RE: U.S. Government Lawyer Defends Wiretapping Program

["StyleWar" <stylewar () cox net>]

I think my point was that it might be easier to obtain a nuke within the
next 5 years....and at that point, it's no more outrageous or 'sensational'
than the 9/11 plan was before it happened.

In essence - we ought to stop calling a nuclear terrorist threat
sensational... it isn't, and if you think it is now, you ought to wake up
and smell the coffee brewing in Tehran.

-

StyleWar

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to 
have for lunch. LIBERTY is a well-armed lamb contesting 
the vote!" 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drsolly [mailto:drsollyp () drsolly com] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 6:05 AM
> To: StyleWar
> Cc: 'Richard M. Smith'; funsec () linuxbox org
> Subject: RE: [funsec] U.S. Government Lawyer Defends 
> Wiretapping Program
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, StyleWar wrote:
>
> > A nuke in the states isn't any more far fetched than 3 fully loaded 
> > passenger jets putting the Pentagon into flames and collapsing both 
> > world trade center towers was in the year 2000.
>
> Flying jets into buildings, requires some flying lessons, 20 
> aline tickets and a few box cutters.
>
> Acquiring a nuke is a lot more difficult than buying airline tickets.
>
>  
> > Especially when one considers the context of present-day 
> Iran, which 
> > has publicly addressed the United States as The Great 
> Satan. They are 
> > actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, and will be there 
> during the 
> > next President's term...The only questions are:
> >
> > 1. How would they keep the planning of it secret, while 
> coordinating 
> > delivery?
> > &
> > 2. Which port would they put it into?
> >
> > The answer to question number one has EVERYTHING to do with the NSA 
> > telephone monitoring program...
>
>   ... unless people avoid using the phone for this stuff.
>
> > and although I'm absolutely confident of my minority status on this 
> > list, I'm sad to see it being hung out to dry.
> >
> > -
> >
> > StyleWar
> >
> >                   "Do big things"
> >   
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org
> > > [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On Behalf Of Richard M. Smith
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 10:06 AM
> > > To: funsec () linuxbox org
> > > Subject: RE: [funsec] U.S. Government Lawyer Defends Wiretapping 
> > > Program
> > >
> > > Tony can be contacted here at this email address:  
> > > tony.coppolino () usdoj gov
> > >
> > > A terrorist nuke sounds pretty far fetched to me.  I also 
> don't know 
> > > what it has to do with the current NSA telephone monitoring 
> > > programs.
> > >
> > > However, I'm curious about Tony's views on how the U.S. 
> > > government would handle an anonymous tip that a nuke had been 
> > > smuggled into DC and no one had a clue if the tip was true or not.
> > >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org
> > > [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On Behalf Of Fergie
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 11:42 PM
> > > To: funsec () linuxbox org
> > > Subject: [funsec] U.S. Government Lawyer Defends 
> Wiretapping Program
> > > Via The Boston Globe (AP).
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > A government lawyer used a dramatic scenario of a nuclear 
> attack on 
> > > Washington to illustrate his arguments Tuesday in defense of 
> > > President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program.
> > >
> > > Anthony Coppolino, a special litigation counsel based in 
> Washington, 
> > > said the Constitution gives Bush the right as commander 
> in chief to 
> > > do what is necessary to surveil terrorists and stop them from 
> > > attacking the United States, including interrogating someone who 
> > > might have information about an imminent attack.
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > More:
> > > http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/09/05/wiretap_
> > > program_justif
> > > ied_lawyer_says/
> > >
> > > p.s. Just as you would expect an attorney for the U.S. to do
> > > -- dramatize the situation to get a point across. YMMV. :-)
> > >
> > > - ferg
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
> > >  Engineering Architecture for the Internet 
> fergdawg(at)netzero.net  
> > > ferg's tech blog:
> > > http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> > > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> > > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> > > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> > > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.


_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.