On Nov 3, 4:19*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:48:11 -0800, "nom=de=plume"





wrote:
wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 01:20:49 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

I can see you, but you cannot see me. *Clear as Scotch tape!

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/decla...9/10/26/barack....

I think the reason Obama is stopping the "wiretap" investigations is
that there are valid national security issues at stake.
We stand around and bitch that Bush should have stopped Atta and the
boys and then criticize the way he could have stopped them.
NSA has always "wiretapped" and they always will. That is their job.
If they are not busting you for your affair with the girl in the
office or that bag of grass you arranged to pick up at the Tastee
Freeze, why do you care?
The reality is they were only looking at international calls to
countries with terrorist ties anyway, if you can believe the official
line. I have seen the bug Clinton put in every telephone office (at
least while it was in the box) and I bet they hear more than that if
they want. It is capable of sniffing every packet that goes in or
out..

Actually, they were listening to far more conversations and many of them
were inside the US. It's pretty well documented. I think Obama made a
mistake by stopping the investigations.

Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cite?

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800, Loogypicker wrote:


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cite?


http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...or_giving.html

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800, Loogypicker wrote:


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cite?


http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...or_giving.html

Jesus Loogie. This is getting pretty bad. Almost everything you have
said today has been proven absolutely wrong, time to take off the
partisan blinders and admit it... Nothing wrong with learning you are
wrong, the problem comes when you are afraid to admit and accept it, and
move on...


--
Wafa free again.

Tosk wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800, Loogypicker wrote:


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Cite?

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...or_giving.html

Jesus Loogie. This is getting pretty bad. Almost everything you have
said today has been proven absolutely wrong, time to take off the
partisan blinders and admit it... Nothing wrong with learning you are
wrong, the problem comes when you are afraid to admit and accept it, and
move on...



Uh, if you were to read the article posted, there was NO BUGGING. It was
a friggin' CONFERENCE call. Yes, it IS getting bad.

thunder wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800, Loogypicker wrote:


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Cite?


http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...or_giving.html


Exactly!!! I was a CONFERENCE call......nothing was "bugged".

wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Cite?
Were you in a cave in 1996 or just in denial.

Try "Martin" "Gingrich" "Cell phone"

I notice the Huffington report has taken down their article (where
Ariana was shocked) as has the DoJ

Once again. There was NO "bugging". IT WAS A CONFERENCE CALL.......get it?

On Nov 5, 12:16*am, wrote:
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:02:27 -0500, NotNow wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Cite?
Were you in a cave in 1996 or just in denial.

Try "Martin" "Gingrich" "Cell phone"

I notice the Huffington report has taken down their article (where
Ariana was shocked) as has the DoJ

Once again. There was NO "bugging". IT WAS A CONFERENCE CALL.......get it?

It was a private conference call between a few participants not a
PUBLIC conference call. They han an expectation of privacy
If you set up a conference call between several family members to talk
about a private issue, would you think it was OK if it showed on the
internet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes! If people are stupid enough to think that a phone call is secure,
that's their problem.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 06:47:39 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

Once again. There was NO "bugging". IT WAS A CONFERENCE CALL.......get
it?

It was a private conference call between a few participants not a
PUBLIC conference call. They han an expectation of privacy
If you set up a conference call between several family members to talk
about a private issue, would you think it was OK if it showed on the
internet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes! If people are stupid enough to think that a phone call is secure,
that's their problem.


So what is all the uproar about NSA then?
You can't have it both ways.
At least nobody ever said NASA was tapping your phone and making the
transcripts public.

Personally I never considered phones secure. I saw transcripts of my
phone conversations when I was a teenager ... from an illegal RFK/DoJ
tap.


If they can get a warrant, then they should be able to tap anyone's phone.
The FISA court will and has issued warrants after the fact of the tap.

--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 06:47:39 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

Once again. There was NO "bugging". IT WAS A CONFERENCE CALL.......get it?

It was a private conference call between a few participants not a
PUBLIC conference call. They han an expectation of privacy
If you set up a conference call between several family members to talk
about a private issue, would you think it was OK if it showed on the
internet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes! If people are stupid enough to think that a phone call is secure,
that's their problem.


So what is all the uproar about NSA then?
You can't have it both ways.
At least nobody ever said NASA was tapping your phone and making the
transcripts public.

Personally I never considered phones secure. I saw transcripts of my
phone conversations when I was a teenager ... from an illegal RFK/DoJ
tap.

Who were you calling?

On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 23:49:03 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:54:12 -0500, BAR wrote:

Personally I never considered phones secure. I saw transcripts of my
phone conversations when I was a teenager ... from an illegal RFK/DoJ
tap.

Who were you calling?

My girlfriend. They had our home phone tapped because my mother was on
Hoffa's legal team. Even if the tap was not egregious enough, how
about lawyer client privilege?

Awesome!