> I agree, I think the wiretaps that Bush is speaking of should only be > used to counter terrorist attacks.. I don't think anyone should abuse > it to check up on an individual just because said person doesnt like > them...
Umm... hence the reason for the special court, to prevent potential abuse. There are already rules in place for wiretaps to occur, they even include a 72 hour grace period in which the government may gather evidence (or more solid evidence) to make (or shore up) their case for the wiretap. That fact in and of itself is waaay better than your standard warrant issue process wherein there must be evidence or probable cause. Geez...The wiretaps are still secret, but they are submitted to a judge for oversight. Being that it is already a special court, there would be, I assume, less of a presumption of innocence (a different matter and troublesome in its own right) and therefore a higher rate of warrants issued. why aren't you seeing that the one step, the oversight is absolutely necessary and not cumbersome? and, yes, it has to be something more substantial than "i'm not doing anything wrong, so I don't have anything to fear." Sorry...that just doesn't pass muster... -- will "If my life weren't funny, it would just be true; and that would just be unacceptable." - Carrie Fisher ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:189254 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
