| 8th February 2006 04:25 PM |
|
|
| CHIEFMOON |
quote:
nankerphelge wrote:
It was a cheap shot at Bush by raising the issue of the FBI's investigation of King and likening it to the NSA's wiretaps. The two are entirely different situations, invoking entirely different issues, and Carter was using her legacy as an opportunity to politicize the issue.
It was beneath him, it was an insult to King, and an insult to most peoples' intelligence.
How is that spying is not spying ?
In the past, just like today the Republican asshats think spying is just fine and dandy, but you know what?
Spying on people sucks and so do the fucking republicans, what ever they may be calling themselves this week.
I hope the PIG party is outlawed and soon. |
| 8th February 2006 04:25 PM |
|
|
| Candace Youngblood |
I would like to nuzzle YOU, but alas my nuzzling days are over. |
| 8th February 2006 04:31 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
hey Joey!!
|
| 8th February 2006 04:36 PM |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
Well CM, if the premise of your argument is that all spying is bad, nothing I say will change your mind. If, however, you can open your mind up and accept the premise that some spying is not bad, then we can have a meaningful discussion of the differneces.
In the meantime, I won't waste my breath...
|
| 8th February 2006 04:44 PM |
|
|
| CHIEFMOON |
quote:
nankerphelge wrote:
Well CM, if the premise of your argument is that all spying is bad, nothing I say will change your mind. If, however, you can open your mind up and accept the premise that some spying is not bad, then we can have a meaningful discussion of the differneces.
In the meantime, I won't waste my breath...
Spying by definition is DECEIT.
When that "spying" leads to asassination and "regime change", is it still "spying" ?
Kennedy was right, the spys DID need to be put out of business.
As to Carter's "weakness", just what the fuck was Ollie North up to when he got in bed with Iran ? |
| 8th February 2006 04:54 PM |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
Sorry CM, if your premise is now spying is deceit and all deceit is bad, we're going nowhere with this discussion.
You know, if I could get me a pair of them rose-colored shades some of you have, and honestly believe that no one out there was out to do anyone else harm, then I might be able to buy into the all deceit is bad premise.
But I can't because that just isn't the way it is.
Yeah you can bad-mouth Republicans or whatever -- but those arguments ignore all the fine Democrats that have condoned spying -- what if Kennedy hadn't gotten the U2 spy plane images of the Russian missles in Cuba as just one example.
Point is, some spying will always be needed, lest ye give your opponent all advantages.
|
| 8th February 2006 06:35 PM |
|
|
| Taptrick |
I agree Nanker. It's a given that others are going to spy on us. Therefore its axiomatic that we must have counter operations at a minimum. You could type all day and never reach the end of listing agressive activities, either plotted or initiated against the Unites States that would have clearly taken lives, that were stopped via counter operations. By the way this reminds me of a discussion I had the other day. What were German spies doing in Florida in World War II and what did FDR have done with them? Death by hanging. Now that's when they truly understood what the Geneva Convention's definition of a noncomabtant is.
|
| 8th February 2006 07:33 PM |
|
|
| PeerQueer |
The more I read Nanker's post the more I come away impressed.
This country has had it good for so long we have lost our spine - we are weened on the tit of "don't hurt anyone", "feelings are the most important thing in the world", "don't say it if it might offend", "just be nice", etc. from day one. Public schools ram this shit into kids' brains over and over and over again and they grow up to be pussy-ass whining, what about me, worthless shits who listen to Eminem and Mariah Carey.
9-11 brought us back to reality - but just for a moment.
I don't care if we elect Dems, or Republicans - I just want them to be tough nose hard ass bastards when it comes to protecting the citizens of this country. Any so-called leader who doesn't believe that there are those in this world who believe their sole purpose is to destroy America and all who call it home are delusional and have no business in any leadership position.
Talk to someone who has lived in Israel for the last four decades. They understand the stakes - Americans have just tasted 1/100th of what these radical fuckwits are capable of. For those who want to bitch and moan about America being too mean, too invasive, too war-like, shut the fuck up and/or just wait until you are impacted personally by the growing tide of anti-American radicalism that WILL strike again. Maybe next time it will be you or a loved one directly hurt. Then come back and share how you are feeling then.
|
| 8th February 2006 08:39 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
So let me get this straight. Carter brings up illeagal wire taps as a way to humilliate the sitting president. Even though the wire taps that Carter is refering to were ordered by the brother of Ted F'ing Kennedy,and carried out at the behest of the LBJ administration? That about right? Yes,it is indeed.
Well firstly what the Bush admin is doing IS NOT wire taps!!! Most of the phones involved are cell phones. There is no line to tap! It's called data mining and any IT guy/gal worth his/her salt will tell you there is a load of difference between the two. Second. Are some of you suggesting that the phone numbers that were seized from Al Qeada inside caves and terror safe houses of Afganistan and Iraq should not be tracked down,and followed up on? Any president that would ignore that would be negligent in the extreme. It's not like Bush did not keep the congress abreast of what the NSA was doing!!! HE told them everything!! Google "Echalon" and see what ya get. Hint-It's got nothing to do with Bush,but everything to do with illegal wiretaps. Hint #2-Google "Echalon/Clinton",and see what pops up.
Let these morons like Carter continue to rehash this ridiculous argument. Let the "no agenda,no plan" democrats continue to bitch and moan about how Bush is trying to protect the country and see how far it gets them. God,you'd think that they would have figured it out by now. THE COUNTRY BELIEVES (rightfully) THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE WEAK ON DEFENSE,why keep proving the point?!? Alas,they are still in "Bush bash" mode as their own party circles the drain.
The King funeral was the best thing to happenn for Republicans since the Wellstone pep rally! Dems showed no class whatsoever,and only cemented their weak ass defense perception with the moderate voters out there. I'm sure that'll help them out come election time! LOL!
Riffy
PS-Pop quiz-What president has appointed more people of color to high level cabinet positions than any other president in US history? |
| 8th February 2006 09:07 PM |
|
|
| Taptrick |
And by the way, I believe it was Bobby Kennedy who authorized wiretaps on the Kings.
|
| 8th February 2006 09:08 PM |
|
|
| Taptrick |
nevermind....riffy already identified that. Amazing how the world forgets. And those people vote - scarey.
|
| 9th February 2006 09:04 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
Tappy, I was there first! The very spying that Carter decried was actually ordered by DrunkTeddy's older & smarter brother. The crowd at the funeral didn't see any irony but I'm guessing nuance isn't their strong point. While we're at it: President Reagan died and had a funeral of about two hours tops. What's with a six hour funeral for anyone? |
| 9th February 2006 10:12 AM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Tappy, I was there first! The very spying that Carter decried was actually ordered by DrunkTeddy's older & smarter brother. The crowd at the funeral didn't see any irony but I'm guessing nuance isn't their strong point. While we're at it: President Reagan died and had a funeral of about two hours tops. What's with a six hour funeral for anyone?
" The Art of WAR !!! "
" When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.
Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain.
Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor damped, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue.
Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays. "
http://www.kimsoft.com/polwar2.htm
|
|
|
V
SUN JOEY !!!! ® |
| 9th February 2006 01:03 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
You right wingers are missing the point of the wire tap issue. The illegality of the wiretaps stems from the Bush team not getting a warrant from the FISA court to tap domestically. The FISA judges are notoriously lenient for issuing these warrants (I believe their appoval of such warrants is over 95%) The whole point of having judges approve such actions is to have a CHECK in place to make sure that one branch of government does not have absolute power. By circumventing the court the Bush administration is saying that the Constitution does not apply to them. Sounds like a march towards monarchy to me!
As far as Bobby Kennedy tapping Kings' homes, I guarantee that there was a judge that signed off on it!
[Edited by monkey_man] |
| 9th February 2006 01:18 PM |
|
|
| Taptrick |
No, every administration has bypassed that court when they needed to.
|
| 9th February 2006 01:19 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
BTW this isn't a partisan issue. . .your fellow Republicans believe it should be investigated as well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/08/politics/08nsa.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
February 8, 2006
Republican Who Oversees N.S.A. Calls for Wiretap Inquiry
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 — A House Republican whose subcommittee oversees the National Security Agency broke ranks with the White House on Tuesday and called for a full Congressional inquiry into the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping program.
The lawmaker, Representative Heather A. Wilson of New Mexico, chairwoman of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence, said in an interview that she had "serious concerns" about the surveillance program. By withholding information about its operations from many lawmakers, she said, the administration has deepened her apprehension about whom the agency is monitoring and why.
Ms. Wilson, who was a National Security Council aide in the administration of President Bush's father, is the first Republican on either the House's Intelligence Committee or the Senate's to call for a full Congressional investigation into the program, in which the N.S.A. has been eavesdropping without warrants on the international communications of people inside the United States believed to have links with terrorists.
The congresswoman's discomfort with the operation appears to reflect deepening fissures among Republicans over the program's legal basis and political liabilities. Many Republicans have strongly backed President Bush's power to use every tool at his disposal to fight terrorism, but 4 of the 10 Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee voiced concerns about the program at a hearing where Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales testified on Monday.
A growing number of Republicans have called in recent days for Congress to consider amending federal wiretap law to address the constitutional issues raised by the N.S.A. operation.
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, for one, said he considered some of the administration's legal justifications for the program "dangerous" in their implications, and he told Mr. Gonzales that he wanted to work on new legislation that would help those tracking terrorism "know what they can and can't do."
But the administration has said repeatedly since the program was disclosed in December that it considers further legislation unnecessary, believing that the president already has the legal authority to authorize the operation.
Vice President Dick Cheney reasserted that position Tuesday in an interview on "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer."
Members of Congress "have the right and the responsibility to suggest whatever they want to suggest" about changing wiretap law, Mr. Cheney said. But "we have all the legal authority we need" already, he said, and a public debate over changes in the law could alert Al Qaeda to tactics used by American intelligence officials.
"It's important for us, if we're going to proceed legislatively, to keep in mind there's a price to be paid for that, and it might well in fact do irreparable damage to our capacity to collect information," Mr. Cheney said.
The administration, backed by Republican leaders in both houses, has also resisted calls for inquiries by either Congress or an independent investigator.
As for the politics, some Republicans say they are concerned that prolonged public scrutiny of the surveillance program could prove a distraction in this year's midterm Congressional elections, and the administration has worked to contain any damage by aggressively defending the legality of the operation. It has also limited its Congressional briefings on the program's operational details to the so-called Gang of Eight — each party's leaders in the Senate and the House and on the two intelligence committees — and has agreed to full committee briefings only on the legal justifications for the operation, without discussing in detail how the N.S.A. conducts it.
Ms. Wilson said in the interview Tuesday that she considered the limited Congressional briefings to be "increasingly untenable" because they left most lawmakers knowing little about the program. She said the House Intelligence Committee needed to conduct a "painstaking" review, including not only classified briefings but also access to internal documents and staff interviews with N.S.A. aides and intelligence officials.
Ms. Wilson, a former Air Force officer who is the only female veteran currently in Congress, has butted up against the administration previously over controversial policy issues, including Medicare and troop strength in Iraq. She said she realized that publicizing her concerns over the surveillance program could harm her relations with the administration. "The president has his duty to do, but I have mine too, and I feel strongly about that," she said.
Asked whether the White House was concerned about support for the program among Republicans, Dana Perino, a presidential spokeswoman, said: "The terrorist surveillance program is critical to the safety and protection of all Americans, and we will continue to work with Congress. The attorney general testified at length yesterday, and he will return to Capitol Hill twice more before the week ends."
Aides to Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, who as chairman of the full House Intelligence Committee is one of the eight lawmakers briefed on the operations of the program, said he could not be reached for comment on whether he would be open to a full inquiry.
Mr. Hoekstra has been a strong defender of the program and has expressed no intention thus far to initiate a full review. In two recent letters to the Congressional Research Service, he criticized reports by the agency that raised questions about the legal foundations of the N.S.A. program and the limited briefings given to Congress. He said in one letter that it was "unwise at best and reckless at worst" for the agency to prepare a report on classified matters that it knew little about.
But two leading Democratic members of the intelligence committees, Representative Jane Harman and Senator Dianne Feinstein, both of California, wrote a letter of their own Tuesday defending the nonpartisan research service's reports on the surveillance program and other issues, saying its work had been "very helpful" in view of what they deemed the minimal information provided by the administration.
Scott Shane contributed reporting for this article.
|
| 9th February 2006 01:23 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
Taptrick wrote:
No, every administration has bypassed that court when they needed to.
Please post examples of when the FISA court was bypassed for domestic survellience. |
| 9th February 2006 01:59 PM |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
I don't believe Clinton obtained a warrant before first tapping Aldrich Ames' phone.
The wiretapping of King was pre-FISA and I am not sure whether it was court sanctioned or not, but given his associations with the Communist party and the J. Edgar Hoover FBI, I suspect that was an easy one to get.
Everyone is quick to say that the Administration broke the law, but there is an overarching issue of whether FISA is even Constitutional. The Administration is saying that in times of war, the Executive has the inherent authority to conduct such activities without involvement of either the Legislative or Judicial branches. That issue will have to be decided, but before it can be, there will be plenty of airing of the issues which will ultimately leave the left looking weak on national security.
I'm looking forward to it!
|
| 9th February 2006 02:18 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
nankerphelge wrote:
I don't believe Clinton obtained a warrant before first tapping Aldrich Ames' phone.
Aldrich Ames's phones were not tapped without a warrant. His house was authorized to be searched without a warrant by Clinton. This loophole was closed in 1995.
As far as this being an issue solely from the left, perhaps you can consult with that great lefty republican Lindsey Graham. . . "I'll be the first to say, when I voted for it, I never envisioned that I was giving to this president or any other president the ability to go around FISA carte blanche."
[Edited by monkey_man] |
| 9th February 2006 02:40 PM |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
The point is, regardless of what Graham or anyone else right or left thinks, whether the Executive branch has the authority at times of war to conduct warrantless wiretaps.
The fact that FISA exists is part of the issue of course, but not an answer to the Constitutional separation of powers argument of whether Congress can trump the Executive's inherent authority. Many pre-FISA presidents felt that they had such authority and Clinton/Gorelick felt that the Executive had such authority for the warrantless physical search of Ames.
|
| 9th February 2006 02:42 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
I think even some Dems are starting to tiptoe away from all this wiretapping controversy. So it's kind of stupid for some scared Republicans to start criticizing it in order to save their seats. |
| 9th February 2006 02:51 PM |
|
|
| telecaster |
Love it!
Dems/libs won't win for decades with your blind hatred
Thank you for granting us Repubs VICTORY for decades
You clowns couldn't win anything
Thanks again |
| 9th February 2006 03:17 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
look what crawls out
|
| 9th February 2006 03:21 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
telecaster wrote:
Love it!
Dems/libs won't win for decades with your blind hatred
Thank you for granting us Repubs VICTORY for decades
You clowns couldn't win anything
Thanks again
.JPG)
|
| 9th February 2006 05:34 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
quote:
telecaster wrote:
Love it!
Dems/libs won't win for decades with your blind hatred
Thank you for granting us Repubs VICTORY for decades
You clowns couldn't win anything
Thanks again
Wow. . . Tele. . .good to see you're off the bottle for the moment! You better get back in one or they win! |
| 9th February 2006 07:47 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
The most sobering news,and the news that the limp wristed weak knee'd libs can not argue,is that there is a bridge in New York City that is still standing because of the actions of the Bush admin. That's right the words "Brooklyn Bridge" were "data mined" from a phone call from within the USA to an al Queada higher up in Pakistan. (That is not a domestic call,by the way. Any more than a flight from NY to Paris is a domestic flight!) That person is now in jail,and the bridge still stands.
That's what happens when you don't have to wait for 72 hours for a warrant. The guy was arrested within three hours of the phone call!! The Dems would have this administration go through the whole process of a FISA isssued warrent,and by that time the Brooklyn Bridge may well have been destroyed. Hence the Dems weak on defense tag. Yet they still harp on it! Funny really. Today Howard Dean said that Bush is turning America into Iran!!! WTF?!?!?
Please keep Dean out there running his mouth! He is doing wonderful things for this country. Namely he's killing any shot at all that the Dems will regain any kind of real power inside the beltway. That's a good thing.
Riffy
[Edited by Riffhard] |
| 9th February 2006 09:14 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
only a non-lawyer would think it takes more than ten minutes to have a judge rubber stamp anything after the words 'national security'......
[Edited by lotsajizz] |
| 9th February 2006 09:30 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
only the dipshit dj/non-lawyer would think it takes more than ten minutes to have a judge rubber stamp anything after the words 'national security'...stick to what you know djboy
You are an arrogant fucknut who is utterly clueless as to anything that differs from your simple minded logic(or lack thereof). The FACT is that the FISA has granted almost every warrant that they have been approched for,but for some reason that seemed to stop shortly after Bush started asking. Yes, the FISA court is made up of largely Clinton appointees,and as such did in fact block warrants for the Bush admin. for the first time ever in the court's history. That this would happen after 9/11 speaks volumes. Fuck 'em. The Brooklyn Bridge is still standing and for the sole reason that Bush used his war powers act according to the US Constitution to bypass the court. Spin away fucknut. The facts are not on your side(not that that has ever mattered to librals!),and more importantly you are proving,once again,why your party is on the outside looking in.
Riffy |
| 9th February 2006 09:40 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
I betcha you're proud that the trains run on time too..... |
| 9th February 2006 09:45 PM |
|
|
| Reginald Denny |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
I betcha you're proud that the trains run on time too.....
10th grade. 11th grade tops. And lemme guess, your folks are still talking it up about the day you got your GED. Am I right? Am I right? |
