On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Judah McAuley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That article rightly points out that the wall did exist previously:
We know the wall existed, she made it much larger to protect Clinton from being investigate for his dealings with John Huang and Charlie Trie. > And I've got to question your ability > to have an informed opinion on the matter when you said the "wall" had > nothing to do with Watergate That's not what I said, I said Watergate wasn't about the FBI communicating with the CIA > when the "wall" in question was Gorelick's > directives on how FISA should be interpreted and FISA was implemented on the > recommendations of the Church Committee which was brought together because > of Watergate. Is that six degrees? >I certainly don't knowall the ins and outs of the all the > intelligence activities and history of the US, but if you are going to > comment you should at least know the big stuff. Why, you just sift through it and comment about unrelated items? > And yes, the Clintion administration wanted a firm wall between domestic law > enforcement and international intelligence. As your op-ed quotes: > > "We believe that it is prudent to establish a set of instructions that will > more clearly separate the counterintelligence investigation from the more > limited, but continued, criminal investigations. These procedures, which go > beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an > unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural > safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation" Go beyond what is legally required? How high is that wall? > That seems like a pretty reasonable thing to me. I actually rather like it > when my government is following procedural safeguards. After the last 8 > years, its positively a breathe of fresh air. So yeah. FISA was put in place > because of governmental abuse of power. The Clinton admin (through Gorelick) > wanted to make sure that people didn't think they were abusing and > circumventing the powers involved in a secret court. Even after 9/11 I am > still very ok with that. That's not why they did, it was to obstruct justice. > So you're wrong about the wall not existing before Gorelecki, You're not understanding the discussion. > you don't have > any understanding of why the wall was put there in the first place and all > you seem to be able to come up with is throwing shit against teh wall to see > what sticks. Anything else? More like I'm talking to a wall. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:269607 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
