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


1 posted on 09/30/2006 6:40:08 AM PDT by 13Sisters76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: 13Sisters76
Times has conceded that targets of the warrantless wiretaps were persons who may have had some connection to terrorists.

....in other words, their brothers.

2 posted on 09/30/2006 6:41:29 AM PDT by Loud Mime (An undefeated enemy is still an enemy.......war has a purpose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 13Sisters76

What I don't get is the frenchies immediately open an inquiry into the leak of an 'Osama has died' report, but the US is still letting the Slimes leak secrets of national security without seriuos investigation?

WTF?


3 posted on 09/30/2006 6:44:12 AM PDT by Reform4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 13Sisters76

Two Comments:

1. Henry Mark Holzer isn't just anybody... he's a retired law prof who is arguably the top authority in the USA on the law of treason and related laws (espionage, various wartime misconduct, etc).

2. We don't know if the USG has opened an investigation. They don't generally tell anybody until the grand jury convenes (and sometimes not even then). Although an investigation doesn't really fit with the Bush Administration's general passivity, misguided collegiality, and feebleness on this issue.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F


5 posted on 09/30/2006 6:52:26 AM PDT by Criminal Number 18F (Build more lampposts... we've got plenty of traitors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 13Sisters76

Giving the New York Times and the Washington Post a pass on printing government classified secrets is an indictment of our government, not these lousy papers.


6 posted on 09/30/2006 6:52:36 AM PDT by hgro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 13Sisters76

I hope the article makes sense. One question, though: does successful prosecution depend on whether the War on Terror is a "declared war", or does it fall under the confused title, "undeclared war" (like Vietnam). If it were a "declared war" it would seem that ... a) Pres Bush could easily declare Marshal Law, or even selected parts thereof; b) suspend habeus corpus, particularly to enemy combatants; c) prosecute treason with no problem. But since it is an "undeclared war" the lefties might have an excuse to block anything the Pres attempts.
These are my uninformed musings. Any informed opinion out there?


7 posted on 09/30/2006 7:03:06 AM PDT by Anselma (Democrats care more (than they think).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 13Sisters76

An interesting article but it's all academic if the government fears political repercussions more than risks to national security.


9 posted on 09/30/2006 7:19:56 AM PDT by RedRover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 13Sisters76

Interesting article, but a complete waste of time. Bush and the rest of the (R)s don't have the stones to stand up to Democrats and call them what they are - traitors. Remember the "new tone?"

Nothing to see here - move on.


11 posted on 09/30/2006 7:25:08 AM PDT by GianniV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SuzyQue

Bookmark.


13 posted on 09/30/2006 7:45:17 AM PDT by SuzyQue (Remember to think.)
[ 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