Patrick Leahy, A true idiot

This guy is seriously a joke. He almost sounds like those funny protesters you see in San Francisco whoi have no clue what they are talking about. Its also another reason his party has no power and wont anytime in the for seeable future.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060206/D8FJMHAG6.html

" My concern is for peaceful Quakers who are being spied upon, and other law-obiding Americans and babies and nuns who are placed on terrorist watch lists," Leahy said.

Has he even read the Patriot act?LOL!

Lions and Tigers and Bears OH MY!!:thumbsup: :dance:

If the feds have been tapping the phones and monitoring the email of american citizens without getting warrants, which are very very easy to obtain, they should be prosecuted. And so should the prez and his cronies if they authorized it. It's illegal and that's that. There is absolutely no excuse for not getting the proper warrants.

Its not illegal...Kennedy did it..Roosevelt did it Clinton did it... democrats and no1 complaigned, but wo...Bush did it, and hes a republican..its all of the sudden illegal..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth1184

Its not illegal...Kennedy did it..Roosevelt did it Clinton did it... democrats and no1 complaigned, but wo...Bush did it, and hes a republican..its all of the sudden illegal..

---

So did Nixon but he got caught...just because they did it does not make it legal or right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bonsaiguy

If the feds have been tapping the phones and monitoring the email of american citizens without getting warrants, which are very very easy to obtain, they should be prosecuted. And so should the prez and his cronies if they authorized it. It's illegal and that's that. There is absolutely no excuse for not getting the proper warrants.

---

Perhaps you should take a class on law in America because it is not illegal. Are you dealing with foreign terrorists? If not, you have nothing to worry about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amsterdam

Perhaps you should take a class on law in America because it is not illegal. Are you dealing with foreign terrorists? If not, you have nothing to worry about.

---

Don't take that Limbaugh/Hannity accusatory tone with me.
See the 4th and 5th amendments...if they are tapping the phones or searching the homes of american citizens, get a warrant. it's not diffucult, especially for the NSA, CIA, FBI, Fed Marshall, etc. If we are dealing with people receiving calls from known terrorists in other countries, they have something like 72 hours after tapping the phones to get the warrant...no excuse for not following due process for american citizens. Then again, the feds have made a concerted effort to bypass the bill of rights for at least the last 100 years. especially the last 50 years. mind you, I'm not bashing bush or his admin specifically, but rather the entire system that has become so bloated and convuluted that these things can happen.

(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath thatâ??
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed atâ??
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;
(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and

Here's the stuff about the 72 hour exception


(f) Emergency orders
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, when the Attorney General reasonably determines thatâ??
(1) an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of electronic surveillance to obtain foreign intelligence information before an order authorizing such surveillance can with due diligence be obtained; and
(2) the factual basis for issuance of an order under this subchapter to approve such surveillance exists;
he may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance if a judge having jurisdiction under section 1803 of this title is informed by the Attorney General or his designee at the time of such authorization that the decision has been made to employ emergency electronic surveillance and if an application in accordance with this subchapter is made to that judge as soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes such surveillance. If the Attorney General authorizes such emergency employment of electronic surveillance, he shall require that the minimization procedures required by this subchapter for the issuance of a judicial order be followed. In the absence of a judicial order approving such electronic surveillance, the surveillance shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 72 hours from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest. In the event that such application for approval is denied, or in any other case where the electronic surveillance is terminated and no order is issued approving the surveillance, no information obtained or evidence derived from such surveillance shall be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, office, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United States, a State, or political subdivision thereof, and no information concerning any United States person acquired from such surveillance shall subsequently be used or disclosed in any other manner by Federal officers or employees without the consent of such person, except with the approval of the Attorney General if the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person. A denial of the application made under this subsection may be reviewed as provided in section 1803 of this titl

I will express myself however I choose.

In times of war we don't always have 72 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amsterdam

I will express myself however I choose.

In times of war we don't always have 72 hours.

---

you misunderstand (i think)...they have up to 72 hours AFTER they place a tap to get the approval if they feel it is warranted. If I understand correctly, if a call comes in from known terrorist leader Joe Al Queda in Syria, and is received by Joe USCitizen in Detroit, they can monitor the call and have up to 72 hours after the fact to get the approval.

I did misunderstand. I will say again however that the wiretap is perfectly legal in a time of war and thats that. People have become hysterical over this and its gotten kinda funny. If you arent friends with any islamo-fascists you have NOTHING to worry about. This was also used quite a bit during the 90's but of course that dosen't fit with the medias agenda so people will never hear much about it. Sad that in 1998 or 19999 we actually had 8 of the hijackers who crashed into the towers identufied but because of laws created the info couldnt be shared with the right people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amsterdam

I did misunderstand. I will say again however that the wiretap is perfectly legal in a time of war and thats that. People have become hysterical over this and its gotten kinda funny. If you arent friends with any islamo-fascists you have NOTHING to worry about. This was also used quite a bit during the 90's but of course that dosen't fit with the medias agenda so people will never hear much about it. Sad that in 1998 or 19999 we actually had 8 of the hijackers who crashed into the towers identufied but because of laws created the info couldnt be shared with the right people.

---

I agree with you about the media's agenda, however we are not at war since it has not been "officially" declared and there is no one coutry to officially declare was against. We are "marching freedom and democracy". Even when we are at war, the warrants are still required. (athough previous corrupt presidents like Johnson, Clinton, Bush 1 will tell you different if it saves their asses) It's not an issue of whether we "have nothing to worry about" if we're not in league with the bad guys, it the issue of granting the feds more power than they should ever have. As for sharing the information of various agencies, that was an issue of politics, corruption and competition between the various intelligence agencies who were unwilling to "share the collar" so to speak. FBI, CIA, NSA, Military Intelligence,etc have never worked together to solve any issue because of their various political ties and rarely share their information with one another. Too many cooks in the kitchen, so to speak. I have yet to see any evidence of terrorist activity in most parts of the country, barring 9/11 which is the only one I am aware of, for many years and firmly believe that the threat to our country has been grossly overblown by the same media that has been attacking our pres, and his predecessors so vehemently for so many years. That being said, we have no way of knowing how many attacks may have been averted in the last 5 years since no one tells.

We haven't seen another attack on American soil because we are playing offense and have captured or killed 10's of thousands of islamo-fascists. I suggest you find the video of the towers falling down and rethink the whole overblown threat comment. Hopefully we will continue this pattern for many years to come because we are clearly winning and the pee-on terrorists are on the run and living in caves. Or living it up at Club Gitmo with their free Korans and prayer rugs.

It seems to me that it is no different than if a woman walks naked in to a room full of convicted rapists and gets raped. It's not right, they made the choice to rape her and by all means she did not "deserve" to be raped (no one does) but she did a very very stupid thing and paid the price. We put Sadaam and Osama in the positions they were in by our attempts to manipulate the governments and cultures in the middle east (and a lot of other places as well). By no means is it our fault that they chose to attack the USS Cole or the Twin Towers and those responsible should and are being hunted down and being brought to justice. But our government has been doing stupid things and has paid the price. Or rather, those 3000 people in the towers paid the price for the governments efforts to interfere where we should not have been interfering. I reiterate, it's not our fault that they chose to do what they did and there is no way to rationalize the actions of a bunch of religious zealots bent on the destruction of all that does not agree with them, but we have paid a very dear price for out stupidity and arrogance.