<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Victory for Islamofascist Cells!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:49:09 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Cobra</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63829</link>
		<dc:creator>Cobra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2005 00:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63829</guid>
		<description>LaShawn writes:

&gt;&gt;&gt;&quot;Hmmmâ€¦FBI files kept on ordinary Americans for political reasons versus monitoring communications between Islamofascists in light of the fact that we were attacked by Muslim terrorist infiltrators 4 short years ago, partly because we didnâ€™t rigorously keep tabs on suspected cells.&quot;

 But that&#039;s the precise problem here, LaShawn. We don&#039;t KNOW who the NSA was monitoring and why they were monitoring them because there was no warrant...no paper trial...no record. 
 If you&#039;re saying that a President should be able to act without oversight, especially in light of Clayton and PTM&#039;s revelations, then I don&#039;t know what to tell you.

--Cobra</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LaShawn writes:</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;&gt;&#8221;Hmmmâ€¦FBI files kept on ordinary Americans for political reasons versus monitoring communications between Islamofascists in light of the fact that we were attacked by Muslim terrorist infiltrators 4 short years ago, partly because we didnâ€™t rigorously keep tabs on suspected cells.&#8221;</p>
<p> But that&#8217;s the precise problem here, LaShawn. We don&#8217;t KNOW who the NSA was monitoring and why they were monitoring them because there was no warrant&#8230;no paper trial&#8230;no record.<br />
 If you&#8217;re saying that a President should be able to act without oversight, especially in light of Clayton and PTM&#8217;s revelations, then I don&#8217;t know what to tell you.</p>
<p>&#8211;Cobra</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ptm</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63744</link>
		<dc:creator>ptm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 23:39:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63744</guid>
		<description>Addendum - from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;EPIC&lt;/a&gt;, from 1979 to 2004 4 wiretap applications were rejected (all in 2003) and 18,700 were approved, for a rate of .02 percent.  (Sure am glad I remembered the number right the first time.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Addendum &#8211; from <a href="http://www.epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html" rel="nofollow">EPIC</a>, from 1979 to 2004 4 wiretap applications were rejected (all in 2003) and 18,700 were approved, for a rate of .02 percent.  (Sure am glad I remembered the number right the first time.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ptm</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63741</link>
		<dc:creator>ptm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 22:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63741</guid>
		<description>Clayton&#039;s pretty much right here.  Everything Bush has said he wants to do is already legal - the Administration just has to get a warrant from a FISA court.  It can even be done retroactively if time is short.  

Seeing as how the FISA courts have rejected something like .02 percent of warrants, that&#039;s not much of a hurdle.  Which makes you wonder why they aren&#039;t just getting the warrants - is it the principle that there should be no checks on a President&#039;s power, or are they doing stuff that they don&#039;t want even secret judges to know about, or would what they&#039;re doing fall under the unpermitted .02 percent, or what?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clayton&#8217;s pretty much right here.  Everything Bush has said he wants to do is already legal &#8211; the Administration just has to get a warrant from a FISA court.  It can even be done retroactively if time is short.  </p>
<p>Seeing as how the FISA courts have rejected something like .02 percent of warrants, that&#8217;s not much of a hurdle.  Which makes you wonder why they aren&#8217;t just getting the warrants &#8211; is it the principle that there should be no checks on a President&#8217;s power, or are they doing stuff that they don&#8217;t want even secret judges to know about, or would what they&#8217;re doing fall under the unpermitted .02 percent, or what?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aleira</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63729</link>
		<dc:creator>Aleira</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 15:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63729</guid>
		<description>Er, excuse me, but isn&#039;t the Pentagon now keeping files on just that, private citizens? For example, who has membership on churches that they deem a threat? And by &quot;threat&quot; I mean &quot;the Quakers&quot;? 
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1215/dailyUpdate.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Er, excuse me, but isn&#8217;t the Pentagon now keeping files on just that, private citizens? For example, who has membership on churches that they deem a threat? And by &#8220;threat&#8221; I mean &#8220;the Quakers&#8221;?<br />
<a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1215/dailyUpdate.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1215/dailyUpdate.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: All Things Beautiful</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63720</link>
		<dc:creator>All Things Beautiful</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 07:42:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63720</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;The President&#039;s Week From Hell&lt;/strong&gt;

I hate to say this, but are you waiting for another disaster to strike, just so that you can stop repeating how &quot;nothing has happened in the last four years&quot;? I suggest you thank God first and our President second for that, and not your pet Islamofas...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>The President&#8217;s Week From Hell</strong></p>
<p>I hate to say this, but are you waiting for another disaster to strike, just so that you can stop repeating how &#8220;nothing has happened in the last four years&#8221;? I suggest you thank God first and our President second for that, and not your pet Islamofas&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton Bigsby</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63717</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton Bigsby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 03:52:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63717</guid>
		<description>Once the warrant is granted it gives them the permission to retrieve anything they want that is stored electronically or otherwise. Which once again why it just boggles the mind on why they bypassed the FISA courts. Since terrorist are not stupid they already assumed we are listening.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Once the warrant is granted it gives them the permission to retrieve anything they want that is stored electronically or otherwise. Which once again why it just boggles the mind on why they bypassed the FISA courts. Since terrorist are not stupid they already assumed we are listening.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DarkStar</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63716</link>
		<dc:creator>DarkStar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 02:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63716</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;&lt;b&gt;once a FISA warrant is granted it can be applied retroactively.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/em&gt;

:-\</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em><b>once a FISA warrant is granted it can be applied retroactively.</b></em></p>
<p>:-\</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton Bigsby</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63713</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton Bigsby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 01:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63713</guid>
		<description>Not sure if it was unlawful. But, if you read how the FISA court is designed this seems like a massive abuse of power or The President received some of the worst advice possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not sure if it was unlawful. But, if you read how the FISA court is designed this seems like a massive abuse of power or The President received some of the worst advice possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mary</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63708</link>
		<dc:creator>mary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 23:42:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63708</guid>
		<description>Clayton, are you saying what they did was unlawful?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clayton, are you saying what they did was unlawful?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton Bigsby</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63706</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton Bigsby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63706</guid>
		<description>Well the real question is why did they not seek a warrant from the FISA court? Another small fact that seems to be ignored that court has only turned down on request in 30 years. But why let our system of checks and balances get in the way. Bet you did not know that once a FISA warrant is granted it can be applied retroactively. If people understood how they system worked they would be appalled at the abuse that occurred. I know this are just silly facts and minor details.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well the real question is why did they not seek a warrant from the FISA court? Another small fact that seems to be ignored that court has only turned down on request in 30 years. But why let our system of checks and balances get in the way. Bet you did not know that once a FISA warrant is granted it can be applied retroactively. If people understood how they system worked they would be appalled at the abuse that occurred. I know this are just silly facts and minor details.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: La Shawn</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63700</link>
		<dc:creator>La Shawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63700</guid>
		<description>Hmmm...FBI files kept on ordinary Americans for political reasons versus monitoring communications between Islamofascists in light of the fact that we were attacked by Muslim terrorist infiltrators 4 short years ago, partly because we didn&#039;t rigorously keep tabs on suspected cells.

Cobra, I allow your comments on this blog for their comedic value and your hopelessly unbalanced and undiscerning way of expressing yourself. You &quot;left wingers&quot; crack me up.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm&#8230;FBI files kept on ordinary Americans for political reasons versus monitoring communications between Islamofascists in light of the fact that we were attacked by Muslim terrorist infiltrators 4 short years ago, partly because we didn&#8217;t rigorously keep tabs on suspected cells.</p>
<p>Cobra, I allow your comments on this blog for their comedic value and your hopelessly unbalanced and undiscerning way of expressing yourself. You &#8220;left wingers&#8221; crack me up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cobra</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63696</link>
		<dc:creator>Cobra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63696</guid>
		<description>Aren&#039;t you right wingers the same guys who were howling over &quot;Filegate&quot;, when the Clinton White House allegedly had secret FBI files on people?

 I guess Civil Liberties matter depending on which party has control of White House.

--Cobra</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aren&#8217;t you right wingers the same guys who were howling over &#8220;Filegate&#8221;, when the Clinton White House allegedly had secret FBI files on people?</p>
<p> I guess Civil Liberties matter depending on which party has control of White House.</p>
<p>&#8211;Cobra</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mary</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63694</link>
		<dc:creator>mary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 15:46:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63694</guid>
		<description>If this is lawful, why the fuss?  I mean on both sides.  Why does the NYTimes present this as illegal?  Why is the President on the defensive?  And why the need for justifying it in the name of &#039;it saves lives&#039;?  

To me, that sounds like &#039;the end justifies the means.&#039;  But if it were lawful, you wouldn&#039;t need a justification, right?  

Is this it: what he did was unlawful, but he&#039;s justified?  

Or: what he did was legal under Executive powers, and all of this is just more Bush bashing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If this is lawful, why the fuss?  I mean on both sides.  Why does the NYTimes present this as illegal?  Why is the President on the defensive?  And why the need for justifying it in the name of &#8216;it saves lives&#8217;?  </p>
<p>To me, that sounds like &#8216;the end justifies the means.&#8217;  But if it were lawful, you wouldn&#8217;t need a justification, right?  </p>
<p>Is this it: what he did was unlawful, but he&#8217;s justified?  </p>
<p>Or: what he did was legal under Executive powers, and all of this is just more Bush bashing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DarkStar</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63686</link>
		<dc:creator>DarkStar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 01:16:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63686</guid>
		<description>It was an international call with one end point in the U.S. and another outside of the U.S. The legality of the eavesdropping depends on how it was targeted.

The law forbids the NSA from eavesdropping on U.S. citizens and U.S. concerns with the U.S. It also prohibits eavesdropping on U.S citizens and U.S. concerns overseas, without their consent.

Next, because there is a law against what the NSA can do against U.S. citizens, any president directing otherwise via executive order, bypassed a law. In other words, broke the law.

Whether or not other people were briefed is not material. 

Next, unfortunately, the Justice Department is a political department.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was an international call with one end point in the U.S. and another outside of the U.S. The legality of the eavesdropping depends on how it was targeted.</p>
<p>The law forbids the NSA from eavesdropping on U.S. citizens and U.S. concerns with the U.S. It also prohibits eavesdropping on U.S citizens and U.S. concerns overseas, without their consent.</p>
<p>Next, because there is a law against what the NSA can do against U.S. citizens, any president directing otherwise via executive order, bypassed a law. In other words, broke the law.</p>
<p>Whether or not other people were briefed is not material. </p>
<p>Next, unfortunately, the Justice Department is a political department.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/12/16/victory-for-islamofascist/comment-page-1/#comment-63684</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 19:08:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/?p=1706#comment-63684</guid>
		<description>&quot;Determined to undermine national security and leave Americans vulnerable to Muslim terrorist cells because they hate George Bush, Democrats in Congress decided that rejecting â€œthe Bush Administrationâ€™sâ€ Patriot Act is worth the gamble of another terrorist attack.&quot;

La Shawn, as you know, they hate a lot more people than George Bush. He&#039;s merely the lightning rod of the day on which to focus their hate. When they think about God -- if they think about God -- they hate &quot;bible thumpers&quot; like you just as much as they do &quot;W.&quot; This is just another skirmish in the cultural war at home, but one that drags in &quot;libertarians&quot; as temporary allies, due to their hatred of a strong federal government as a matter of &quot;principle.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Determined to undermine national security and leave Americans vulnerable to Muslim terrorist cells because they hate George Bush, Democrats in Congress decided that rejecting â€œthe Bush Administrationâ€™sâ€ Patriot Act is worth the gamble of another terrorist attack.&#8221;</p>
<p>La Shawn, as you know, they hate a lot more people than George Bush. He&#8217;s merely the lightning rod of the day on which to focus their hate. When they think about God &#8212; if they think about God &#8212; they hate &#8220;bible thumpers&#8221; like you just as much as they do &#8220;W.&#8221; This is just another skirmish in the cultural war at home, but one that drags in &#8220;libertarians&#8221; as temporary allies, due to their hatred of a strong federal government as a matter of &#8220;principle.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
