Like I've been saying all along, if you're tapping someone you don't need a warrant for everyone they call or everyone that calls them. I think I used Gruss bank robber brother in law as an example. It's not an unreasonable search unless the person in the US is being tapped without the warrant.
On 1/26/06, Robert Everland III wrote: > We can't get this through our heads because there is no need for it. There > has been a system in place to have surveillance on someone without a warrant, > as long as they go back and get a warrant after the fact. That system > approved just about every warrant that came through. You may ask now, well if > they approved just about every single one then why do you care? The answer is > this; I want accountability in the government. If no one is able to account > for whom, what or why we are doing this, then I would presume that they have > no justifiable reason to do so. I am not willing to give my rights up cart > Blanche just because someone uses fear. We're fighting for people's rights > overseas, why are you so willing to throw yours away here. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:194567 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
