Bush Admits to Authorizing Wiretaps

[Danoff]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/16/bush.nsa.ap/index.html

If this is true, he should be tried and convicted of criminal offense for the laws he broke and likely impeached. If we can't uphold our basic principles when they're no longer so convenient, then they aren't really principles.

The terrorists did more damage on 9/11 than anyone might have realized. This country is so focused on staying safe and preventing death that we can't seem to tolerate even a little freedom. If we don't fix this it will be the downfall of the entire concept of America.

 

[Zardoz]

The terrorists did more damage on 9/11 than anyone might have realized. This country is so focused on staying safe and preventing death that we can't seem to tolerate even a little freedom. If we don't fix this it will be the downfall of the entire concept of America.

Bullseye.

This is what it's all about. Crap like this plays right into Osama's hands. This is what that SOB wants.

Every time we chip away at our basic principles, it is a victory for terrorism.

 

[Ev0]

It will certainly be interesting to see what develops from this. Could go as far as impeachment, or nothing could happen at all. I'm definitley going to keep an eye on this.

 

[194GVan]

Watch nothing happen, yet as soon as someone sucks a 🤬 the entire nation is up in arms

On another note, Senate failed to renew patriot act. Take that Bush, you mush-mouthed idiot.

 

[Danoff]

Watch nothing happen, yet as soon as someone sucks a 🤬 the entire nation is up in arms

You don't understand anything that happened during Clinton's impeachment do you?

On another note, Senate failed to renew patriot act. Take that Bush, you mush-mouthed idiot.

HEY! Take your Bush bashing elsewhere. I won't have you mucking up my thread with your refusal to use your brain.

 

[194GVan]

You don't understand anything that happened during Clinton's impeachment do you?

HEY! Take your Bush bashing elsewhere. I won't have you mucking up my thread with your refusal to use your brain.

Well, this is an opinions thread, and no matter how uninformed and biased my opinions may be, they are still mine. However, I see your point, I would rather read an intelligent debate between informed people than a bunch of crap like I just posted. Sorry for my post

 

[Zardoz]

Not a good sign:

Mum's the word...

 

[Solid Fro]

Not so fast, New York Times...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9nyt.htm

 

[skip0110]

Not so fast, New York Times...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9nyt.htm

That doesn't make the claim false...

 

[Solid Fro]

That doesn't make the claim false...

No, it does not, but it does make it highly suspicious.

I doubt the pundits actually read the piece, but the Times' states that this information was discovered only months after September 11th, 2001, over four years ago.

Is this front page news?

It also goes on to admit that this was a NSA (not CIA) program to monitor international phone calls and Internet communications, NOT domestic communications. The NSA is still seeking permission to do so. Since the Senate struck down the Patriot Act today, I doubt the NSA will ever get it.

Funny how the NYT article doesn't mention that.

Buried in the article, the NSA was able to capture Al Qaeda terrorist Iyman Faris. Faris admitted to trying to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge in New York and Washington D.C. subways, using this NSA program.

1,000 words later, that information was told.

So, instead of having the Iraqi elections on the front page, the New York Times would rather dig up a four year old story about the NSA trying to capture Al Qaeda terrorists and using a misleading headline to promote some dude's book about how he hates the Bush administration so much.

Is this the kind of **** the media is trying to shove down our throats?

 

[Danoff]

So, instead of having the Iraqi elections on the front page, the New York Times would rather dig up a four year old story about the NSA trying to capture Al Qaeda terrorists and using a misleading headline to promote some dude's book about how he hates the Bush administration so much.

Is this the kind of **** the media is trying to shove down our throats?

I don't care if it was dug up to try to counteract the elections - if it's real there need to be charges.

 

[Solid Fro]

I don't care if it was dug up to try to counteract the elections - if it's real there need to be charges.

Charges for what?

Impeach President Bush because he used the NSA to monitor international communications looking for terrorists?

or...

Arrest the person who leaked this information from the CIA to the New York Times?

 

[Danoff]

Charges for what?

Impeach President Bush because he used the NSA to monitor international communications looking for terrorists?

or...

Arrest the person who leaked this information from the CIA to the New York Times?

The former. Charges against everyone who violated federal law by circumventing the courts.

 

[Solid Fro]

I don't understand.

Let's sit here and get permission from a judge at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or wherever while the Brooklyn Bridge crumbles into the East River?

 

[Danoff]

I don't understand.

Let's sit here and get permission from a judge at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or wherever while the Brooklyn Bridge crumbles into the East River?

You don't understand due process or check and balances? So you think that Bush should have the power to simply authorize a wiretap on anyone he feels like?

 

[F1GTR]

Makes people feel safer I suppose, I think most people wouldn't be that bothered by tapping, but it's a huge risk of privacy and freedom. Why don't people just set up a nationwide watch, reporting any suspicious behaviour, would make alot of sense that way.

 

[Solid Fro]

I think due process goes out the window when you know someone is trying to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge.

I doubt President Bush wants to read my text messages or listen into my private phone calls. Since the Patriot Act was defeated in the Senate, no one has the power, even if it's to stop a terrorist act.

Now, that's scary.

 

[Danoff]

I think due process goes out the window when you know someone is trying to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge.

I doubt President Bush wants to read my text messages or listen into my private phone calls. Since the Patriot Act was defeated in the Senate, no one has the power, even if it's to stop a terrorist act.

Now, that's scary.

It's almost like you don't understand why civil rights are important at all...

 

[Zardoz]

It's almost like you don't understand why civil rights are important at all...

"Almost"?

 

[Solid Fro]

It's almost like you don't understand why civil rights are important at all...

Civil rights of whom?

Me and you or the terrorists?

 

[Zardoz]

Override civil rights in the name of "fighting terror", and it's that much easier to override civil rights to "get" your political enemies. This is basic, no-brainer kid stuff.

 

[Solid Fro]

Are you afraid that Republicans might wiretap people's phone calls to see how they vote? What about the other way around? Democrats might flood people's phones with their talking points?

Ha.

As I said before, these wiretaps were for international phone calls tracking down terrorists, not domestic calls trying to snoop on your personal conversations.

 

[OGLE B]

Right on Viper Zero.
The charges are false, made up to sell a book. Same old "attack Bush, attack Bush, etc." day after day after day. In the meantime, employment up, we are winning in Irac, economy growing, taxes down, all kinds of good news not being reported because the old media can't bring itself to say anything good about Bush. Disgracefull.
On the wiretap issue, don't kid yourselves. If there are terrorists amoung us, catch them before they kill my neighbors or family. We give up many "personal freedoms" in order to live in a "free" society. I'm not worried at all if the government wants to listen in on anything I am doing. Why are you worried, Danoff?
However, I'd rather Google didn't keep a record of all the websites I visit, so they can send me a bunch of targeted advertising......

 

[Plague.Ghost]

. . . The charges are false, [...] employment up, we are winning in Irac, economy growing. . .

I really don't want this to go off-topic, so could you PM those statistics and where you got them please? Thanks.


But back on track; why are there always so many conflicting stories about something that's happened in America, and why is the second one to come along always reported as absolute truth?

 

[Solid Fro]

I really don't want this to go off-topic, so could you PM those statistics and where you got them please? Thanks.

Do you not know how to use the Internet?

US Department of Labor

Unemployment rate is at 5.0%. 215,000 new jobs were created just last month.

Iraqis vote:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178770,00.html
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsA...15T173423Z_01_FOR344623_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ.xml
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/14/iraq.elections/index.html

 

[Zardoz]

...employment up, we are winning in Irac, economy growing, taxes down, all kinds of good news not being reported because the old media can't bring itself to say anything good about Bush...

What are you talking about? All of the above is being reported. The success of the elections has been a huge story. The optimism of the Iraqis in the face of the high level of violence and fear has received a lot of coverage lately.

You seem to be complaining because the 2100 American deaths, 30,000 Iraqi deaths, and very slow pace of progress in Iraq is not being whitewashed and covered up.

EDIT: Here's an example of your "good news not being reported":

Sunni leader ready to play ball

 

[niky]

What are you talking about? All of the above is being reported. The success of the elections has been a huge story. The optimism of the Iraqis in the face of the high level of violence and fear has received a lot of coverage lately.

👍

___________

There are reasons stories get squelched for long periods of time, and research is only part of it. Think, just maybe this has nothing to do with Bush-bashing, and more to do with sensitivity to the political situation of the time (as hard as that idea mght be to stomach, regarding the cavalier attitude of the press towards the feelings of our dear politicians). Allegations like these can't be made and supported overnight, and I'm surprised they even printed it.

As for civil liberties vs. security concerns, I'm kind of divided about that. I value my privacy as much as anyone else, but I don't give a rat's ass about what people can overhear from my cellphone conversations (hello? Got a secret? Keep it face to face, sheesh.).

What is of concern here is the ability of the government to sidestep constitutional rights without due process. Who's to say that unconstitutional wiretapping/bugging by government agencies can't be used for political agendas? What was Watergate about then? Read up on what's been happening in the Philippines for the past few months.

That brings up another point, albeit minor... the "illegally" obtained evidence vs. the terror suspect re: the Brooklyn Bridge was never used in court as evidence obtained without a warrant is inadmissible in court.

As for me... bug away... but if they can't be bothered to get a court order to bug a terror suspect (and I believe in times of emergency, it wouldn't take them more than an hour or two to actually get that court order... you'd be surprised at how quickly having the president on your ass can cut red tape), then who's to say they're not doing it to non-terrorists.

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with wiretapping. If you have something that can't be said over the phone, then you're probably doing something wrong... or criminal. But there's still the law... and if you have to break the law to uphold it, as the saying in comicbookdom goes, there's something wrong there.

 

[Kylehnat]

The charges are false, made up to sell a book. Same old "attack Bush, attack Bush, etc." day after day after day.

Now I know that Reuters is not a reputable news source, but perhaps you should look at this...

News Story

 

[Plague.Ghost]

Do you not know how to use the Internet?

US Department of Labor

Unemployment rate is at 5.0%. 215,000 new jobs were created just last month.

Iraqis vote:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178770,00.html
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsA...15T173423Z_01_FOR344623_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ.xml
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/14/iraq.elections/index.html

I was focusing on the "winning the war in Iraq" part, and I don't doubt that a bunch of jobs were just created or that your economy is doing slightly better, and frankly I don't care about that.

 

[iceburns288]

Since the Patriot Act was defeated in the Senate, no one has the power, even if it's to stop a terrorist act.

Now, that's scary.

You think it's scary that the government is not technically allowed to monitor us as closely any more? Idiotic. Plus it's not like it's going to stop them anyways, it's been going on for years.