across America voiced opinion against the Patriot Act
The Fight Back
Since its inception in October 2001, the debate over privacy and constitutional issues raised by PATRIOT has motivated more than four states and 357 cities, representing more than 55 million people in 44 states, to pass resolutions officially condemning portions of PATRIOT in their local, city and state legislatures. In addition to resolutions passed in more than 200 smaller cities, the list of successful resolutions includes those passed in the large metropolitan cities of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis and Philadelphia. In addition, the states of Hawaii, Alaska, Maine and Vermont have also passed statewide resolutions condemning portions of PATRIOT as being unconstitutional and infringing on individual rights.
Privacy and civil rights advocates, both Democratic and Republican, have also called for greater congressional oversight on any extensions or additions to USA PATRIOT. In addition to state and local governments, several bipartisan national organizations have also adopted similar pro-civil liberties resolutions condemning PATRIOT. Among them are the National League of Cities, American Conservative Union, the American Library Association, the Japanese American Citizens League , National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Organization of Chinese Americans and Veterans for Peace.
Even traditionally conservative voices like former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Republican Senators Larry Craig of Idaho, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska have all publicly voiced criticism of the PATRIOT Act.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on December 31, 2005 07:26:02 AM new
Probably won't do much partying tonight but you never know. I've been asked to several parties to "Bless the event".
Happy, Healthy and prosperous New Year to all of you.
LD,
"You can't educate the ignorant either so what is your point."
You’re correct but I won't give up on you.
Edited to add:
LD, by the above post I take it you don't have a date for tonight.
posted on December 31, 2005 07:31:27 AM newIt certainly won't be used on my phone, computer etc. as I'm not supportive of any terrorist. Including our anti-American, homegrown ones like you.
Don't be so sure of that Linda. All it would take is some planted evidence and a call from your neighbors or some one you have ticked off to the FBI and they could start watching you.
PHOTOGRAPHER ARRESTED FOR TAKING PICTURES OF VICE PRESIDENT'S HOTEL
Posted 5 Dec 2002 06:03:48 UTC
An amateur photographer named Mike Maginnis was arrested on Tuesday in his home city of Denver - for simply taking pictures of buildings in an area where Vice President Cheney was residing. Maginnis told his story on Wednesday's edition of Off The Hook.
Maginnis's morning commute took him past the Adams Mark Hotel on Court Place. Maginnis, who says he always carried his camera wherever he went, snapped about 30 pictures of the hotel and the surrounding area - which included Denver police, Army rangers, and rooftop snipers. Maginnis, who works in information technology, frequently photographs such subjects as corporate buildings and communications equipment.
The following is Maginnis's account of what transpired:
As he was putting his camera away, Maginnis found himself confronted by a Denver police officer who demanded that he hand over his film and camera. When he refused to give up his Nikon F2, the officer pushed him to the ground and arrested him.
After being brought to the District 1 police station on Decatur Street, Maginnis was made to wait alone in an interrogation room. Two hours later, a Secret Service agent arrived, who identified himself as Special Agent "Willse."
The agent told Maginnis that his "suspicious activities" made him a threat to national security, and that he would be charged as a terrorist under the USA-PATRIOT act. The Secret Service agent tried to make Maginnis admit that he was taking the photographs to analyze weaknesses in the Vice President's security entourage and "cause terror and mayhem."
When Maginnis refused to admit to being any sort of terrorist, the Secret Service agent called him a "raghead collaborator" and a "dirty pinko #*!@."
After approximately an hour of interrogation, Maginnis was allowed to make a telephone call. Rather than contacting a lawyer, he called the Denver Post and asked for the news desk. This was immediately overheard by the desk sergeant, who hung up the phone and placed Maginnis in a holding cell.
Three hours later, Maginnis was finally released, but with no explanation. He received no copy of an arrest report, and no receipt for his confiscated possessions. He was told that he would probably not get his camera back, as it was being held as evidence.
Maginnis's lawyer contacted the Denver Police Department for an explanation of the day's events, but the police denied ever having Maginnis - or anyone matching his description - in custody. At press time, the Denver PD's Press Information Office did not return telephone messages left by 2600.
The new police powers introduced by the USA-PATRIOT act, in the name of fighting terrorism, have been frightening in their apparent potential for abuse. Mike Maginnis's experience on Tuesday is a poignant example of how this abuse is beginning to occur. It suggests that a wide range of activities which might be considered "suspicious" could be suddenly labeled a prelude to terrorism, and be grounds for arrest.
Here is more stories for you:
Remember, section 802 is specifically aimed at US citizens and announces any crime as "domestic terrorism". Citizens can be held without a trial as "Enemy Combatants". Let us recap just some of the horror stories that misuse of the Patriot Act has produced, As you will see these are not isolated incidents, this is common practice.
Homeland Security Agents Visit Toy Store
When Homeland Security agents arrived at the Pufferbelly Toys store, the lead agent asked owner Stephanie Cox whether she carried a toy called the Magic Cube, which he said was an illegal copy of the Rubik's Cube, one of the most popular toys of all time. Invoking the Patriot Act, he told her to remove the Magic Cube from her shelves, and he watched to make sure she complied.
Patriot Act Being Used to Harass BlackBoxVoting.org website
Activist Bev Harris was told not to reveal to anyone the fact that she and her website were being investigated under the Patriot Act. It is illegal for a government agency to go in and demand the list of all the members of a group. And you can't investigate leaks to journalists by going in and grabbing the reporter's computer.
Secret Service Questions Students
Two students who were interrogated by the Secret Service following remarks the teenagers made about the President during a class discussion. The discussion was about the war in Iraq and while the exact wording is up for debate, the teacher didn't consider it mere criticism, but a direct threat and she called the Secret Service.
Boy investigated by FBI for researching paper on Chesapeake Bay Bridge
A 12-year-old kid at Boys' Latin researches a paper on the Bay Bridge, and suddenly the Joint Terrorist Task Force shows up in the headmaster's office.
Photographer Arrested "Under Patriot Act"
A Denver photographer was arrested while taking pictures in Denver, during Vice President Dick Cheney's visit to the city. Denver resident Mike Maginnis reports being physically assaulted by Denver police.
FBI says Patriot Act used in Vegas strip club corruption probe
The FBI used the USA Patriot Act to obtain financial information about key figures in a political corruption probe centered on striptease club owner Michael Galardi, an agent said.
Webmaster Sherman Austin, Jailed under PATRIOT Act
Political prisoner Sherman Austin, who made headlines last year after being targeted as one of the first casualties of the infamous USA PATRIOT Act, was released from the Federal Corrections Institute in Tucson and left Arizona July 12 to return to Los Angeles.
Using The Patriot Act To Target Patriots
The Patriot Act has been used to obtain search warrants against doctors and scientists who had been warning about the threat of bioterrorism in the U.S.
Shopkeeper deported from South Carolina under PATRIOT Act killed in Pakistan
After marrying a naturalized U.S. citizen, having two U.S.-born children and running a Rock Hill convenience store for years, Khan was rounded up in post-Sept. 11, 2001, sweeps that targeted Muslim immigrants.
ARTISTS SUBPOENAED IN USA PATRIOT ACT CASE
Three Four artists have been served subpoenas to appear before a federal grand jury that will consider bioterrorism charges against a university professor whose art involves the use of simple biology equipment.
Patriot Act used to prosecute U.S. civilian
The CIA contract employee accused of abusing a prisoner in Afghanistan is being prosecuted under the Patriot Act in what legal experts are calling a surprising and to some, troubling application of the new anti-terrorism law.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on December 31, 2005 07:43:15 AM new
That's a good question, dbl.
---
She's often right, Colin.
---
And a VERY Happy New Year to both of you, dbl and Colin...and yours.
posted on December 31, 2005 11:00:49 AM new
Thanks, logansdad, for posting what is being done to American citizens by their own government.
The really sad thing is neocons who jump up and say none of my rights are being violated. Puts me in mind of a rather famous quote:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
posted on December 31, 2005 11:23:55 AM new
LOL....I think there are millions and millions who disagree with you and other's who refuse to hold saddam responible for ANY part of causing this war.
The PA has WORKED at arresting and preventing terrorists attacks, in our country, in FIVE STATES.
Yep, again if it's working....the anti-Bush crowd want it stopped.
And should it be stopped who do you think will be the FIRST person they'd blame for NOT preventing it? Yep....
posted on December 31, 2005 11:46:44 AM new
How many times have I seen the NYT print articles praising the PA for all the good it HAS done? Not once....but they're sure willing to print a story that endangers our National Security.
Be sure and email the NYT thanking them for being so unconcerned about finding out what terrorists are up to here in our own country.
Justice probes leak on intercepts
By Bill Sammon
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
December 31, 2005
The Justice Department has begun an investigation into an illegal leak that allowed the New York Times to disclose that the National Security Agency was intercepting al Qaeda conversations.
"The leaking of classified information is a serious issue," White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy told reporters near the president's ranch in Crawford, Texas.
"The fact is that al Qaeda's playbook is not printed on Page One. And when America's is, it has serious ramifications. You don't need to be Sun Tzu to understand that," Mr. Duffy said, referring to the legendary ancient Chinese military strategist.
A spokeswoman for the New York Times declined to comment on the probe, aimed at identifying who leaked the story about the NSA eavesdropping on Americans who are suspected of communicating with al Qaeda operatives overseas.
Mr. Duffy said the probe was not ordered by the White House, although President Bush speculated earlier that the Justice Department would initiate an investigation on its own. The president has made no secret of his displeasure over the leak.
"My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important program in a time of war," Mr. Bush told reporters earlier this month. "The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy.
"You've got to understand," the president added. "There is still an enemy that would like to strike the United States of America, and they're very dangerous. And the discussion about how we try to find them will enable them to adjust."
Such concerns initially persuaded the New York Times to withhold publication of the story for a year. But two weeks ago, the newspaper published it on the front page, angering administration officials who had been pleading for secrecy.
The leak of the NSA program has attracted far less attention in the press than the 2003 leak of CIA analyst Valerie Plame's identity.
Although special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has not charged anyone with the Plame leak, he did charge I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, with lying to investigators. The probe also has ended or damaged the careers of various journalists.
Democrats have not denounced the NSA leak, but they have criticized Mr. Bush for signing a secret order to begin the eavesdropping program shortly after the September 11 attacks in which terrorists killed about 3,000.
Democrats plan to further criticize the administration during congressional hearings next year, and some are planning to highlight the issue in the 2006 congressional elections.
A recent poll by Rasmussen Reports showed that 64 percent of Americans support the NSA program, while only 23 percent oppose it.
While at his ranch yesterday, Mr. Bush signed various pieces of legislation, including a five-week extension of the USA Patriot Act. He originally had called for a permanent extension of the law, which would have expired tonight , and had threatened to veto a temporary extension.
But the president ultimately contented himself with buying some time with a temporary extension while pushing Democrats for one that is permanent.
"He's not satisfied with a one-month extension," Mr. Duffy said. "But we've got to get that in place, and we've got to work with them to get it permanently re-extended."
----------------
I hope the dem party DOES make this bill an issue. Show the American public just how the dem party doesn't want to/won't work to protect this Nation.
posted on December 31, 2005 11:59:34 AM new
Another American who has enough common sense to not support giving those who wish to destroy our country a better opportunity.
Spies like us
By Kathleen Parker
Dec 31, 2005
I've been trying for several days now to get upset about the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program. No, wait, make that President George W. Bush's illegal, warrantless, domestic spying scandal.
That sounds more darkly nefarious, more richly conspiratorial and, most important, more impeachable.
But is it true? Is Bush spying illegally on Americans? As usual, it depends on whose head is talking and how one spins the yarn.
"The president has authorized a domestic spying program without court approval" sounds like Big Brother is breathing down all our necks. "The president has authorized national security agents to wiretap suspected terrorists" sounds like common sense.
Thus, try as I might, I can't muster outrage over what appears to be a reasonable action in the wake of 9/11. As a rule, I'm as averse as anyone to having people "spying" on me. I'm also as devoted to protecting civil liberties as any other American. But the privilege of debating our constitutional rights requires first that we be alive. If federal agents want to listen in on suspected terrorists as they plot their next mass murder, please allow me to turn up the volume.
Meanwhile, unless I start placing calls to Peshawar using phrases such as "I want my 72 virgins now," then I figure I'm safe to make my next hair appointment without fear of exposure. OK, fine, so I highlight.
I'm not making light of legitimate concerns about government power over private lives - vigilance is critical and debate worthwhile, but this seems like a manufactured controversy. It also reminds us yet again that America's decency may be her greatest weakness.
It is our nature to project onto others the principles, values and qualities we hold dear. But it is our enemies' nature - and their strategy - to take advantage of those same principles. If not for our open-heartedness toward diversity and our generous spirit in welcoming all comers to these shores, Sept. 11, 2001, might never have happened.
Instead, 19 terrorists traveled freely and lived among us undetected because we were too fat, dumb and happy to imagine that anyone would want to kill us. We were innocent then, but no more. Now we look for dots and try to connect them. We use sophisticated technology to track calls, collate data, and match suspicious-sounding words with names and numbers to create a mosaic of potentially murderous intent.
Sometimes we might get it right and prevent another attack; sometimes we might mistakenly eavesdrop on an innocent conversation. What we save - possibly thousands of lives - compared with what we lose (mostly the exposure of our embarrassingly dull lives) would seem sufficiently self-evident to preclude the meme-driven hysteria now clotting airwaves:
Bush lied; Bush spied. And, oh yes, People Died.
Or maybe not. Maybe people didn't die because federal agents acted in the moment and wiretapped someone they thought might be a threat to U.S. security. Maybe thousands didn't get blown up on the Brooklyn Bridge as Iyman Faris had plotted because agents wiretapped Faris' phone.
Now we learn that Faris, who pleaded guilty in October 2003 to working with al-Qaida, is prepared to sue Bush for illegally wiretapping him. The crux of his case would be that Bush's NSA policy violated the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires a warrant from a special court before an American citizen can be wiretapped. That, at least, is his attorney's position.
Other legal authorities assert that Bush is well within his constitutional authority to pursue foreign intelligence and to monitor communications without a warrant. For more on this, read "Unwarranted Complaints" in the Dec. 27 New York Times by David B. Rivkin and Lee A. Casey, both lawyers who served in the Justice Department in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations.
However the fine legal points are resolved, the current tenor of debate seems out of tune with events. In theory, I don't want to be wiretapped without due process, no matter how unlikely it is that anyone would want to know the shade of my highlights.
But in practice, the task of getting scores or hundreds of warrants to wiretap terrorism suspects mid-conversation seems impossible to imprudent.
More to the point, I want the government to connect all the little dots it can in order to prevent another slaughter on American soil. How rich that Bush should be treated as a criminal for trying to prevent another 9/11 attack, while a known al-Qaida terrorist could be set free on a technicality.
Our decency may kill us yet.
Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/kathleenparker/2005/12/31/180759.html
posted on December 31, 2005 02:21:09 PM new
Kiara, that's great about your new house! Do you guys fix them up to sell?
P.S. Don't listen to these clowns. Most of them have been hammered since Thursday night. Especially Colin. He's been pounding back the beer because he wants to join AA in the new year and maybe lose a few pounds off his 86 inch beer belly.
This topic is 6 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new
