REP BARNEY FRANK DELAYING DOJ'S ANTI-TERRORIST NEEDS FOR ANOTHER WEEK!!!!

US HOUSE ^ | 09-24-01 | Registered

[Registered]

Barney Frank says WE CAN WAIT ANOTHER WEEK SO THEY CAN "WORK AS A COMMITTEE" TO CRAFT AN ANTI-TERRORIST BILL THAT ALL CAN LIVE WITH. CONCERNED ABOUT "RELEASE OF INFORMATION" being inappropriately disclosed. Probably worried about his own "exposures".

[verity]

Do not think anyone gives a crap about your private life!

[DAGO]

HE IS THE SHILL.If he opposes it,everyone else will love it!!! Reverse psychology.Its Ridicules! Is anyone listing to Dershowitz?That's the real worry he's talking about Expanding wire taps being GOOD things.Facial Recognition Being GOOD things.LISTEN UP SHEEPLE!!!! IN ONE SWOOP THE COMMUNIST WILL WIN OUR COUNTRY!!!!! JUST SAY NO TO THE NWO!!!!!!!!

[Loopy]

Look here: "http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_philosophy/dsa_members.htm". It used to be on the Democratic Socialists of the USA Website. It appears that they deleted their congressional information.

[MrConfettiMan]

Hint to Dick Armey: If you are going to mock someone for their name, please try not to be named after a battalion of phalluses.

ROTFLMAO!!!! Laz, that's just too funny.

[kcvl]

i'm confused.

Obviously!

he's protecting your constitutional rights, and you find this relivant HOW, exactly?

Where has he been for the last 10-20-30 years in PROTECTING our national security? After all that is his FIRST responsibility! I suppose he's been too 'busy' to bother with THAT! He's 'protecting our rights' unless, of course, it includes the ones he doesn't agree with.

[DAGO]

HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND?!!!!!

[Clemenza]

Uh, McStain, your pal Barney Fag may be right on ths issue, but he is still a Socialist. Look at his voting record.

[VoodooEconomist]

Before you go calling people liars, you'd better get your facts straight. There is a website for the American Socialist Congress ...

http://bernie.house.gov/pc/.

Bernie = Bernie Sanders (VT) - the only congresscritter with enough balls to label himself a Socialist ... and the only congresscritter with enough balls to host the Congressional Progressive Caucus website. Bawney Fwank is a member of CPC.

http://www.anticommunism.org/pyramid.html

[xzins]

I'm in favor of waiting. In fact, I'm in favor of a separate bill for each item rather than having a number of them rolled into an omnibus bill.

The important question on each new proposal is this: how can it be MISUSED at another time, another era, by a different group of leaders, or by an unscrupulous group of leaders? If that question isn't answered then I don't want ANYTHING to pass.

The weakness with the idea of letting a wire-tapping warrant be for an individual instead of a phone is that an unscrupulous agent could claim he had "reason to believe" his suspect was at just about any place in the world.

That means they could tap your phone tomorrow night.

[BigShinyPackard]

LOL!! Great pic! All it needs is a midi of "Dance of the SugarPlum Fairies".

[JmyBryan]

It is wise to take time crafting this bill - Frank is correct - regardless of what ideological label may be the most appropriate for him

[stevej]

Ashcroft et al want the ability to seize assets without a trial and to hold people in perpetuity without being charged.

I also believe the definition of "Terrorism" is very, very broad.

A larger crime than the destruction of the WTC is taking place in front of our eyes.

[DLfromthedesert]

Good!! Then we don't have to give them permission to get into our stuff, do we?

[CheneyChick]

Did you know the sky is falling?

[Common Tator]

To the Barney franks and Katie Courics who don't want us to kill any Afghanistan terrorists I ask the following.

Why don't we have a depressed Texas mom adopt all 28 million Afhganistan citizens?

IF she did would it then be OK to nuke them or would their new mom have to drown them all?

[Iwo Jima]

How low we have fallen when we the only people defending the Constitution are Barney Frank and John Conyers and their ilk.

Is it too much to ask before we gut the Constitution and the freedoms for which thousands of good American have fought and died, WHY? What is the problem which we are trying to solve? What are the deficiences which government would have us believe need to be remedied, and just how would these increased powers of governement, if they had existed prior to Sept. 11, have prevented any of the tragic events of that day?

It is false to say that existing law does not allow for the wiretapping of a phone line, as opposed to a person. Anyone who tells you that is either a fool or a liar (maybe both). Search warrants are issued all the time BASED ON PROBABLE CAUSE to believe that a person owning or using that phone line is engaged in an illegal act. GOVERNMENT CAN DO THAT NOW, so what is the real reason why government wants changes AND WHAT CHANGES DOES GOVERNMENT WANT and why (just give me the ostensible reason, I know real reason).
.
As to disposable phones, I do not know any way that those can be tapped. Someone will have to explain to me the technology and the practical means by which a disposable phone could be tapped.

So let's get specific: what will these new laws do that the old laws didn't and how will the new laws prevent or make less likely the events of Sept. 11.?

I have been sorely disappointed in John Ashcroft. I can see a scenario in which his actions do more to destroy this country than the terrorists could have ever hoped to do in their wildest dreams.

[Harmsway]

MMMM Barney would LOVE to get his lips aroung that tip.

[ChaseR]

"of course, frank is doing his job, and truly protecting the people of this country, but that seems to escape you."

I got news for ya enderwiggnz, filthy bastard Barney Frank - wasn't at serices last Thursday morning! That was horrendous.