|Re: Public Wants Court to Okay Wiretaps|
|Phil Earnhardt (firstname.lastname@example.org)|
10 Jan 2006 17:01:22 -0800
On 10 Jan 2006 07:43:29 -0800, email@example.com wrote:|
>> And no mention that Hoover's FBI, with the approval of JFK, RFK and LBJ
> Dad, its not so bad that I broke the window. Billy broke a bigger
> Bad behavior is bad behavior.
A conjecture is a conjecture.
> It should not be condoned because someone else did it.
The "it" in that sentence doesn't antecede very well!
You shouted below; I'll shout here: there is NO COMPARISON between
> It should be condemned because its WRONG!
Actually, it should be condemned IF it is wrong. AFAICT, this is more
> We don't need to rehash Democratic wrongs when discussing Republican
> Any reason that you didn't include the gross abuses of power by
As already noted, the ACLU has already attempted to paint this issue
Is there any reason that there's almost no public debate about this
Instead of creating "news" -- contracting for self-serving polls that
Why is there no mention in AP articles of the history of FISA: what it
|Post Followup Article||Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply|
|Go to Next message: Canadian Press News Wire: "Canadian Auditor Concerned Citizens' Information Leaked to U.S."|
|Go to Previous message: Justa Lurker: "Re: History of Hayes Modem"|
|May be in reply to: Katherine Shrader: "Public Wants Court to Okay Wiretaps"|
|Next in thread: firstname.lastname@example.org: "Re: Public Wants Court to Okay Wiretaps"|
|TELECOM Digest: Home Page|