From: "Gary Britt" 

Wrong!

Padilla's rights were not infringed.  He's been granted more rights than
any enemy traitor in history.

You don't know of any specific person who has had their rights violated by
an ISP and you can't present a single case of injury.  Its just a general
non-specific theoretical complaint.  Guess what, the people who want to
murder our children don't want to just do it in theory.

International calls have been subject to monitoring for decades.  That's
not even something new.

As I suspected you haven't presented a single instance of a single person
you know that has had any known injury.  Just made up bullshit, just like I
said.  Rich presented even less than you.

Gary



"Robert Comer"  wrote in message
news:442bc935$1{at}w3....
> > Please name one single person that you personally know who has had their
> > freedom imposed upon by Bush administration.  Please state what freedom
> > was
> > specifically involved and how specifically that specific person was
> > affected.
>
> Jose Padilla for one, imprisoned 3 years without being charged or allowed
to
> see a lawyer for the first couple of years.  How 'bout the rest of us when
> our privacy has been compromised when our ISP has had to turn over
records?
> How about those of us that make international call and have been monitored
> illegally? (bound to be some, otherwise Bush wouldn't be fighting for it)
> And then there's the cases we really don't know about...
>
> > That's of bullshit talk on this subject, but not a single victim that
I'm
> > aware of.
>
> Only because you think *you* haven't been effected.
>
> --
> Bob Comer
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:442b7623{at}w3....
> > Please name one single person that you personally know who has had their
> > freedom imposed upon by Bush administration.  Please state what freedom
> > was
> > specifically involved and how specifically that specific person was
> > affected.
> >
> > That's of bullshit talk on this subject, but not a single victim that
I'm
> > aware of.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> > news:442b15c9$1{at}w3....
> >>
> >> "John Cuccia"  wrote in message
> >> news:n24m22hoi7l1oj03c0hpo5mtdge1fkuh4n{at}4ax.com...
> >> > On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:20:53 -0500, "Gary Britt"
> >> >  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>And the problem with this would be what?  If an alien german
operative
> >> >
> >> > How would you know that the person you picked up was an alien
> >> > operative without a trial?  You are now advocating
"guilty until
> >> > proven innocent", or perhaps you just want to shoot
first and ask
> >> > questions later?
> >> >
> >> > You are willing to give the US Government carte blanche w/r/t
> >> > detaining anyone they deem a suspicious character.   That is
> >> > diametrically opposed to the principles upon which the
Republic was
> >> > founded.
> >>
> >> Many of the current principals of this administration are diametrically
> >> opposed to a conservative base -  from spending, to big government, to
> >> imposition of freedoms. Of course one of the definitions of neo- is
'new
> > and
> >> abnormal'  so I reckon neo-con it fits.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

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