READER COMMENTS ON
"BUSH 2004 VIDEO: 'A wiretap requires a court order'"
(72 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 3:18 pm PT...
To see the original that the poster took this from, the video is at CanOFun
He liked my hard work and compilation enough, apparently, to take it and modify it.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 3:38 pm PT...
Yes, and the minions who have been sent out to deceive Americans about this have shot themselves in the foot in about every way imaginable. Like they care.
I have mentioned the F.I.S.A. court in posts here in the past, and that I think they should be abolished because they are secret courts. We do not need secret courts. Regular courts can look at things in camera without the need for a secret court. Open and honest government is the only way to fly.
But even the secret courts were not good enough for the neoCons. They don't need no stinkin checks and balances, that is for "crooks" and "I'm not a crook". Well, heard that before. It was a lie then and its a lie now.
They claim to be technological whiz kids that can't wait for slow courts to give them tapola maxola phonola and other needless rights and therefore have to do it themselves where ever and when ever they care to.
Problem still gets back to them deciding who is an "enemy combatant" and who is a "terrorist". The people so far targeted in this great, secret, life saving, and evesdropping misadventure are quakers, green peace folk, and other peace niks.
Meanwhile this administration has let "Doctor Germ" and "Mrs. Anthrax", said to have been mad scientists making WMD in Iraq, go free (link here).
So quakers, green peace, peace niks, and other similar Americans are a danger to this administration but Doctor Germ and Mrs. Anthrax are not?
Our CIA agent Valerie Wilson working against the efforts of Doctor Germ and Mrs. Anthrax is outed so she can no longer protect Americans, but the administration lets WMD makers in Iraq go free?
Only the fascist faith of the neoCons can see this as sensible, as perhaps 56% of the soldiers are poisoned (link here).
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 3:46 pm PT...
It's really so simple. Just ask any republican Senator or Congressman who doesn't think Bush did anything wrong if he would pass legislation authorizing President Hillary Clinton to spy/eavesdrop on American citizens without obtaining a warrant.
Please Sean Hannity, just ask that question, okay?
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 4:09 pm PT...
If 9/11 could have been prevented using this technique, would you change history or let the people die.
The honest answer is you would let them die, because thats what at risk.
Be who you are libs! You cant have it both ways!
P.S. The terrorists thank you.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 4:17 pm PT...
Follow the Republican Math:
Person with any disagreement with the administration = Unpatriotic = Democratic = Liberal = Anti-war activist = Heathen = Immoral.......... So the rule is, do not disagree with this President.
All I know is that when Clinton messed up, only Monica swallowed, when Bush screws up, the whole world swallows. :crazy:
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
A Concerned Citizen
said on 12/20/2005 @ 4:22 pm PT...
Makes me want to cry. Our liberties and quality of life are fading away every single day, so fast, right before our eyes.
If they had a "legitimate" reason to wiretap anyone, Bush knew the courts would have backed him in a heartbeat after 9/11. He didn't need to go above/around/beyond the law. He shouldn't be allowed to have done it, or continue to do so, which we all know he will. So, the imagination can easily wander into thoughts of what other legal rights we have lost with this administration, the house, the whole bunch of them. Been sold out to the lobbiests and they now own us. Slavery of the working folks in the new century, by the rich. Their millions aren't enough, they want billions. Back to the words that keep running through my mind from the Declaration of Independence:
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
I sure don't feel safe and I can't afford to be happy any longer. The polls have shown we're now awake for sometime. Have we, the People, officially started this anywhere yet? Day after day after day after day we read more and more about illegal/stupid/dishonest things going on by Washington officials. They must ALL be in it together to some degree. Can't we clean them all out and start over with real people, by the people, for the people, of the people, with the people, etc.?
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 4:53 pm PT...
Yes Dredd, I would be curious just who was the object of this investigation. I am inclined it was not so much a terrorist, but as you say a peace-nik. And the names are?
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 4:56 pm PT...
Did I understand correctly ,they can tap any phone etc for up to 72 hours without court permission and if it "bears fruit" they apply for permission ?
Where's all the "fruit" ?
"If 9/11 could have been prevented using this technique, would you change history or let the people die." are you kidding or what ?
...Medium Right how many Israeli's died in the 911 attack ?
maybe they are also "tap" your phones ,yes ?
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 4:57 pm PT...
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 5:30 pm PT...
Medium Right, #4
I know you love rewriting history, but if a Presidential Daily Briefing titled "Bin Laden determined to strike within U.S.", or the 52 FAA warnins, or the data-mining operations of Able Danger couldn't prevent 9/11 - then neither would running around hysterically eavesdropping on American citizens in secret without a court order.
What other bullshit hypotheticals can you think up Medium? Should the government confiscate guns from every American citizen? Should the fingerprints and profiles of every citizen be kept in a federal database? Should we be required to show our papers at random checkpoints? All of those things would have prevented a 9/11, so in your government-loving security-obsessed mind we should! You can take your terrorist-sympathizing communist rhetoric to China, I hear they're not big on civil liberties there either...
Stop sucking on the teat of Big Government expecting them to keep you safe from the big bad brown people - they are not keeping you secure by stripping away your rights!
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 5:43 pm PT...
He broke the law, lied about it and said he will continue to break the law. This is a Constitutional crisis. Are there any honest Republicans remaining? A few of you voted against torture (although 111 voted for it). It is time for you to admit that those voting machines made a big mistake --- twice.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 6:12 pm PT...
"If 9/11 could have been prevented using this technique, would you change history or let the people die."
If 9/11 could have been prevented by choking every Muslim in their sleep, would you change history or let people die?
If 9/11 could have been prevented by shooting GHWBush and Ronald Reagan's parents so they would never have been born thereby ending the funding and training and support of the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan would you change history or let people die?
If 9/11 could have been prevented by going back in a time machine and taking them to the moon, thereby ending oil as an energy source millions (yes I said millions Kansans) of years before countries could exploit it, would you change history or let people die?
You get my drift...idiot.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 6:13 pm PT...
A friend of mine, a Republican who is sometimes a candidate for local office, said to me today that Dubya is not a Republican at all, that Republicans believe in small government. That got me thinking; if he's not a Republican, what is he? And then it hit me:
Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peaceů.
Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage....
Fascism denies, in democracy, the absurd conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility, and the myth of "happiness" and indefinite progress....
The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 6:23 pm PT...
What is most disturbing and devastating to me is the New York Times' role in delivering the presidency to Bush by withholding Bush's spying information for one year. I have been venting and railing against Diebold's former CEO O'Dell and Blackwell's complicity in illegally delivering the election 2004 in Ohio to Bush. Now I learn that a source I have trusted for so many years sold out, too. Why? Think about how our lives would be so different w/o Bush in power....no war in Iraq with over 2500 of our own precious children killed and God knows how many are truly maimed at this point b/c the numbers are always fuzzy in the Bush administration; consider the huge tax cuts for the country club set, while, at the same time there is the slashing and trashing of benefits to the economically disadvantaged; and now, because of the war, we owe our souls to the Chinese who are our biggest competitors and probably hate us, too, along with the rest of the globe. Think about it. We have been so screwed with Bush the King, Dictator or whatever title you choose. He is not our President.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 7:02 pm PT...
Years ago, I was told by my brother, an ex-marine during Vietnam, that Americans live in an illution of democracy. Our government is run by a few very rich persons/organizations that allow us to believe that we actually make a difference in voting. Back then I thought he was wrong. HOWEVER, I now feel he was on to something. I feel, though, that we can wake up and do something about it.
We must do something.........Thank Brad, Bradblog and all you out there......LETS' DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT....
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 7:05 pm PT...
There you go again with that "George Bush is eroding our civil liberties" stuff.
It is making the rounds now that Bill Clinton issues an executive order to allow physical searches (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-12949.htm) without a court order and Jimmy Carter issued an Executive Order to allow electronic monitoring without a court order (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm).
Following from a 1994 Washington Post Article
"Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes."
So, please quit your silly whining that George Bush, alone, is responsible for such things.
Now, would any of you care to condemn Clinton and Carter for doing the same thing.
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 7:29 pm PT...
......that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, & to institute new Government, laying it's Foundation on such Principles, & organizing it's Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety & Happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light & transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shown that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses & Usurpations pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty to throw off such Government, & to provide new Guards for their future Security. ~4th of July, 1776
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 7:57 pm PT...
b...b..but clinton did it!!!
I'm glad you bring up that talking point, NMH.
For his abuses of power, Clinton paid the price. So when Bush is made to pay his own price, and an inquiry of impeachment is submitted, I'm sure you will have no trouble getting behind it. After all... c..c..clinton was impeached!!!
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 8:02 pm PT...
that video has good info....but the way he did it bugs the hell out of me.. What kind of moron makes an annoying video like that....jesus...makes me sick just lookin at it alkl jerky and crap.
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 8:04 pm PT...
its embarassing when I want to share the video...because it sucks so bad.
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 8:05 pm PT...
TooMuch Hypocrisy -
If Clinton did actually break the law using an executive order, why was the best that Republicans "come up with" to impeach him on...the presidential pecker? While not defending his infidelity, I will say that it was not a matter of national security, and that he was badgered and backed into a corner over defending his marriage. Over an "issue" that was really nobody's business. This was a Republican controlled Congress, remember? Doncha think they'd want to send him up the river for this if they could? So why didn't they?
Because, once again, the best that you fuckwits can come up with...EVER...is Clinton did it too. It's so ultra-fucking-lame-O.
But! If Clinton or Carter did the same thing, yes I would condemn them. I am no Democrat lapdog (and neither are the many of us who want our democracy back, but you always manage to ignore that.)
The point is, we are here, now, witnessing our government act like the Gestapo, and our government turn into the fourth reich. It's happening, dipshit. It's actually really happening. And it's indefensible under our Constitution, period.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 8:14 pm PT...
IF clinton did it too, then by all means he should of been impeached also...YOU DON'T PLAY PARTISAN POLITICS WHEN IT COMES TO AMERICAN PRIVICY. Bush didn't report it because he was spying on anti-war activists and who knows else. Prob same with CLinton, we all know Clinton went ape shit and audited a whole crap load of republicans. (I stand by it, teehee) There is a silent war in politics between dems and cons.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 12/20/2005 @ 8:16 pm PT...
It's not the dems fault Bush got caught!!! LMAO
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 2:29 am PT...
yup, ship is sinking...all the republicans are jumping trying to save their own ass.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 4:12 am PT...
I agree Concerned Citizen. After Kerry's judus goat betrayal allowing the massacre at Fallujah and only God knows how many massacres since, it is hard to trust anyone in Congress.
But I signed Rep. Conyer's letter anyway and also signed petition (linked at Democratic Undergrounf) supporting Howard Dean's Freedom of Information Act on the spy documents to see why bush could not trust even the secret FISA courts.
Conyer's Action Items
Join me, below, in the sending: Letter Advising President of Censure and Steps to Begin Special Committee Investigation Every movement has a starting point. I believe this next effort to bring the administration to justice will have an even bigger impact and will lead to change. But I need help from all of you. I need a huge number of people to join me in our message of censure to the President. A big response will force greater news coverage of my legislation to censure the President and Vice President and to create a Special Committee to investigate the White House. The Downing Street petition had a huge number of signatories, but the mainstream media had not yet begun asking the difficult questions of the President.
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 5:29 am PT...
Concerning the issue of Carter and Clinton did it. I am on record saying equal application of laws to all, and that I would advocate equal sentences to prison for any president, past, present, or future who would operate outside the law as Bush is.
Second, there is no evidence that Carter or Clinton unleashed the NSA, an enterprise that was bigger than the CIA at all times material.
Only Bush has unleashed the NSA to spy on Americans. I find no evidence whatsoever that any president except Bush has unleashed such a massive spy organization on Americans.
Besides, the NSA has always been designed and operated only to spy on foreign agents, not American citizens. And Bush is first to order it to do the contrary.
It gives new meaning to his phrase "that part of the world" doesn't it. Now not only New Orleans gets the kiss of death, but the rest of us "from that part of the world" (America) do too.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 5:50 am PT...
You people are funny!
First, to Soul Rebel at 8:05. I didn't say Clinton and Carter broke the law. I just said they did it too, so it appears that Bush isn't the only President that thinks that such things are legal. At this point, I would have to say that congress simply needs to pass a law explicitly preventing such activity, then we don't have to worry about it, anymore from any President, current or future.
Dredd, drawing a line of distinction on which agency the President used is just plain silly and smacks of a desperate attempt to justify it from one President and condemn it from another.
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 6:03 am PT...
Next, get the video in which he states in his campaign, that he is against "nation building". That is absolutely true, he said it during the 2000 campaign.
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 6:09 am PT...
It still stings rightwingers, that there was a Democratic president for 8 years! Republicans think there should never be a Democrat president, like they have the "right" to it. Republicans and rightwingers are control freaks. Even though they are the minority, they want to control everything, like the media, because they think they are better than everyone else. And they have more money, so they SHOULD have the right to run everything. They think it's OK to steal elections, because there shouldn't be voting anyway. THEY should just be put in office.
Internet news stings them, because they aren't controlling dissenting opinions, like on TV & newspapers. Bush begged the NYTimes not to run the wiretap story. Let me spell it out for all you idiots out there: IF BUSH BEGGED THE NYTIMES TO SUPPRESS NEWS, HE'S BEEN DOING IT SUCCESSFULLY FOR 5 YEARS!!! DUH! That's reading between the lines. Do you think the wiretap story is the first time ever, the Bush administration approached the media to slant or suppress the news???
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 6:46 am PT...
A federal judge, on the bench for life, has just resigned in protest from the secret court:
"The action by U.S. District Judge James Robertson stemmed from deep concern that the surveillance program that Bush authorized was legally questionable and may have tainted the work of the court that Robertson resigned from, the newspaper said in Wednesday's editions." (link here).
You have no judgment nor common sense when you do not realize that tapping 1 phone is different in scope from tapping 3 million phones.
You qualified as a neoCon when you ignored my words then lied to indicate I advocate unequal application of penalties.
I specifically said "I am on record saying equal application of laws to all, and that I would advocate equal sentences to prison for any president".
Why do you neoCons give in to a compulsion to lie? The lie is not good for America nor Americans.
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 12/21/2005 @ 6:58 am PT...
The hypocrisy argument ("Other presidents have done it, so it's O.K.") has no standing in the law. Either Bush broke the law, or he didn't. If he did, he should be impeached and removed from office. If he didn't, he should not be. Whether Carter, Clinton, and possibly others did likewise is interesting to consider, but not relevant to the case for impeachment.
This isn't rocket science, folks. Imagine if a bank president embezzled money and got away with it. Further imagine that his successor at the bank also embezzled money, but was caught and indicted. Would his lawyer argue, "The previous president did it, so it must be legal."????? Would any judge allow such an argument? Would any juror be able to keep a straight face if it were allowed?
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 7:54 am PT...
If you knew the difference betweeen a wiretap and computer monitoring it might help you comprehend what the president is saying.
What part of war do you not understand?
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 7:57 am PT...
Oh and 32, after hearing Democrats say all weekend that this had never been done before it is hypocritical now to complain that well just because Clinton and Carter did it doesn't make it right.
By the way, Clinton and Carter were right to do so.
The president fulfilled his constitutional obligation as commander in chief. The FISA law allows this.
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 8:18 am PT...
Donsurber, I think you're listening to rightwing radio too much. Rush Lame-Boob, Bill O'LIEly, and Shaun "Let Freedom Ring" Hannity.
So, you would sacrifice your rights because it's a Republican president? That's OK. Drink some more Kool-Aid.
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 8:21 am PT...
O'Reilly's coming out with a new book just in time for Christmas. It's called, "How to give up your rights...FOR KIDS." Teach them young, to drink the rightwing Kool-Aid, or should I say "Kook-Aid". Don't fight for your rights, let the GOP tell you what your rights are, as an American citizen.
It's OK to break the law, because we're in a time of war. Gee, you're stupid!!!
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 8:27 am PT...
To all those saying Clinton did it - take a look at this
Yes he did wiretapping and spying - BUT he did it legaly and with the proper safegaurds in place!!
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 8:35 am PT...
donsurber #34 Sais:
"The president fulfilled his constitutional obligation as commander in chief. The FISA law allows this."
The FISA law requires that a warrant be issued for the wire tapping. It has an emergency provision wich allows a wire tap as long as a warrant is applied for within 72 hours of the tap.
Bush did not request the required warrants which is at the heart of the matter, not to mention that the taps are only to be used on communications to or from a foriegn country - not on communications within this country - see the link in my post at #37.
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
target of NSA
said on 12/21/2005 @ 9:16 am PT...
NSA has been spying on American citizens for decades. This has occured no matter which party was in control. Hearings in Congress, decades ago, confirmed this.
They never stopped and they don't care what the "little" people have to say about it. Any belief in their respect for the law is simply based on illusion not reality.
COMMENT #39 [Permalink]
Judge of Judges
said on 12/21/2005 @ 9:46 am PT...
G W when ya in the oval office all by yourself
nobody's watchin over ya, ya gut nothin ta do,
which is most if the time. Pleeeease DO NOT!
* Rollup the Constitution and snort coke with it.
* Wipe your ass with the Constitution.
* Use the Constituion to clean up after dreaming about BILL and Monica.
Maybe NASA is spinng on us ??????????????
COMMENT #40 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 10:33 am PT...
I can't divulge that cause it is classified
However, knowing this admin and that some of their campaign folk have been convicted of crimes having to do with throwing elections, I think the spying is on politicians who may be planning to run for office in '06.
If they can dig up info, and they can with the great power of the NSA turned on opponents, they can silence their opponents. Note that Senator Rockefeller is afraid to talk even to his fellow Senators. Wonder what "classified" information they showed him to make him clam totally up?
Who is next? All of them would be easy to watch if the NSA even barely cranks up.
COMMENT #41 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 10:40 am PT...
Hey Liberals, good luck!
Bush has done nothing wrong and it will be proven so.
You blamed him for not stopping 911 and your will blame him if we get hit again. You leftists will never be satisfied because all you want is impeachment.
#3 guy in Clinton's Justice department says Bush is consistent with court decisions and decisions under prior presidents. Go read the article and don't tell me you cannot find it!
THE LIBERAL MEDIA IS LYING, CENSORING, and PROPAGANDIZING.
You guys are lying!
Electronic surveillance is not an infringement on privacy.
Good luck nuts!
COMMENT #42 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 10:52 am PT...
Your are obviously unaware of American jurisprudence. I do not know what nation you claim citizenship from, but let me tell you a bit about the law of the country I love and am a life long citizen of.
American law, specifically "The FISA law" you mention, is a federal statute. Federal statutes are created by Congress. This law sets up a secret court specifically designed to deal with foreign spy incursions into America.
You state "his constitutional obligation as commander in chief. The FISA law allows this". I am sure you are parroting some neoCon or neoConvict talking point, because the statement is sensless.
The constitution came into existence hundreds of years before FISA. FISA cannot "allow" the constitution anything. The constitution may or may not allow FISA this or that. It is good for you to learn the tail from the dog ... so the proper one is wagging in your mind.
Finally, please show me where, by link, any definitive place that shows Carter or Clinton did what Bush did.
COMMENT #43 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 10:53 am PT...
Electronic surveillance is not an infringement on privacy.
I hear you man! Anything big Government says might help protect us is not only legal, but morally right.
What other rights, in your opinion, should we surrender to the state in the name of security against the brown people?
COMMENT #44 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 10:56 am PT...
RE: The NSA, this was a top secret agency that was 'outed' in the early '80's. Originally established in 1952 by Truman, it was America's newest and most secret agency. It was conceived in silence, no news coverage, no congressional debate, no press announcements. No statue established the NSA. (The CIA was established by Congress under the National Security Act of 1947.)
The NSA was free of legal restictions and had the capablility to monitor everything Americans did. The NSA was a carefully guarded secret for more than 30 years. I read about the NSA several years ago in the book "The Puzzle Palace" by James Bamford. FISA was finally signed into law in '78, to 'protect' Americans from being spyed on.
I am sure many are aware of this history but I think it is important to note that this agency has been around for a long time. What happened before '78 in anyones guess, what with Viet Nam, etc. I do not believe spying on Americans is anything new, given the absolute secrecy awarded this agency. I don't believe anything has been done to preserve our Democracy for a long time.
To those that come on this blog pointing fingers at the dems, may I point out one more time, many that post here are not party affilitated. I am here because I want my Country back. I am here because what the regime in power is doing, they are doing in my name. The corruption runs deep on both sides of the aisle. Many have stated this but I can only speak for myself. I have been following the corruption for 30 years. I believe our 'leaders' are puppets to a greater Master and it is not God as I understand him/her/whatever.
The corruption started when this Nation was founded and the design has always been to bring us to our knees. bushco is simply a tool to drive the final nail in our coffin. Our history is replete
with corruption, all branches of our Government. I will say to those that come here with their 'talking points' to do some investigating, then come back and show some inkling of intelligence. The Clinton/Carter did this or that is not an argument, only shows to me a complete lack of intellectual curiosity. Those that post such nonsense can live in their world, which I am sure is full of gadgets and rose colored glasses. M4
COMMENT #45 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 11:46 am PT...
This nice old Martin couple was driving around Florida and turned on their tape recorder in their car (we all have one in our car) and recorded a Newt conversation they picked up on their cell phone and sent the tape to McDermott!
McDermott sent the transcript to the NY Times.
You guys loved it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You guys are DHs!
COMMENT #46 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 11:49 am PT...
You are on the net meeting young boys. the government picks it up. I am ok with it. However, they will need a court order to come in your house and take your PC and arrest you, which they will.
You are on the net discussing killing someone - same scenario.
You are on the net discussing blowing yourself up for Allah, same scenario.
If you are not doing anything questionable on the net or on the phone, you have nothing to worry about!
Please, relax and go smoke a doobie!
COMMENT #47 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 12:30 pm PT...
I'm liking the way you think man. But I don't think your slippery slope is steep enough: we need to prosecute jaywalkers, parking violations, domestic abuse, and drug dealers under anti-terrorism statutes, using every apparatus of the National Security Agency. Kill 'em all, let Big Government sort them out.
COMMENT #48 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 12/21/2005 @ 12:32 pm PT...
If Clinton and Carter spied on people without a warrant, they should have been impeached. No question. Because you can't do that.
Because two presidents (allegedly) broke the law and got away with it, it's now argued that to avoid appearing hypocritical, we should let Bush break the law, too? If Reagan and/or Bush # 41 had done it also, would that have excused Clinton?
Sorry, trolls...your boy is going down over this. When you lose support of red-state conservative Republicans like Bob Barr and Lindsey Graham, you've lost your base.
COMMENT #49 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 12:53 pm PT...
COMMENT #50 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 12/21/2005 @ 1:04 pm PT...
For Donsurber: What part of war don't I understand? As Robert Browning once said, "Let me count the ways."
I don't understand why war hasn't been declared.
I don't understand what victory is in the war, or when we'll know that we've won.
I don't understand why we forgot about bin Laden and invaded Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11
I don't understand why you aren't fighting yourself, if you're a believer in the cause.
I don't understand why we've heard so many lies in defense of a supposedly noble effort.
I don't understand why Bush said spying requires a warrant, when he was just then doing the opposite.
I don't understand why you don't understand.
COMMENT #51 [Permalink]
Judge of Judges
said on 12/21/2005 @ 1:39 pm PT...
!!! DANGER !!! Will Robinson
Liberals that Post On Conservative BLOGs
* Liberal and anti-bush messages are removed
* They get your IP and Virus-Bomb your email
* Spoof you with your own Personal info (ebay)
How do they get this Data??? Homeland security ???
Are we now in the "Fascist States of America" ???
COMMENT #52 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 2:50 pm PT...
HEY BIG DAN!
Finally, somebody remembers what Bush said about nation building in the debates. It's true. I have the transcript. He said it twice in different debates.
I kept waiting for Kerry to show the video of the debates and then make political hay on nation building in Iraq, but, sigh, it never happened.
What's galling is that the United States has been doing nation building for centuries, starting with the Monroe Doctrine and as recently as the end of the Korean War and WWII. Bush's refusal to "engage in nation building" didn't end up as promised, with the difference being that we are nation building but doing it badly, because we weren't prepared for it.
COMMENT #53 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 3:00 pm PT...
Bush was given power by Congress in Oct 2001 to act in any way he saw fit to protect the country from terrorism. Wire tapping overseas calls from KNOWN AL QAEDA members fits that description. Jamie Gorelick testifed in 1994 that a president's conduct of foreign policy permits him to order wire taps without a court order when he feels it necessary. That was after the '93 WTC bombing. Why was it ok then and not now?
COMMENT #54 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 4:20 pm PT...
Jesus Christ! You and your Big Government apologists spread enough misinformation to fill a fucking encyclopedia!
I don't know how you can say that only "KNOWN AL QAEDA" members were surveilled, that is highly classified information. Please stop aiding and abetting the enemy, Cindi.
One of the few good things about our system here in the United States of America is that it is one based on laws, and those laws are passed through a deliberately complex process to protect the republic. For you and your ilk to defend lawlessness is anti-American, and trading civil liberty for security shows that you deserve neither.
This isn't Soviet Russia Cindi, no one was ever given absolute authority to do whatever the hell they want because it might some day sort of protect us from some thing.
COMMENT #55 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 4:43 pm PT...
I am with you bro ... I always thought that the charter of NSA was foreign spying only. Just asking bro.
All I have to do is take your word??? See the Dredd Thread baby!!
Your link is disingenuous. Your logic too. I explained that elswhere.
RLM # 50
You said "Bush was given power by Congress in Oct 2001 to act in any way he saw fit to protect the country from terrorism" ...
Does that include BJ's
COMMENT #56 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 6:14 pm PT...
Link and logic are disengenuous, but somehow you have a better handle on it than Clinton's asst. Attorney General?
I suspect that the only reason that you answered with such an empty statement is the emptiness of your argument.
COMMENT #57 [Permalink]
Judge of Judges
said on 12/21/2005 @ 7:17 pm PT...
Let me make one thing Perfectly CLEAR
george bush et al is Philthy Fucking Piece of Shit
no ONE incident draws me to this conclusion...
COMMENT #58 [Permalink]
said on 12/21/2005 @ 8:25 pm PT...
# 50 - Robert --- I don't understand either, unless it is the inability to think things through and the boundless capacity ignore inconvenient facts and demonstrable lies.
Now, call me picky --- (Sorry, I was once a book editor and can't change my ways.) It was Mrs. Browning who said, "let me count the ways...".
COMMENT #59 [Permalink]
said on 12/22/2005 @ 7:09 am PT...
Excerpt from Article:
"In 1994, President Clinton expanded the use of warrantless searches to entirely domestic situations with no foreign intelligence value whatsoever. In a radio address promoting a crime-fighting bill, Mr. Clinton discussed a new policy to conduct warrantless searches in highly violent public housing projects. "
COMMENT #60 [Permalink]
Judge of Judges
said on 12/22/2005 @ 8:32 am PT...
Then Why did G W Coward, Bully, Cheerleader, Drunk
have to Coverup and lie about the details ?
COMMENT #61 [Permalink]
said on 12/22/2005 @ 8:52 am PT...
Because it was a SECRET PROGRAM TO FIND TERRORIST!
Perhaps you would have preferred that they announce, "Mr. / Ms. Terrorist, we are listening in to try to find you, and here is how we are doing it."
Give the terrorists enough information to hide? Are you nuts?
The real problem is not what George Bush did. He didn't do anything differently than Clinton (well, probably less intrusive than Clinton considering Clinton authorized warrantless searches of impoverished Americans). No, the real problem is that some liberal, terrorist sympathizer (somebody that you probably call a patriot) tipped our hand to the terrorists and told them exactly how we were trying to find them.
COMMENT #62 [Permalink]
said on 12/22/2005 @ 2:25 pm PT...
So.. when we find out that the "terrorist threat" is all a hoax as perpitrated by "people in power" (not to be confused with one side or the other, for you partisanlly challenged tools), will we -still- say "they are trying to protect us"? Will we -still- say "it's a just cause", even knowing it was a "fabricated cause"?
Here's my ONE question to -everyone- here.. If Al Qaeda hijacked HUGE passenger liners and flew them into the WTCs and PENTAGON, as the official story goes.. where is/was the wreckage at the Pentagon? How did a HUGE passenger liner make a 16 foot hole in the building, then vaporize, denying all known laws of physics?
I think people need to understand.. the very people that are claiming to "protect us from terrorists" have a LOT of explaining to do before we should be "convinced the terrorists they point at did the deeds they claim they did".. That is, WTC-7 STILL has no official explination, and there is NO WAY IN HELL a 757 hit the Pentagon.. Go look at the footage.. THERE IS NO PLANE THERE, yet we're being told there was.. No one herd a HUGE JET fly over, no wreckage, NO reason to believe a passenger liner hit the Pentagon.. something did, that's for sure.. but the "official story" is so full of holes it makes me want to puke.. And "those stories" are what everyone is grabbing on to to "defend these violations of the Constitution"?
Simple logic, folks. If your argument is based on a false premise, your argument is false. I have yet to be "properly convinced" that "[foriegn] terrorists" were involved in Sept. 11, 2001, and all the claims made by the Government are "accurate". Physics calls them liars, so unless you accept that "God reached down and plucked the plane away", there's some explaining that needs to be done.. don't you think? And, God must have brought back 7 of the hijackers after the flights, cause they were saw ALIVE after the incident.. Interestingly, all are now dead.. again.. Maybe it was just their zombies that were seen after the attacks..
COMMENT #63 [Permalink]
Judge of Judges
said on 12/22/2005 @ 3:31 pm PT...
I Don't Buy the Smoking scum from Mushroom Croud.
60 60 24 7 28 29 30 31 12 365 . . . . . . .
We must never take our eye's off the government .
The Best Mushrooms are kept in the dark and fed shit.
COMMENT #64 [Permalink]
said on 12/22/2005 @ 5:26 pm PT...
Savantster, you and the Illuminati agree, then.
The plane hit a recently reinforced part of the building. In other words, it didn't give in to the force of the airplane (like the WTC). The building literally pushed back. Physics DOES tell us that the energy had to go somewhere. The only place for that energy to go would be an explosive heat that very well could vaporize a bunch of aluminum.
But, like I said, you and the Illuminati agree, and that is all I need to know.
COMMENT #65 [Permalink]
said on 12/23/2005 @ 2:02 pm PT...
No, No More Hypocrisy, Bush and the neocons ARE the Illuminati. Skull and Bones anyone?
You had better stop talking about this NOW! We know who you are...
COMMENT #66 [Permalink]
said on 12/23/2005 @ 2:14 pm PT...
The White House memo [Ref ] is trash --- they selectively taken pieces of the caselaw, but ignored the important words.
They're doing the same as they did pre-Iraq Invasion: Total spin mode without regard to facts or the law.
COMMENT #67 [Permalink]
said on 12/23/2005 @ 3:27 pm PT...
It's good to see you back to set things straight, listening to these apologists spin for their beloved Leader becomes maddening after awhile.
Are you still having trouble registering on Conyers' blog?
COMMENT #68 [Permalink]
said on 12/24/2005 @ 8:30 am PT...
I have a question for the trolls:
Do any real terrorists think that there is the possibility of them being spied on? Of course they do. I imagine that infiltration of their operations is an ongoing high priority concern for them - it would be for me (see right there how I think like a terrorist? better watch out!)
**For any NSA perusing this blog, the aforementioned comment was a JOKE. Thank you for not wiretapping me.
So the story is not that some "cover" was blown on an illegal spying operation - as Colin Powell said, they could have gotten pretty much any approval they wanted to wiretap, and even do it retroactively. The story IS, in fact, the abridgement of the freedoms of the people from unreasonable (unlawful) search and seizure.
Quit defending this, you fools. It has nothing to do with terrorists, unless you come to the logical conclusion that our government is acting like the the terrorists also.
Remember, "First they came for the trade unionists..." You morons are somewhere in that list. Eventually they will come for you, because they will have stepped over some boundary that you conflict with them over. Understand these people - they keep pushing forward. It's got nohting to do with protecting your freedoms and your security from some terrorist menace. It is about power, greed, control. And it is never enough.
COMMENT #69 [Permalink]
said on 1/16/2006 @ 3:41 pm PT...
Let me make this very simple. If there is no paper tria to see who has been spied on then the president saying" trust me''give him no checks and balances. Anyone reding this could be spyed on with no record of it THAT IS SCARY!
COMMENT #70 [Permalink]
said on 1/18/2006 @ 9:19 am PT...
COMMENT #71 [Permalink]
said on 2/9/2006 @ 4:13 am PT...
if your defending these actions of this president and his cabinet your a sorry excuse for an american.. there are 2 million of these "taps" an hour going on, thats 48 million phone calls, e-mails and what not a day.. this president clearly says "a wiretap requires a court order" dont worry those provisions are still in place, knowing dam well hes already done what it takes to get around that.. your a sheep..."if you give up your
liberty for security, you deserve neither security or liberty" - Ben Franklin. how many of these "terrorists" are there in america? whos making all these calls right now, "the base"? even if a "support" group still is here, how many fuckers does it take to call & email 2 million times an hour? if theres a hundred calls to a questionable/known place/person, nail'em!! the means to do so already existed before the Fatherland,err Homeland Security Act was forced through congress without them even reading it !!(Congressman. Ron Paul),but dont blanket all of america in the name of keeping us safe, thats a sad joke, and so is your defense of such actions by this government against its own people under this false threat of terrorism which they have not even tried to show any proof of. either you have forgotten history or were not taught it, regardless educate yourself, stop being a scared sheeple shouting lies...
COMMENT #72 [Permalink]
said on 2/9/2006 @ 12:30 pm PT...
Wow, I am emesnly gratified to have found this somewhere I have been looking for this http://thinkprogress.org...12/20/drudge-fact-check/ for a long time, I am glad that there is no way Bush has legal ground for his program, I was worried small scale surviellance activity on Americans had been done in the past by Clinton and Carter administrations I am which might have possibly laid a framework for justifying the huge scale stuff now, so glad this argument holds not water....kinda like most neoCon arguments........