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

Once again, the Comicle sides with the terrorists - just as long as they aren't Republicans.
1 posted on 08/18/2006 12:29:24 PM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SmithL
The SFO Chronicle clearly works for AlQaida.

Why hasn't "W" moved against some of these agents.

2 posted on 08/18/2006 12:31:32 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
The Follicle is so far off base they don't deserve the First Amendment rights they so dearly cherish.
3 posted on 08/18/2006 12:33:20 PM PDT by xcamel (Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
This will pretty much prove, again, that liberals/Democrats can't be trusted with security and terrorism.

You may remember the polling data that shows huge public support the surveillance programs. The Democrats are way out of tune with this country and the voters.

4 posted on 08/18/2006 12:33:35 PM PDT by capt. norm (Bumper Sticker: Honk if you've never seen an Uzi shoot from a car window.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
"The public interest is clear in this matter," she wrote in her 43-page opinion. "It is the upholding of the Constitution."

Maybe they should have somebody who knows something about law read the opinion. Even the Washington Post is saying the ruling was poorly written and will be overturned.

5 posted on 08/18/2006 12:34:06 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL

Instead of reporting the news, the SF Commie prints their version of it.


6 posted on 08/18/2006 12:34:29 PM PDT by jazusamo (DIANA IREY for Congress, PA 12th District: Retire murtha.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL; All
"FISA judges say Bush within law"

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060329-120346-1901r.htm

8 posted on 08/18/2006 12:36:35 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
Judge Anna Diggs Terror is a loon of the left, and a very untalented loon at that.

Her "decision" reads like it was lifted from DU.

Impeach Judge Anna Diggs Terror.
9 posted on 08/18/2006 12:38:25 PM PDT by Semi Civil Servant (Colorado: the original Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL

All these pundits are making pronouncements like this is a done deal. The judges ruling in this case was so weak in citing applicable law that the next court won't be restrained by her ruling since it isn't based on anything other than her political views and feelings. I wonder if they will retract any of this when it's overturned? (rhetorical question)


12 posted on 08/18/2006 12:40:43 PM PDT by saganite (Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL

There should be a three-strikes rule for judges: Three decisions get overturned and you're back to being a regular lawyer.


13 posted on 08/18/2006 12:44:21 PM PDT by ZGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL

The Chronicle simply reflects the place where it is located. If anything, it is more conservative than the Bay Area. Sometimes I wonder how much longer America can stay together as a single country. Clearly, the Kaliforniacs will not give up til the rest of us are like them.


18 posted on 08/18/2006 12:54:54 PM PDT by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
A FEDERAL judge Thursday reaffirmed one of the Constitution's most cherished principles: Everyone one, even a federal judge has the right to make comments that make themselves look like a fool, and that right is guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
19 posted on 08/18/2006 12:56:14 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Bring your press credentials to Qana, for the world's most convincing terrorist street theater.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
A FEDERAL judge Thursday reaffirmed one of the Constitution's most cherished principles: No one, even the president of the United States, is above the law.

(Except Bill Clinton, of course.)

20 posted on 08/18/2006 12:58:28 PM PDT by Obadiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
You have a civil right and a free speech right to plan attacks on the phone???? huh???
21 posted on 08/18/2006 1:06:20 PM PDT by GeronL (flogerloon.blogspot.com -------------> Rise of the Hate Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
Coming soon the Constitution and Bill of Rights:

The individual's absolute right to advocate and plan the violent overthrow of the United State's government. Once they finish representing the folks at Guantanamo, there will be an absolute right to wage war against any conservative American government. We will have to accept the Peoples Republic of the Americas to just legally defend ourselves. Of course, with a Maoist government, self defense becomes irrelevant. Rant over.

24 posted on 08/18/2006 1:15:18 PM PDT by JimSEA ( "The purpose of diplomacy is to prolong a crisis." Spock)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
Judge Anna Taylor carves out a dark evil niche for herself in a time of war. It's a treasonous judgement and she should be impeached for it. Every President since FDR (including President Bush, who has been most prudent) has used the National Security Agency without infringing on any US person's privacy.

I tell you, these democrats are putting the American people at greater and greater risk. Democrats do not deserve the power they have, let alone the power they seek. I hope no terrorist action occurs within our borders because if it does, most democrat officals will answer directly to the people.

26 posted on 08/18/2006 1:20:07 PM PDT by Rapscallion (In war the only moral value is to win. America, you must become ruthless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL

It's just one more judge who is on the terrorist list of good friends, supporters and aide-de-camps.

When the islamic terrorist win this war, the judge will get a visit from her good buddies at al-quaeda and see what a rusty blade across her throat feels like.

American traitors are not respected by our enemies either.


28 posted on 08/18/2006 1:52:00 PM PDT by TimesDomain (When a judge declares himself "MASTER", you become his "SLAVE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
No one, even the president of the United States, is above the law.

What about judges? Since when did we allow judges to be above the law?

There's supposed to be more to the law than just saying it's whatever any seditious or treacherous judge wants it to be.

31 posted on 08/18/2006 2:22:32 PM PDT by 3niner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL
Consider the source ---- a CARTER EEO-quota appointee!!!!

In 1979, Anna Diggs Taylor became the first black woman judge to be appointed to the United States District Court...

32 posted on 08/18/2006 2:32:59 PM PDT by GoldCountryRedneck ("It's never too late to have a happy childhood" - unknown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SmithL

The Democrats are determined to destroy America. I wonder what they will gain in the end.


35 posted on 08/18/2006 2:47:51 PM PDT by maxwellp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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