| Quote: |
CAMBRIDGE, Md. - The eavesdropping tables were turned on President Bush on Friday. The president apparently believed he was speaking privately when he talked about listening in without a warrant on domestic communications with suspected al-Qaida terrorists overseas. But reporters were the ones doing the listening in this time.
The incident happened at a House Republican retreat. After six minutes of public remarks by the president, reporters were ushered out. "I support the free press, let's just get them out of the room," Bush said, intending to speak behind closed doors with fellow Republicans and take lawmakers' questions.
When reporters left, Bush spoke about the National Security Agency program that he authorized four years ago and which has drawn criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike.
However, the microphones stayed on for a few minutes. That allowed journalists back at the White House to eavesdrop on Bush's defense of the eavesdropping. His private statements were basically no different from what he's said in public.
"I want to share some thoughts with you before I answer your questions," Bush began. "First of all, I expect this conversation we're about to have to stay in the room. I know that's impossible in Washington."
He was right. |
-------Comcast.net Strange News
All I have to say to this is no comment. I don't know what to say. Bush said it all.Sad and dangerous times.. We are passively watching the very essence of our lady liberty be degraded and cheapened by war mongrels in the “name” of democracy. Seemingly to the American public this is overlookable offense and we do nothing to stop it. In some conservative places it has become hard to even speak public on concerns and oppositions despite residing in a free country. With the systems being established that are currently working their ways into practice it is only going to be all the more difficult when they begin locking us into our homes and dictating our “needed position” in society. It is indeed a sad time for our democracy.
| Quote: |
| Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin |
[sarcasm]Yes! It is just terrible that the president wants to catch terrorists in the country! It is just a horrible thing that he wants to foil the terrorist plots before they kill thousands of innocent Americans! How selfish he is! You're making me angry! You might listen to my insignificant phone call! This upsets me! I am going to go cross my arms and pout about it. [/sarcasm]
I still fail to see how this is at all against Bush, if he did in fact say the same things he has been saying in public. There really is no relevancy here, it's not a huge deal, it's just another democrat acting like a 5 year old pointing and calling names at people.
*Sighs*
I am really tired of it.
I don't think Bush's plan for catching terrorists will work, now that everyone knows what Bush is planning to do. If Bush is going to eavesdrop in our phone calls, people will talk to each other about private matters orally, instead of using the phone.
Yeah, I don't see how this is against Bush either. The man admits to doing the same thing that every president has done for quite some time, and it's a big deal. They only listen in on Al-qaida suspects' phone calls. If you're not an Al-qaida suspect, Bush isn't listening to you try to buy some pot or gossip about who cheated on who.
Get over yourselves people, if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about.
Here's a little scenario for you leftists: Bush ends eavesdropping, we have another major terrorist attack and all of your loved ones die. You whining about your f*cking privacy being violated (when it's not) caused the end of the NSA which let a terror attack slip throughwhich caused the death of your loved ones. This situation is unlikeyly, but you get the point, and I wanted to rant.
I'm starting to get sick of this leftist bullsh*t. Liberals need to open their f*cking eyes. I'm not saying you have to like Bush, but you have to renounce ignorance, pettiness, bitching, and being a pussy.
Agreed. In my opinion there is nothing wrong about eavesdropping if you got nothing to hide anyways. And if it's all to prevent another terrorist attack, then by all means full steam ahead.
George Washington had an annual budget for Domestic Spying....
Do a little research on President Kennedy...
Its been a matter of policy from the getgo...
It's only being politicized as a desparate means of getting Bush Impeached...
With Cheney's gun handling abilities I'd say "be careful".
Why is it impossible that it will stay in that room?
LIBERAL MEDIA
What's really funny here is that the leftards think it's a huge deal that he wanted it to stay in that room, yet what he said followed the same lines as what he says publically.
Talk about Dems owning themselves... 
Its not all about bush. Its about our rights. For example, my life is transparent. What takes place in doors takes place outside as well (other than private time with the miss). Although there is nothing that I have to hide it is my right to not have my conversations evesdropped on without a court order first. Checks and balances were established for a reason and they have been made a mockery of.
There is no question that many presidents have authorized simular actions in the past, that does not make this time any more right then when they did it. If I felt that I could trust this administration with other information they found outside the spectrum of terrorism it would be okay but then again thats where it all gets grey as who decides who is trustworthy. One thing that this administration has proven though is that they most certainly are less than trustworthy. Dont get me wrong, I was duped the first go round and helped get GW in but he didnt hold up on a single agenda or promise. You do not rewards failure in leading the free world with another chance.
As far as bushes braisen and open speach, this is nothing new. It has never been in questions that his balls are the size of cantalopes, its the brains behind them that causes concern.
| shr3dd wrote: |
| I'm not saying you have to like Bush, but you have to renounce ignorance, pettiness, bitching, and being a pussy |
The only ones who are being ignorant here are the people who allow anything to pass through law from their beloved president because it's in the name of fighting terrorism. If you really believe that if you give him ultimate power, once he has removed terrorism, he'll step down, i feel you put too much faith into this man. Men are power hungry and do anything to maintain it. Once someone hass power it is hard too remove it, but if you stop it before it gets too great, it is much easier. The ignorance here is not looking at the history of men and power struggle, George Bush will turn USA and the world if he can into a dictatorship under himself. | eznet wrote: |
| Its not all about bush. Its about our rights. For example, my life is transparent. What takes place in doors takes place outside as well (other than private time with the miss). Although there is nothing that I have to hide it is my right to not have my conversations evesdropped on without a court order first. Checks and balances were established for a reason and they have been made a mockery of. |
If you're not talking to terrorist groups, they won't be listening. No need to spin the situation to make a point that is moot anyway. | Quote: |
S3nd K3ys
If you're not talking to terrorist groups, they won't be listening. No need to spin the situation to make a point that is moot anyway. |
See I do not think that it is a moot point as you put it.. It is about the values of our democracy. Maybe I am too idealistic and my ideas are too lofty but so is a democracy when it is compaired along side the alternative forms of goverment...lofty...
One thing that disturbes me is not the spying on terrorist, that is peachy keen; it is who is doing the spying that is of concern. Let us look at the fact that supposedly the main reason, according the Bush administration, that this issue was not brought to the law makers and ammended to law was to keep knowledge of it away from the terrorist. Great, well that time has passed and the world knows of the program; why not now go about it the right and legal democratic way and send it through the system. And do not say because the "lefty dems" will stop it; Bush had no problem passing the patriot act and renewing it despite mass opposition of even the American public.
To me what it boils down to is if we let him wipe his ass with this part of the constitution where will he stop? Without the values and concepts behind the foundation of our goverment we have nothing. Actions such as these undermine the very being of our democracy. Keep in mind there are safe communist countries (cuba)... Safty is not a good enough reason to shred our very values in democracy... if we allow this then we might as well call ourselves what we are; a dictatorship.
| Quote: |
Bush
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” |
To me its more than a piece of "goddamned" paper; its the foundation of the most successful and longest lasting democracy to have existed. Just a thought. I am sure that the extreme right will find everything in the "free" world wrong with my take, but thats the great thing about a free democracy; we are allowed to do that. I hope it stays that way.
Where is Franklin when you need him?!(Answer: he is 220 years ago helping write what will become a mockery in 2000-?)Lets face it, Bush was a bit spooked by 9-11, just as we all were. But its time to REMEMBER that it is the AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEM that determines the Terrorist. Innocent until proven guilty. Remember?
The reason we are a having so many problems today is that we are trying to IDENTIFY the terrorist BEFORE we run the process. The lawyers have let Bush down by not holding him to this BEFORE be does something dumb.
We can right our ship, when we find ourselves on the wrong side of the law we should just wriggle back over to the rights side of the law. This way Truth and Law are our guide, and if someone throws the first punch to us we kick their butts, in self defense, of course, perhaps with one extra pop for good measure, just as our system was designed.
Its time to right our ship and the world will love us for it.
When will the world react to such autrocities that our/my (American) government seem to doing to my (American) Liberties. We all remember President Clinton right? And exactly what do we remember about his great presidency; Monica Lawinsky. Within just a few weeks after the media blitz on President Clinton there was talks of impeachment. remember? The Republicans couldn't wait to start that political ball rolling. Now that the Republicans hold the major seats in the governmental system, and even in the light of the recent events that only seem to state that the left wing conspiracy-theroist radicals where right in there proclaiming that there is a evil secret society thats aim is to overcome the current global governmental powers. Yet Nothing from the media, no reaction from the democrats. Why? Are they afraid of retaliation from the Republicans, could they be that powerful? Or could they be silent partners on a larger agenda that the general public has been shielded from? It seems to me that at the very least congressional investigations of the current policies and proceedures of the current Presidency to determine if at the very least if the checks and balance system that was implaced by our forefathers has been compromised.
There are a lot of good points here but a lot of ridiculousness too. The bottom line is that this
[quote=”constitution”]The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[/quote]
No laws broken…….
So what does this mean? It means that the forefathers did not know about communication hubs. They did not even know about the phone. Later, it was decided that phone conversation would be considered “personal affects” thank God, and that a court order would be required prior to acquiring them a court order. This would then transfer to email.
Now we have the ability to monitor huge amounts or information at these hubs where this phone and internet information enters and leaves the country.
We need new laws…….
| Soulfire wrote: |
[sarcasm]Yes! It is just terrible that the president wants to catch terrorists in the country! It is just a horrible thing that he wants to foil the terrorist plots before they kill thousands of innocent Americans! How selfish he is! You're making me angry! You might listen to my insignificant phone call! This upsets me! I am going to go cross my arms and pout about it. [/sarcasm]
I still fail to see how this is at all against Bush, if he did in fact say the same things he has been saying in public. There really is no relevancy here, it's not a huge deal, it's just another democrat acting like a 5 year old pointing and calling names at people.
*Sighs*
I am really tired of it. |
Just because you are without the social life to make phone calls you might prefer kept private...What a muppet - he is a complete joke. I remember one conference where he couldn't find the door and wondered around stage, trying to find his way out. He's definitely got comedy value.
Bush isn't exactly a rocket scientist, but maybe he knew the mikes where still on and was trying to get a point across.
Let's face it folks, he ain't the brightest bulb in the box...but he did get elected, maybe it was because of daddies money and oil ties....but he still made it to the oval office.
Which just goes to show the sad state of affairs the US is in 
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I still fail to see how this is at all against Bush, if |
IF clinton had done his job and nabbed the people behind the FIRST ATTACK on the word trade towers 3000 people needn't have lost their lives
| rwojick wrote: |
| and if someone throws the first punch to us we kick their butts, in self defense. |
How many city-leveling nuclear punches do we have to take? | gonzo wrote: |
| Soulfire wrote: | | I still fail to see how this is at all against Bush, if |
IF clinton had done his job and nabbed the people behind the FIRST ATTACK on the word trade towers 3000 people needn't have lost their lives
| rwojick wrote: | | and if someone throws the first punch to us we kick their butts, in self defense. |
How many city-leveling nuclear punches do we have to take? |
No Doubt, our country has been ran by idiots for some time now. Truth be told it has been quite a while since anyone with an agenda other than their own has been in the white house or on capitol hill for that matter; clinton and gore included (Gores punk ass authorized spying also; just didnt get caught till after the fact(which raises a really interesting point when compairing their competancy - dull vs duller)).
With that said, none of this excuses the joke that Bush has made out of our country both domestically and internationally. If you would like to point fingers at Clinton for being a tard lets look back at the dude we keep supporting.
NEWS FLASH: BUSH KNEW ABOUT SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 in July 2001!!
(link CBS News)
If we, as Americans, keep rewarding incompetancy with continued support we will only continue to have incompetant leaders. If you do not do your job and do not accomplish anything that you are paid to do at your job they will fire you; the same AT THE MINIMUM should be true for our president. Clinton can get impeached for getting a wet willy (as many presidents have) and Bush gets re-elected after his hack-shot at the first 4 years... go figure.This sounds like made for tv propaganda to me. In other words he had someone leave the mikes on to try and make the world believe he is honest. This is a false information propaganda tactic deployed mostly on the battlefield but now washington is the battlefield it seems.
