• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Poor Georgie

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
He got caught. Entire commentary; link below; my emphasis.

"Finally we have a Washington scandal that goes beyond sex, corruption and political intrigue to big issues like security versus liberty and the reasonable bounds of presidential power. President Bush came out swinging on Snoopgate—he made it seem as if those who didn’t agree with him wanted to leave us vulnerable to Al Qaeda—but it will not work. We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought 9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
No wonder Bush was so desperate that The New York Times not publish its story on the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American citizens without a warrant, in what lawyers outside the administration say is a clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I learned this week that on December 6, Bush summoned Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Bill Keller to the Oval Office in a futile attempt to talk them out of running the story. The Times will not comment on the meeting, but one can only imagine the president’s desperation.
The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden’s use of a satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists—in fact, all American Muslims, period—have long since suspected that the U.S. government might be listening in to their conversations. Bush claimed that “the fact that we are discussing this program is helping the enemy.” But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a “shameful act,” it was the work of a patriot inside the government who was trying to stop a presidential power grab.
No, Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important story—which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year—because he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker. He insists he had “legal authority derived from the Constitution and congressional resolution authorizing force.” But the Constitution explicitly requires the president to obey the law. And the post 9/11 congressional resolution authorizing “all necessary force” in fighting terrorism was made in clear reference to military intervention. It did not scrap the Constitution and allow the president to do whatever he pleased in any area in the name of fighting terrorism.
What is especially perplexing about this story is that the 1978 law set up a special court to approve eavesdropping in hours, even minutes, if necessary. In fact, the law allows the government to eavesdrop on its own, then retroactively justify it to the court, essentially obtaining a warrant after the fact. Since 1979, the FISA court has approved tens of thousands of eavesdropping requests and rejected only four. There was no indication the existing system was slow—as the president seemed to claim in his press conference—or in any way required extra-constitutional action.
This will all play out eventually in congressional committees and in the United States Supreme Court. If the Democrats regain control of Congress, there may even be articles of impeachment introduced. Similar abuse of power was part of the impeachment charge brought against Richard Nixon in 1974.
In the meantime, it is unlikely that Bush will echo President Kennedy in 1961. After JFK managed to tone down a New York Times story by Tad Szulc on the Bay of Pigs invasion, he confided to Times editor Turner Catledge that he wished the paper had printed the whole story because it might have spared him such a stunning defeat in Cuba.
This time, the president knew publication would cause him great embarrassment and trouble for the rest of his presidency. It was for that reason—and less out of genuine concern about national security—that George W. Bush tried so hard to kill the New York Times story."


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10536559/site/newsweek/
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
I haven't made up my mind about this one yet, but I've heard that the guy who wrote the story kept it under wraps for a year, and it probably has more to do with his new book coming out than anything else. Regardless, I'm sure Bush wasn't wiretapping YOUR phones.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
mp.freelance said:
I haven't made up my mind about this one yet, but I've heard that the guy who wrote the story kept it under wraps for a year, and it probably has more to do with his new book coming out than anything else. Regardless, I'm sure Bush wasn't wiretapping YOUR phones.


Yes, that liberal, biased, newspaper kept it under wraps for a year. When they finally contacted the White House and said they were going to press, the President called the Editor and reporter in and made a personal appeal for them to keep the secret. Thank goodness they stood up to the political pressure.

Why do you think I wasn't being wiretapped. Does your family still make phone calls back to their homeland? How do they feel about this.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Does your family still make phone calls back to their homeland?

My wife makes a international calls evey other week to her Father, if the feds wish to eaves drop on the call, they have our permission.....

I would rather they stop another terrorist from creating a crater out of one of our cities then worry about them...tappin a terrorists phone...
sedancrater1.jpg


but Dis.you keep defending the terrorsits civil liberties......I'll Keep defending Americans Right to Peaceful existance......

something to think about first it was 2800 innocent lives, Dis disregarded, whats next? Millions?
htoak2.jpg
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
7
What's the pic of the meteor crater got to do with anything? Not jumping into you guys fight....but can't see the connection
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Disagreeable said:
Why do you think I wasn't being wiretapped. Does your family still make phone calls back to their homeland? How do they feel about this.

:lol: :lol: Your delusions of grandiosity never disappoint! If Bush would bother eavesdropping on every aging liberal spouting off about the government, there wouldn't be enough wiretaps to go around. Don't give yourself too much credit, Dis.

As for my family, the only thing we worry about when making international calls is the phone bill.

My point isn't that Bush did the right or legal thing - like I said, I haven't decided on that one yet. But the truth of the matter is that his secret program has zero effect on the civil liberties of most Americans.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
What's the pic of the meteor crater got to do with anything? Not jumping into you guys fight....but can't see the connection

Sorry I could't find one of a Nuke crator, and was pressed for time.

I will look now to see if I can get the correct crator, to make my point that spying on international calls is alot better then some wacked radical Islamic Terrorsist ( or any terrorist for that matter) setting off a large nuclear weapon in one of our cities........

But now that I found an actual picture of a nuclear crater maybe you can see the connection.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
Steve said:
Does your family still make phone calls back to their homeland?

My wife makes a international calls evey other week to her Father, if the feds wish to eaves drop on the call, they have our permission.....

How about your wife's permission? It's her phone call.

I would rather they stop another terrorist from creating a crater out of one of our cities then worry about them...tappin a terrorists phone...
sedancrater1.jpg

I'm not concerned about the terrorists' phones. I'm concerned about my phone. I believe in the Constitution of the US and it gives me the right to not have the government looking over my shoulder, checking my bank account, or listening to my phone conversations.

but Dis.you keep defending the terrorsits civil liberties......I'll Keep defending Americans Right to Peaceful existance......

I'm defending my civil liberties. From MS Sage: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both...Benjamin Franklin"

something to think about first it was 2800 innocent lives, Dis disregarded, whats next? Millions?

There are millions of people today living under tyranical governments. I don't plan to be one of those people. Patrick Henry: "Give me liberty or give me death." You want to give up your liberties, move to Iraq. I don't plan to be leaving anytime soon.
 

Latest posts

Top