Author Topic: US judge rules wiretaps illegal  (Read 4620 times)

Offline ujustdied

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #45 on: August 17, 2006, 10:14:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Eagler
another liberal judge trying to get her name in the news ...


lmao i was about to say the samething. except i was going to say another liberal judge trying to take over america.

Offline ujustdied

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #46 on: August 17, 2006, 10:16:25 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
9/11

9/11 would never have happened in the first place had our government agencies simply ENFORCED the laws that were already on the books.

And they could have done so wiithout anyone giving up a single one of their liberties.

9/11 was the preventable attack ever

Over 1,000 lives lost because people didnt do their jobs.
Now your willing ot give up your liberties for what?
So they will fail to do their jobs correctly again?
And they will fail

Sure they can take your liberties. Cant stop hardly a damn person from sneaking across the boarder but they sure as hell can take your liberties.



so like uhhhhh you tell us Mr. president how could they have prevented 9/11.

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #47 on: August 17, 2006, 10:24:47 PM »
Question: the 'people of Middle Eastern extraction' that we keep finding buying masses of cell phones--- the obvious intent here is: use the phone...1-2 calls, throw it away. (They have bought over a THOUSAND that we KNOW about) Following current wiretap rules, I don't believe we will be able to legally eavesdrop on any terrorist cells using this method inside our country..., be they citizen of foreigner....does that bother anyone?
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline Edbert1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
      • http://www.edbert.net
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #48 on: August 17, 2006, 10:43:54 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by ujustdied
so like uhhhhh you tell us Mr. president how could they have prevented 9/11.
Dred is able to speak for himself, and quite eloquently I must say. But I took this to mean that the terrorists were all guilty of haven broken multiple laws, any one of which was grounds for their arrest, IF we ever decide to enforce laws already on the books. Enforcing existing laws would obviate the need for new laws in many instances.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #49 on: August 17, 2006, 11:18:36 PM »
As this ruling clearly points out, she clearly does not support the troops! :rolleyes:
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #50 on: August 17, 2006, 11:52:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
the judge apparently broke a lot of rules and ethics about picking up new cases, and the ethics on ruling on them.  I think there might be a good chance she's kicked out and disbarred.


Source?
sand

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #51 on: August 18, 2006, 12:30:57 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Edbert1
Dred is able to speak for himself, and quite eloquently I must say. But I took this to mean that the terrorists were all guilty of haven broken multiple laws, any one of which was grounds for their arrest, IF we ever decide to enforce laws already on the books. Enforcing existing laws would obviate the need for new laws in many instances.


Exactly

"Some of the vulnerabilities of the plotters become clear in retrospect. Moussaoui aroused suspicion for seeking fast-track training on how to pilot large jet airliners. He was arrested on August 16, 2001, for violations of immigration regulations. In late August, officials in the intelligence community realized that the terrorists spotted in Southeast Asia in January 2000 had arrived in the United States. "

"Nonetheless, there were specific points of vulnerability in the plot and opportunities to disrupt it. Operational failures-opportunities that were not or could not be exploited by the organizations and systems of that time-included

not watchlisting future hijackers Hazmi and Mihdhar, not trailing them after they traveled to Bangkok, and not informing the FBI about one future hijacker's U.S. visa or his companion's travel to the United States;
not sharing information linking individuals in the Cole attack to Mihdhar;
not taking adequate steps in time to find Mihdhar or Hazmi in the United States;
not linking the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui, described as interested in flight training for the purpose of using an airplane in a terrorist act, to the heightened indications of attack;
not discovering false statements on visa applications;
not recognizing passports manipulated in a fraudulent manner;
not expanding no-fly lists to include names from terrorist watchlists;
not searching airline passengers identified by the computer-based CAPPS screening system"

"Since the plotters were flexible and resourceful, we cannot know whether any single step or series of steps would have defeated them. What we can say with confidence is that none of the measures adopted by the U.S. government from 1998 to 2001 disturbed or even delayed the progress of the al Qaeda plot. Across the government, there were failures of imagination, policy, capabilities, and management"

"There were opportunities for intelligence and law enforcement to exploit al Qaeda's travel vulnerabilities. Considered collectively, the 9/11 hijackers

included known al Qaeda operatives who could have been watchlisted;
presented passports manipulated in a fraudulent manner;
presented passports with suspicious indicators of extremism;
made detectable false statements on visa applications;
made false statements to border officials to gain entry into the United States; and
violated immigration laws while in the United States"

Source- Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A Costly Lesson

One of most important lessons that the United States learned on 9/11 was that state and local law enforcement can be the difference between an unsuccessful terrorist plot and a devastating terrorist attack.

 

Five of the nineteen hijackers had violated federal immigration laws while they were in the United States. Amazingly, four of the five had actually been stopped by local police for speeding. All four terrorists could have been arrested if the police officers had asked the right questions and realized that they were illegal aliens."

"The cases of two of the 9/11 hijackers show just how critical a role state and local police can play.

 Lebanese terrorist Ziad Jarrah was at the flight controls of United Airlines Flight 93 when it crashed in rural Pennsylvania. Jarrah first entered the United States in June 2000 on a tourist visa. He immediately violated federal immigration law by taking classes at the Florida Flight Training Center in Venice, Florida—a violation because he never applied to change his immigration status from tourist to student. Jarrah was therefore detainable and removable from the United States almost from the moment he entered the country.Six months later, Jarrah committed his second immigration violation when he overstayed the period he was authorized to remain in the United States on his tourist visa"

Jarrah successfully avoided contact with state and local police for more than fourteen months. However, at 12:09 A.M. on September 9, 2001, just two days before the attack, he was clocked driving at 90 miles-per-hour in a 65-miles-per-hour zone on Highway 95 in Maryland, 12 miles south of the Delaware state line. He was traveling from Baltimore to Newark in order to rendezvous with the other members of his team.

 

The Maryland trooper did not know about Jarrah’s immigration violations. Had the officer asked a few questions or simply made a phone call to the federal government’s Law Enforcement Support Center (LESC), which operates around the clock from Williston, Vermont, he could have arrested Jarrah. Instead, the trooper issued Jarrah a $270 speeding ticket and let him go. The ticket would be found in the car’s glove compartment at Newark Airport two days later, left behind when Jarrah boarded Flight 93.

 

Saudi Arabian terrorist Nawaf al Hazmi was the second-in-command of the 9/11 attackers and a back-up pilot. He entered the United States on a tourist visa in January 2000 and rented an apartment, where he lived for more than a year, with fellow hijacker Khalid Almihdhar in San Diego. As with Jarrah, Hazmi’s period of authorized stay expired after six months—after July 14, 2000, Hazmi was in the United States illegally. In early 2001, Hazmi moved to Phoenix, Arizona, to join another 9/11 hijacker, Hani Hanjour.

 

On April 1, 2001, Hazmi was stopped for speeding in Oklahoma while traveling cross country with Hanjour. Had the officer asked Hazmi a few basic questions or asked to see Hazmi’s visa, he might have discovered that Hazmi was in violation of U.S. immigration law. Once again, the officer could have detained him but did not. The officer also had the authority to detain Hanjour, who had entered the country on a student visa but never showed up for classes.

 

All of the 9/11 hijackers’ encounters with local law enforcement were missed opportunities of tragic dimensions. If even one of the police officers had made an arrest, the terrorist plot might have been unraveled.

Source -The Heritage Foundation
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Edbert1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
      • http://www.edbert.net
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #52 on: August 18, 2006, 07:44:43 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
If even one of the police officers had made an arrest, the terrorist plot might have been unraveled.

I just want to add that I think we should avoid placing the blame on "police officers", and I'm not suggesting that is what Dred was doing. The blame for our contriy's inability/unwillingness to enforce laws already on the books lies at the feet of DAs, Grand Juries, Legistlators, and Judges, not the officers themselves; unless you are talking about federal LEOs who seem to operate outside of the bill of rights with impunity on a regular basis.


ETA: I just saw a sound clip from our illustrious AG, Herr Gonzalez; he said they've already apealed the decision (duh) and received a stay on the matter. He also said they need these abilities to keep the American people safe. This is from the same AG who refuses to enforce hundreds of laws regarding immigration, the same AG's office who is allowing two Border patrol agents in Texas to serve 20 years hard time for violating the rights of an admitted illegal alien drug smuggler (admitted by the government lawyer who prosecuted said LEOs using the testimony of the smuggler who was given immunity) . He is the kind of guy (the AG) that I feel we need protection from.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2006, 07:50:41 AM by Edbert1 »

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #53 on: August 18, 2006, 08:02:37 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Edbert1
I just want to add that I think we should avoid placing the blame on "police officers", and I'm not suggesting that is what Dred was doing. The blame for our contriy's inability/unwillingness to enforce laws already on the books lies at the feet of DAs, Grand Juries, Legistlators, and Judges, not the officers themselves; unless you are talking about federal LEOs who seem to operate outside of the bill of rights with impunity on a regular basis.


And Im not. It is our agiencies as a whole whom are to blame.

And I am not against wiretapping as a whole to help fight against terrorism.
What I am against is wiretapping without a Warrant

I can think of no excuse whatsoever. Why they shouldnt have to, or wouldnt be able to obtain a warrant.
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #54 on: August 18, 2006, 08:06:23 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Edbert1
.
ETA: I just saw a sound clip from our illustrious AG, Herr Gonzalez; he said they've already apealed the decision (duh) and received a stay on the matter. He also said they need these abilities to keep the American people safe. This is from the same AG who refuses to enforce hundreds of laws regarding immigration, the same AG's office who is allowing two Border patrol agents in Texas to serve 20 years hard time for violating the rights of an admitted illegal alien drug smuggler (admitted by the government lawyer who prosecuted said LEOs using the testimony of the smuggler who was given immunity) . He is the kind of guy (the AG) that I feel we need protection from.


There may be hope though

"But Taylor's opinion was so sweeping that congressional approval of the program would not address her concerns, said Richard Pildes, a professor at New York University School of Law.  

"The debate about this program has overwhelmingly been about whether Congress has to authorize it for it to be constitutional. But beyond holding that Congress does have to do so, this judge has suggested it would violate the Constitution even if Congress authorized it," Pildes said.  

"Until Congress actually addresses these questions, I would expect most appellate courts to be extremely reluctant to address many of the questions this judge was willing to weigh in on."
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18796
give me liberty or give me death!
« Reply #55 on: August 18, 2006, 08:15:33 AM »
I guess that bold statement didn't apply to their slaves of the time eh?
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #56 on: August 18, 2006, 08:30:11 AM »
Yeager, Toad.


I wasn't aware that the US President trying to see how much power he could steal and how many Constitutional rights he could erode was how the US was supposed to work.

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
Re: give me liberty or give me death!
« Reply #57 on: August 18, 2006, 08:35:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Eagler
I guess that bold statement didn't apply to their slaves of the time eh?


No it didnt.
But your statement is irrelevent in the topic at hand
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
US judge rules wiretaps illegal
« Reply #58 on: August 18, 2006, 08:42:57 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
Yeager, Toad.


I wasn't aware that the US President trying to see how much power he could steal and how many Constitutional rights he could erode was how the US was supposed to work.


From her ruling

"We must first note that the Office of the Chief Executive has itself been created, with its powers, by the Constitution," Taylor wrote. "There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."  


I agree.
Now I voted for Bush. Given the alternative I probably would vote for him again (lessor of two evils)

But he needs to realise he is president, NOT king.
Should we grant him unchecked all the powers he seems to think he is entitled to.
We might as well have Saddam in the whitehouse and do away with the consitution and congress, and the judiciary altogether
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18796
Re: Re: give me liberty or give me death!
« Reply #59 on: August 18, 2006, 08:54:55 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
No it didnt.
But your statement is irrelevent in the topic at hand


sure it does, Patrick Henry was a hypocrite yet everyone quotes him like its his way or no way

it isn’t the 1700’s and his famous line was flawed when he stated it way back then
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder