From: "Robert G Lewis" 

I noticed you omitted those CRIMINALS at the  WALL STREET JOURNAL.


"Gary Britt"  wrote in message
news:44dea67e{at}w3.nls.net...
> Why focus on cell phones?  BECAUSE CRIMINALS AT THE NEW YORK TIMES LEAKED
> NSA SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES TO THE ENEMY AND AS A RESULT THE ENEMY CHANGED
> THEIR BEHAVIOR.  THAT'S WHY NO 1000'S OF CELL PHONES IN THE HANDS OF
> MULTIPLE MUSLIMS IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS PRIOR TO THESE TRAITOROUS ACTIONS
> BY CRIMINALS IN OUR MIDST.
>
> Gary
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:44de4935$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> In this day and age anonymous communications seems to be the norm. Why
>> focus on cell phones? Many major cities, counties and coffee shops
>> already have free wireless connectivity. If you wish to scare yourself go
>> right ahead.
>>
>> I'll also wait and see where these arrests lead. Several years ago the
>> Justice Department made big news here in Detroit with arrests of shop
>> owners in Dearborn Michigan who were sending money overseas to supposedly
>> aid terrorists. After all the jailings, news headlines and lost
>> businesses everything was quietly dropped as all those people were just
>> sending money home to support their families.
>>
>> Hopefully they have their facts correct this time
>>
>>
>> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
>> news:44de36f6$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> Both you and Rich miss the point of my post entirely.  I didn't claim
>>> that catching these guys with 1000's of cell phones was due to NSA
>>> surveillance. I'm saying that this is clearly a sign that the NSA leaks
>>> did in fact damage our intelligence gathering and that terrorists did in
>>> fact change their behavior AFTER these traitorous leaks because PRIOR to
>>> these leaks we weren't apprehending people with 1000's of cell phones.
>>> We start apprehending them only AFTER the leaks and would be terrorists
>>> begin to CHANGE their behavior as a RESULT of the NSA surveillance
>>> leaks.
>>>
>>> I'm saying this fact that NOW we catch guys with 1000's of cell phones
>>> and BEFORE the leaks we didn't put the LIE to the liberal traitors pooh
>>> poohing the effect of the leaks as being inconsequential.
>>>
>>> And for Rich to paraphrase your little snark to me.  Don't let the FACTS
>>> get in the way of defense of the traitors who leak our national security
>>> secrets.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> "Phil Payne"
 wrote in message
>>> news:44de3034{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>> I remember all that.   Strange that if these liberal
traitors more
>>>>> interested in political power than the safety of our
children were
>>>>> correct
>>>>> in their assertions above, that PRIOR TO THESE LEAKS WE WEREN'T
>>>>> CATCHING
>>>>> NUMEROUS AND SEPARATE GROUPS OF MUSLIM CRIMINALS WITH 1000'S OF
>>>>> PREPAID
>>>> HARD > TO TRACE CELL PHONES IN THEIR VEHICLES.
>>>>
>>>> Trying to make some sense out of all that.
>>>>
>>>> The arrests, as I understand it, were prompted not by any
sophisticated
>>>> surveillance but by shop assistants (clerks) at Walmart becoming
>>>> suspicious - their awareness having been raised by earlier
reports and
>>>> a
>>>> directive from their management.
>>>>
>>>> The directive was apparently the result of an FBI Advisory dated 3
>>>> August.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see where the New York Times, the NSA, leaks,
surveillance or
>>>> anything else fits in this.  It's plain, simple, boring and very
>>>> effective
>>>> police work.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27267626.shtml
>>>>
>>>> "During a telephone conversation between British
Prime Minister Tony
>>>> Blair
>>>> and President George W. Bush regarding the terrorist plot
and arrests
>>>> in the
>>>> United Kingdom, Blair warned Bush about possible
intelligence leaks in
>>>> the
>>>> US, according to Fox News.
>>>>
>>>> There is fear that the ongoing investigation into a large-scale
>>>> terrorist
>>>> attack on airline flights between the UK and US will be
compromised by
>>>> leakers and the American news media, who in the past have
compromised
>>>> national security."
>>>>
>>>> Why do you think we didn't ****ing tell you until the arrests were
>>>> underway?
>>>> Your intelligence services leak like sieves.
>>>>
>>>> I have a friend who is involved in another issue - not directly
>>>> terrorist-related.  He passed information to two US officials on a
>>>> "need-to-know" and strict non-distribution
basis.  And read it in the
>>>> papers
>>>> days later.  He (and his department) now pass _NO_ information to US
>>>> authorities.  It just blows their operations.
>>>>
>>>> And note - this isn't legitimate whistle-blowing like in
the NYT case -
>>>> this
>>>> is someone leaking a story for personal gain of some kind.
 I support
>>>> whistle-blowers, but these ****s should be shot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5