Re: It's FISA! Not whatever....

[Cam <melion@xxxxxx>]

Karl Magnus wrote:
> Getting *legitimate* wiretaps against *legitimate* suspected terrorists is
> the easiest thing in the world to get.
>
> The NISA Court okays 99% of all requests, including those which are
> requested after the fact.
>
> If the NISA Court happens across a wiretap that cannot justify a warrant,
> the only consequence is that the information gained cannot be used in a
> court of law.
>
> Well, fuck, "courts of law."  "This is war!" right?
>
> George WMD Bush isn't gonna dilly-dally around with "legalisms" if it means
> "protecting the United States from terrorism," is he?!
>
> Under the cover of "National Security" and "the war against 'Terrorism'"
> the
> Shrub Administration obviously is wiretapping political opponents.
>
> Any *legitimate* wiretaps would get an automatic okay.
>
> The only wiretaps that wouldn't get an okay from the NISA Court are, by
> experience of some 30 years, *illegitimate."
>
> The proof is already on the record.
>
> For example:
>
> Remember that seemingly goofy episode in Texas a while back?
>
> Tom DeLay orchestrated a massive gerrymandering scheme to re-draw
> congressional districts but Texas Democrats took it on the lam to prevent a
> quorum in the legislature.  Some when to Albuquerque, some went to
> Oklahoma.
>
> How were there whereabouts found?
>
> The Republicans used the "P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act" to track them down.
>
> Lord knows, there are plenty of right-wing Republicans who can rationalize
> that anyone who doesn't fall in lockstep behind the neo-con agenda must
> some
> way, somehow, be considered a "terrorist," and I'm perfectly willing to let
> someone post here and now the legal justification of imposing the
> "P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act" to track down a handful of absentee state legislators:
>
> But, after 30 years of NISA Court approvals of warrantless wiretaps for
> just
> about any and every pre- and post-hoc wiretap in the interest of *real*
> national security issues, the George WMD Bush Administration has to hide
> its
> motives.
>
> Because they're illegal as hell, as unconstitutional as could ever be
> imagined, and as sleazy as the Commander in Thief.
and you're a moron. take this crap to the political nutjob newsgroup,
please. :)