BREAKING: Bush Admits Authorizing Secret Domestic Spying Program
BREAKING: Bush Admits Authorizing Secret Domestic Spying Program
From his radio address this morning:
This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends, and allies. Yesterday, the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports after being improperly provided to news organizations. …I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks
Bush claimed it was consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution. Many experts disagree.
Full transcript:
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH DELIVERS WEEKLY RADIO ADDRESS
DECEMBER 17, 2005
SPEAKER: GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
BUSH: Good morning. As president, I took an oath to defend the Constitution, and I have no greater responsibility than to protect our people, our freedom, and our way of life.
On September the 11th, 2001, our freedom and way of life came under attack by brutal enemies who killed nearly 3,000 innocent Americans. We’re fighting these enemies across the world, yet in this first war of the 21st century, one of our most critical battle fronts is the home front.
And since September the 11th, we’ve been on the offensive against the terrorists plotting without our borders. One of the first actions we took to protect America after our nation was attacked was to ask Congress to pass the Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act tore down the legal and bureaucratic wall that kept law enforcement and intelligence authorities from sharing vital information about terrorists threats, and the Patriot Act allowed federal investigators to pursue terrorists with tools they already used against other criminals.
Congress passed this law with a large, bipartisan majority, including a vote of 98-1 in the United States Senate. Since then, America’s law enforcement personnel have used this critical law to prosecute terrorist operatives and supporters, and to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia, California, Texas and Ohio.
The Patriot Act has accomplished exactly what it was designed to do. It has protected American liberty, and saved American lives. Yet, key provisions of this law are set to expire in two weeks. The terrorist threat to our country will not expire in two weeks. The terrorists want to attack America again, and inflict even greater damage than they did on September the 11th.
Congress has a responsibility to ensure that law enforcement and intelligence officials have the tools they need to protect the American people. The House of Representatives passed reauthorization of the Patriot Act, yet a minority of senators filibusters to block the renewal of the Patriot Act when it came up for a vote yesterday.
That decision is irresponsible, and it endangers the lives of our citizens. The senators who are filibustering must stop their delaying tactics, and the Senate must vote to reauthorize the Patriot Act.
In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment. To fight the war on terror, I am using authority vested in me by Congress, including the joint authorization for use of military force, which passed overwhelmingly in the first week after September the 11th.
I’m also using constitutional authority vested in me as commander-in-chief. In the weeks following the terrorist attacks on our nation, I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations.
Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist networks. This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends, and allies. Yesterday, the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk.
Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country. As the 9/11 Commission pointed out, it was clear that terrorists inside the United States were communicating with terrorists abroad before the September the 11th attacks. And the commission criticized our nation’s inability to uncover links between terrorists here at home and terrorists abroad.
Two of the terrorist hijackers who flew a jet in the Pentagon, Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar, communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas, but we didn’t know they were here until it was too late.
The authorization I gave the National Security Agency after September the 11th helped address that problem in a way that is fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities. The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time.
And the activities conducted this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad. The activities I authorized are reviewed approximately every 45 days. Each review is based on a fresh intelligence assessment of terrorist threats to the continuity of our government and the threat of catastrophic damage to our homeland.
During each assessment, previous activities under the authorization are reviewed. The review includes approval by our nation’s top legal officials, including the attorney general and the counsel to the president. I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups.
The NSA’s activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA’s top legal officials, including NSA’s general counsel and inspector general.
Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it. Intelligence officials involved in these activities also receive extensive training to ensure they perform their duties, consistent with the letter and intent of the authorization. This authorization is a vital took in our war against the terrorists. It is critical to saving American lives.
The American people expect me to do everything under my power under our laws and constitution to protect them and their civil liberties, and that is exactly what I will continue to do so long as I am the president of the United States. Thank you.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yeah, right. Any moron can look at recent and past history and know this has been going on since before chimpy was born. But wait… he’s not any moron. He’s an exceptional moron!
December 17th, 2005 at 11:08 amOne the one hand, Bush is doing what we asked of him years ago – to admit his mistakes. But even with this radio address, it is too little MUCH too late. He has waited more than half way through his fake Presidency to admit mistakes. And this is only because of the poll numbers which he says he doesn’t look at. If his numbers go back up, his ability to admit mistakes will go back in the closet.
To add insult to injury, these apologies and acceptance of responsibility are not met with much action. I’ll give him some recognition for asking money for rebuilding the NO levies, but that is a microcosm of the “too little too late” scenario.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:13 amIs ThinkProgress concerned about this leak of classified material, Judd? Or only about leaking the name of bureaucrat Valerie Plame?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:15 amOn MSNBC:
Americans already distrust the President for a multitude of reasons. And now he’s asking Americans to trust that he will spy on them in a trustworthy fashion?
The appearance on Jim Lehrer was a dead giveaway that the President is in serious trouble. He could have had judicial oversight that would have maintained the alleged needed secrecy to do this spying. He chose not to.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:15 amWhy is a man who has, for the last 5 years of his presidency, denied anything and everything, suddenly started to come clean? Granted, it is with much spin, but none-the-less there have been two admissions in one week. What’s with that? What is he trying to divert out attention away from? I’m almost afraid to ask…
December 17th, 2005 at 11:15 amAre there any liberals besides Joe Lieberman who actually want to defend America?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:17 amWE CAN’T LET THE PRO-WAR MEDIA CONTINUE TO SUPRESS THE CRIMES OF THIS GOVERNMENT.
. Control acquired.
1. On 30 January 1933 Hitler became Chancellor of the German Republic. After the Reichstag fire of 28 February 1933, clauses of the Weimar constitution guaranteeing personal liberty, freedom of speech, of the press, of association and assembly were suspended. The Nazi conspirators secured the passage by the Reichstag of a “Law for the Protection of the People and the Reich” giving Hitler and the members of his then cabinet plenary powers of legislation. The Nazi conspirators retained such powers after having changed the members of the cabinet. The conspirators caused all political parties except the Nazi Party to be prohibited. They caused the Nazi Party to be established as a paragovernmental organization with extensive and extraordinary privileges.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/count1.htm
December 17th, 2005 at 11:18 amWhen Will the Bush Gangsters Lies End ?
Whe Are they All Going to JAIL ?
When Will U Stand Up and Say
NO-MORE – KILLING of USA DEMOCRACY & People
http://www.RogerART.com
Thank U,
December 17th, 2005 at 11:18 amJoe Lieberman can burn in the hell which his religion does not believe in.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:19 amwwallace,
December 17th, 2005 at 11:20 amI, like the terorists, assumed the terrorists were being watched. I assume that MY stuff is being surveilled. You know wwallace, at some point the chemotherapy becomes worse than the cancer. That point was a long time ago.
#3
wwwwingnut, are you concerned with illegal government activities or just annoying people?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:20 amMagnum, thank you for demonstrating yet again that Democrats do not tolerate any dissent.
#7, Tribunal has triggered Godwin’s Law, so this thread is over. LOL
December 17th, 2005 at 11:21 amwhen shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house?
-Patrick Henry
December 17th, 2005 at 11:22 amLet’s not be surprised: Remember Dec. 2000?
We’re almost there.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:22 amCarl, the Democratic party is the cancer at this point. They seem unwilling to defend America.
unbelievable, what illegal activities?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:22 amAre their any neocons who respect the Constitution?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:23 amwwallace…here’s your cracker you Limbannity parrot.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:24 amHe admits it. There have been a few admissions of behavior recently — he knows he must come “clean” so the American public might then pardon him.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:25 amThe liberal public is the nurturing, and forgiving segment of society, and the conservative public is the authoritative, punishing, segment of society. Will Bush now fall on his knees to the liberal public and beg forgiveness?
No.
He must be impeached for federal crimes, notwithstanding the fact that he has violated international law with his invasion of Iraq based upon insufficient evidence, selected intelligence and fabrications.
SPYGATE…the beginning of the end. The girl who got a visit from the secret service who had a anti-bush picture developed. Our phones,internet any history of us recorded is against the law,no matter how bush defines it. Using 911 is just a ‘control’ excuse for the dictatorship we have taking over us. Impeach
December 17th, 2005 at 11:27 am#15
Are you serious? Are you really serious? Did you completely ignore the article yesterday about our government ILLEGALLY tapping American citizens without the appropriate court documents in accordance with the LAW??? Which, Heir Bush has since admitted in his radio address? That illegal activity.
Your inability to see past your own ass is really amazing. It’s ignorant egocentric people like you who inspired our brilliant, progressive forefathers to instill the electoral college.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:28 am#16
NO
December 17th, 2005 at 11:30 amBecause you said it ,it ain’t so ” Mr president ” .
A Lie is a lie is a lie is a lie ……
It’s against the law to spy on american citizens without due cause and due court order . It is not the NSA’s role .
You have broken the law
December 17th, 2005 at 11:30 amMr president . Yours is to defend the CONSTITUTION , not to tear it apart . If you wish to be King george ,Mr president , may i suggest England . You will be well received there , Mr president.
Judd…can you put Feingold’s response up front, too?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:31 am
I wonder if there are any people left that believe this administration should not be watched very carefully? I mean, how could anyone, even if they say they trust Bush, not be at least concerned, if not absolutely convinced?
The Constitution is the highest law in the land, as it should be. That is why we have a Supreme Court.
I support anyone in the government that releases information that shows violations to our Constitution, over any oaths or other duties they may have.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:32 amMore than ever we must not let Alito to the supreme court .
December 17th, 2005 at 11:40 amthe SCOTEUS will more important than ever in the near future.
Is ThinkProgress concerned about this leak of classified material, Judd? Or only about leaking the name of bureaucrat Valerie Plame?
Comment by wwallace — December 17, 2005 @
I don’t know. Was Valerie Plame commiting a crime that violated our laws and our constitution? As fas as which info was more sensitive… I’d bet it was Plame’s status as a covert op, a NOC involved in WMDs.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:49 amCarl, the Democratic party is the cancer at this point. They seem unwilling to defend America.
We are more interested in defending the constitution. because without it we are just like any other righ wing dictatorship.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:51 amBesides, it’s moral cowardice not to defend the constitution. And the constitution is under a greater threat than the country and most of the people know that now.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:52 amAre their any neocons who respect the Constitution?
Comment by WaltTheMan — December 17, 2005 @ 11:23 am
Good question! Much more info here with links:
December 17th, 2005 at 11:54 am
This is the headline that people like wwallace want to see:
December 17th, 2005 at 11:55 am“December 31, 2007 (BBC) – After claiming that yesterday’s fire that consumed the Capitol building was the work of terrorists, Bush issued Executive Order 666 declaring martial law throughout the entire United States, closing off its borders and suspending the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Several critics of his Administration were immediately arrested on charges of treason, including Senators Specter, Hagel, Kerry, Kennedy, Byrd, Reid, Biden, and Feinstein and held at undisclosed areas. An emergency session of both houses of Congress presided by Vice President Cheney was called, and all political parties except for the Republican party were banned. Newspapers critical of his administration and the war in Iraq such as the NYT and Washington Post and major television networks including ABC, NBC and CBS were immediately shut down until further notice. Fox News was allowed to continue to operate as the official government news network. Bush said that he was forced to do so in order to “protect Americans and to safegauard and defend our freedoms.” He said that future plans included pushing for amendments to the Constitution that would declare the USA to be a Christian nation and establishing Christianity as the official religion.”
The answer is no. Far more dangerous than terrorism.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:56 amNonsense, liberal Democrats have no interest in the Constitution.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:56 amRick wants to burn down the capitol building. Rick is obviously unamerican.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:58 amThere’s a petition at MoveOn.org for those who want to use the mightiness of the pen…
http://political.moveon.org/patriotact/
December 17th, 2005 at 11:59 amNonsense, liberal Democrats have no interest in the Constitution.
Comment by wwallace — December 17, 2005 @ 11:56 am
George Bush doesn’t either. Neither do you.
George Bush and wwallace are anti-American.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:01 pmWe cannot dignify the stupid, nonsensical remarks by wwallace with replies. He makes no sense, he is full of contradictions, he repeats himself endlessly and he is not worth our time.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:03 pmTreat him as an insignificant mite; ignore him/it.
wwallace…you must be hungry today…have another cracker
December 17th, 2005 at 12:03 pm#32
Based upon what wwwwwingnut? Cite your sources and explain your supposition for this ignorant generalization.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:05 pmwwallace is a shyster. I know some good lawyers. wwallace is a hack like those corporate jackasses at powdwertools. I can tell he is because of the facile way he casts off complete falsehoods. He may well be a sociopath as well, so was Ted Bundy. Bundy was a better lawyer.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:05 pmwwallace argues like a fourth grader on the school yard “you are” “no, I’m not,” “you are,” endlessly going in a circle.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:07 pmYeah, Marie, and he communicates like one too…
December 17th, 2005 at 12:08 pm#27, Isn’t that something Bush aspires to? Dictatorship, as long as he’s the dictator.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:09 pmI believe that is a paraphrased quote of his, and he is well on his way to fulfilling his own goal. He must be stopped.
From teh President’s radio address today, calling out the Democrats who are undermining the war on terror:
December 17th, 2005 at 12:10 pm
Calling me names won’t change the fact that liberals are undermining US national security.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:16 pmwwallace…you are right…
The battle lines have been drawn. On one side, the ends justify the means. Other wish to protect the constitution at all costs.
Which side are you on?
December 17th, 2005 at 12:16 pmmeinkampf bloedwormAT SKYherme
BloedfagginHousen
Queerkens
and
schlottmornemES!!
HASHITOFF
HASHITOF
‘n grie
das programmTatale\
BushenwaffenSSAT
December 17th, 2005 at 12:17 pmYour “fact” is a fantasy you made up so you can justify turning the United States into a one party dictatorship run by you and your cohorts.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:19 pmBye Bye Bushy
December 17th, 2005 at 12:20 pmFunny about Leo Strauss. He wrote a book vilifying Machiavelli and then he goes and advocates Machiavelli’s suggested tactics. Well, I guess everyone has the right to change their mind.
Where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control.
The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the party that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.
~Lord Acton
December 17th, 2005 at 12:21 pmThat meddling in other people’s affairs…formerly conducted by the most discreet intrigue is now openly advocated under the name of intervention.
Justice itself tends to be corrupted by political passion.
~T.S. Eliot
December 17th, 2005 at 12:21 pmwally, all that they are calling out is a corrupt president. What the President did IS NOT allowed in the Constitution. He MUST obtain authorization throught Congress or a search warrant. Neither were done. This is PLAIN AND SIMPLY AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION. Please take your communism somewhere else, and once again this will be my last reply to you as you are a person that provides ZERO facts to your comments. Please show me where in the CONSTITUTION that it states that the President does not have to obtain proper authorization to perform these things? He is not a king, he is a President (well at least until we can get congress off their butts to impeach him, and he does not have power to do that without oversight.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:22 pmCan you say Soviet Union! Ronald W. Reagan must be turning over in his grave. How did we go from democracy to dictatorship so fast. Since when does the president have the authority to do what ever he pleases without having to conform to the laws of the United States? Apparently 9-11 gives the president the power to: (1) Hold American citizens without Charge. (2) Hold enemy combatans without charge. (3) Torture people.. (4) Spy of the American people without approval from any Court of Congress. (5) Make up the Law as he goes along. (6) Spy on people’s medical records. (7) Check the Library to see what books people read.
If I remember correctly all of the things I mentioned above were exactly why we fought the “Cold War” and opposed Communism. What has happened to America? Why do we stand for this kind of stuff being done in our name. Why are we fighting in Iraq to give them freedom and at the same time taking away our own rights. The Constitution has been screwed by this president and his administration. They remind my of Stars Episode III when the emporer was given emergency powers.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:22 pmWwallace has interests in the German Nationale Capitalis COmmunists
AKA
Wwallace
is a
Wannabeee
BloedKingcreePE
Arent ya Wwallace?
December 17th, 2005 at 12:22 pma VRIL light loving
GremANNFREEKZ
Whose GOD
ISTKAPITAAL?
YES!
Wwallace is da Commie! Nationale!
#44
the fact that liberals are undermining US national security
Prove it… all you posted was some spin wwwwingnut. It’s a sales pitch – an opinion to sell a point of view that is unsubstantiated by either reality or evidence. That is not a fact. Are you even capable of thinking or speaking with your own words and thoughts? Or do you always turn to some talking head to think|speak for you?
December 17th, 2005 at 12:23 pmMLDB – I, unlike you, am on America’s side.
RemoveBush, This…
…is bunk.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:25 pmThose who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin
Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.
~George Washington
Although tyranny…may successfully rule over foreign peoples, it can stay in power only if it destroys first of all the national institutions of its own people.
~Hannah Arendt
The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests and his own are the same.
~Marie Beyle
I guess every generation is doomed to fight its war…suffer the loss of the same old illusions, and learn the same old lessons on its own.
~Phillip Caputo
Before the war is ended, the war party assumes the divine right to denounce and silence all opposition to war as unpatriotic and cowardly.
~Senator Robert M. La Follette
After every ”victory” you have more enemies.
~Jeanette Winterson
The great error of nearly all studies of war… has been to consider war as an episode in foreign policies, when it is an act of interior politics…
~Simone Weil
Death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war.
~Donald Rumsfeld
Violence can only be concealed by a lie, and the lie can only be maintained by violence.
~Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
December 17th, 2005 at 12:25 pmWWW , How is Karl Rove is paying you . Is it by each posting or monthly , weekly ? And how much .
Nobody , but nobody can be insensitive to the news and facts as you are unless , yes a paid agent provocateur . And if you are not paid , you are some blind hard headed brain .Surely you’re mot made of stone .
December 17th, 2005 at 12:26 pmAnonymous, this is historical revisionism:
Liberal Democrats opposed Reagan’s fight against communism, not communism.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:26 pmI just thought a comparison between wwallace’s stilted and parrot like talking points and the words of some truly eloquent persons might be illustrative of something.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:27 pmhardass, calling me names like that will not change the fact the Democrats and their MSM allies are undermining US national security.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:27 pmStop responding to wwallace’s idiotic blather.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:28 pm#54 Unbelievable, you know the answers to your questions. wwallace is simply a Limbannity talking point parrot.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:28 pmLiberal Democrats opposed Reagan’s fight against communism, not communism.
Comment by wwallace — December 17, 2005
Now you know he’s an idiot propagandist. Did Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson know this?
December 17th, 2005 at 12:29 pmBye Bye Bushy, “Did Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson know this?”
They weren’t around when Reagan was president, you ignoramus. LOL
December 17th, 2005 at 12:30 pmThose who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.
-John F. Kennedy (1917 – 1963)
December 17th, 2005 at 12:30 pm“Protect and defend the constitution of the United States.”
Not protect us…the peasants.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:31 pmStop responding to purvis ames’ idiotic blather.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:31 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 12:32 pmI will say this. Bush sure knows how to energize the base. He’s just energized the opposition’s base in this case, and it includes many members of his own party. Bush has wagered his political life on it. You and he will regret it, I’d wager your life on it wwallace.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:34 pmWwallace your GERMAN Bush
Side
is about 20%
NOT very good ODDS.
AND DROPPING RAPIDLY
YOUR gonna REGRET BACKING THESE
GERMAN NATIONALISTES
GOT YOUR NUMBER
December 17th, 2005 at 12:34 pmPAL.
#62 MLDB
Yes, but I wasn’t sure that wwallace was :)
I point these things out because I know that there are people on the fence who come here. I was once a Republican conservative, and when I began to question that system, I found that my ability to break away from it came from listening to the people who were willing to point out that the Emporer had no clothes… They simply made the most sense.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:37 pmThey weren’t around when Reagan was president, you ignoramus. LOL
You are the ignoramus for thinking I suggested they were. They were liberal Democrats who opposed communism, and fought it, whereas Reagan just blustered about it alot and reaped the benefits of the previous 40 years of the Cold War.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:37 pmIt’s been known since the Kennedy administration that intercepts of international communications were being carried out via taps on undersea cables and radio monitoring. Furthermore, this practice was carried out since the onset of WWII and publicized in books, TV documentaries and newspapers. Why is this practice suddenly classified?
The real issue is the interception of information exchanges within the United States without a warrant. This is both illegal and unconstitutional. You might notice that W carefully parses his words to link only to the legality of international intercepts. Karl must have been up all night penning the spin.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:39 pmI’m going to suggest that what’s on many minds right now, though many don’t wish to say it, is that Feingold is right. This changes everything. I have nothing left to say to wwallace. Civil war may be avoided in Iraq. I wonder if it can be avoided here. I think he will be impeached before it comes to that. Too bad really.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:43 pmThe Democratic party changed after the Vietnam war, Bushy. They stopped being anti-communist. They opposed Reagan’s successful efforts to end the Soviet Union at every turn.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:47 pmWalt, the real issue is the Democrats want to defeat Bush more than they want to defeat al Qaeeda.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:49 pmWhy the hell are we not starting inpeachment proccedings against this bastard? Oh I forgot,they are in charge and are just as big a bunch of criminals as he is.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:50 pmI find it interesting,although understandable given the kind of feelings that Mr. Bush engenders, that in this whole thread, not one person mentioned the most significant fact in the story.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:51 pmThe NYT had this story over a year ago,you remember,before the election and somehow managed only now to conclude its negotiations w/the gov’t and release the story.
Between this story,Time mag sitting on the Matt Cooper/Libby disclosures, Woodward at the WaPo etc. the “press” in this country has seriously defaulted on its responsibility.
Mr. Bush may have given the order but the criticism here should be addressed to the NYT and the other components of the “liberal” press.
Limbannity talking parrot? I like that one!!!!!
December 17th, 2005 at 12:53 pmIf someone LASHES Out At You, Are You supposed to Sit Idoly
December 17th, 2005 at 12:54 pmAnd Take The Crap?
Because I,ve noticed ALOT Of Bushes Headlines LASHING OUT!
Does That mean He wants a REAL FIGHT?
Al Qaeeda = Bush :)
December 17th, 2005 at 12:55 pmWallace;We Dems tolearate dissent,we don’t tolerate stupidity and criminality,both of which Bush and his ass kissers such as yourself have given us in spades.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:55 pmLeaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it.
Isn’t this the other big scandal here? Who was briefed and why didn’t they object?
December 17th, 2005 at 12:55 pmWWALLACE -
Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the war and this is what the Supreme Court had to say about that and other infringements on civil liberty:
Ex Parte Milligan (1866)
“The constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with its shield of protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of men that any of its great provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of Government.”
December 17th, 2005 at 12:56 pm#81
I would say it more like this:
Al Quaida {hearts} Bush
He is their #1 recruiting tool.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:57 pmwwallace is a traitor to the American people. wwallace and Bushco hate the American people’s freedom.
December 17th, 2005 at 12:58 pm#60
I guess you’re just going to have to start looking for the terrorists under your OWN bed. Booga-booga!
If you don’t mind, I’ll take freedom and the rule of law over safety provided by my Benevolent Overseer.
If you hate freedom so much, wallace, why don’t you move to Russia?
December 17th, 2005 at 12:58 pmThe world’s stupidest man who is also supposed to be President is now officially the world’s most stupidly stupid man in the solar system. I knew he’d bring up 9/11 as a reason for anything he does to destroy this country.
Even if his speech is going to cut into Desperate Housewives time, I ain’t watching it. I don’t watch it, but given the choice between Dubya and the Housewives, I’d take the latter.
What will he say in the address? The SOS that he has been saying and he’ll probably pre-screen the TV audience as well. He’ll bring up 9/11 about 20-25 times. He’ll bring up the words, Freedom, Victory, God and America about 40-50 times.
The little C**T won’t explain himself to his daddy or Mike Wallace, but he chooses to take his self-serving dribble to an already pissed-off public just for an boost in his polls. I hope he stumbles, again. How’s that Patriot act working out, Georgie? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
December 17th, 2005 at 12:59 pmIdly
December 17th, 2005 at 12:59 pmBUSH LASHES.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:03 pmDoes that Mean he is Angry at Us?
Shouldn,t We be Fearing Bush when He Lashes Out At us?
December 17th, 2005 at 1:04 pm#78 TJM
December 17th, 2005 at 1:07 pmYou’re reading my mind. Early this morning I wrote to the NYT and chastised them for holding back information under the guise of “national security” when in truth, it would have most likely affected the national election. Considering the MSM scandals (Miller, Blair, Gannon, et al.) one would think they would reconsider their complicitity with the White House. And yet, the ill-informed still believe the press is “liberal.”
I was allways taught that if someone trys to bully you, You hit back and Hit back HARD!
December 17th, 2005 at 1:07 pmNot only Impeah but, tribunal For the UNJUSTIFIED WAR On Iraq And AFGANISTAN!
P.S. He let Osama Bin Laden Get Away, Now All Sorts of Terrorist are starting to Grow!
How will He explain the Deaths of over Two Thousand American Soldiers?
December 17th, 2005 at 1:10 pmPlus the Deaths of 911, Which , Had he Listened, Could have been Preventable.
Hey, has anyone noticed that wwallace’s posts are almost always under two lines and they end with either “LOL” or “ROFLMAO”? Its almost like wwallace is one of those automatic radio DJ’s… “Good Morning Everyone! Bush is Great! Its 58 degrees outside, and here is John Ashcroft singing Let the Eagle Soar!” I love reading his posts, its just like my Bush-isms calendar. :)
December 17th, 2005 at 1:10 pmBushes problem is He Knows too Much, Yet, Knows Nothing at all!
December 17th, 2005 at 1:11 pmall Intell, no wisdom .
Come on fellows ease of on poor WWW . He’s having an epiphany . He loves the constitution and swears to defend it . Now if only he reads it … we may be getting some where. and creeping fascism will be defeated.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:12 pmand why is wwallace , laughing so much? does wwallace think this is a game? or a joke? wwallace for your info. over two thousand american soldiers are D.E.A.D.! its not a game, its difinitely NOT a Joke. The Joke is on you if you think Repubs are getting away with anything.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:14 pmthe hammers going to drop!
I am going to D.C. and Personally Make a Citizens Arrest of GWB!
December 17th, 2005 at 1:17 pmWhat I would like to see on these threads is the author posted at the top line instead of the bottom. It would make it so much easier to skip past inanities like those posted by hot tip. Here’s a hot tip, you’re boring,boring boring.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:18 pmThe fact that a sitting president would knowingly and willingly disregard the constitution and american values is such a blatant way should bring about immediate impeachment! Now THIS is a HIGH CRIME!
December 17th, 2005 at 1:19 pmDecember 17th, 2005 at 1:20 pm
• Bush defends spying
December 17th, 2005 at 1:21 pmDec. 17: President says he personally approved eavesdropping in U.S. and blasts lawmakers for revealing secret program.
MSNBC
Related Stories | What’s this?
• 9/11 panel: More F’s than A’s for U.S.
• U.S. misses post-9/11 security deadlines
• 5 Kuwaitis released from Guantanamo
• Dean: GOP to scapegoat immigrants
• Top Sunni willing to form coalition government
• Bush says he authorized eavesdropping in U.S.
• Is the Pentagon spying on Americans?
• Protesters battle past police, reach WTO venue
Article 2
Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.
This conduct has included one or more of the following:
He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be intitiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.
He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.
He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavoured to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as Attorney General of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the offices of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President.
In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division, and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, of the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:22 pmWherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
We’re fortunate to have Think Progress. Most administrators don’t allow this kind of free sppech. We should thank them for establishing this forum and not worry so much about the format…
December 17th, 2005 at 1:23 pmArticle 3
In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:24 pmSay , all they have to do is replace the name. I.E…erase nixon and put in Bush
December 17th, 2005 at 1:24 pmThis is Worth Many Repeatings,
Can’t wait for the investigation as it will show once again that Bush ignored intellegence that might have stopped 9/11 from happening.
Bring it on!
Comment by Spudge_Boy — December 16, 2005 @ 4:17 pm
December 17th, 2005 at 1:27 pmHope you dont mind Spudge
December 17th, 2005 at 1:28 pm
This is the act of a DICTATOR, not an american president.
IMPEACH
December 17th, 2005 at 1:28 pmIMPEACH
IMPEACH
December 17th, 2005 at 1:28 pm
Winston Churchill, contrary to the lies conservatives will tell you was a conservative at 15 and a liberal from then on, till his death. He was also a staunch anti-Stalinist. Once, when asked his opinion by a reporter about the British communist party, and if he feared them, he replied, “Of course not. They are Englishmen after all.” Churchill would spit on Bush, Reagan, Nixon and wwallace.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:29 pmHave No Fear. The Truth Shall Make You Free!
December 17th, 2005 at 1:30 pmWallace, let me fix that for you:
Walt, the real issue is the Republicans want to defeat freedom more than they want to defeat al Qaeeda.
The Democrats don’t hate Al Qaeda, they just want the people in power to be held accountable for their actions.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:31 pmSuch filthy liars neocons are. As bad as the Stalinists
Quotes Falsely Attributed
These quotes make
for good story-telling
but popular myth has
falsely attributed them
to Churchill.
“Conservative by the time you’re 35″
December 17th, 2005 at 1:32 pm“If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.” There is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this. Paul Addison of Edinburgh University makes this comment: “Surely Churchill can’t have used the words attributed to him. He’d been a Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal.
wwallace likes being unaccountable because he can’t count :()
December 17th, 2005 at 1:32 pmThe Smoking Gun
Yesterday, I wrote about Scott McClellan’s remark that the number one priority of the President was “to save lives.” In my mind that is not and should never be the President’s number one priority. Well, this morning, in his weekly…
December 17th, 2005 at 1:35 pmever notice how poll takers word their questions to the audience?
QUICKVOTE
Do you agree that greater trade liberalization benefits developing countries?
Yes
No
or View Results
Instead of saying” Do You Disagee?”
December 17th, 2005 at 1:37 pmor” Do the greater trade liberalization benefits developing countries?”
December 17th, 2005 at 1:38 pmDont believe the polls. Propagandas tool.
Well, that’s it. Bush admitted that he authorized the program. As known, what Bush has done is illegal under the law. And for this, a review / investigation will likely be conducted that could very likely lead to an impeachment process.
As for who leaked this information that brought to light of this criminal conduct, that identity will probably not land to an definitive conclusion. But as to how it will be seen in the eyes of the people, it will indeed go down as another Deep Throat.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:40 pmI bet the left won’t ask for investigations into who leaked this confidential information to the New York Times.
In the view of the left
“Leaking” the name of a non-covert agent who works at a desk = Baaaaaaaaad
December 17th, 2005 at 1:44 pmLeaking vital national security information to the New York Times = Gooood
If Bush’s #1 priority is to save lives, he would have done better as a paramedic. Or any profession where you kill fewer than 100,000 people.
Also… can we impeach the Sonofabush now? I understand that incompetence and lying (in speeches) is not an impeachable offense, so we had to wait until he actually committed high crimes, but I think he has satisfied the constitutional requirements for impeachment now.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:44 pmFight the Power said, in #114: “The Democrats don’t hate Al Qaeda”
Thanks for the admission.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:45 pmCNN Gets A BIG FAT F For Failure By propagating its Polls/
QUICKVOTE
Do you agree that greater trade liberalization benefits developing countries?
Yes
No
QUICKVOTE
it should read like this, Do “greater trade liberalization(free trade).” benefit developing countries?
yes
December 17th, 2005 at 1:46 pmno
cynical, the president hasn’t engaged in any wrongdoing, let alone impeachable wrongdoing.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:46 pmIt’s bad because it was a COVERT agent, and it is yet another clear example of the Bush administration’s desire to keep the people in the dark about the truth.
The leak to the Times is good because it protects our right to know about any and all government corruption. Spying on ordinary American’s does not make anybody safer. It is wrong and the people need to know about it. If you need government spying on your neighbors makes you safer, you need psychological counseling desperately.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:48 pmwwallace, in your opinion, who are Al Qaeda? where did they originate from? how many are there? is there a link between Afganistan, Iraqs leadership/people? How old is the Al Qaeda Klan? who started Al Qaeda and who Sponsored Al Qaeda? These are serious Question, because I heard Rumour that Republicans May have Sponsored Al Qaeda during the Afganistan/Russian War.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:51 pmPlame hasn’t been covert since the mid-1990s.
How is it corrupt to protect America?
We are monitoring terrorists, not ordinary Americans.
The enemy is aided by being told that he is under scrutiny by the Government. They’ve surely changed their tactics to evade detection.
My neighbors aren’t terrorists. If they were, I would hope the Government was monitoring them.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:53 pmBush thinks he is a king sent on a mission from God to defeat the evil-doers. That’s why he wipes his ass with the Constitution and the Geneva Convention.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:54 pmwwallace thinks that Democrats and anyone who criticizes Bush and his policies are all terrorists.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:56 pm#128
Gary – Do you know the odds of being killed by terrorists verus being killed by second hand smoke? Your fears are in the wrong place. Be afraid of Big Tobacco… They are trying to kill Americans and succeeding.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:57 pmWill someone in congress not stand up and begin the impeachment proceedings?
December 17th, 2005 at 1:58 pmJust go through the motions so that we won’t think you are all paid off stooges.
we know the GOP will block it. But the people will know if their representative is for or against. This will help a lot in the new elections to defeat the GOP and allow for the punishment phase of treason and other high crimes to begin. even if it is in 2007
if we make it that long.
Tobacco Companies don’t plan ways to kill millions with WMDs to bring the world under a dictatorship.
Terrorists plan ways to kill millions with WMDs to bring the world under an Islamic Dictatorship.
And Bush should move fast to find the leaker and put him on trial for endangering the War on Terror.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:59 pmWe all need to start writing our Senators demanding Impeachment for this. Mine are Neocons, but even some of the less fascist ones seem to be disassociating themselves from the Bush Regime, and might be ammenable to the choice between Bush’s job or their own…
December 17th, 2005 at 2:00 pm“How is it corrupt to protect America?”
How is hiding corruption protecting America?
“We are monitoring terrorists, not ordinary Americans.”
The government doesn’t have to prove someone is a terrorist to secretly monitor their activities, or waterboard them in a secret prison. That means the government can just single out brown people and watch them for no reason and there’s nothing to stop the government from doing so other than the press exposing such actions.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:02 pm“Terrorists plan ways to kill millions with WMDs to bring the world under an Islamic Dictatorship.”
Ever hear of PNAC? It’s the Republicans who want a world-wde fundamentalist Christian dictatorship.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:03 pm#133
Gary – Really? You know this because… What, you have the mindset of a terrorist and can speak from personal perspective here?? Saddam did not have weapons of Mass Destruction. Big Tobacco has tiny, billions of little WMD’s called cigarettes. They kill thousands of people every day. So far, not one single American has died from WMD. Not one. Seems a bit paranoid, or arrogant, to think that other people exist to kill you, well not without a profit…
December 17th, 2005 at 2:05 pm#136
Of course he has, because that would be fine by him. After all, it’s a benevolent Christian dictatorship and not, gasp, an evil Islamic one. Egocentrity has no sense of reality…
December 17th, 2005 at 2:08 pm#138
Dictatorships and theocracies come in only one type: evil. A benevolent Christian, Islamic or Jewish dictatorship will never exist.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:14 pmJust read 1984. You will find all the troll talking points in there. Almost word for word.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:15 pmActually, this is the best thing that could ever have happened. Bush has lost states like Idaho and Montana and vast parts of many other red states. He’s further splitting his base and his own party.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:17 pmThis could be Bush falling on his sword. He must know the consequences of domestic spying, he’s surely heard of Nixon, so he’s just too tired of the lies that he wants out. Perhaps subconsciously, like the thief that leaves clues to get caught. He knows he can’t just abdicate.
Congress could use this as impeachment made easy, without having to go through all the convoluted lies and deceipt up till now, or take the blame for their oversight failures.
To my surprise, we do seem to have some quality people in Congress ready to carry on once the trials are over. I wonder how they got in there?
December 17th, 2005 at 2:18 pmwwallace should definitely be skipped over. If you see a post signed by, just ignore it. He has nothing of importance to add
December 17th, 2005 at 2:21 pm#139
I agree, was doing a satire of Gary… :)
December 17th, 2005 at 2:21 pm#144,
Sorry about that. I should have checked your earlier comments and realized you’re not a troll.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:23 pmWhat the President has done is not a crime. And it was expected of him after 9/11 to aggressively try to prevent another 9/11.
9/11 was sort of like a big deal people that called for action, not long slow steps through the judiciar.
And most importantly nobody’s liberty has been seriously affected by this… unless you’re believed to be involved in terrorism or close to it.
Cry me a river people.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:27 pmGary, the NSA contains provisions to go to a secret court to get authorization to wiretap domestic calls. The President authorized these wiretaps without that authorization. The hunt for and monitoring of terrorists is unaffected by the disclosure of a presidential order allowing the wiretap of American citizens without even the semblance of court ordered authorization. You have set up the usual straw man argument that is simply irrelevant.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:28 pm#145
No problem, I did the same thing to ChuckLA yesterday. Sometimes it’s not hard to get caught up in it. Am definitely on your side.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:32 pmLyle,
December 17th, 2005 at 2:34 pmIts Called “Invasion of Privacy Act”.
Then of course, this is nothing new. As freedom loving people who want their privacy not involked on, don,t mind if its someone elses privacy. double standards for sure.
That is why I do NOT Mind if you Lose your Rights, Freedoms, Liberty, or whatever else you might call it. I call it Propagande of the Third Riech.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:35 pm#146
What the President has done is not a crime. And it was expected of him after 9/11 to aggressively try to prevent another 9/11.
Lyle, You really should READ the Constitution. No where does it give the President unlimited powers to act above or beyond it. You might also wanna go check out a book on Political Science, which will explain the three equal branches of our governemnt (legislative, judical and executive), which created as a checks and balance system to prevent any one branch from assuming too much power. So, to respond to your comment, no, no it was not expected of him.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:36 pmAnd most importantly nobody’s liberty has been seriously affected by this… unless you’re believed to be involved in terrorism or close to it.
Cry me a river people.
Comment by Lyle — December 17, 2005 @ 2:27 pm
December 17th, 2005 at 2:39 pmLyle, I pray to God that You LOSE Your liberties one day.
90% of NSLs are not related to terrorism.
Those people that think that violating our Constitutional rights is necessary are by definition Un-American.
We either have a Bill of Rights, or we don’t. I don’t see a middle ground anywhere.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:40 pmLyle, Just maybe You will get caught doing something ILLEGAL, One Day.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:41 pmThen You,ll Lose your Liberties Hopefully.
AAnd dont think you wont get caught.
Thank You, Toys. Exactly my Thought.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:51 pmWhats good for the Gander is Good for the Goose.
Maybe we ought to Spy on Them.
I liked it better before I did the math. At first, I read more than 30 operations. Now, it looks like
(30+ authorizations) times (45 days reauthorization period) = (every day between Sept. 11th and today).
December 17th, 2005 at 2:52 pmGiven that this surveillance was a) started immediately after 9/11 when we thought we may be “hit” again b) done on international (not domestic) calls, emails, etc. and c) done in an effort to stop further terrorism I have ZERO problems with this. Again, everyone’s all up in arms about the “rollback” of liberties, but no one’s actually mentioned a single case that substantiates this claim other than the general, surveillance was done so it must be bad.
People, I’m with you on the torture thing … I am. However, we cannot hamstring the NSA (Nation SECURITY Agency) when they’re trying to PROTECT us. I hope to God that Bill Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter … all of them actively engaged in this process. This is a clear example of how we can avoid the aforementioned (and horrible) practice of torture … we eavesdrop on those that are ready to committ the crime … how else would we find them. And please don’t give me the BS that they should’ve gone first to the “secret court” to get approval … this is a new breed of enemy that demands new tactics and mandates. For those of you that believe that this somehow affects you … since this is the first you knew about it, likely not. Chill out with the “tinfoil hat”conspiracy theories.
Once again, a classic example of people taking a moral stand that can be so taken because, in doing so, they injure/effect nobody … classic “bubble” leadership. Do you honestly think the framers would’ve considered eavesdropping in the name of security to be a civil liberty violation … get real.
Oh, and to the person that said something like “do you know the chances of getting killed by a terrorist” as if that makes any difference when the NSA is trying to impede terrorists. Do you know the chance of dying on a plane … under your logic, we shouldn’t continue to add measures of safety on airplanes because “the chances are so small” … tell that theory to the families of those who died on 9/11.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:52 pmThis looks to me to be another all to convenient excuse to further demonize Bush … a non story and a non issue … add to that the fact that the NSA caught terrorists using these techniques and the “outrage” is even less relevant. The NSA can listen to every one of my calls for all I care … if it helps. We put people in power to protect us, and then get pissed when they try … unbelievable. For those of you so concerned, what do YOU have to fear from the NSA … if you are afraid, what the heck have you been up to.
December 17th, 2005 at 2:57 pmBolton is the smoking gun here, and key to us winning the debate. The reason the admin didn’t go through FISA is because they were targeting political oppenents. Get those documents on Bolton’s abuse of the NSA and the whole of the administrations argument falls appart. Particularly in the court of public opinion. Bush, i.e. Rove, doesn’t give a damn about the media or the congress. He cares only for his base. Cut off that support and we have done real dammage.
Right now, you have GW and conservatives saying that what the NY Times did is treason. To counter that, we need to show that the NSA was used for political gain and not to defend us from terrorists.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:03 pmBush’s speech
In the weeks following the terrorist attacks on our nation, I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist networks.
This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country…
…The NSA’s activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA’s top legal officials, including NSA’s general counsel and inspector general. Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it.
I think this could be a critical issue for the Democrats, but not the way you think it may. Pursuing this as a major issue will further ingraine the “soft on defense” mentality that many Americans associate with DNC … it may hurt Bush’s numbers, but it won’t benefit the Democrats at all if they try to act outraged … watch and see. Most voters want to be safe, don’t think the government is out to get them, and will come to think that this type of tactic actually makes them safer … for your own good, stick to the issues that Bush SHOULD be attacked on.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:07 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:09 pmThe reason the admin didn’t go through FISA is because they were targeting political oppenents.
To assume this is ridiculous … Bush’s approval was sky high after 9/11. He had no reason to fear political opponents (at that time) because they were all singing God Bless America together on the Capital steps … stop trying to squeeze this issue into what you want it to be.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:10 pm“This looks to me to be another all to convenient excuse to further demonize Bush … a non story and a non issue … ” GeoMetro
Spying on americans without warrants is a direct violation of the constitution. The only demons are those who would do this and those who would defend them (YOU!). You don’t deserve the right to be an american!
“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain
December 17th, 2005 at 3:11 pma little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Benjamin Franklin
[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:12 pmYou believe that the discovery that the government is spying on americans makes them feel ’safer’ in violation of the constitution?
You’re SUCH A MORON! You’ve definitely picked the correct political party.
And you live in a cocoon … it may not make you feel safer, but I’m super glad they’ve been doing it. I have nothing to worry about and neither do you. (unless your real name is Al Ryani Neatallah and you’ve been placing weekly calls to Al Qaeda :-))
December 17th, 2005 at 3:13 pmGeoMetro,
We already know bush has been investigating political opponents. The watch lists contains quakers and other pascifists as TERRORISTS, yet the republican abortion clinic bombers aren’t anywhere to be found. Now THAT is political investigations – pure and simple!
December 17th, 2005 at 3:14 pmHow many trolls have changed someones mind? “0″ ,and are they being paid to post here?…”Yes”…We’re not buying it the same with bushies lies.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:14 pmSpying on americans without warrants is a direct violation of the constitution.
Not when that same Constitution gives the President those rights … get real. You’re way off base on this one.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:14 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:15 pmThere’s something called the 4th Admendment that says that a crime has been committed. Cyphers only exist because it is the policy of governments to try to spy on one another. But the 4th Amendment bars our government from spying on its own people without judicial approval.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:16 pm“Not when that same Constitution gives the President those rights … get real. You’re way off base on this one.
Comment by Giacomo”
The words of a dictator and his apologists. You are unworthy of american citizenship!
December 17th, 2005 at 3:16 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:19 pmAnd since when have you become a strict Constitutional constructionist, Ryan. You’ve found a right to privacy that seems, by many, to be an interpretation outside the framers original considerations … why not this as well. To say that what “I, Ryan Neat, thinks” the Constitution guarantees is the ONLY interpretation is pure folly … you already admit, by your stances, that the Constitution is “living” … well, we must it only “live” in the direction you see fit … answer that for me. It doesn’t … it’s pure partisanship on your part … and it’s utter BS. (and I have to go to the mall, so I’ll read whatever depraved repsonse you concoct later … if at all possible, try and describe your opinions without name calling … it’s easier to read and I automatically ascribe more intelligence to your thoughts).
December 17th, 2005 at 3:19 pmWe already know bush has been investigating political opponents.
I won’t even argue with you on this, fair enough, I’ll just say, fine. How then do you deduce that the NSA is doing the investigating. You’re looking for smoke, finding steam and screaming FIRE.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:20 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:21 pmI really like what Arlen Specter said yesterday: “This act is really important. Without it the CIA and FBI are totally screwed up because we set it up that way in the first place. I am a complete idiot for allowing this situation, but I won’t take any responsibility for it and prefer to scare everyone. 9/11 so there. I am right and you can’t tell me about the abuses because they are under a gag order anyway. Trust us. We know best.”
December 17th, 2005 at 3:21 pm#45 – “The battle lines have been drawn. On one side, the ends justify the means. Other wish to protect the constitution at all costs. Which side are you on?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:21 pmComment by MLDB
*****Excellent question – and cleverly spun. “Progressives” love affair with the Constitution (EXCEPT the Second Amendment) seems sincere – but would you gentle, pasty pacifists dirty your Birkenstocks, and pick up a sword to defend it? Better to reason with the barbarians, right?? Our Constitution, in a destroyed USA, would be no more useful than Charmin. The palpable hysteria of the left should be reserved for the 36 people who were receiving international phone calls from suspected terrorists. Those 36, and their friends, send a big “Thank you!!!”
#157
Oh, and to the person that said something like “do you know the chances of getting killed by a terrorist†as if that makes any difference when the NSA is trying to impede terrorists. Do you know the chance of dying on a plane … under your logic, we shouldn’t continue to add measures of safety on airplanes because “the chances are so small†…
I said. And I stick by it. According to your logic, the police should have the right to decide that they think you’re thinking about committing a crime, so therefore, they should arrest and convict, and put you to death by lethal injection because you merely for the thought (that is EXACTLY was the Bush Regime did to Iraq). Giacomo, that IS what you’re avocating by supporting pre-emptive anything.
So I am merely suggesting you consider something proven to kill Americans and go after it, rather than something you think might.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:22 pm[Commented deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:24 pm#158
For those of you so concerned, what do YOU have to fear from the NSA … if you are afraid, what the heck have you been up to.
Why did the government fear getting the correct and legal documents first… what the heck were they up to?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:25 pmThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated
And I consider it HIGHLY REASONABLE to eavesdrop on calls from suspected Al Qaeda to arab nations … why don’t you is the question. The fact that you somehow have hopped from international eavesdropping of terrorist suspects to domestic eavesdropping of political opponents is proof that you’re all to willing to connect dots in any way you see fit. You’ve connected some dots … now step back and see if you’re “picture” makes sense … likely what you’ll see is a snarl.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:25 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:28 pm“And I consider it HIGHLY REASONABLE to eavesdrop on calls from suspected Al Qaeda to arab nations … why don’t you is the question.” GeoMetro
Oh you missed the news today? It wasn’t just international calls that were eavesdropped on you retarded fool. You aren’t even arguing the current point you halfwit.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:29 pm#181,
“And I consider it HIGHLY REASONABLE to eavesdrop on calls from suspected Al Qaeda to arab nations”
If you replace the “suspected” with “proven with evidence that would stand up in a U.S. court” you might have a point. If we don’t require the government to prove they are going after legitimate targets, how do we know they aren’t targeting innocent Americans or just Muslims in general?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:30 pmFTP,
We do know they are targeting innocent americans. They’ve been spying on peace activists – quakers and pascifists. It’s just more fascist justifications for throwing out the constitution and instituting a rule of dictatorship.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:31 pmAccording to your logic, the police should have the right to decide that they think you’re thinking about committing a crime, so therefore, they should arrest and convict, and put you to death by lethal injection because you merely for the thought
The police must follow probable cause and reasonable suspicion … these same concepts are EASILY applied to suspected Al Qaeda operatives … c’mon guys … I read an article this morning that said the reason they started this was because two 9/11 terrorists were talking UNDER OUR NOSES … and the NSA didn’t sniff it out. I know you don’t like Bush, but demonizing this issue looks really petty … he’s trying to protect you for God’s sake (no pun intended). Attack the man for the stuff he actually does do wrong … and for those that say the NYT should’ve released this story … if the releasing of this story causes us to “lose” a terrorist we would’ve otherwise caught, does that change your opinion. We are in a war with terrorists OVER HERE … THEY”RE ALREADY HERE … and the NYT decides to expose one way we find them … the terrorists must think we are total morons.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:32 pmBut it is the domestic intercepts that people in the know are concerned about. iIt is legal to intercept information that goes to or comes from abroad as information is part of international commerce.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:35 pmIf you replace the “suspected†with “proven with evidence that would stand up in a U.S. court†you might have a point.
You’re letting some paranoia get the best of you … Mohammed Atta was suspected Al Qaeda too … up until he flew a 757 into the WTC, that is. The NSA has to go on “suspected” in order to “prove” … it’s called compiling evidence.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:36 pmGeoMetro,
There’s nothing petty about spying on americans without a warrant. If that’s how you feel, you understand nothing about what it means to be an american, or what it means to fight for us. Considering you approved of strip searching a child, I’m not surprised you possess no moral compass.
Re-read your own post, and read franklin’s statement he wrote for total morons just like you.
“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain
a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
Benjamin Franklin
And the terrorists do think we’re morons, because bush has done everything in the world to improve their lot, while making ours worse! And fools like you enable those behaviors.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:38 pm#186
I know you don’t like Bush, but demonizing this issue looks really petty … he’s trying to protect you for God’s sake (no pun intended).
Actually, I don’t dislike Bush, I just think he’s imcompetant and dangerous. Like you. It’s not personal. It’s a matter of the President overstepping his powers. Once you let him get away with one violation, you let him get away with another and another until you are in a dictatorship. It’s what happened to Germany with Hitler – a slow and steady erosion of their rights until Holocaustic tyranny was all that was left. A a history forgotten, is a history repeated. It’s why we bring it up. Because people like you forget. You can’t see beyond your own ass.
God’s sake? I don’t believe in gods.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:38 pmWhy did the government fear getting the correct and legal documents first… what the heck were they up to?
They didn’t … anyone with experience in law enforcement knows that sometimes “time is of the essence” … to make the NSA go back and forth would’ve put an undue burden on them when they are actively engaged and trying to protect us … again, I have no problem with following the proper channels, but all of us should have a problem if following those channels causes us to lose opportunities and information … if that’s the case, then the channels are no longer “proper” and the hinderance they’ve become is far more detrimental to the public that the channels were designed to protect.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:39 pm“You’re letting some paranoia get the best of you … Mohammed Atta was suspected Al Qaeda too …” GeoMetro
And yet all of that was done with warrants, and without violating the constitution. Just because bush is too inept to act on intelligence, doesn’t mean he should be granted more rights to thwart the constitution – if anything means he should be given less! Clearly he’s not competent enough to protect us, so he’s the last person who should be given more authority!
December 17th, 2005 at 3:39 pmGiacomo go read the posts on about this issue. The President can conduct any of these wiretaps with a warrant from the FISA court. That court is designed to get warrants quickly,as Josh Marshall opoints out “FISA specifically empowers the A.G. or his designee to start wiretapping on an emergency basis even without a warrant,so long as a retroactive application is made for one as soon as practicable,but not more than 72 hours after the A.G. authorizes such surveillance.
I’m for wiretapping Americans who are communicating with AlQaeda operatives. I just want it done according to the law so that any evidenced obtained can be used against them in a court of law. My question is why don’t you?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:41 pmAnyone who tries to defend Bush signing a secret document, to permit the NSA, an orginization that was NEVER chartered for domestic survellience, to SPY on Americans right here on US soil, anyone trying to defend this is a fool.
Why do you think he had to do it in SECRET?
Gee, I don’t know,,,maybe because,,,,,,he KNEW it was WRONG?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:41 pm“They didn’t … anyone with experience in law enforcement knows that sometimes “time is of the essence†… to make the NSA go back and forth would’ve put an undue burden on them when they are actively engaged and trying to protect us …”
GeoMetro
Are you a recent immigrant, because you seem clueless on american values, or how this country works.
1) for ‘emergency’ situations, law enforcement is granted immediate hearings with judges. This is not a problem.
2) if the NSA has to go back and forth, it means they don’t have probable cause, and therefore the constitution IS WORKING.
3) if you think that law enforcement has the right to trample people’s civil liberties for expediency, you know nothing of the constitution or american values.
Get out of my country, you don’t belong here!
December 17th, 2005 at 3:42 pmA court order means that someone, a 3rd party, is going to look at why you are eavesdropping on someone, which keeps us honest.
All Bush wants is absolute power, which of course he’s pretty much taken on his own.
Unltimate power ultimately corrupts.
IMPEACH BUSH
December 17th, 2005 at 3:44 pmIMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH BUSH
TJM,
This is typical of GeoMetro. He comes and makes a big wasteful argument, talking out of his a$$ about stuff he knows NOTHING about. And the entire time he sounds like a retarded fascist that mussolini would be proud of.
GeoMetro,Your alias is italian, has your family always been fascist?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:44 pmGeoMetro,
Would you feel so happy if Gore or Kennedy had this right to wiretap americans without court supervision?
December 17th, 2005 at 3:45 pmThere’s nothing petty about spying on americans without a warrant.
As usual, your comment is a) not what I said b) not in the correct context. You’re trying to draw a line between terrorist observation and political expedience … this line is only drawn be your personal opinions. That’s the petty part.
And the terrorists do think we’re morons, because bush has done everything in the world to improve their lot, while making ours worse!
Like invading Afghanistan and Iraq … maybe on the Iraq. Bush actually has the balls to do something … unlike others who would send a few cruise missles over. Have we been attacked since 9/11 Ryan … then our lot (at least our terrorist lot) is not worse … why can’t you see that newspapers can’t just go around reporting whatever the feel like.
Oh, and you’re using Ben Franklin like others try to use the Bible … one, seemingly relevant, out of context, innocuous quote is proof of nothing … zip … zero … nada.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:46 pm#191
I feel like I would do better to have a dialog with a turnip. Are you kidding? Are you actually serious about this? How do you function in the real world with thoughts like these?
Giacomo, seriously, pack a bag and go live in another country that exists as you are willing to tolerate, and then come back and talk about this inane idea of flexibility in our Constitution. These can be no flexibility to our system, otherwise we have no system.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:46 pmHas anyone figured out yet that right wingers who want to issue unlimited power to the President to “protect” them from harm, are nothing more than cowardly little traitors?
They are the Benidict Arnolds, the ones who sell out there country for fear of getting hurt.
MAN UP Sissies. We are Americans, show some courage for God’s sake.
Stop being such cowards and MAN UP.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:48 pmHere’s what’s wrong with republicans. A university student orders a copy of Mao’s book, and gets a visit from the FBI.
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/12-05/12-17-05/a09lo650.htm
Communism is dead, and yet we get this. And if the same student were to order Strauss or Hitler’s or any number of evangelical whacko’s books that incite violence (Coulter!), would the FBI show up? Nope…
THIS is why the power of the government and government spying is WRONG.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:48 pmThere’s nothing petty about spying on americans without a warrant.
As usual, your comment is a) not what I said b) not in the correct context. ” GeoMetro
Bull crap. You lie.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:49 pm“Have we been attacked since 9/11 Ryan … then our lot (at least our terrorist lot) is not worse”
Apparently our lot isn’t that good. According to you, there are terrorists on our soil wanting to take America down. If we weren’t fighting them in Iraq they would get on planes, fly over here undetected by our military and kill us all. The only way we can feel safe is if we give up all our civil liberties and let Bush dictate our lives for us.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:49 pmShow some gnads for God’s sake!
December 17th, 2005 at 3:49 pmCOWARDS
December 17th, 2005 at 3:49 pmMaybe all this wiretapping is why so many republicans are being indicted.
Bubble boy is not smart enough to know who should be spyed on.
We should be thanking Bubble boy for bringing down the criminals that will ultimately rat him out.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:52 pm“Like invading Afghanistan and Iraq … maybe on the Iraq. Bush actually has the balls to do something … unlike others who would send a few cruise missles over.” GeoMetro
Actually Clinton proposed invading Iraq, but republicans said they’d block it. They desperately tried to block Kosovo as well, but because it was a UN action and a peacekeeping mission he was able to thwart them. You really should be blaming republicans for this, it was you chickenhawks who are responsible for this – but you tend to be ‘balless’ wonders anyway.
” Have we been attacked since 9/11 Ryan …”
Yes, the US has been constantly in Iraq… Hadn’t thought of that had you? And Spain and England have also been attacked. Not to mention that it was 8 years between the first trade center attacks – this proves nothing but that Al Qaeda has a long window between attacking on american soil. But you’ve seemed to extrapolated it into a fantasy of safety, out of your own insecure dreams.
” then our lot (at least our terrorist lot) is not worse ”
Ah, but this is where your consistent ignorance comes into play. The pentagon has already confirmed that the number of terrorist attacks internationally is up because of our actions in iraq, and that the number of terrorists themselves was up 4 fold when they stopped publically announcing the figures. You live in delusion you little moron.
“… why can’t you see that newspapers can’t just go around reporting whatever the feel like.”
Yeah, freedom of the press is a real bummer for fascism, it must really make you sad.
“Oh, and you’re using Ben Franklin like others try to use the Bible … one, seemingly relevant, out of context, innocuous quote is proof of nothing … zip … zero … nada. “GeoMetro
You talked framer’s intent – not only is this quote proof that you’re wrong, it’s within the context of the framers.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:54 pmWould you feel so happy if Gore or Kennedy had this right to wiretap americans without court supervision?
Absofreakinlutely … all Presidents MUST be alllowed to do this … I already said this.
It’s what happened to Germany with Hitler – a slow and steady erosion of their rights until Holocaustic tyranny was all that was left.
This statement doesn’t even resemble the truth … I have no time to engage in a WWII discussion. I’ll say this, to compare Bush to Hitler, and the US to post WWI Germany is WAY off base.
I’m for wiretapping Americans who are communicating with AlQaeda operatives. I just want it done according to the law so that any evidenced obtained can be used against them in a court of law. My question is why don’t you?
Precisely my point actually … I think the taps WERE under Constitutional law (as the much maligned Yoo argued).
Ryan, I thought you only argued about subjects you “know” about … clearly law enforcement does not fit this bill.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:55 pmOh,Giacomo………I’m so disappointed. You want to dismiss a Ben Franklin quote,ok,he’s dead after all, but why do you want to wiretap Americans illegally when there are methods already in existence to do it legally and expeditiously.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:55 pm#199
Oh, and you’re using Ben Franklin like others try to use the Bible … one, seemingly relevant, out of context, innocuous quote is proof of nothing … zip … zero … nada.
Ben Franklin was one of the founding fathers of our country. Jesus was not. Franklin is, therefore, relevent in this context while the Bible is not.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:56 pmRight on Ryan.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:56 pmI compare Bubble boy to Hitler all the time Giacomo.
The similarities are striking.
I also compare neocon chickenhawks with Hitler.
The similarities are striking.
December 17th, 2005 at 3:59 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 3:59 pmGiacomo You said:
Absofreakinlutely … all Presidents MUST be alllowed to do this … I already said this.
Actually, they stopped that practice dimwit, when they figured out that ALL Presidents will use it to SPY on their politcal enemies.
Your a coward Giacomo, and cowards and sissies like you are the backbone behind every totalitarian government throughout history.
Move to Red China, you’ll fit in there better.
We have no use for traitors and cowards like you.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:00 pm#209
This statement doesn’t even resemble the truth … I have no time to engage in a WWII discussion. I’ll say this, to compare Bush to Hitler, and the US to post WWI Germany is WAY off base.
No, I’m not off base. When Hitler first assumed power he started out with burning books. Eventually, as he usurped power, he eventually burned humans.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:00 pmSusan,
GeoMetro is just like all of the italian fascists that went along with mussolini. He’s an idiot and a fool.
GeoMetro,
December 17th, 2005 at 4:01 pmIf you like fascism so much, move to another country – it’s NOT an american value – and you are clearly not an american in your values!
I agree with Ryan, illegal wiretaps will not hold up in court. Any normal thinking person understands this.
Giacomo, the Constitution bans illegal wiretapping, read it.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:01 pmGiacomo is soooooooooo afraid of the big, bad terrorists, that he-she-it will say, ooooohhh pleeeeeze Mr President, don’t let me get hurt,,,,,oooooooohhhhhh I’m soooooo afraid of the terrorists.
Don’t wet meee git hurt……pleeezzeeee
December 17th, 2005 at 4:02 pmI predict WORFEUS will continue to hurl juvenile names and offer absolutely no substance.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:02 pmGiacomo, seriously, pack a bag and go live in another country that exists as you are willing to tolerate, and then come back and talk about this inane idea of flexibility in our Constitution. These can be no flexibility to our system, otherwise we have no system.
So much for the “living document” that Ryan often states it is … I’m glad to see your a strict contructionist, unbelievable. I, then, can expect you picketing outside planned parenthood soon, I guess.
Yeah, freedom of the press is a real bummer for fascism, it must really make you sad.
So i guess the press can say anything they want then … under the guise of freedom. Maybe we should advertise our troop movements in Iraq … freedom of the press. Your statement is absolute folly.
You talked framer’s intent – not only is this quote proof that you’re wrong, it’s within the context of the framers. You’re such an ignorant and lying fool…
So I guess if I find one sentence from BenFran … that perfectly encapsulates ALL the “framers” ideals … yeah, cause they all agreed, didn’t they. Your arguments are deteriorating quickly. Just say “I don’t think the Constitution allows this” (the wire taps) without the predication that ALL must share your opinion (and that no one could soundly disagree constitutionally) and I’ll shut my mouth … you won’t and can’t …
December 17th, 2005 at 4:03 pmPOST 216 Unbelievable said
When Hitler first assumed power he started out with burning books
That’s right, and he also signed secret documents giving him unprecedented domestic survellience capabilities.
The similarites between Busch and Hitler, are absolutely astounding.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:05 pm…I think that’s 3 “Troll-Spankings” you guys have given out in ONE thread.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:05 pmGOOD WORK, everyone.
[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 4:05 pmBubble boy claims he got bad intelligence: excuse for not finding WMD’s.
Are we expected to trust Bubble boy with the power to spy on American citizens when he admits he is an idiot who cannot gather good intelligence?
Only an idiot would trust a complete failure with their safety.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:06 pmpredict WORFEUS will continue to hurl juvenile names and offer absolutely no substance.
Comment by wwallace
You predict right chucklehead.
What is there intelligent to say to cowards like you who are sooooooo afraid of the big, bad terrorists?
Your fear has clouded any reason. You’re yellow, chicken, and we don’t need anymore cowards in the country.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:07 pm“So much for the “living document†that Ryan often states it is … I’m glad to see your a strict contructionist, unbelievable. I, then, can expect you picketing outside planned parenthood soon, I guess. ” GeoMetro
You once again show that you’re a retard. It is a living document, but one that lives to fulfill the ideals of the founding fathers. If you don’t like those ideals of peace, pursuit of happiness, liberty and individual freedoms and privacy – go elsewhere. If you wish to change the living document, then amend it constitutionally. You don’t amend the constitution with an executive order you mentally ill dope!
Before arguing a point, next time try to look up what the words mean. You look REALLY stupid on that one.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:08 pmMan, Ryan’s on a roll today :D
December 17th, 2005 at 4:09 pm#221
So much for the “living document†that Ryan often states it is … I’m glad to see your a strict contructionist, unbelievable. I, then, can expect you picketing outside planned parenthood soon, I guess.
It is a living document. Like a plant, it needs nurture and nourishment. But you want to put it in the closet, ignore and starve it, and expect it to live.
Planned Parenthood isn’t unconstitutional. And I won’t picket. I am pro-choice.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:09 pm“I consider it HIGHLY REASONABLE to eavesdrop on calls from suspected Al Qaeda to arab nations”
I do too. But I also think there are indications that the NSA was used to spy for political gain. How do I justify that? By looking at what is not said and what is not done. The failure to act within the law is as good as any postive evidence.
Why go through the NSA when FISA give you all you need? As others have shown above, there are no impediments to the administration going thought the usual channels to spy on potential terrorists in the US. So why make all that effort to go around it?
Bolton is a definate smoking gun and the administrations refusal to release the NSA documents during his confirmation hearing is telling.
In other words… look at the pattern and the negative space the pattern creates. This gives you insight into what is going on. It isn’t legal proof of course. Legalisms get over-kill IMHO, but the law only determines guilt or innocense, not truth or falshood.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:09 pmActually, they stopped that practice dimwit, when they figured out that ALL Presidents will use it to SPY on their politcal enemies.
Your a coward Giacomo, and cowards and sissies like you are the backbone behind every totalitarian government throughout history.
Nice … following the Ryan Neat lexicon of arguments, are you. Oh well … how cowardice enters the equation, I’m not sure. You’re all fighting to protect the “rights” of suspected terrorists that would lob your head off, if only for the chance … the President has broad constitutional powers … you don’t have to like it … and likely, Gore would’ve done the same thing. I can’t understand why this is hard … if you’re against torture … this is a MUCH better way to get info. Stop living in a fanciful ideallic world that doesn’t exist. You’re endangering your own selves with this opinion.
Unbelievable, let me know when the book burning starts … until then, I’ll reserve my judgment on the facism of this administration.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:10 pm“Yeah, freedom of the press is a real bummer for fascism, it must really make you sad.
So i guess the press can say anything they want then … under the guise of freedom. Maybe we should advertise our troop movements in Iraq … freedom of the press. Your statement is absolute folly.” GeoMetro
Funny you should say that, because I was watching faux news during the Iraqi invasion, and I was amazed at how much troop movement was detailed on the show. Obviously this wasn’t a problem if faux news did it now, was it?
What’s folly is your desire to cut freedom of the press, and give the government unlimited control.
You are a fascist, and you never answered my question. Was your family fascist in italy during the war?
We all know the answer is yes…
December 17th, 2005 at 4:11 pm#222
WORFEUS, I’m sure Giacomo burns books in his backyard… :)
December 17th, 2005 at 4:11 pmWell, I guess I vehemently disagree on this issue … thanks to those that argued the opposite with questioning morality and intentions (both of you). Off to the mall … it’s been real.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:13 pmGia-COMA:
December 17th, 2005 at 4:15 pmDidn’t you read Ryan’s link?
A kid got a visit from the big boys because of a BOOK he requested. They had the book with them, but wouldn’t give it to him.
The book is on a “watch list”
That’s how it starts….
#232
Man, Ryan, you are a warrior. Actually watch FAUX “News”…
December 17th, 2005 at 4:16 pmGiacomo said;
Oh well … how cowardice enters the equation, I’m not sure
Cowardice enters the equation because you introduce it everytime you want to trade the freedoms, laws and liberties so many Americans fought and died for, trade them so you and your security moms can sleep safe at night.
Real Patriots. like Patrick Henry, (remember him? He’s the one who the school books point to as a true Patriot), say things like “give me liberty, or give me death“.
Cowards however say, “ohhhh please Mr. President, take away whatever liberties you want, just don’t let us get hurt!”
THAT IS WHERE COWARDICE COMES IN.
Clear it up any?
December 17th, 2005 at 4:17 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 17th, 2005 at 4:17 pm“Well, I guess I vehemently disagree on this issue …”
That’s just because you’re too much of a fascist fool to admit you’re wrong.
” thanks to those that argued the opposite with questioning morality and intentions (both of you). Off to the mall … it’s been real.”
It’s been a real example of how fascist, and retarded republicans are. You’d sell your mother out to make a buck. You’re unworthy of america. And your unwillingness to discuss the fact that your family were fascists during WWII proves my point. You don’t deserve america – and she certainly doesn’t need you!
December 17th, 2005 at 4:19 pmYou’re all fighting to protect the “rights†of suspected terrorists that would lob your head off, if only for the chance Comment by Giacomo
No, were fighting to protect the rights of AMERICANS.
Remember those people?
You used to be one before you traded your soul for a swastika.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:20 pmOne last note … my original intention for coming here was to see how the “other half lived” and to challenge my own beliefs with others that didn’t hold those beliefs. I’ve come to the realization based upon a) the debase manner that dissent is repudiated b) the almost complete lack of point/counter-point logic and c) the amount of self congradulatory back-slapping (among other observations) that many here are the “fringe left” … out of touch with even those of their own party …
Thank God …
December 17th, 2005 at 4:22 pmDoes anyone have that poem re:WWII, the ones that goes somewhat like,
First they came for the Poles.
But I was not Polish, so I said nothing
Then they came for……
It seems kind of appropriate here, and Giacoma seems to be the perfect example of the narrator.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:22 pm“Off to the mall … it’s been real.â€
Guess he punched off the fascist clock… and is off to preserve the consummeristic holiday he believes this country was built upon… probably a good time to go clean the litter box. Giacomo inspires me to scoop the poop.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:23 pmSusan, “Giacomo, the Constitution bans illegal wiretapping, read it.”
The Constitution doesn’t mention wiretapping at all, you ignoramus. Read it. LOL
December 17th, 2005 at 4:24 pmGot your clock cleaned there Giacomo and now you turn to debating tactics?
Anyone ever notice how when these guys get the facts shoved down their throats, they always just call us “fringe” and “mean” and slink away.
Go ahead Giacomom, crawl back in your saftey PATRIOT bed and pull the covers over your head.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:25 pmwwallace – I don’t tollerate idiocy. I don’t tollerate stupidity. I don’t tollerate greed. I don’t tollerate people who shouldn’t be in office. If Joe wants to believe what he beleives, fine. But I don’t want someone like that in office.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:25 pmI predicted that Ryan and WORFEUS would call names and offer no substance. There’s yet another thing I was right about!
December 17th, 2005 at 4:26 pmThe story that is starting to come out is that the same results could have been achieved via the NSA via legal routes. Which begs the next question why would they want to spy in total secrecy?
December 17th, 2005 at 4:26 pmBush syas he told 12 members of congress-any Dems? Durbin didn’t know~
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
December 17th, 2005 at 4:26 pmPlease remember that personal attacks on other commenters are not allowed. Attack the argument, not the person. Thanks.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:26 pmMAgnum, “wwallace – I don’t tollerate idiocy. I don’t tollerate stupidity.”
Oh, so you’re what they call a “self-loather.” OK.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:27 pmwwallace, in case you didn’t notice, I just clearly articulated how you and those like you are cowards.
Cowards that sell out American freedoms because they are afraid of the Big Bad Terrorists.
You’re a coward chump, prove me wrong.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:27 pmwwwwingnut,
The only ones not providing substance is you Neocons. Ryan and WORFEUS decimated Giacomo. You guys only come here because you’re paid by the fringe right to do so. You know you lose every argument, and look like idiots in the process, but as long as your check clears, that’s all that matters to you.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:29 pmThanks, unbelievable.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:32 pmI only saw that once, in school.
loooong time ago!)
Got your clock cleaned there Giacomo and now you turn to debating tactics
Just realized that I was banging my head against a wall. This forum doesn’t really allow for debate anyway. Everyone just picks apart one aspect of anothers point and no real give and take occurs … I wish it would … Ryan seems hell bent on prooving his points by slander and misrepresentation. He really is a huge disservice to liberals who would enjoy appropriate and effective reparte … the fact that you think he “won” just shows you to be on the same level (but to be fair, maybe not). I can’t argue with someone that never learned (in the 1st grade) that name calling only makes that person look like a fool … for you and others to ignore this is true cowardice. I hope he never procreates (or if he does, his face to face morality is nothing akin to his web posting morality).
December 17th, 2005 at 4:32 pmhis message is clear – he’s above the law…
December 17th, 2005 at 4:33 pmI predict WORFEUS and unbelievable will continue to call names and offer no substance, in violation of the site Terms of Use. :()
December 17th, 2005 at 4:33 pm#254
No problem, True Blue. Thanks for reminding us. You’re right, it is so very appropriate and timeless!
December 17th, 2005 at 4:33 pmalso wwallace – YOU do not seem tolerate any dissent either. All of us here are expressing that towards Bush, and you’re on here trying to bad mouth Democrats and Liberals for it. Is it ok for YOU do be against a point of you but not ok for US?
See the difference is, we’re against Bush because we KNOW Bush is harming America and the world. YOU on the other hand are just an idiot and playing politics, not realizing the harm Bush is causing.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:36 pmThe only ones not providing substance is you Neocons. Ryan and WORFEUS decimated Giacomo.
It appears that “substance”, not unlike love, is in the eye of the beholder … enjoy your cats.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:36 pmSad to say, Nixon is probably starting to look better and better to you as Bush goes on and on and on. At his very most paranoid and embittered, Tricky D would never never never have admitted he did anything like this illegal surveillance. And he certainly would never have tried to claim it was legal. Are you getting a new understanding of the Book of Job? Do I have to continue with this??
Methinks Bush may be having a melt down on his own. I’m considering turning him and Cheney into pillars of salt.
Pray often and well. That is all for now.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:36 pmDid anyone give thought to what we should do when we take back the government? I mean, we’ll have all this evidence of citizens that have made statements against our Constitution, our most treasured document. I think those people should be denied the right to vote until they decide to uphold our Constitution.
I think over the long term, we need to find a way to get “more better” education to inform people of what our country stands for, lots have forgotten.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:37 pm#257
Oh, stop calling the kettle black… Judd’s right. Let’s discuss the issues. Ryan has managed to pull apart everything Giacomo has posted with facts and substantial arguments. You want to say he hasn’t, fine, but you know that’s simply not true. If we were scoring this like a debate forum, Ryan would have won them all. You know it.
So, give us some facts then. We’ve been posting many. You guys just say ‘that’s a lie’… prove yor side with evidence. I dare you.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:38 pmGiacomo Post 255, so prove me wrong.
My argument is not as erudite as Ryan’s today, because it is simple. Apparently so simple, and TRUE, that both you and wwallace cannot counter it.
Here, let me explain again.
I, WORFEUS, am calling ANYONE, who would trade our civil liberties away because they are afraid of getting hurt by terroists, a coward.
Prove me wrong.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:38 pm#260 You never gave us the O’Reilly ‘Silent Night’ update…
December 17th, 2005 at 4:40 pmIt’s pretty obvious that Bush didn’t break the law for no reason at all, though he is sort of a compulsive criminal. The reason he didn’t go through FISA, where they rubber stamp warrants, was that the targets of the surveillance weren’t terrorist suspects at all. They were American opponents of his policies.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:42 pmThat’s right Purvis, and that’s exactly why they stopped it back in the days of Tricky Dick.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:44 pm#262
Education… I shouldn’t get started, I have a litter box to empty… but, I will say that we should have a forum for thsi subjevt in itself. I left Corporate America to become a high school teacher and I am appalled with the dismal condition of the public education system. What passes as history is laughable. It explains why so many of the neocons lurking in here believe what they actually believe.
But, you’re right we do need to think about how to move forward…
December 17th, 2005 at 4:44 pmRyan has managed to pull apart everything Giacomo has posted with facts and substantial arguments. You want to say he hasn’t, fine, but you know that’s simply not true. If we were scoring this like a debate forum, Ryan would have won them all. You know it.
Your comment perfectly encapsulates the problem … you believe what you want to believe and no amount of counter-argument will EVER be accepted. It’s too bad really, any honest person would detest Ryan’s manner … no matter how “right” they thought his opinions to be. The fact that you can think that a lucid and “right” opinion can somehow be brought by someone with Ryan’s level of conversational skill is beyond me. It’s safe to assume that you have already decided everything, don’t wish to be challenged on those decisions, and if you are challenged, can’t (or won’t) even recognize an appropriate counter point or dissent when it stares you in the face.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:44 pmGiacomo, counter my argument. It’s a real one.
I am not just calling names, I am making a point. One that you and wwallace cannot debate, because it’s a fact.
You are sooooo scared of terrorists, that you abandon our civil liberties to feel safe.
Just admit it, so we can find a nice safe house for you.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:47 pmIs Giacomo into S&M or what? I’ve never seen someone who enjoyed being pummeled so much.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:49 pm#269
Giacomo, paisano, I grew up with an Italian mafia father who was Catholic, conservative and Republican. Ronald Reagan was his idol. John Basilone was his cousin (google him). I’ve lived your side of the fence. I know your arguments backward and inside out There are reasons, very valid reasons why I defected. Why I think Ryan is winning the debates, and why you will not win me back. Your arguments are flawed, egocentric, and based on fear. The grass is greener inthis side (figuratively, and literally), and you are right, you’re not converting us. But this is a liberal blog. We didn’t come to a conservative blog looking to be converted. You came here, like the Christians on the Crusade looking for some heathens to save. But what you instead found was that you are in fact the heathens you sought to destroy.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:50 pmWORFEUS, the claim that civil liberties are being destroyed is nothing but paranoid kook nonsense.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:58 pmPolitical opponents=Terrorists=Peace activists=political opponents=terrorists=anti-war activists=political opponents=terrorists.
December 17th, 2005 at 4:58 pmAmen Unbeleivable.
I’m sorry my argument today is so simple and terse. Ryan and Unbelivable are both on fire today, so I hope I am not taking away from the overwhelming logic and facts they are putting out.
But when Friday’s revelation came out, I just kinda, “snapped”.
Not that I did not suspect he was doing this all along, but to hear Bush “taut” it from the bully pulpit.
Man I just lost it. This type of treason is beyond words for me. So I have just one, plain simple argument to offer today.
If you sell out our freedoms for your fear, then you are a traitor, and a coward. Simple.
Prove me wrong.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:01 pm#275
If you sell out our freedoms for your fear, then you are a traitor, and a coward. Simple.
What’s that adage about the soul of wit is brevity, or something like that? You nailed it WORFEUS. There’s a lot to be said for that…
December 17th, 2005 at 5:03 pmwwallace, brilliant genius, but the right to NOT BE SPYED ON WITHOUT WRITE OR WRIT, is an American civil liberty.
Brilliant.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:04 pmthe soul of wit is brevity
I like that :D
December 17th, 2005 at 5:05 pm1) #260 You never gave us the O’Reilly ‘Silent Night’ update…
You’re right … from the shows (two of them) I watched … he DID NOT issue a correction. I was wrong in my assumptions.
2) I, WORFEUS, am calling ANYONE, who would trade our civil liberties away because they are afraid of getting hurt by terroists, a coward.
Cowardice is not the root of the issue … my interests are not to save my own neck. As I’ve said countless times, what truly annoys me is that while people might be very principled here, those same people believe others who don’t share those principles are ignorant and/or evil. My arguments, almost always (and even in cases where I don’t actually share the dissenting view) are intended to try and “open the eyes” of those to a world and point of view that they don’t share … a world that they assume to be less moral and less “worthy”. I haven’t deduced whether this phenomenon is an attempt to deligitmize the contra-argument or becuase of a heart felt ideal that all Republicans are evil (this notion is extremely absurd and obtuse).
In that vein … (and don’t separate these points as they build)
1) The motivation for the wire taps is to protect the Constitution not tear it “asunder”. Some have insinuated political gain enters the equation … there is no proof for that in this and these intance(s)
2) The taps begun after 9/11 … it now appears we could’ve impeded 9/11 had we engaged in this manner prior to 9/11.
3) The interpretation of the Constitution is often like medical diagnoses unfortunately … two see the same information and come to differing conclusions … to say that one side is “self serving” when they do this is to try and influence the argument with conjecture.
4) I don’t have trouble saying that a) Bush, in this case, acted in a manner in keeping with the Constitution and b) Bush acted in this manner to protect the nation as a whole.
5) Something I’ve recently tried to shed light on the notion that all of us are allowed a certain sense of moral clarity and indifference precisely because our current position in life means such positions endanger no other. We see clearly … but filter our decisions through a lense where that clarity (right or wrong) effects scores of citizens and our positions merit gain in gravity. To say that Bush is Hitler … is an easy association from the arm chair. He, according to that one, is rolling back liberties much the same as Hitler … hence, the shoe fits. Now, place that same one in the position where that aforementioned stance effects someone (even 2) outside themselves … and their stance seems flippant and overly casual. The depth of information and advise in which the government makes decisions is far greater than any of us imagine … and to label a political opponent as depraved misses the mark.
6) While some choose to heighten the Constitutional concepts of “illegal search and seizure” they conveniently forget the mandate of the President to “protect and uphold” the same. Those two words are not synonomous. Uphold … to fulfill the intent. Protect … to render safe. THAT’S the basis of my opinion.
I hope this sheds light on your cowardice question … I sincerely hope that, eventually, I can express myself here without fear of others questioning my morality. (I’m also not “paid” to be here … odd that some would assert as much). God bless (even those that don’t believe in Him).
December 17th, 2005 at 5:05 pmWhile I believe that the substance of Ryan Neat’s arguments were superior to those of Giacomo’s, I have to admit that Giacomo does have a point when he says:
December 17th, 2005 at 5:16 pm“It’s too bad really, any honest person would detest Ryan’s manner … no matter how “right†they thought his opinions to be.” I suppose that in this case I am one of the people that he describes, and though I disagree with much of what he says, he definitely beats most of the posters here in decorum. I urge us not to become a mirror image of the hateful, unthinking vitriol that I have found on conservative blogs.
To Ryan Neat — you’re obviously a bright, educated person. But it is my belief that you debase your arguments by engaging in name-calling.
The motivation for the wire taps is to protect the Constitution not tear it “asunderâ€.
Well it sure as heck ain’t strengthing it. You can crap on a silver platter, call it filet mingon, serve it up to your friends and all take a bite.
I’m not biting. Wire taps do nothing to strengthen our liberties, (and BTW, I think I might point out here that not ALL of our liberties are spelled out in the constitution. Go read the Declaration of Independence on time, and see the formula America created for itself to deal with corrupt governments)
Why do you think the President signed this order in secret?
Some have insinuated political gain enters the equation … there is no proof for that in this and these intance(s)
We don’t NEED proof. It’s happened before, and that’s was ALL we needed to know to inact laws to make sure it did not happen again.
Besides, you’re not really sitting there thinking that I believe this lying sack of sh#@t in the White House is not going to do anything dishonest, are you?
December 17th, 2005 at 5:17 pmmun13A I hear you, but know this.
We are talking about the President of the United States, signing an SECRET, ILLEGAL order authorizing the NSA to SPY ON ITS OWN PEOPLE!
I think you should be thankful for anything short of a lynchmob making it’s way up Pennsylvania Ave with a torches and ropes.
Oh yea, and a little pot ash tar and some feathers. :|
December 17th, 2005 at 5:19 pm#281
Seem you found your voice WORFEUS :)
December 17th, 2005 at 5:19 pmOur Revolution began with people saying that certain freedoms were worth dying for. Now some people are saying we should take away our liberties so we don’t die.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:29 pmThanks Unbelievable ;)
This one really got to me.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:32 pmAmerica Truly is going to hell in a basket of lies cheats dictators, corruptation, violence. america truly is pure hell.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:32 pmComment by toys — December 17, 2005 @ 5:29 pm
December 17th, 2005 at 5:33 pm#186. I second that.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:33 pmAmerica Truly is going to hell in a basket of lies cheats dictators, corruptation, violence. america truly is pure hell.
Sorry for the repost Toys, but I wanted to make sure everyone heard that one, because that IS the point.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:34 pm286
December 17th, 2005 at 5:34 pmDecember 17th, 2005 at 5:35 pm
Thanks wwallace, glad you’re finally seeing the light :)
December 17th, 2005 at 5:36 pm#252 – “…Cowards that sell out American freedoms because they are afraid of the Big Bad Terrorists.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:39 pmYou’re a coward chump, prove me wrong.”
Comment by WORFEUS — December 17, 2005 @ 4:27 pm
******WorFEus – you remind me of Butch and Sundance – with no idea that the Bolivian Army was just waiting for them! You must be the kind of person who would bring a knife to a gun fight. If radical Muslims decimate large portions of our population I get the impression you wouldn’t give a $h*t.
NotSoMighty Aphrodite,
Well at least you had the gravitas to address my argument.
And you make a reasonable argument. So let me be clear.
I would rather watch every man, women and child in America, die from the enemies bombs, than watch America become a corrupt Police State.
This American says, true freedom is worth dying for.
How bout you?
December 17th, 2005 at 5:47 pmOur Revolution began with people saying that certain freedoms were worth dying for.
Now some people are saying we should take away our liberties so we don’t die.
While this comment seems praiseworthy, a simple purvey of history will note all sorts of “rollbacks” during “wars” … especially the civil war and wwII. Decisions are not made in a vacuum.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:49 pmHas anyone ever noticed that in Sci Fi movies, the evil alliance always ends up losing in the end? But of course the evil alliance always thinks they are doing “what’s best” for everyone. I just watched ‘Serenity’ the other night, definitely recommend it.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:50 pmGiacomo, this ain’t WW2. Our war in Iraq is equivlent to watching Mike Tyson in a boxing match against Don Knotts.
Your argument is little more than a Red Herring.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:52 pm#295, do you feel this administration is trustworthy? Do you feel any administration should be trusted?
I believe that numerous links have been posted in this very thread that support the belief that all “rollbacks” of our liberty are wrong, whether they happen or not. I hate to break it to you, but I remember the 60s and 70s and cointelpro, our government is not known as highly ethical, that is the cause of the FISA courts.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:54 pmLast year, 16,694 Americans, good US Citizens, were killed by Drunk Drivers.
But we still sell Alcohol.
Last year, 42,636 Americans, good US Citizens were killed in Automobile accidents.
But we still sell cars.
See guys, it’s dangerous, just stepping out your door in the morning. Life is dangerous.
And living free can be even more dangerous.
But that does not mean you stop doing it, just because you’re afraid.
December 17th, 2005 at 5:55 pmI believe that numerous links have been posted in this very thread that support the belief that all “rollbacks†of our liberty are wrong, whether they happen or not.
Again, tell that to Abe Lincoln (Martial law) and FDR (the department of censorship) … Wrong = immoral or Wrong = poor decision. People seem to be equating the two. To say that the War on Terror is less than the WWII or the Civil War in its threat to our society is, in my opinion, a grave miscalculation.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:05 pmWar on Terror ?
Oh yea, the perpetual war you told us we are in, in order to take away these liberties.
Like Michael Douglas said in “the American President”,
you’re problem is not that you don’t get it, it’s that you can’t sell it”.
Sorry there slick, but I ain’t buyin no “war without borders” and “enemies without banner”.
Bin Laden and some thugs killed 3000 Americans.
We got 300 million left.
I got a better chance of getting hit with a bus, than I do getting killed by a terrorist.
Grow up. (and some gnads while you’re at it)
December 17th, 2005 at 6:11 pmI know, lets start the “war on busses“
December 17th, 2005 at 6:13 pm#294 – “I would rather watch every man, women and child in America, die from the enemies bombs, than watch America become a corrupt Police State.” – WorFEus
December 17th, 2005 at 6:13 pm****** I NEVER want America, to become a police state!!! But if every man, woman and child is dead – who is here to fight the good fight??? Maybe we’ll have to agree that each of us is fearful of something HUGE & ominous – you fear government oppression and I dread the thought of another attack – yet neither of us welcomes what the other fears.
Once again kudos Aphroidte. You make a “reasonable” argument.
But the fact is, you need to read my post #301 and caculate the ‘WORFEUS EQUATION’ into your reasoning.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:16 pm#300, no one has ever stated that any terrorist group could destroy the US. Tony Blair has stated the same for the UK. They could cause damage, but not destroy. Do you know otherwise? What do you mean by “threat to our society?”
December 17th, 2005 at 6:16 pmBTW, Mighty Aphrodite, the mispelling of your name in 304 was an accident this time.
You are slowly gaining my respect as at least someone who believes her argument, and articulates her oppoistion to what I consider to be the real points here.
You’re wrong of course, but at least you aren’t afraid of articulating your point.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:21 pmWhat these trolls fail to understand is that Bush’s idea of patriotism requires us to give up our privacy, sanity and happiness in order to please the bubble president, his oil-loving cronies and the NASCAR crowd.
Patriotism is fighting for your freedom, standing strong against adversity, helping your fellow man. As WORFEUS stated, anyone who sells out to the idea of destroying liberties should be labeled a coward. Better yet, a coward should also be labeled as a traitor and a Benedict Arnold.
Patriotism doesn’t come from lobbyists, research groups, think tanks, pundits, bigots, people who practice bestiality, Nancy Grace, Rick Warren or Frank Luntz. Patriotism comes from courage, not cowardice.
Come 2006, the bubble president is going to find the bubble is getting smaller and smaller and smaller. Soon, the bubble will burst and he and his cronies will have to answer.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:23 pmLet me as a valid question here. And now, think about it before you rush to respond…
Prior to 9/11, how many of you were afraid of terrorist attacks by 9/11?
No one, of course. Because it is the things that have already happened to us that we fear the most. It’s why we fear another unlikely terror attack far more than all the other things that have much higher probabilities of getting us (See post #299 – thanks WORFEUS).
All we’re trying to point out is that there are people in power who are trying to use that fear to better their own positions. Personally, I don;t think Bush is one of them. Though I do think he is highly ignorant and incompetent as President (because he gives into his fears), I think there are other people influencing him who want to take advantage of your willingness to give up your civil liberties.
The enemy isn’t always obvious. Sometimes the enemy is the people claiming to be your friend (after all, isn’t this how children are lured away by preditors). You even have a quote in your Bibles that warn you about the Anti-Christ appearing to be your friend (or somethign like that, it’s been a while).
We’re saying that if you’re going to give up your civil liberties, be sure the cure isn’t worse than the disease. In this case, we are certain that it’s not. That’s why we’re so passionate about defending our rights.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:27 pmDecember 17th, 2005 at 6:27 pm
Amen Jimbo,
And the fact is, it’s kinda courageous for the guys even running this Blog right now to even be doing it.
Being labled a traitor by me or Jimbo, while stinging, is of little consequence.
But being labled a traitor by your government, is dangerous.
“it is dangerous to be right, when your government is wrong”
December 17th, 2005 at 6:28 pm#308 sorry – typos… replace that second “9/11″ with “al quaeda”
December 17th, 2005 at 6:29 pmHas anyone noted that if someone were apprehended based upon illegal wiretapping and surveillance, that person would be set free in a court of law?
December 17th, 2005 at 6:30 pmOh wait, I forgot, Bush would apprehend anyone he merely suspected of illegal activities and ship them off to foreign prisons never to be heard from again.
It’s all about keeping within the law, folks.
We cannot demand that other countries follow the law when our president doesn’t.
This is an impeachable offense.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:30 pmHot tip.
What is that?
December 17th, 2005 at 6:32 pm#295. Giacomo,
December 17th, 2005 at 6:33 pmHeHe, You think THIS so called War is Bad???
Wait until you are Confronted with a Nation Your own Size, Or Worse , Bigger stronger And Four times Greater Population.
Then you will reconsider your Precious Freedoms. You would be one of the First to Cry “mommy, Mommy”.
And hide under your Bed scared Shitless.
In fact, all of you on the left here are taking chances if you think about it.
Even those of you with anonymous handles, how hard do you think it would be to log your visiting IP address?
See, the PATRIOT ACT, gives the not just government agencies, but individual agents, or lone wolf’s, to do just that.
Be careful, that guy agreeing with you may really be big brother, putting your name on the “naughty” list.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:35 pmWorfeus, I just got his e maail. I think hes looking for help getting his website running again.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:35 pmthought I would pass it on.
well, im off to another subject.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:37 pmadios.
“my original intention for coming here was to see how the “other half lived†and to challenge my own beliefs with others that didn’t hold those beliefs.
Giacomo”
Did you really expect something different on the internet? It is the same all over and it isn’t a right vs left thing. It’s just the nature of the internet hun. Don’t you think I’d get the same at any right wing blog?
Take these exact same people and put us all in a real 3D room and the conversation, while heated maybe, would be much better. People behave differently on the internet, and not for the better.
If your goal is to have good conversations in blog comment pages, not a very realistic one I might add, then in my experience you have to work very hard to ignore the flames, studiously avoid flamming others and concentrate on those willing to talk to you on a more civil level. You have to be super diplomatic and be carefull how you word things.
Here it is in a nutshell Giacomo. People are scared, really scared. Many people see a slow progresive loss of their liberties and then the shennanigans of this administration only fuel their fears. Add to that the internet where everything get amped up and rumors fly all over and…well… you can see the results right here.
Frankly, my reading of this administration is that they really are different and not in the least bit ‘conservative at all. They are radical neocons and yeah, I’ve read Kristal and Pearlman and the others and that only scares the crap out of me. Do you really trust these former militant Stalinists, (not Marxists, no not at all)? I don’t. Their writings disgust me and they should disgust you too. Given that that is where I’m comming from it should hardly surprise you that I doubt their motives when spying on us.
I understand that you trust them and that you’re comming from a position of trust. I get that. I just don’t see how, especially after the Katrina debacle, that any reasonable person could still put their trust in these clowns. I just don’t see it.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:40 pmSection PageVideoLocal NewsNortheastWestSouthMidwestSouthwestCentralBush aims at paper for damaging security
• Multimillionaire shot several times in ambush
December 17th, 2005 at 6:42 pm#316
Good point WORFEUS, and I agree. I joke all the time thatthe emails I send teh White House and my Reps will get me audited by the IRS, or worse. I believe the chances of being targeted by my own governement are more likely than being caught in an act of terror.
I’ve been all over the world. And I go with care, and respect for these new cultures, and always leave with new memories and new friends. Murder is not a human trait. Most people don’t want to kill Americans. And we can’t live like they do or what’s the point?
I refuse to be intimidated or afraid. It’s not worth it.
December 17th, 2005 at 6:44 pm#321 I really need food… meant to say murder is not a ‘typical’ human trait…
December 17th, 2005 at 6:47 pmI knew what you meant :D
December 17th, 2005 at 6:50 pmDon’t think it’s too far fetched.
We all heard about the Episcopalian (Or was it a Presb?)that got audited as to their tax exempt status for daring to speak out against the war, although churches who speak out for the President were ignored.
Pretty freakin Orwellian like scary, ayy?
December 17th, 2005 at 6:52 pmboy…..got kinda quiet in here all of a suddin….:|
December 17th, 2005 at 6:55 pmk….i’m gettin scared now…..
December 17th, 2005 at 6:58 pmYeah, I guess everyone else needed food too… :) Well, enjoy your evening. I’m gonna go get a bite. Nice talking with you, as always. People like you make me feel better about humanity, and give me hope that this current debacle is just temporary. Thanks for the support. See ya…
December 17th, 2005 at 6:58 pmComment by WORFEUS — December 17, 2005 @ 5:35 pm
December 17th, 2005 at 7:00 pmJIMBO, “Bush’s idea of patriotism requires us to give up our privacy, sanity and happiness in order to please the bubble president, his oil-loving cronies and the NASCAR crowd.”
That’s lunatic paranoid nonsense. Get a grip, you kook.
December 17th, 2005 at 7:01 pmActually wwallace, go back and look at the posts. At 5:35, the only person posting, was you.
December 17th, 2005 at 7:08 pmIf you’re going to fabricate quotes by me, you could at least get the times right.
December 17th, 2005 at 7:08 pmAnd I never got answers to my questions. I’m bummed. Maybe next time, it was fun. I’m baking a pumpkin pie, now that’s American…
December 17th, 2005 at 7:10 pmYou ought to take a lesson from Aphrodite. She at least had the gnads to address my one and only argument in here tonight.
December 17th, 2005 at 7:10 pmmmmmmm…….punkin pie………mmmmmmmm
December 17th, 2005 at 7:11 pmWorFEus – I believe your post #301 weakens your argument. I say this as someone who has heard the weeping and shrieking of “progs” for 2200 servicemen and women who volunteered for military service – with your logic, why not just say, “$h*t, there’s more where they came from??” When I studied History, I was facinated by the story of Samarakand (sp?) in Central Asia. The place has never been able to recover after the thorough and deadly assault by Ghengis Khan – and sowing salt in the agricultural perimeter was designed so it NEVER recovered. Perhaps, I have a bit of “Never again!!” in me.
My vocal criticism of the Left’s position began when Clinton refused to understand the magnitude of repeated assaults on America and Americans. This was NOT a law enforcement issue – yet that is how he treated the international aspect of the first WTC bombing. And when he thought it might be a defense policy issue – he used the equivalent of a pea shooter.
I suppose if you were alive during the Civil War, you would have been outraged at the suspension of Habeus Corpus? Would you have asked for a cessation of hostilities? I mean, how ridiculous to fight a war to FORCE southern states to remain in the Union – and if several million slaves gain their freedom in the process – what’s the big deal?? Your desire for a perfect world is admirable – but I doubt you’re going to find it in this life. (So as not to appear exclusionary, to all the atheists, the translation is, “You’re $crew*d…”
In short, Habeus Corpus was restored, internment camps (developed by liberals) were done away with, and we no longer execute the enemy caught wearing US military uniforms- but I wouldn’t have a problem with THAT.
December 17th, 2005 at 7:18 pmYou haven’t made any arguments, WORFEUS, you’ve only engaged in cheap name-calling.
December 17th, 2005 at 7:20 pmwwallace, I am not name calling when I call you a moron. It is an accurate designation, even according to your last comment. Go back and read my argument. Look at my posts.
I know it’s hard to understand simple arguments, but this is a simple one.
Here, let me repost one of my posts which clearly articulates my argument.
_________________________________________________________
Last year, 16,694 Americans, good US Citizens, were killed by Drunk Drivers.
But we still sell Alcohol.
Last year, 42,636 Americans, good US Citizens were killed in Automobile accidents.
But we still sell cars.
See guys, it’s dangerous just stepping out your door in the morning.
And living free can be even more dangerous.
But that does not mean you stop doing it, just because you’re afraid.
___________________________________________________________
Bozo.
December 17th, 2005 at 8:01 pmwwallace-
I already have my grip and it’s called the truth.
December 17th, 2005 at 9:07 pmYou, on the other hand, continue to lose your grip on sanity. Learn to read, buddy.
You haven’t made any arguments, wwallace, you’ve only engaged in cheap name-calling.
December 17th, 2005 at 9:09 pmI hate America and everything it stands for. I am a traitor.
Comment by wwallace — December 17, 2005 @ 7:00 pm
December 17th, 2005 at 9:10 pmMightyTranny answers with the response typical of ‘fascists’, that the end justifies the means, and that civil liberties are ‘conveniences’ that people don’t need…
He/She demostrates why he/she is unworthy of this country, and why her family should have stayed in nazi europe where they belonged. MightyTranny, please take GeoMetro back to mussolini’s italy while you’re at it!
December 17th, 2005 at 9:13 pmIIf BBush DDeclares HHimself KKing TTomorrow II wwallace aam OOk wwith iit. DDictatorship iis ggood ffor AAmerica.;/
December 17th, 2005 at 9:23 pm#337 by WORFEUS contained no arguments.
December 17th, 2005 at 9:31 pm#343 by wwallace contained no arguments.
December 17th, 2005 at 9:37 pm#337 proved wwallace was wrong – as always! :()
December 17th, 2005 at 9:38 pmwwallace disrupts the site, because he can’t cope with facts that prove him wrong :()
December 17th, 2005 at 9:38 pmRyan seems obesessed with me, poor boy. LOL
December 17th, 2005 at 9:39 pmwwallace seems obesessed with me, poor girl. LOL
December 17th, 2005 at 9:45 pmwwallace stalks liberals, because no one will date her :()
December 17th, 2005 at 9:45 pmwwallace tries to distract everyone from the fact that Bush should be impeached for wiretapping, just like Nixon.
Bush = Nixon = criminal!
December 17th, 2005 at 10:32 pmYou know Ryan,
I think you just struck gold.
That’s true. We may have just saw the start of the Bush Watergate.
That’s why they put the story out on a Friday.
The times was being nice, giving them time to circle the wagons.
December 17th, 2005 at 10:37 pmThey threw the story out with the trash.
worfeus,
It’s the same crime. Wiretapping without a warrant, brought on by an arrogant out of control president who doesn’t respect the constitution. His claims that this was ‘necessary’ holds no water based in the FISA system, and the general leniency of the current laws. It’s the act of a dictator (or king), not of an american president who honors american values. This is what rang with the public with Nixon, because it is wholly unamerican, just like the trolls that defend it!
December 17th, 2005 at 10:42 pmFunny thing is, he was so popular that he probably could have gotten away with anything back then in 2002 if he had just asked.
But since he decided to do it on his own, he could be in huge trouble.
Now I know why he wanted his own lawyer on the Supreme Court.
December 17th, 2005 at 10:49 pmI mean, if I thought that they were going to be judging whether or not something I did was constitutional or not, I’d want my lawyer on the court too. :|
Kinda puts the Harriet Myers thingy in a whole new light, doesn’t it?
December 17th, 2005 at 11:21 pm“FISA makes it a crime, punishable by up to five years in prison, to conduct electronic surveillance except as provided for by statute. The only defense is for law government agents engaged in official duties conducting “surveillance authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order.†[50 U.S.C. § 1809]”
Fisa PROHIBITS the actions of Bush and the NSA.
This means that Bush and those who committed this crime should all go to jail for 5 years for each surveillance that happened.
This IS a high crime – impeach now, because he already admitted he’s guilty!
December 18th, 2005 at 1:41 am2,154 American service people dead. 15,568 wounded. Over 30,000 innocent Iraqis dead. Authorized torture, wire tapping. Homophobia. Darwinphobia. Civilrightsphobia. Lies. Corruption. Ignorance. Arrogance. Not to mention he cannot put together a decent sentence or thought to save his life. But so what? What’s the big deal? Please, will someone give this guy a blowjob! Then we will finally have something serious to impeach this idiot for!
December 18th, 2005 at 5:52 am#356- Maybe that is his real problem…never had one! Or one too many Wedgies at school by the bullies
December 18th, 2005 at 9:36 amMERRY CHRISTMAS!
December 18th, 2005 at 11:12 amhttp://www.stcharleschristmas.com/
Just remember, if you impeach Bush you will make Cheney POTUS
December 18th, 2005 at 5:10 pm[...] On Saturday, President Bush acknowledged that he had personally authorized a secret warrantless domestic surveillance program more than three dozen times since October 2001. Bush’s actions run contrary to the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which forbids “unreasonable searches” and sets out specific requirements for warrants, including “probable cause.” They demonstrate a dangerous disregard for the basic liberties that serve as our nation’s guiding values. They are also in violation of federal law. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) makes it a crime, punishable by up to five years in prison, to conduct electronic surveillance, except as “authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order.” Moreover, since 1978, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2511(2)(f) has directed that Title III and FISA “shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance…and the interception of domestic wire and oral communications may be conducted.” The President’s actions were not necessary; if he had legitimate concerns about FISA, “the appropriate response would have been to go to Congress and expand it, not to blatantly violate the law.” Below, we debunk the administration’s attempts to justify Bush’s actions. [...]
December 19th, 2005 at 1:30 pmelectronic federal tax payment system
Didn’t realise there was this type of information out there
March 20th, 2008 at 4:24 amsheep toys
In addition, Webkinz recently announced that it would offer a new
March 21st, 2008 at 4:10 amWjlliam
This is one thing I definitely agree on
March 23rd, 2008 at 4:33 ameagle knife
g. * Skeleton handles refers to the practice of using the tang itself as the handle, usually with sections of material removed to reduce
March 28th, 2008 at 8:33 amNocolas K. Kerry
Very nice article. For more info visit: http://www.alcoholtreatmentonline.info/alcohol-withdrawal-treatment.html
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:09 amProm Dresses Hat Hollister Clothing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:47 amJack
I?ll admit it. i have been to your blog SIX times since your last post looking for a new post?.
April 5th, 2008 at 3:36 ampennsylvania injury lawyers
Aspiring lawyers raised in psychologically healthy families face more obstacles in law and their careers than those raised in dysfunctional families and I imagine this is true since law often requires one to be cutthroat.
April 13th, 2008 at 9:17 pm