Comments on: Criminals Hiding In Plain Sight http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/2007/12/17/criminals-hiding-in-plain-sight/ID=688/ Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:04:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: The Reverend http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/2007/12/17/criminals-hiding-in-plain-sight/ID=688/comment-page-1/#comment-2241 The Reverend Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:46:00 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/2007/12/17/criminals-hiding-in-plain-sight/ID=688/#comment-2241 Wrong on both counts there King. Do you believe that Americans have a right to privacy that's inherent in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Everything hinges, I think, on the answer to that question. I believe we do have that right. In addition, the 4th amendment is not negotiable. It says what it says. Probable cause....then a warrant....then an eavesdrop or search. What they were debating in the Senate yesterday was whether corporations should be granted immunity from all civil lawsuits if they cooperate, knowingly, with an illegal order from federal officials. Also under consideration was oversight of executive branch eavesdropping. The only issue that needed addressed was the foreign to foreign calls that went through U.S. located switches. Yes, the CIA, NSA, and FBI should be able to tap those calls. No one disputes that. Bush/Cheney, in a big surprise, is trying to disinform in order to expand their already self-expanded powers. The White House's desire to grant immunity is for the sole reason of protecting any criminal information, evidence and testimony from being made public. This is only a continuation of what they've been doing now for 7 years. They care about no one but themselves. Wrong on both counts there King.

Do you believe that Americans have a right to privacy that's inherent in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Everything hinges, I think, on the answer to that question. I believe we do have that right.

In addition, the 4th amendment is not negotiable. It says what it says. Probable cause….then a warrant….then an eavesdrop or search.

What they were debating in the Senate yesterday was whether corporations should be granted immunity from all civil lawsuits if they cooperate, knowingly, with an illegal order from federal officials.

Also under consideration was oversight of executive branch eavesdropping. The only issue that needed addressed was the foreign to foreign calls that went through U.S. located switches. Yes, the CIA, NSA, and FBI should be able to tap those calls. No one disputes that.

Bush/Cheney, in a big surprise, is trying to disinform in order to expand their already self-expanded powers. The White House's desire to grant immunity is for the sole reason of protecting any criminal information, evidence and testimony from being made public. This is only a continuation of what they've been doing now for 7 years. They care about no one but themselves.

]]> By: Da King http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/2007/12/17/criminals-hiding-in-plain-sight/ID=688/comment-page-1/#comment-2235 Da King Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:12:26 +0000 http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/2007/12/17/criminals-hiding-in-plain-sight/ID=688/#comment-2235 Monitoring global communications didn't start with the Bush administration. I know I've told you about Project Echelon, Project Minaret, etc. before, which ran under the Clinton administration (and which the NY Times then thought were so very necessary to national security. I wonder what changed, lol ?). So, why are you only telling your readers half the story ? Why all the misdirection ? Are you running for office ? You are talking about horses that left the barn long, long ago. Now, when there is actually some justification for this type of behavior (tracking terrorist activity), you decide the Bush administration is the worst criminal enterprise that ever graced the White House. In addition, point me to the law that prevents the government from asking for telephone company records, please. There isn't one. The government has been getting those records for decades. What they were supposed to be debating in Congress yesterday was whether or not the phone companies can be sued for providing those records, not the legality of the request. Monitoring global communications didn't start with the Bush administration. I know I've told you about Project Echelon, Project Minaret, etc. before, which ran under the Clinton administration (and which the NY Times then thought were so very necessary to national security. I wonder what changed, lol ?). So, why are you only telling your readers half the story ? Why all the misdirection ? Are you running for office ? You are talking about horses that left the barn long, long ago. Now, when there is actually some justification for this type of behavior (tracking terrorist activity), you decide the Bush administration is the worst criminal enterprise that ever graced the White House.

In addition, point me to the law that prevents the government from asking for telephone company records, please. There isn't one. The government has been getting those records for decades. What they were supposed to be debating in Congress yesterday was whether or not the phone companies can be sued for providing those records, not the legality of the request.

]]>