Click here for AnswerPool.com Home page


Google

    AnswerPool.com  Hop To Forum Categories  News & Reference  Hop To Forums  Current Events    How to Tell Your Civil (and Constitutional) Rights Are in Danger

Moderators: Koz
Go
Post
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
Site
Administrator
Picture of DorianGreyed
Posted
The Director of the FBI has to be called in to help John Ashcroft fight off the bush Administration.

Note: A friend from trivia contests told me last night that he lived in New York while Comey was Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. He said that Comey was a very hard-nosed prosecutor who really went after people who lied during investigations, regardless of their position or influence. I found a quote of his about the Martha Stewart case, in which he was the driving force:

"This criminal case is about lying - lying to the F.B.I., lying to the S.E.C., lying to investors.

It's no wonder he resigned his position as Deputy Attorney General of the US. The wonder is why he accepted the position (in late 2003) in the first place. (His resignation came in April 2005, after just a little more than a year on the job.)
 
Posts: 17210 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
Your civil right is endangered by warrantless surveillance.

501. Surveillance without warrant (8/8/07)

The honorable Senator
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator

I'm writing you to oppose the newly passed law (Passed in Senate on Aug. 3, signed by Bush on Aug. 5) which gives government expanded surveillance authority without court approval.

I urge you to re-consider the law because of the following reason:

1. The proposed bill is a violation of the Constitution and an affront to our civil rights as US citizens. It especially damaged the Fourth Amendment which protecting people from unreasonable search and arrest.

It's easy for coruptive police to manipulate a "terrorist suspect" to e-mail, or dialogue in an internet forum, to frame innocent people. (In Miame terror cell case of 2006, a FBI informant had instructed the cell member to attack FBI office ).

2. There is no reason to say old FISA rule doesn't work. Under which the government can do eavesdropping any time when it requires. Even if it's in emergence, they can wiretap first and submit an application to court later. Nothing hinder their surveillance work.

A surveillance without warrant means a blank check to the secret police. It opens the door to a fascist country.

3. Surveillance not only means eavesdropping, it also means harassment. FBI, DEA are notorious for abusing power. They harass, plant and frame case. There is lack of a surveillance on these so said "law enforcement". The new law gives them further more room for abusing power. It is an attack on the principle of Check and Balance.

4. A negative side of this law from my personal experience. I posted a lot in internet web forum. I used to reveal the dark side of the government, especially about the law enforcement. I suffered continuous harassment from the Feds cyberspace team. Recently I was blocked from three web sites. (two of them are media's web site)

(1) On Aug. 1, blocked to enter "http://p067.ezboard.com/fdenverpostnewsfrm9 " by technical problem.
(2) On Aug. 4, banned to enter "http://forum.signonsandiego.com/upload/index.php?"
(3) On Aug. 5, banned to enter "http://forums.shoutwire.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=7"

Since my posting were all of political opinion, there was no reason to ban me accessing the site. The ban is so thorough that I couldn't complain nor read. I allege it was from surveillance team not from the web site. I think it was done when Feds (FBI, DEA) has been inspired and encouraged by the would passing new surveillance law.

In conclusion, I urge you to re-consider the new intelligence surveillance law, at least do some amendment to limit the unrestricted power of law enforcement. I also urge you to investigate the abusing in internet communication caused by the Feds (FBI, DEA). (see below)

Sincerely

Kat Hak Sung

--------------


http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campai...p?campaign_KEY=12293
 
Posts: 211 | Location: San Jose | Registered: 12-11-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
The dissenter silenced by assassination.

Pat Tillman killed for anti-war?

This is a dark country. They kill to silence dissenters.
Quote, "Were War Critic Soldiers Killed To Send Message?

Two soldiers who wrote op-ed that contradicted Patraeus report die in strange accident, while another is shot in the head in case that bears chilling resemblance to Pat Tillman story

September 14, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

The mother of a soldier who died in an apparent vehicle accident shortly after writing a New York Times op-ed critical of the war in Iraq is demanding to know the truth about what happened to her son, while another author of the piece was also shot in the head in a case that bears a sinister resemblance to the murder of Pat Tillman.

Like Tillman, 28-year-old Sergeant Omar Mora enlisted shortly after 9/11 in the belief that he was fighting to protect his country from terrorists.

However, after the invasion of Iraq Mora became increasingly skeptical of the true agenda behind the war and in August he, along with six other active duty soldiers of the 82nd Airborne Division, wrote a stinging New York Times op-ed that slammed the occupation as "flawed," "absurd," and concluded that the sentiment of the Iraqi people renders the ultimate withdrawal of American troops inevitable.

The op-ed directly contradicts the foundation of the Patraeus report and characterizes the occupation as doomed to failure if the Bush administration's current policy is continued.

Just over three weeks after the op-ed was published, two of its authors, Mora and Sgt. Yance T. Gray, were killed in an apparent vehicle accident when their truck veered off an elevated highway in western Baghdad and fell about 30 feet, the military said.

Was this a simple accident or another Pat Tillman style cover-up? Was a message being sent to other soldiers who are considering speaking out against the war that dissent has deadly consequences?

Even if we are to dismiss the truck wreck as nothing more than an accident, another factor that has received next to no press attention should send red flags up for everyone.

A third author of the letter was also shot in the head in a separate incident during the time when the op-ed was being written. Though Staff Sgt. Jeremy Murphy survived and is expected to make a full recovery, the fact that three of the seven authors of the op-ed were either killed or received life-threatening injuries shortly before and after the publication of the piece is highly suspicious.

Sergeant Mora's mother certainly has questions - and is now demanding the Army provide a full account of the circumstances that led to her son's death.

After the op-ed was published Mora became depressed and wanted to return home. "He told me, 'Mama, I am tired, I am so tired. I want to come home,' " his mother, Olga Capetillo, recalled of a recent phone conversation," reports the Houston Chronicle .

As we reported in July , the revelation of astounding new details surrounding the death of Pat Tillman clearly indicated that top brass decided to execute the former pro football star in cold blood to prevent him from returning home and becoming an anti-war icon.

Medical examiners concluded that the Army Ranger was shot with an M-16 three times in the head from a mere 10 yards away. The close proximity of the bullet holes raised suspicions that foul play was involved but attempts to launch a proper investigation were stymied by higher-ups and a cover-up ensued.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/iraq/war_critic_soldie..._to_send_message.htm
 
Posts: 211 | Location: San Jose | Registered: 12-11-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Site
Administrator
Picture of DorianGreyed
Posted Hide Post
Of all your whacked out ideas, this one is actually offensive. These men put their lives on the line because their country asked them to. While anything you say can't really cheapen what they did, I find your attempts to use them like this disgraceful.
 
Posts: 17210 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Diamond
Enthusiast

Picture of Scotty
Posted Hide Post
quote:
It must be a full moon

Is there any truth to the idea that all the crazies come out during a full moon?


My mom is a nurse, and for years she has claimed she knew whether or not it was a full moon just by how crazy the patients were
acting. When patients start acting nutty, (once a gentleman threw himself down the stairs in an attempt to "escape," and another was found using the sink as a toilet--both in one day) she often says, "It must be a full moon." Come sundown, she's usually right.


REF.

Anyone notice the beautiful "full moon" last night?
 
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DorianGreyed:
Of all your whacked out ideas, this one is actually offensive. These men put their lives on the line because their country asked them to. While anything you say can't really cheapen what they did, I find your attempts to use them like this disgraceful.


I sympathize with those soldiers whom put their lives on the line for the interest of Bush group, though they are cheated that they are for the country. I find your attempt to cover up the evil will of this inside group. You use same tactic of Bush group to propaganda. Try to deceive innocent people to be gun fodder for the Inside group. When soldiers found it was unjust war, they were murdered. And in your propaganda, the victim of assassination became hero to encorage others. When the truth were revealed, you accuse truth seekers "disgraceful".

As a matter of fact, most soldiers are disgust with this war.

Re: Military support Ron Paul

Military support for the republican candidates
Percentages**:

49.5% Ron Paul
34.6% McCain
7.0% Romney
4.6% Giuliani
2.0% Hunter
2.3% Others

*Note: These statistics include the contributions of employees who recorded or indicated their military branch. Contributions where no employer was specified were naturally not included.

**Edit: McCain and Ron Paul have USMC contributions which were overlooked. Their totals have been corrected. (7/17/07)
Update: Ron Paul leads ALL presidential candidates in monetary military contributions

.
 
Posts: 211 | Location: San Jose | Registered: 12-11-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Site
Administrator
Picture of DorianGreyed
Posted Hide Post
Hey Scotty! I'm a shill for bush! I bet you did know that! (is it a paying job?)

Kath, you were closer to the truth when you had the government poisoning your water. Roll Eyes
 
Posts: 17210 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Diamond
Enthusiast

Picture of Scotty
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Hey Scotty! I'm a shill for bush! I bet you did know that! (is it a paying job?)


I think it is.
 
Posts: 3165 | Location: From the Mountains to the Sea. | Registered: 06-08-02Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Diamond
Enthusiast

Picture of Lighteningrodd
Posted Hide Post
Democrats seem ready to extend wiretap powers...


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/washington/09nsa.html?th&emc=th
 
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community  
 

    AnswerPool.com  Hop To Forum Categories  News & Reference  Hop To Forums  Current Events    How to Tell Your Civil (and Constitutional) Rights Are in Danger

© 2002-2008 AnswerPool.com



Visit DiscussionPool.com!