indicted

I was not arguing gworlds opinion, I was trying to show a point to you that part of what he said, the part about a CIA leak could be considered 'domestic terrorism' as you've stated before you didn't believe the patriot act could be used for anything but terrorism.

I was not backing him up in the least on what Libby was charged with, you however by your own post appeared to be stating that even the charge of a cia leak could be considered under the patriot act in that instance, as you did not debate that the charge was false.

My entire point if you read my arguments was based off of the 'cia leak' itself, not lying under oath the charge that came out. Maybe it's possible we both read each another wrong, I was simply trying to show a non terror related instance could be used with the patriot act.

Do you disagree that leaking an undercover cia agent 'could' be used under the wording of domestic terrorism?

 

Oh, I thought you were talking about lying under oath on the previous page?

Read my previous point. It stands, as is. Though you've tried several approaches, it's just not disputable.

 

I brought it up stating that was not the issues I was using?

So in other words you refuse to dispute what all of my posts have been about, and refuse to answer the question? I'll leave it at that as it's obvious it's hopeless to get you to look at what I'm trying to say

 

Your posts have been about a hypothetical. In an effort to refute what I posted. Since Libby was accused of lying to reporters, my post stands as it is and is entirely correct and validated with the source I provided.

You could also contend I would be wrong, "IF" Libby had been charged with frying chicken in front of the White House and serving it to terrorists. But it's still a hypothetical.

 

Yes Libby was not charged with anything but lying under oath, I did not even attempt to dispute that, I had hoped you could see what I was trying to say, and multiple times I tried to show by stating over and over a CIA leak, 'if' being actually charged with it of which you continued to try to dispute?

So then again you wont answer the question? Do you see how a CIA leak could use the domestic terror clause?

 

Nope, I sure don't. "If" Libby had gone to Pakistan for some training and was arrested coming back to the country in a plot to carry out a dirty bomb attack, then yes. "If" Libby had given information to terrorists directly, then yes. If Libby was caught with an al qaida card that said "kill the infidels, I pledge my allegiance to osama," then yes. We can speculate on "ifs" all day long. The quote I used was quite specific:

I think it's far fetched. Doesn't discount some fool might try it, but then it's all hypothetical and simply doesn't refute anything I posted.

 

None of these things that you mentioned is in the text of patriot act and that is the reason it so dangerous because it can as easily be used for what it was not intended.

 

on a side note

patriot act used against strip club owners

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/probe/20031104-0835-nv-corruptionprobe.html

 

ferret;

Have you seen the size of "you know what" on some of those strippers? I am sure they can be classified as weapon of mass destruction. One of those hit me in the eye couple of weeks ago and almost made me blind.