Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (165638)	6/2/2002 3:41:21 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

RE:"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evilminded rulers.The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal well meaning but without understanding." JUSTICE LOUIS D. BRANDEIS"... Sounds really great. Much like a democratic liberal rallying call. Now, who's liberty are we protecting here. The right of some dude from the middle east to enter the country and blow us up? These terrorists and the rest of the middle east for the most part, are focused. They are at war and the hate. The US still seems to want to dance around on political correct table tops. Do you really think they really care about Louis Brandeis? Jim

To: Road Walker who wrote (165638)	6/3/2002 3:27:27 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

OT Hi John, RE: "The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by persons of zeal well meaning but without understanding." I like that quote. In history, we learned about the McCarthy list and how some innocent people were targeted, but there really wasn't too much information on what specifically happened to people on the list. (What did happen to people on the list?) CNN had an article quoting a Republican that said the FBI was spying on Martin Luther King back when the rules for spying were too loose. Basically, the Republican implied a person with an opinion different from the majority, could have been at risk of being spied upon, back in the old days. That's a bit of a damper on freedom of speech for those that aren't strongly-enough opinioned. But the real problem seems to be more related to an operational problem within the FBI, rather than the laws. Handing reports up to HDQTRs where it just sits, or doesn't get logged into some type of system wide computer for field agents to review if needed, doesn't sound very effective. Though, not giving the MN FBI field agent a search warrant could be more of a legal issue than an FBI issue, since courts handle search warrants. [Edit: Michael Gat's next post indicates FBI HDQTRs, not the courts, turned down the request for the search warrant.] The media doesn't explain why the search warrant wasn't given. To me, that's the most important issue because it would point to whether the laws need to be changed or not. [Edit: Is the issue only that the field offices aren't empowered to process search warrants through the courts? Or, did FBI HDQTRs turn down the request for the search warrant because they felt the court system would turn it down?] Regards, Amy J