Skip to comments.
Columbus Man Accused Of Bridge Plot Seeks Evidence Of NSA Spying
NBC 4 Columbus ^
| February 3, 2006
Posted on 02/03/2006 8:23:04 AM PST by flutters
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Why don't the government just get the man a camel to abuse and settle it? In the middle of July in Death walley with 1 quart of water and no shoes?
21
posted on
02/03/2006 9:10:00 AM PST
by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: RSmithOpt
walley=Valley ooopps!! fumbly fingers strike again --- spell check is my friend....
22
posted on
02/03/2006 9:13:23 AM PST
by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: flutters
This is exactly why we need domestic surveillance.
To: generally
Surveillance does not force law-abiding citizens to modify their behavior to accommodate criminals, and may be effective in reducing the need for the types of security measures which do.
To: GovernmentShrinker
An excellent point. Too bad it's lost on all the left-wing extremists.
I'm all in favor of privacy, but we need to use some common sense. If the lefties would stop defending the criminals, we'd have very little need for surveillance, since the criminals would be in jail or deported.
To: flutters
Boy, am I going to draw fire for this:
Illegally gotten evidence (if that is what it is, and the court will decide based on the evidence and the letter of the constitution), is inadmissable.
The argument that if you are doing nothing wrong, you have no fear of surveilliance is not the point. If this is so, why object to gun registration? Firearm finger printing? IDing and registering everything? National ID cards? To search, in any method, they need a warrant. If they violated this BASIC principal, that evidence cannot be used. That does not necessarily mean this guy walks, but if it came down to this guy walking or me/us living under the chains of constant surveilliance, this guy should walk.
26
posted on
02/03/2006 9:30:03 AM PST
by
barj
To: flutters
"Faris pleaded guilty in 2003 to conspiracy and aiding and abetting terrorism, and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Prosecutors cited incriminating statements he made under questioning by federal agents. "
Not as though there is any question about guilt or innocence. These liberals are pushing this protection of national security out of the bounds of mental wellness.
To: flutters
I think this is just the first of many more challenges to come. Bring 'em on. The makeup of the Supreme Court has changed recently in the direction of sanity and enforcing the Constitution as written, rather than what they want it to say.
28
posted on
02/03/2006 9:40:55 AM PST
by
El Gato
(The Second Amendment is the Reset Button of the U.S. Constitution)
To: flutters
The article says the government used evidence from another call to start its investigation of him. No where does the article- and one hopes the article accurately reflects the suit- allege that the convicted man was tried and found guilty on the basis of the phone calls. Unless a warantless call was used to find him guilty I don't see how he has legal standing.
29
posted on
02/03/2006 9:47:18 AM PST
by
brothers4thID
(Being lectured by Ted Kennedy on ethics is not unlike being lectured on dating protocol by Ted Bundy)
To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Bang! (the sound of the Hammer striking the nail)
Amazing set of rules in place. But if he had succeeded, no doubt it would have been a failure of the Bush adminsitration to protect us.
Hypocracy knows no bounds.
30
posted on
02/03/2006 9:56:48 AM PST
by
SueRae
To: flutters
Faris pleaded guilty in 2003 to conspiracy and aiding and abetting terrorism, and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Think about the idiocy of this appeal. He already pleaded guilty to the crime while knowing exactly how the evidence against him had been obtained, and now he wants to have his "conviction" (i.e., guilty plea) thrown out.
This is probably why the appeal includes an "incompetent counsel" element as well -- because on its face the appeal is ludicrous.
31
posted on
02/03/2006 10:13:41 AM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows.)
To: barj
See #31. He's not appealing a conviction -- he's appealing his own freakin' guilty plea.
32
posted on
02/03/2006 10:14:59 AM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows.)
To: princess leah
So, this proves that the spying actually IS WORKING!!! Excellent point. The more I learn about who effective this eavesdropping has been, the more I tend to support it.
If al-Qaida is calling Americans, I want to know what it's being discussed. My children's life and my own life are at risk from these terrorists, and I'm glad someone is keeping track of their evil plans.
To: brothers4thID
Unless a warrantless call was used to find him guilty I don't see how he has legal standing. I don't think the purpose of the appeal is concerned with this case at all. It is just the wedge used to pry into information for a broader purpose, to seek to uncover classified information and to destroy the weapons we use against terrorists and other miscreants.
34
posted on
02/03/2006 10:45:58 AM PST
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
To: finallyatexan
"He looks just like Freddie Fender - always wondered what happened to him !!!!! You didn't hear?
Freddy got caught trying to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge! ! ! ! !
35
posted on
02/03/2006 10:50:37 AM PST
by
DeaconRed
(IF . . . . . . . . . . . . . .)
To: RSmithOpt
Is that you, Dilbert? ;-P
36
posted on
02/03/2006 1:25:36 PM PST
by
MortMan
(There is no substitute for victory.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson