From: "Gary Britt" 

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