Attorney General Is Asked to Testify on Spy Program - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Honus · #16 01-09-2006, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

proving anything about any of this concerning any individuals or previous Administrations is going to be an interesting process to watch unfold.

B

Previous administrations? I haven't heard any allegation that previous administrations did warrantless wiretaps on American citizens. You hear repeated allegations that Clinton and Carter "did the same thing that Bush did" but that allegation is clearly false. What Clinton and Carter did was different than what Bush did. There is no ambiguity about that. There may be room for argument about whether what they did was different in any legally significant way, but they clearly did not "do the same thing" that Bush did.

NKowi · #17 01-09-2006, 04:41 PM

We live in a representative democracy - the last thing our elected officials or political appointees (on either/any side) want to do is offer public candor and honesty.

Botnst · #18 01-09-2006, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Previous administrations? I haven't heard any allegation that previous administrations did warrantless wiretaps on American citizens. You hear repeated allegations that Clinton and Carter "did the same thing that Bush did" but that allegation is clearly false. What Clinton and Carter did was different than what Bush did. There is no ambiguity about that. There may be room for argument about whether what they did was different in any legally significant way, but they clearly did not "do the same thing" that Bush did.

My bad, I should have said, "this or previous administrations."

How do you know it is clearly false? You have access to Top Secret data and reports?

This is the critical attribute concerning intelligence information. It is valuable for two reasons: tells you rwhat the enemy knows and keeping your own knowledge secret deprives the enemy of countering your means and methods. So in order to prove malfeasance we need public access to sensitive information. But to do that we have to violate security.

At some point we have to trust somebody. Whom should we trust? The Adminstration? Congressional Republicans? Congressional Democrats? Bullshoes. We can't trust any of them because if Political Side A can't trust Political Side B, how can normal people know whom to trust.

So we declassify everything and find out the TRUTH. In so doing we inform our enemies of our means, methods and probably sources. The enemy kills the sources and changes their own means and methods.

It looks to me like we're headed for a dilemma of trust.

Bot

Honus · #19 01-09-2006, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

...How do you know it is clearly false? You have access to Top Secret data and reports?...

Yes, I do, and I am careful never to reveal the data or reports anywhere but on this website.

I guess I should say that the press accounts and Executive Orders I've read and heard about Bush's activities (warrantless wiretaps of American citizens) differ from Clinton's activities (warrantless physical searches aimed at non-US persons) and Carter's activities (warrantless wiretaps of conversations not involving US persons). The reports that say those activities are the same are false. I don't know what happens in secret.

Here's a link to Clinton's Executive Order 12949: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-12949.htm

Here's Carter's Executive Order 12319: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm

Quote:

...At some point we have to trust somebody....

That's right, which is what makes Bush's preposterous conduct in all areas of governance so unfortunate. He cannot be trusted. Period.

Quote:

...It looks to me like we're headed for a dilemma of trust...

I agree. And it is the Republicans' fault. It's fashionable to say that both parties are equally bad, but I ain't buying it. It was the Republicans who stretched every shred of shakey evidence to try to reverse the 1996 election. It was the Repulicans who used fraudulant means to try to destroy Social Security. It was the Republicans who have put the needs of the country to the side while they go about accumulating power. And it is the Republicans who continue to push their fraudulant verson of the War on Terror. They have no regard for our institutions of government. That is why we have a trust problem in this country.

NKowi · #20 01-09-2006, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Yes, I do, and I am careful never to reveal the data or reports anywhere but on this website.

Fortunately, we can be certain that no one who reads these threads is any sort of a security risk - that everything that's discussed here stays here.

boneheaddoctor · #21 01-10-2006, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Previous administrations? I haven't heard any allegation that previous administrations did warrantless wiretaps on American citizens. You hear repeated allegations that Clinton and Carter "did the same thing that Bush did" but that allegation is clearly false. What Clinton and Carter did was different than what Bush did. There is no ambiguity about that. There may be room for argument about whether what they did was different in any legally significant way, but they clearly did not "do the same thing" that Bush did.

So we are expected to take the word of the party of liars (Democrats) that their guy didn't do it when they DID do it.

boneheaddoctor · #22 01-10-2006, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NKowi

Fortunately, we can be certain that no one who reads these threads is any sort of a security risk - that everything that's discussed here stays here.

I see plenty of security risks here.....

most of them from the AlQueda hugging left.

Honus · #23 01-10-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

So we are expected to take the word of the party of liars (Democrats) that their guy didn't do it when they DID do it.

I assume that police misconduct occurs under every administration. The difference here is that Bush appears to have made police misconduct part of his official administration policy. So maybe he should get points for being upfront about his disregard for the Constitution.

boneheaddoctor · #24 01-10-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

I assume that police misconduct occurs under every administration. The difference here is that Bush appears to have made police misconduct part of his official administration policy. So maybe he should get points for being upfront about his disregard for the Constitution.

Bush never committed Perjury and tried to intimidate witnesses like Clinton did....whine about that one and then you can complain about Bush

dwayneb · #25 01-10-2006, 11:25 AM

The bottom line here is that we are at war! This is a war for the survival of democracy and freedoms of every kind. Just ask any non-Taliban Afganistani.

The democrats are trying to relive their protesting childhoods when they protested the Viet Nam War. They are screaming and making noise about the wiretapping which is a defensive act against murdering fanatics. Fanatics who would love to slip a nuke into any major city. We all know full well, that these screaming liberals/democrats, are the same ones that were trying to pin 911 on Pres. Bush. If the terrorists are ever able to commit(God forbid), another act on our country during this administration, watch how quickly the "libodems" come out screaming about how Bush didn't do enough.

Sometimes I think these libodems actually believe the crap they spread.

Honus · #26 01-10-2006, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

Bush never committed Perjury and tried to intimidate witnesses like Clinton did....whine about that one and then you can complain about Bush

I don't see the connection between the two, but how about this: As soon as you complain about Bush, I will complain about Clinton.

dkveuro · #27 01-10-2006, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

I personally don't see the big deal about this spying. So what if someone listens to your phone conversation? Unless you're discussing your plan to bomb the white house, you have nothing to worry about. I'm more worried about innocent people getting locked up indefinitely at Gitmo or innocent people being executed throughout the US.

Bush said..." We want to know why Al-Qaeda is calling you."

If you recieved a 'wrong number' call from A-Q....try explianing that to the NSA.

I don't want Black Hawk's hovering over my shop/home.

.

dwayneb · #28 01-10-2006, 12:58 PM

I don't think Al-Qaeda goes around making random phone calls. If they called you, you probably deserve Blackhawks over your house.

boneheaddoctor · #29 01-10-2006, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

I don't see the connection between the two, but how about this: As soon as you complain about Bush, I will complain about Clinton.

Clinton was proven to do what I complain of....the left however has proven nothing and therefore base their bashing on lies....

boneheaddoctor · #30 01-10-2006, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkveuro

Bush said..." We want to know why Al-Qaeda is calling you."

If you recieved a 'wrong number' call from A-Q....try explianing that to the NSA.

I don't want Black Hawk's hovering over my shop/home.

.

don't hang out with Al Queda types and you won't get Al Queda calls...

remember ...you are known for the company you keep.

Hang with druggies and get treated like a druggie.

Al Queda doesn't make random calls to the public.....only the Al Queda supporters on the left leaning media do that.