From: "Robert G Lewis" 

Well Gary you have convinced me that if a Democrat says it, it cannot be
true therefore I can only believe that no harm whatsoever could have been
done.

It is NOT obvious that 'great harm' was done. I mean what exactly is so
secret about the United States intercepting phone calls and other means of
communication. Anyone who doesn't realized we've had the capability of such
for years isn't smart enough to be a threat to a dead dog.

I'd love to see what is this 'great harm' that was done . Unlike some of
the leaks that have had serious ( as in dead people ) consequences all this
seems to have done is confirm what anyone with half a brain already
accepted.

"Gary Britt"  wrote in message
news:43c71993{at}w3.nls.net...
> Well such strong Bushies as Democrat and ranking member of the House
> Intelligence Committee, Jane Harmon, widely and highly regarded in
> intelligence matters stated for the record just a few days ago that the
> NSA
> leak was VERY HARMFUL to the country.
>
> Others not in a position to know are of course free to blather on about
> how
> such claims of harm are "hollow".
>
> There was obviously great harm, but the criminal statutes applicable to
> this
> series of crimes doesn't require harm.  Its a crime even when there is no
> harm.
>
> Gary
>
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:43c6efb9{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
>> news:43c6ed59{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >
>> > "George Sherwood" 
wrote in message
>> > news:pan.2006.01.12.22.59.07.986403{at}beernabeer.com...
>> >> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:49:28 -0500, Robert Comer wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> You either have checks and balances like our
government was intended
> to
>> >>> be,
>> >>> or you have what Phil is talking about.......
>> >>
>> >> So you don't think the courts will eventually rule on the
wiretaps?  I
>> >> think there will be hearings and rulings. The only thing I know for
> sure
>> >> is the person that leaked this did break the law.  Where is the
>> >> outcry?
>> >> He has done much more damage then the Plume leak ever caused.
>> >>
>> >> George
>> >
>> > What damage has he really caused ? I haven't seen where he has released
>> > any specific information about how we are doing any of this. The
>> > information that we are monitoring groups or have the ability to
> intercept
>> > communications is certainly no secret.  Anyone who thinks they aren't /
>> > can't be monitored hasn't been paying attention for about the last 20
>> > or
>> > so years.
>> >
>> > If he has actually published operational details then it may be a
>> > different story.
>> >
>>
>> I agree that the 'enormous damage has been done' shouts of the Bush
>> administration sounds more than a trifle hollow.
>>
>> Most everyone ( except for some globally warmed drowned polar bears )
> knows
>> that the NSA monitors and what the secret part of that usually amounts to
> is
>> who is being monitored and how successful the monitoring is. As far as I
>> know none of that information has been revealed. The shouts of damage
>> just
>> seem a silly political ploy.
>>
>>
>>
>
>

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