Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MinuteGal

Turley has obviously not researched this matter being too busy rushing to the nearest camera. LOL


86 posted on 12/23/2005 5:17:26 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]


To: Peach
Peach, Did you see this posted on the American Thinker blog today, 12/24?

Another suicidal national security leak

Media outlets are now racing each other to expose vital national security secrets to mass-murdering terrorists. US News & World Report just gave our enemies another tip: Don’t store your dirty bomb materials in a mosque.

The US has been monitoring for radioactive materials in US mosques, because if you want to kill a lot of people, the dirty bomb is your weapon of choice. All it takes is some uranium or radium in a truck full of dynamite. If the 9/11 terrorists had carried radioactive materials on board their four hijacked aircraft, we would now be digging bomb shelters in our gardens.

As a result of this criminal leak of a vital program, future terrorists will be sure to store their radioactive materials outside of mosques. Now we do not know where to look.

Thank you, mainstream media. You may kill us all yet, but you will defend the public’s right to know to the last man, woman and child in the United States.

It is past time to prosecute leakers and “journalists” to the full extent of the law. The US Constitution is not a suicide pact.

......................

The question is - WHEN WILL THE LEAKERS GO TO JAIL????

94 posted on 12/24/2005 7:44:02 AM PST by Elkiejg (God Bless our Troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: Peach

This was a great post. And I am glad that we have all this info in one place.

But I am confused about much of the cases . For instance-- Hamdi case is a case concerning whether or not he should be considered a US citizen because he was born here, they (SCOTUS )decided he was a US citizen and ruled that he should be given due process under the law, and not considered an "Enemy Combatant", correct? Maybe I am wrong. But then if this assertion is correct, how does the AG use this as any type of support?


122 posted on 12/30/2005 1:40:01 PM PST by amutr22 (....not ANOTHER clinton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson