I think what I am saying is that I do agree that there are bad guys. I am
not really concerned with Ames. He got a trial, correct? I have waaaaay too
much going on fact check Nick's assertion about warrants in this case, and I
think it's a side issue. The man is not currently being held without trial.
It seems he was a genuine threat to the US, as opposed to let's say the
local branch of the ACLU.

But to answer your point. I personally question whether Bush was elected.
Assuming he was, I don't think this proves much except that Americans do not
value their freedoms. Didn't they have a poll a while back in which a
majority of people said the 1st amendment goes too far? I mean, just look at
what some otherwise intelligent people have said in this thread right here.


On 12/22/05, Chesty Puller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't know that there's a real difference here.  Maybe in degree, but
> not
> in meaning.  Additionally, Clinton did not have to deal with the aftermath
> of 911.  Now the country is begin vigilant about preventing another
> attack.
> The fact is that Bush was reelected and the majority that voted him back
> into office apparently approve of the way he handles the security of this
> nation.  Not that I necessarily approve or disapprove of these actions or
> his ability to protect us.
>
> - Matt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [politics] nobody else seems to be concerned
>
>
> > ok. So if you are correct about that it would seem that Clinton may have
> > violated the civil liberties of one person whom he correctly suspected
> of
> > being a spy. Can we let go of that and take a look at the wholesale
> > violations of the fourth amendment that seem to currently be taking
> place?
> >
> > On 12/22/05, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> No, after the fact his aide testified in front of Congress about it,
> >> stating
> >> that the President didn't need a warrant.
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:27 PM
> >> > To: CF-Community
> >> > Subject: Re: [politics] nobody else seems to be concerned
> >> >
> >> > did he talk to a judge at some point?
> >> >
> >> > On 12/21/05, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > But Clinton didn't have a warrant, that was the point.
> >> > >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
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:5:189496
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=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to