"Pan Ohco" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:00:53 GMT, blake murphy >
> wrote:
>
> >>I seem to remember a lot of Dems condemning listening to the
> >>conversations of terrorist.
> >>>
> >
> >you seem to remember a lot of things that aren't true. they objected
> >to listening to american citizens *without getting a warrant*, which
> >is required by the constitution, and could be obtained with about as
> >much effort as going to the post office. here's a clue: rush
> >limbaugh is not the best source of information on this or any other
> >topic.
> >
> So if an american is talking to a terrorist, you can only listen to
> the terrorist side?
>

Bush had ALL the power he needed to monitor ANY call he wanted to - but he
had to go through the legal process of informing a FISA judge. He even
could monitor the call and then had 72 hours to tell the judge. What he did
was to do it completely OUTSIDE of the law. Why? Well obviously he knew
that even the FISA court would deny his request because he wanted to do it
in complete secrecy. Even today they refuse to release details of whose
calls they listened in on and have ignored judges rulings on the matter. It
was a blatant and flagrant violation of the Constitution and the existing
FISA laws.

> Oh by the way, I haven't listen to Rush in about 15 years.

Sure, sure. Funny thing about Limbaugh's listernership - they almost always
deny listinening to him.

> Personal attacks lessen the impact of your statements.

Rush Limbaugh will one day be a synonym for idiot. Even more so than he is
now.

Paul