Thread: Police State New Law= Uniting and Strengthening America ....

I was browsing the internet and came to this old article about the Patriot Act, maybe somebody else might be curious about it ,( as I was) and have never had the opportunity to read it .

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/policeState.html

Police State
by Kelly Patricia O'Meara
19 November 2001
Insight on the News


If the United States is at war against terrorism to preserve freedom, a new coalition of conservatives and liberals is asking, why is it doing so by wholesale abrogation of civil liberties? They cite the Halloween-week passage of the antiterrorism bill -- a new law that carries the almost preposterously gimmicky title: "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" (USA PATRIOT Act). Critics both left and right are saying it not only strips Americans of fundamental rights but does little or nothing to secure the nation from terrorist attacks.

Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, one of only three Republican lawmakers to buck the House leadership and the Bush administration to vote against this legislation, is outraged not only by what is contained in the antiterrorism bill but also by the effort to stigmatize opponents. Paul tells Insight, "The insult is to call this a `patriot bill' and suggest I'm not patriotic because I insisted upon finding out what is in it and voting no. I thought it was undermining the Constitution, so I didn't vote for it -- and therefore I'm somehow not a patriot. That's insulting."

Paul confirms rumors circulating in Washington that this sweeping new law, with serious implications for each and every American, was not made available to members of Congress for review before the vote. "It's my understanding the bill wasn't printed before the vote -- at least I couldn't get it. They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote."

And why would that be? "This is a very bad bill," explains Paul, "and I think the people who voted for it knew it and that's why they said, `Well, we know it's bad, but we need it under these conditions.'" Meanwhile, efforts to obtain copies of the new law were stonewalled even by the committee that wrote it.

What is so bad about the new law? "Generally," says Paul, "the worst part of this so-called antiterrorism bill is the increased ability of the federal government to commit surveillance on all of us without proper search warrants." He is referring to Section 213 (Authority for Delaying Notice of the Execution of a Warrant), also known as the "sneak-and-peek" provision, which effectively allows police to avoid giving prior warning when searches of personal property are conducted. Before the USA PATRIOT Act, the government had to obtain a warrant and give notice to the person whose property was to be searched. With one vote by Congress and the sweep of the president's pen, say critics, the right of every American fully to be protected under the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures was abrogated.

The Fourth Amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which is joining with conservatives as critics of the legislation, the rationale for the Fourth Amendment protection always has been to provide the person targeted for search with the opportunity to "point out irregularities in the warrant, such as the fact that the police may be at the wrong address or that the warrant is limited to a search of a stolen car, so the police have no authority to be looking into dresser drawers." Likely bad scenarios involving the midnight knock at the door are not hard to imagine.

Paul, a strict constructionist (see Picture Profile, Sept. 3), has a pretty good idea of what Americans may anticipate. "I don't like the sneak-and-peek provision because you have to ask yourself what happens if the person is home, doesn't know that law enforcement is coming to search his home, hasn't a clue as to who's coming in unannounced ) and he shoots them. This law clearly authorizes illegal search and seizure, and anyone who thinks of this as antiterrorism needs to consider its application to every American citizen."

The only independent in the House, Rep. Bernie Sanders from Vermont, couldn't support the bill for similar reasons: "I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and I'm concerned that voting for this legislation fundamentally violates that oath. And the contents of the legislation have not been subjected to serious hearings or searching examination."

Nadine Strossen, president of the ACLU and professor of law at New York University, tells Insight, "The sneak-and-peek provision is just one that will be challenged in the courts. We're not only talking about the sanctity of the home, but this includes searches of offices and other places. It is a violation of the Fourth Amendment and poses tremendous problems with due process. By not notifying someone about a search, they don't have the opportunity to raise a constitutional challenge to the search."

Even before the ink on the president's signature had dried, the FBI began to take advantage of the new search-and-seizure provisions. A handful of companies have reported visits from federal agents demanding private business records. C.L. "Butch" Otter (R-Idaho), another of the three GOP lawmakers who found the legislation unconstitutional, says he knew this provision would be a problem. "Section 215 authorizes the FBI to acquire any business records whatsoever by order of a secret U.S. court. The recipient of such a search order is forbidden from telling any person that he has received such a request. This is a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech and the Fourth Amendment protection of private property."

Otter added that "some of these provisions place more power in the hands of law enforcement than our Founding Fathers could have dreamt and severely compromises the civil liberties of law-abiding Americans. This bill, while crafted with good intentions, is rife with constitutional infringements I could not support."

Like most who actually have read and analyzed the new law, Strossen disagrees with several provisions not only because they appear to her to be unconstitutional but also because the sweeping changes it codifies have little or nothing to do with fighting terrorism. "There is no connection," insists Strossen, "between the Sept. 11 attacks and what is in this legislation. Most of the provisions relate not just to terrorist crimes but to criminal activity generally. This happened, too, with the 1996 antiterrorism legislation where most of the surveillance laws have been used for drug enforcement, gambling and prostitution."

"I like to refer to this legislation," continues Strossen, "as the `so-called antiterrorism law,' because on its face the provisions are written to deal with any crime, and the definition of terrorism under the new law is so severely broad that it applies far beyond what most people think of as terrorism." A similar propensity of governments to slide down the slippery slope recently was reported in England by The Guardian newspaper. Under a law passed last year by the British Parliament, investigators can get information from Internet-service providers about their subscribers without a warrant. Supposedly an antiterrorist measure, the British law will be applied to minor crimes, tax collection and public-health purposes.

Under the USA PATRIOT Act in this country, Section 802 defines domestic terrorism as engaging in "activity that involves acts dangerous to human life that violate the laws of the United States or any state and appear to be intended: (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping."

The ACLU has posted on its Website, www.aclu.org, a comprehensive list of the provisions and summarizes the increased powers for federal spying. The following are a sample of some of the changes as a result of the so-called USA PATRIOT Act. The legislation:


minimizes judicial supervision of federal telephone and Internet surveillance by law-enforcement authorities.


expands the ability of the government to conduct secret searches.


gives the attorney general and the secretary of state the power to designate domestic groups as terrorist organizations and deport any noncitizen who belongs to them.


grants the FBI broad access to sensitive business records about individuals without having to show evidence of a crime.


leads to large-scale investigations of American citizens for "intelligence" purposes.

More specifically, Section 203 (Authority to Share Criminal Investigative Information) allows information gathered in criminal proceedings to be shared with intelligence agencies, including but not limited to the CIA -- in effect, say critics, creating a political secret police. No court order is necessary for law enforcement to provide untested information gleaned from otherwise secret grand-jury proceedings, and the information is not limited to the person being investigated.

Furthermore, this section allows law enforcement to share intercepted telephone and Internet conversations with intelligence agencies. No court order is necessary to authorize the sharing of this information, and the CIA is not prohibited from giving this information to foreign-intelligence operations -- in effect, say critics, creating an international political secret police.

According to Strossen, "The concern here is about the third branch of government. One of the overarching problems that pervades so many of these provisions is reduction of the role of judicial oversight. The executive branch is running roughshod over both of the other branches of government. I find it very bothersome that the government is going to have more widespread access to e-mail and Websites and that information can be shared with other law-enforcement and even intelligence agencies. So, again, we're going to have the CIA in the business of spying on Americans -- something that certainly hasn't gone on since the 1970s."

Strossen is referring to the illegal investigations of thousands of Americans under Operation CHAOS, spying carried out by the CIA and National Security Agency against U.S. activists and opponents of the war in Southeast Asia.

Nor do the invasion-of-privacy provisions of the new law end with law enforcement illegally searching homes and offices, say critics. Under Section 216 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Modification of Authorities Relating to Use of Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices), investigators freely can obtain access to "dialing, routing and signaling information." While the bill provides no definition of "dialing, routing and signaling information," the ACLU says this means they even would "apply law-enforcement efforts to determine what Websites a person visits." The police need only certify the information they are in search of is "relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation."

This does not meet probable-cause standards -- that a crime has occurred, is occurring or will occur. Furthermore, regardless of whether a judge believes the request is without merit, the order must be given to the requesting law-enforcement agency, a veritable rubber stamp and potential carte blanche for fishing exhibitions.

Additionally, under Section 216, law enforcement now will have unbridled access to Internet communications. The contents of e-mail messages are supposed to be separated from the e-mail addresses, which presumably is what interests law enforcement. To conduct this process of separation, however, Congress is relying on the FBI to separate the content from the addresses and disregard the communications.

In other words, the presumption is that law enforcement is only interested in who is being communicated with and not what is said, which critics say is unlikely. Citing political implications they note this is the same FBI that during the Clinton administration could not adequately explain how hundreds of personal FBI files of Clinton political opponents found their way from the FBI to the Clinton White House.

And these are just a few of the provisions and problems. While critics doubt it will help in the tracking of would-be terrorists, the certainty is that homes and places of business will be searched without prior notice. And telephone and Internet communications will be recorded and shared among law-enforcement and intelligence agencies, all in the name of making America safe from terrorism.

Strossen understands the desire of lawmakers to respond forcefully to the Sept. 11 attacks but complains that this is more of the same old same old. "Government has the tendency," she explains, "to want to proliferate during times of crisis, and that's why we have to constantly fight against it. It's a natural impulse and, in many ways, I don't fault it. In some ways they're just doing their job by aggressively seeking as much law-enforcement power as possible, but that's why we have checks and balances in our system of government, and that's why I'm upset that Congress just rolled and played dead on this one."

Paul agrees: "This legislation wouldn't have made any difference in stopping the Sept. 11 attacks," he says. "Therefore, giving up our freedoms to get more security when they can't prove it will do so makes no sense. I seriously believe this is a violation of our liberties. After all, a lot of this stuff in the bill has to do with finances, search warrants and arrests."

For the most part, continues Paul, "our rights have been eroded as much by our courts as they have been by Congress. Whether it's Congress being willing to give up its prerogatives on just about everything to deliver them to an administration that develops new and bigger agencies, or whether it's the courts, there's not enough wariness of the slippery slope and insufficient respect and love of liberty."

What does Paul believe the nation's Founding Fathers would think of this law? "Our forefathers would think it's time for a revolution. This is why they revolted in the first place." Says Paul with a laugh, "They revolted against much more mild oppression."




Kelly Patricia O'Meara is an investigative reporter for Insight.

This legislation wouldn't have made any difference in stopping the Sept. 11 attacks,"

Wrong, and the immigration laws enforced to the letter of the law would have as well.

(9/11) would have never happen if we would have already had the USA PATRIOT Act and laws like it. And it’s a proven fact that if we were enforcing this and other laws like it. We wouldn’t be fighting so hard against criminal aliens. Immigration crimes would be as small of an issue, as someone feeding a parking meter. If a person surely thinks with out good resin there rights are being violated as a result of the new laws on terror, maybe they are hiding something or someone that is hurting the future of Americas protection….

Hind sight is always 20/20, but cold bloodedness to criminals needs no glasses!

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

This legislation wouldn't have made any difference in stopping the Sept. 11 attacks,"

Wrong, and the immigration laws enforced to the letter of the law would have as well.

(9/11) would have never happen if we would have already had the USA PATRIOT Act and laws like it. And it’s a proven fact that if we were enforcing this and other laws like it. We wouldn’t be fighting so hard against criminal aliens. Immigration crimes would be as small of an issue, as someone feeding a parking meter. If a person surely thinks with out good resin there rights are being violated as a result of the new laws on terror, maybe they are hiding something or someone that is hurting the future of Americas protection….

Hind sight is always 20/20, but cold bloodedness to criminals needs no glasses!

Existing immigration law has NOTHING to do with the PATRIOT Act. Furthermore, I am reminded of the words of a wise American when I consider the surrender of liberties implicit in the disastrous PATRIOT Act:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

If a person surely thinks with out good resin(sic) there(sic) rights are being violated as a result of the new laws on terror, maybe they are hiding something or someone that is hurting the future of Americas protection….

Greg,

Do you really believe this tripe you've written?? You've equated the preservation of our inalienable rights with having something to hide. Just because I don't want Big Brother's nose up my arse doesn't mean I have something to hide.

These kinds of statements only show how shallow your thinking really is.

I've post that article because I think it is interessting and many people as myself didn't had the oppotunitty to read it.
I also think it has nothing to do with the illegals once is completely directed against citizens and doesn't say a word about illegals.
It really seams that it was a conspiracy how to deprive the people from their "Bill of Rights".
Yesterday I fond also a DVD named "Under Siege
Does Anybidy know this DVD ?
Here the link
http://www.policestate21.com/undersiege.html

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

If a person surely thinks with out good resin(sic) there(sic) rights are being violated as a result of the new laws on terror, maybe they are hiding something or someone that is hurting the future of Americas protection….

Greg,

Do you really believe this tripe you've written?? You've equated the preservation of our inalienable rights with having something to hide. Just because I don't want Big Brother's nose up my arse doesn't mean I have something to hide.

These kinds of statements only show how shallow your thinking really is.

Do you really believe this tripe you've written?? You've equated the preservation of our inalienable rights with having something to hide. Just because I don't want Big Brother's nose up my arse doesn't mean I have something to hide.

tribe no, fact for sure t the Act has already has proven to us that people we normaly wouldnt think are hiding stuff are.

It was early when i read the story but i belive what I said and stand by it, I dont want uncle Sam down my back either and If im not mistaken some of the admin. to the act apply directly to immigration laws of today . and some of the past ones as well. The whole act is about the size of a small book . and i dont rcall all of it but
and is why I said what I did
The USA PATRIOT Act (officially the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act) was quickly developed as anti-terrorism legislation in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks. The large and complex law received little Congressional oversight and debate, and was signed into law by President Bush Oct. 26, 2001.

Now maybe I’m wrong and know I don’t want uncle sam down my back either, but the two are highly related. Highly applying to each other criminal aliens are named in about ten places off the top of my head and about 50 other indirecty

but i did say it would have stoped 9/11 and i think it would still today right, wrong or indiffernt.

The actual size and the origin of the illegal immigrant population in the United States is uncertain and hard to ascertain because of difficulty in accurately counting individuals in this population. National surveys, administrative data and other sources of information provide inaccurate measures of the size of the illegal immigrant population and current estimates based on this data indicate that the current population may range from 7 million to 20 million..
According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, Mexicans make up 57 percent of the undocumented immigrants. Another 24 percent are from other Latin American countries. Approximately 9 percent are from Asia, 6 percent from Europe and Canada, with the remaining 4 percent from the rest of the world
According to a Time magazine report (dated Sept 12, 2004),"They turn the land to a vast latrine, leaving behind revolting mounds of personal refuse. They steal vehicles. They poison dogs to quiet them."
In addition to the obvious damage done to fragile deserts by hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens tramping through them [citation needed] are many other significant negative environmental impacts of expanded population. According to the Negative Population Growth organization, the use of increasingly scarce resources like, tax money, schools, uncrowned roads, land, water supplies, fisheries, forests, minerals and energy supplies and increased pollution all endanger or reduce the quality of the environment

.
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director for the Center for Immigration Studies, testified in a hearing before the House of Representatives "out of the 48 al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes here between 1993 and 2001, 12 of them were illegal aliens when they committed their crimes, 7 of them were visa overstayers, including 2 of the conspirators in the first World Trade Center attack, one of the figures from the New York subway bomb plot, and 4 of the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, even a couple other terrorists who were not illegal when they committed their crimes had been visa overstayers earlier and had either applied for asylum or finagled a fake marriage to launder their status."[56] Vice Chair Lee Hamilton and Commissioner Slade Gorton of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has stated that "Two hijackers could have been denied admission at the port on entry based on violations of immigration rules governing terms of admission. Three hijackers violated the immigration laws after entry, one by failing to enroll in school as declared, and two by overstay of their terms of admission.
Ahmed Ressam (a member of Al Qaeda, known as "The Millennium Bomber", who was convicted and given a prison sentence of 22 years in a plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport on New Year's Eve 1999) was originally from Algeria, entered Canada with a falsified French passport and, once in Canada, procured a false Canadian passport to enter the United States. Now directly or in directly the two tie together.
SEC. 312. SPECIAL DUE DILIGENCE FOR CORRESPONDENT ACCOUNTS AND PRIVATE BANKING ACCOUNTS.
SEC. 326. VERIFICATION OF IDENTIFICATION.
SEC. 416. FOREIGN STUDENT MONITORING PROGRAM.
SEC. 422. EXTENSION OF FILING OR REENTRY DEADLINES
SEC. 351. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO REPORTING OF SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITIES. just to name a few.


Im glad im not a lawyer because i dont like to read stuff like this but a whole bunch of stuff that pertains to the boarders and a bunch of other adminments on the immigration laws of today and the past . its way to long to post here .


but agian know I think our phones at home are safe but its good to know if we need this we have it.

but its good to know if we need this we have it

I wonder how many Germans felt this way as the "law and order party" of National Socialism began drafting its "sensible" legislation in 1930s Germany?

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

[quote

The actual size and the origin of the illegal immigrant population in the United States is uncertain and hard to ascertain because of difficulty in accurately counting individuals in this population. National surveys, administrative data and other sources of information provide inaccurate measures of the size of the illegal immigrant population and current estimates based on this data indicate that the current population may range from 7 million to 20 million..
According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, Mexicans make up 57 percent of the undocumented immigrants. Another 24 percent are from other Latin American countries. Approximately 9 percent are from Asia, 6 percent from Europe and Canada, with the remaining 4 percent from the rest of the world
According to a Time magazine report (dated Sept 12, 2004),"They turn the land to a vast latrine, leaving behind revolting mounds of personal refuse. They steal vehicles. They poison dogs to quiet them."
In addition to the obvious damage done to fragile deserts by hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens tramping through them [citation needed] are many other significant negative environmental impacts of expanded population. According to the Negative Population Growth organization, the use of increasingly scarce resources like, tax money, schools, uncrowned roads, land, water supplies, fisheries, forests, minerals and energy supplies and increased pollution all endanger or reduce the quality of the environment

.
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director for the Center for Immigration Studies, testified in a hearing before the House of Representatives "out of the 48 al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes here between 1993 and 2001, 12 of them were illegal aliens when they committed their crimes, 7 of them were visa overstayers, including 2 of the conspirators in the first World Trade Center attack, one of the figures from the New York subway bomb plot, and 4 of the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, even a couple other terrorists who were not illegal when they committed their crimes had been visa overstayers earlier and had either applied for asylum or finagled a fake marriage to launder their status."[56] Vice Chair Lee Hamilton and Commissioner Slade Gorton of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has stated that "Two hijackers could have been denied admission at the port on entry based on violations of immigration rules governing terms of admission. Three hijackers violated the immigration laws after entry, one by failing to enroll in school as declared, and two by overstay of their terms of admission.
Ahmed Ressam (a member of Al Qaeda, known as "The Millennium Bomber", who was convicted and given a prison sentence of 22 years in a plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport on New Year's Eve 1999) was originally from Algeria, entered Canada with a falsified French passport and, once in Canada, procured a false Canadian passport to enter the United States. Now directly or in directly the two tie together.
SEC. 312. SPECIAL DUE DILIGENCE FOR CORRESPONDENT ACCOUNTS AND PRIVATE BANKING ACCOUNTS.
SEC. 326. VERIFICATION OF IDENTIFICATION.
SEC. 416. FOREIGN STUDENT MONITORING PROGRAM.
SEC. 422. EXTENSION OF FILING OR REENTRY DEADLINES
SEC. 351. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO REPORTING OF SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITIES. just to name a few.


Im glad im not a lawyer because i dont like to read stuff like this but a whole bunch of stuff that pertains to the boarders and a bunch of other adminments on the immigration laws of today and the past . its way to long to post here .


but agian know I think our phones at home are safe but its good to know if we need this we have it.

Sorry Greg, but I don't understand .

maybe, I'm the one in the wrong on this one, Ill just stop and go back and reread the story one more time, and see if Im out of line. or just out in left field

Originally Posted by minnie

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

[quote

The actual size and the origin of the illegal immigrant population in the United States is uncertain and hard to ascertain because of difficulty in accurately counting individuals in this population. National surveys, administrative data and other sources of information provide inaccurate measures of the size of the illegal immigrant population and current estimates based on this data indicate that the current population may range from 7 million to 20 million..
According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, Mexicans make up 57 percent of the undocumented immigrants. Another 24 percent are from other Latin American countries. Approximately 9 percent are from Asia, 6 percent from Europe and Canada, with the remaining 4 percent from the rest of the world
According to a Time magazine report (dated Sept 12, 2004),"They turn the land to a vast latrine, leaving behind revolting mounds of personal refuse. They steal vehicles. They poison dogs to quiet them."
In addition to the obvious damage done to fragile deserts by hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens tramping through them [citation needed] are many other significant negative environmental impacts of expanded population. According to the Negative Population Growth organization, the use of increasingly scarce resources like, tax money, schools, uncrowned roads, land, water supplies, fisheries, forests, minerals and energy supplies and increased pollution all endanger or reduce the quality of the environment

.
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director for the Center for Immigration Studies, testified in a hearing before the House of Representatives "out of the 48 al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes here between 1993 and 2001, 12 of them were illegal aliens when they committed their crimes, 7 of them were visa overstayers, including 2 of the conspirators in the first World Trade Center attack, one of the figures from the New York subway bomb plot, and 4 of the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, even a couple other terrorists who were not illegal when they committed their crimes had been visa overstayers earlier and had either applied for asylum or finagled a fake marriage to launder their status."[56] Vice Chair Lee Hamilton and Commissioner Slade Gorton of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has stated that "Two hijackers could have been denied admission at the port on entry based on violations of immigration rules governing terms of admission. Three hijackers violated the immigration laws after entry, one by failing to enroll in school as declared, and two by overstay of their terms of admission.
Ahmed Ressam (a member of Al Qaeda, known as "The Millennium Bomber", who was convicted and given a prison sentence of 22 years in a plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport on New Year's Eve 1999) was originally from Algeria, entered Canada with a falsified French passport and, once in Canada, procured a false Canadian passport to enter the United States. Now directly or in directly the two tie together.
SEC. 312. SPECIAL DUE DILIGENCE FOR CORRESPONDENT ACCOUNTS AND PRIVATE BANKING ACCOUNTS.
SEC. 326. VERIFICATION OF IDENTIFICATION.
SEC. 416. FOREIGN STUDENT MONITORING PROGRAM.
SEC. 422. EXTENSION OF FILING OR REENTRY DEADLINES
SEC. 351. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO REPORTING OF SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITIES. just to name a few.


Im glad im not a lawyer because i dont like to read stuff like this but a whole bunch of stuff that pertains to the boarders and a bunch of other adminments on the immigration laws of today and the past . its way to long to post here .


but agian know I think our phones at home are safe but its good to know if we need this we have it.

Sorry Greg, but I don't understand .

Mabey with all the hollaobaloo over my reply I could be the one that doesnt understand.