Congress has agreed on a surveillance bill that would shield from lawsuits the telecommunications companies that helped the government wiretap phone and computer lines, Associated Press reported. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the bill “balances the needs of our intelligence community with Americans’ civil liberties and provides critical new oversight and accountability requirements.” But a New York Times editorial today said that the bill doesn’t appear to be balanced or a compromise. “President Bush and his allies are once again trying to scare Congress into expanding the president’s powers to spy on Americans without a court order,” the editorial argued.
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- mom on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Mr_Kia on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Regular on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Regular on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- mom on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- spiro_agnew_crook on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- beber on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- mom on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Regular on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
- Maggotpunk on McCain’s surprise pick for veep
91 Comments
If I was a lib I’d be thinking(yes, they do think);
“I send these guys money on the internet and vote them in; and they won’t even put the trial lawyers and my civil rights above the safety of the country.
I get the feelings that we left wing wackos are getting taken advantage of. They take our money, but they won’t share our paranoia.
I mean, what have we got to do so that we can be more like the Euros?”
So, ignoring outlander’s flaming nonsense…
In what alternate universe is this bill a compromise?
It’s capitulation and appeasement. Let’s call a spade a bloody shovel, because that’s what it is.
C & A, capitulation and appeasement, has become the hallmark of the democrats in congress. They cant stop things when they are out of power, and they cant stop things when they are in power.
WTF?
I think they are protecting their own sorry asses just like they continue to protect the sorry asses of bushco.
Oh yeah. And they REALLY protect their campaign donations from the telecoms.
Jesus WEPT!
And impeachment is off the table…
Send ‘em all home in November. For good!
Heh CF. Great minds work alike! But you’re a better writer.
“In what alternate universe is this bill a compromise?”
Steny compromise - 1 for me - 100 for you.
Never trust a man named “Steny.”
What a douche.
Sorry, a douche may have some value - Steny - not so much.
ksfarmgrrl,
Yeah–and those same minds operate by the same schedule.
You couldn’t be more right about protecting themselves. Hoyer, Harman, and Pelosi must in it up to their eyeballs, judging by their clinging to this “legislation” as if it were a life preserver. The hell with all of them. My money this year is going to ActBlue for REAL Democrats to challenge these anti-American, DC pig insiders. And if Pelosi is returned to office, I will support ANY challenger for the Speaker’s chair.
Unlike the Repigs, I don’t believe in rewarding traitors to the Constitution.
Well ya know, some of us screamed bloody murder when he was up for his “position”. So… as an alternative, pelosi nominated Murtha, a guy SURE to be divisive and just as sure to get defeated. Like he did. What a way to get Steny in there. Supposedly, he and pelosi dont like each other much, but given that pelosi’s district housed the old AT&T fortress where this took place, wtf did we expect.
Send ‘em all home to spend more time with their families so they leave us and our ALONE!
So.. in congress… do you know what the difference is between the captitulation democrats and the bushco appeasing republicans?
Me neither…
The phone companies should be shielded, but since bush f’d up, America (or maybe just the Repub. party) should be held financially liable.
Outie,
“I send these guys money on the internet and vote them in; and they won’t even put the trial lawyers and my civil rights above the safety of the country”
I hate to be the one who has to tell you this, but the safety of our Constitution IS the safety of our country. If you’re willing to sell out our Constitution because you’re scared something might happen to your miserable hide, you don’t deserve to be protected by that “scrap of paper” as your fuhrer so aptly put it.
Go find youself some nice banana dictator and kiss, kiss, kiss, (upwardly) and you’re living somewhere safe (for the moment)!
(looks over Lib phone surveillance list under FOIA)
Wow! Didn’t know Libs had so many cell phones and Ipods!.
(chortles)
Reggie,
There are six people in the world who I’ve given my cell phone number. Anybody else who calls it had better be prepared to hide for a long time!
Dang Jedidiah, I was just channeling a liberal. The liberal I was channeling though was mostly mad because he was a lawyer wanted to sue the telecommunications companies for cooperating with the government in a time of national peril.
But now that you mention it, I might as well be consistent. It was always much ado over nothing, as the Democratically controlled Congress has now acknowledged.
National Defense and National Security are NOT the same thing as routine law enforcement.
It is entirely possible that some evidence, obtained in this matter, will not be admitted in a trial.
So what?
The PURPOSE of this spying activity is to prevent an attack on our country.
The Military and our National Security agencies do not need a warrant to do that.
It is not our intent, with these laws, to convict terrorists, in court.
It is our intent to save lives and protect our country.
If by compromise they mean give everything Bush wants and trash the Constitution, then yes, it’s a compromise.
Pall,
“It is not our intent, with these laws, to convict terrorists, in court.
It is our intent to save lives and protect our country.”
From Democrats, I’m sure.
So, Rossell, you will be okay with President Obama ordering a warrantless wiretap of your phone, right?
After all, all he has to say is that it is a matter of national security.
Or, he could just use the existing FISA system as it was intended.
Outie,
I wasn’t planning on suing anyone. The person who was suing was the agent who suffered psychological trauma from having to listen to my phone calls.
“If by compromise they mean give everything Bush wants and trash the Constitution, then yes, it’s a compromise.”
Nobody is trashing the Constitution.
Your attitude towards protecting this country will trash your chance to get back to the White House.
McGoverbama. Didn’t work then …
WS
It must hurt, huh?
George W. Bush, a lame duck President, who is way down in the polls —
JUST KICKED YOUR ASSES AGAIN!
How did he do it?
Simple.
On this one, Bush has common sense on his side.
Fighting a war is far different from fighting crime.
In a war, you win by preventing attacks.
If we treat the terrorist threat like it is purely a law enforcement issue, we have to wait until the bad guys kill again.
The American public does not support giving “Miranda Rights” and “Warrant Rights” to our sworn enemies.
“If we treat the terrorist threat like it is purely a law enforcement issue,…”
I thought we tried that in the ’90’s.
“JUST KICKED YOUR ASSES AGAIN!”
Huh?
Clark is beginning to sound like Scooby-Doo.
“Huh?”
““JUST KICKED YOUR ASSES AGAIN!”
Huh?”
What do you call it when Bush gets his way (the country’s best interests) and you far lefties are angry about it. Looks like the you people in Congress caved again.
How is all that “vote for me and we’ll get us out of Iraq” crap going?
“How is all that “vote for me and we’ll get us out of Iraq” crap going?”
Vetoed.
“The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the president’s illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home,” Feingold said.
”
Several points here:
1) i have not read the bill, but the “com promise” seems to be about shielding the telecoms from lawsuits for doing as the PResident and his minioins asked
2) the hue and cry here is nothing more than a desire an unrequited desire to punish the administration
3) “impeachment off the table” Pelosi is a piece of shit coward. If she wanted to do something, really do something, she would have went after the administration. She didn;t The noise afterwards is just that. Noise. Election year noise.
4)Want to after someone, someone responsible? Go after the administration. The telecoms deserve to be shielded from doing what the administration asserted was “legal”.
“Your attitude towards protecting this country will trash your chance to get back to the White House.”
Destroy the Constitution to protect the country? Yeah, how many dictatorships started by the appeal of leaders to claim they needed to destroy civil rights and freedoms in order to protect us from invisible enemies? I guess you are saying the Republicans are so utterly incompetent that rights that have been in place for 200 years now must be removed because of Republican incompetence.
Since you hate this country so much why don’t you move to Saudi Arabia? Lovely theocratic dictatorship with no civil rights. You’d fit in perfectly with all your security.
BTW, these illegal wiretaps didn’t protect us from the 9/11 attacks. Oh well, fascists were never ones for facts.
Ever since 9/11 guess how many detainees in Gitmo were prosecuted for terrorist attacks? Zero.
How many terrorists did the illegal wiretaps catch? Zero.
Who are we being protected from?
“Who are we being protected from?”
Anti-war demonstrators.
Maggot
It is NOT the goal of this program to prosecute anyone in court.
It is the goal of this program to PROTECT the country from attack.
Since it is NOT the goal, to go to court with this information, why would your question about prosecutions have any weight?
Who cares?
A better question:
“How many times has the United States been attacked, on our own soil, since 9-11?”
Answer: “ZERO”
“How many terrorists did the illegal wiretaps catch? Zero.”
———-
You must have good sources, WS.
But I understood that a lot of foreign terrorists just disappeared. Which is OK too.
Oops, that first one should have been fired at Maggie. Sorry WS.
Paul, the illegal wiretaps began before 9/11. The NSA proposal to wiretap began in Feb. 2007, one month after your fuhrer was appointed to office. Did it catch the terrorists? Nope. It just amazes me how cowardly you conservatives are. One attack and 7 years later you are still cowering in fear.
And guess what, even if you fascists managed to catch someone the evidence wouldn’t be admissible. So what would happen with the “terrorist”? You’d have to let him go on a technicality.
You protect nobody in your crusade to destroy the Constitution and this country.
Let me ask this question………….
The FISA Law allows for emergency wiretaps. The board of judges for FISA have only rejected 2 out of 10,000 applications for wiretaps.
Why “bend” the law?
Why can’t we comply with the law as written - use the emergency provisions if necessary - and be done with this stupid debate?
What is “gained” by ignoring the law?
You Repigs may want to adjust your spin: the NSA was already spying on American citizens in January 2001–eight months before the 9/11 attacks.
“In the months before 9/11, thousands of American citizens were inadvertently swept up in wiretaps, had their emails monitored, and were being watched as they surfed the Internet by spies at the super-secret National Security Agency, former NSA and counterterrorism officials said.
The NSA, with full knowledge of the White House, crossed the line from routine surveillance of foreigners and suspected terrorists into illegal activity by continuing to monitor the international telephone calls and emails of Americans without a court order. The NSA unintentionally intercepts Americans’ phone calls and emails if the agency’s computers zero in on a specific keyword used in the communication. But once the NSA figures out that they are listening in on an American, the eavesdropping is supposed to immediately end, and the identity of the individual is supposed to be deleted. While the agency did follow protocol, there were instances when the NSA was instructed to keep tabs on certain individuals that became of interest to some officials in the White House.
What sets this type of operation apart from the unprecedented covert domestic spying activities the NSA had been conducting after 9/11 is a top secret executive order signed by President Bush in 2002 authorizing the NSA to target specific American citizens. Prior to 9/11, American citizens were the subject of non-specific surveillance by the NSA that was condoned and approved by President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, according to former NSA and counterterrorism officials.”
http://www.truthout.org/article/jason-leopold-nsa-spying-evolved-pre-911
All your chest thumping and hiding behind 9/11 is just so much bullshit from you–as usual. It is and was the Administration’s goal to spy on its citizenry. They were doing it before 9/11, illegally, and they’ve continued doing it ever since.
A reasonable person, Repigs, would take the fact that these illegal surveillance measures were such a failure at stopping 9/11 as a good reason to curtail their use in favor of human intelligence. But an Administration that prefers to look busy rather than to get busy has been all too eager to use the pretext of 9/11 to set its electronic dragnet to use against all of us. Evidently, you rank and file Repukes, and lots of Democratic Congresspigs, seem to agree.
Your “arguments” don’t hold up to the slightest bit of logic or scrutiny. This is about two things: unchecked Presidential power and blanket amnesty for corporations–two things that give woodies to authoritarian Right-Wingers everywhere.
Still, it must feel like vindication that so many Democratic Congresspigs are so deeply implicated in the lawbreaking that they were eager to shame themselves by giving political cover to the Nazi Republican Party and Der Fuhrer in the White House.
Glad that the burning down of the Constitution gives outlander something to crow about. Tough luck for the rest of us.
“What is “gained” by ignoring the law?”
Because then you can do illegal activities like spy on political opponents, find information for blackmail, etc. If the Bush regime wanted to actually go after criminals they would have done so legally so they could use the evidence to prosecute them.
Conservatives like Paul and outlander don’t give a shit about the laws and the Constitution.
I could not make a judgment on this bill until reading it, in the past there have been so many subliminal meanings in the wordings. That it was open to any understanding of meaning anyone who they wanted to spy on.
Richard Clarke has said the main reason we have not been attacked again is that Al-Qaeda thinks we are smarter and better prepared then we really are. They just can not believe that we are leaving our boarders so open. They are thinking its a trap, and we are trying catch them. Little do they understand its so the country can have cheap labor.
Maggotpunk,
“Conservatives like Paul and outlander don’t give a shit about the laws and the Constitution.” Indeed. They want a country of men–THEIR men–not of laws.
The Repiglican Party: defending the flag, and shitting on the Constitution.
Mainly I think this is hilarious because you all try to add it to your bush bashing line but you can’t. This is allllll congress baby. The DEMOCRAT congress NO LESS.
Please line up any AMERICAN citizen whose rights have been violated and I’ll show you terrorist sympathisers and criminals.
To bad it can’t go to the 9th Circuit, then it will get thrown out, because the Liberal Chief Judge might get busted by the FBI for some of his porn downloads.
I’ve said it before, the only civil rights of mine that have been violated were by 19 guys on 9-11 for making me go through the crap I have to just to get on a plane.
I wonder what ol Billy had to do with that by protecting the rights of the terrorists while they were here in the 90’s???
generastonthedumbass,
“Liberal” Chief Justice Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court is a Repiglican appointee (Reagan) and a self-described “libertarian” who publishes articles in the National Review.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Kozinski
Get stupid much, Generaston?
What’s a Democrat congress?
“I wonder what ol Billy had to do with that by protecting the rights of the terrorists while they were here in the 90’s???”
When some people tried to blow up the WTC during the Clinton administration they were caught and tried and found guilty. Now they sit in prison. How’s Bush doing on catching those responsible?
It was also the Clinton administration that informed the Bush regime of the treat of Bin Laden but the Bush regime ignored it. The Clinton administration worked to upgrade safety in airplanes (like reinforced doors) but the Republican Congress voted it down claiming it was too costly. The Clinton administration was working on intelligence and training people to go into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. He held back because he, unlike Bush Sr., didn’t want to start an invasion right before a new administration took over. Bush scrapped the plans.
So what has Bush done? He spied on Americans before 9/11. He rounded up some semi-literate kids in Florida who weren’t connected to Bin Laden. He tortured a bunch of people that were picked up off the streets then let them go because they were innocent. But he did put on of the Cheech and Chong guys in prison. Mission accomplished.
generaston,
As for your other “point,”
“This is allllll congress baby. The DEMOCRAT congress NO LESS.”
Um, nooooooooo, generastonthedumbass–it’s ALL the Repiglican Party and SOME of the Democrats.
The following numbers are ‘yes’, ‘no’, and ‘not voting’
Democratic 105 128 3
Republican 188 1 10
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll437.xml
Only ONE Repiglican voted against the measure: Tim Johnson of Illinois. That makes it YOUR bill, Repig Nazis.
And Tiahrt? Tiahrt didn’t vote AT ALL. Undoubtedly he had better things to do, i.e. off being wined and dined by some lobbyist or other.
Outie,
“Dang Jedidiah, I was just channeling a liberal.”
No you weren’t, you’re just picking up O/Reilly on your fillings.
The reason Hoyer and his minions call this a “compromise” was it forces the telcos to get in writing that the government told them to break the law. From a purely political perspective, that’s a “compromise,” since they can beat up the administration after the fact. in other words, they’re more interested in show than substance.
Constitutionally, legally, and morally, it’s an indefensible disaster, as companies that are shielded from liability from illegal actions will be perfectly free to knowingly break the law, so long as the King says it’s ok. And refusal of Qwest to play along shows it was quite possible to resist.
Imagine for a moment if you could get away with, say, robbing liquor stores, so long as you could prove a government official said it was okay.
And for all the posturing about protecting Americans and faux patriotism, I notice the telcos didn’t have any issue with cutting off the surveillance when the bill wasn’t paid!
P.S. Clarification: the telcos have to show a judge that the administration told them it was legal (to break the law).
I dunno CF2K. Gene is right about the compromise being a creature of the Democrat controlled Congress. You are right to be pissed though, after all you guys went through to get them in there. They are treating you like you are just left wing nuts that they don’t take seriously.
It is interesting though, that you evidently think that you we have just the right balance between legal privacy protections and national security concerns. That there is no gray area, no room for compromise. Hell, we added the right to an abortion to the U.S. Constitution without a vote of the people. That is the Supreme Court usurping real power, that has killed millions. IF the president went over the line in his resolve to protect your sorry ass, what harm was done?
Congress apparently doesn’t think any.
#
Jed
Posted June 20, 2008 at 7:33 pm | Permalink
Outie,
“Dang Jedidiah, I was just channeling a liberal.”
No you weren’t, you’re just picking up O/Reilly on your fillings.
———-
Good one Jed.
WOW CF2, mention that it was a majority held democrat congress that did it and not bush, to add to your 7 years of bush bashing and you just go all to hate don’t you.
What else, lets see. You also seem to think that I think everyone who has ever violated the law or committed a crime is a dem, I guess. You can’t really think that I think that just because Reagan appointed someone that I think they walk on water.
And well gee Maggot I suppose since a couple of folks went to jail that we are suppose to just forget alllll about the 7 years that ol Billy had, in which to REALLY do something about OBL and Al Quida but didn’t.
At least Bush DID something after we were attacked on 9-11 and not just throw a couple of people in jail. If he had responded like Billy, after 9-11 bush would have just sent a letter of condemnation to the taliban and told the UN to also send a letter. And if OBL happened to turn himself in then maybe we would have arrested him
According to your thinking then if you were a firefighter and happened upon a house fire, you’d use the small fire extinguisher you had with you, which helped a little and then wait 10 minutes to call the fire department and let them know there is a fire.
Well, Generass, what did your hero George WMD Bush do about the Cole attack after the CIA certified that al Qaeda was behind the incident?
By the way, that certification happened after Clinton left office.
Intel briefing from outgoing administration of Billy to incoming administration of Bush.
“Uh guys, just to let you know, Al Quida did an attack on the WTC 7 years ago. They’ve attacked us a couple of more times since but hey we uh, you know, arrested a couple of folks.
Uh, their leader published a fatwah against the US a couple of years back. We haven’t really accomplished much since but uh, we do have this intel that says that Al Quida is determined to attack in the US, but uh, hey they already did 7 years ago and haven’t been back, so uh, everythings probably cool now.
I mean we haven’t really been paying much attention. The Prez he doesn’t want to seem to, you know, be seen as aggressive and wants to keep his image of doing nothing intact, so uh, yeah, thats, thats about all the intel briefing we got for you, uh good luck.”
What did George do, Generass?
Clinton worked from scratch and did something. He had seven years of work and handed it off to Bush and he did nothing. A huge memo titled, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the U.S.” and they dumped it in the bin.
Keep in mind while Reagan and Bush Sr. were in office they were busy training and financing Bin Laden and his folks. Clinton was busy dealing with Bush’s screw-up in Somalia and had an economy to fix. Perhaps if Republicans didn’t f*ck things up so much Clinton would have had more time to focus on other things. Then again, Republicans complained that Clinton was too focused on terrorism. When Clinton launched a missile assault against Bin Laden’s camp the Republicans cried “Wag the dog!” and mocked it as an attempt to distract from Lewinsky.
Clinton did something and Republicans complained and pressed ahead with their impeachment because they considered that more important than national security. Seeing the way Republicans have constantly screwed up foreign affairs they are in no position to criticize the Democrats. If you don’t recall you Republicans are having Americans slaughtered in Iraq and Afghanistan now, occupations that lasted longer than the entire second world war.
Like I said a week or so back WS, you would have been okay then had Bush taken GIGANTIC steps upon getting the memo about Al Quida determined to attack in the US?
You’d have been okay with him, just a few months in office, taking very, very drastic measures to protect this country from 9-11???
Of course all the dems that were still whining about Bush supposedly being given the presidency by the supreme court, would have been JUST FINE, had Bush wanted to do what he is now trying to do, to protect us????
You all would have had no problem, had he come to you and said
“I’ve been given an intel memo that says that Al Quida is determined to attack in the US, so I’m am now going to do throw out the FISA court, and allow secret wiretapping because that is what I need to do to protect this country.”
No problem with that huh?
You all are all hot and bothered about the supposed intel that all the dems in congress received about Iraq and how phony it was and on and on.
Gee I wonder what would have been your response had Bush brought you the intel about Al Quida determined to attack in the US and what he felt he needed to do with that intel to keep us safe?
WOW and we’ve occupied Germany and Japan for 60 years
Answer those questions first Maggot.
“Uh, their leader published a fatwah against the US a couple of years back.”
Yeah, at a time he wasn’t known to be a leader of a terrorist group and his only wanted status was in Saudi Arabia. Did you have a point? It was issued in 1996, when Republicans ran Congress, so your claim that Clinton had seven years to respond is BS. Perhaps if Republicans weren’t so busy doing pointless investigations on old land deals or travel agencies something positive could have been done.
Do you know why Bin Laden was pissed at the U.S.? It’s because Bush had soldiers in Saudi Arabia. He wanted them withdrawn. He also wanted oil prices to increase. Bush Jr. gave him what he wanted.
Just remember Regular, you Republicans screwed things up and you continue to screw things up with your failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.
If everything that Bush has done against terrorism in the past 7 years, you would have been okey dokey with had he started it on the day he got that intel memo about Al Quida attacking in the US, you would have been alright with that?
NO whining or crying or Bush Bashing, you would have thought he was the greatest president of all times for keeping you safe. Is that it???
Regular, give me one name of a terrorist connected with the 9/11 attacks that Bush has captured and prosecuted.
4,100 soldiers died as a result of Bush’s war for oil, Bush didn’t keep them safe. Uncounted numbers of soldiers returned home with wounds, missing limbs and severe brain trauma, Bush didn’t keep them safe. Uncounted numbers of contracted workers were killed for Bush’s war for oil, Bush didn’t keep them safe.
Bush is piling on the body count. Tell me again how Bush kept them safe.
So then Maggot, WHY didn’t Billy with all this supposed intel and fatwah and knew OBL was pissed for having troops in Saudi, WHY didn’t HE pull us out of Saudi???
Why didn’t he on his first day in office declare that we would NO LONGER be an ally of Israel? Supposedly he knew about this fatwah?
Bush SR hadn’t done anything, he had the reins now, why didn’t he do something then?
Why 7 years after we had been attacked on US soil was there a problem to hand off to Bush JR?
Has Bush’s illegal wiretaps and war crimes against innocent detainees help catch the person(s) responsible for the anthrax attack that killed five people? How has Bush kept them safe?
Please answer the question Maggot.
Had Bush done all that he has done against terrorism in the past 7 years, when he got that memo, we wouldn’t be in Iraq now, would we. You’d be okay with that.
Having Saddam in power was much more preferable. Tell that to the families of those in the mass graves. Tell them they have NO RIGHT to live in freedom, to do or say what they want.
See what you get when you compromise and work with the cons?
They are not to be worked with. They are to be squashed like a dangerous insect.
Regular, how dense are you? Were you not familiar with that point in history? America was enforcing the no-fly zone and UN weapons inspections, UN security resolutions, protecting the Kurds, etc. He was obligated to finish the mess that the Republicans started.
I see you can’t answer any challenge I put up Regular, as usual you prove yourself incompetent on the issues but that’s consistent with Republicans. I say you are status quo with the Republican party when it comes to international affairs. Blame Clinton for what Bush started, yeah, great excuse. Get an education.
Regular, maybe this history lesson will educate your dumbass since you were apparently in a coma in the 90s.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2889/is_n38_v29/ai_14558606
I’m sorry Maggot, I’m asking questions of you but you keep responding to ‘Regular” is that me or someone else? My handle is Generaston.
I mean you had pointed out that the reason OBL was pissed at us was because we had troops in Saudi during the 90’s. I understand that we were there dealing with the no fly and such. But after the fatwah declaring war on us, why didn’t Billy pull us out of Saudi and just turn everything over to the UN.
He had the excuse that terrorists were declaring war on us for that reason. So I’m asking, WHY didn’t he pull us out then in 96 to protect our country from declared terrorist intentions???
“You’d have been okay with him, just a few months in office, taking very, very drastic measures to protect this country from 9-11???”
In other words, Bush didn’t do a damned thing about the Cole attack.
“WOW and we’ve occupied Germany and Japan for 60 years”
We don’t occupy Germany or Japan - we have military bases in those countries, along with 128 others.
“Tell them they have NO RIGHT to live in freedom, to do or say what they want.”
Bush said we invaded Iraq because of WMD - where are they?
Got any answers or just more bullshit?
Sorry WS, I feel my questions are very relevent to the discussion. I’m sorry that the Dem majority held congress broke your heart but come on, NO civility?
So tell me WS when did we stop occupying and start having bases? Were we invited???
So we went into Iraq for WMD’s but we got a dictator thrown out at the time, just like the congress said back during Billy’s time, that the US should actively work towards getting Saddam thrown out.
Are you sorry we did???
Wasn’t the fatwa kinda like an intel memo to Billy, basically saying that Al Quida determined to strike against the US? Why didn’t Billy react to that, he had 3 more years???
According to you there was allll this intel and info out there for Bush Sr to respond to and yet somehow we got through 8 years of Billy doing nothing to protect us from attack. Not the first WTC, not the Khobar towers, not the embassy’s.
Talk about your presidents not doing anything to respond and make us safe!!!! Ignoring all the intel.
I see Maggot left without responding to my question. How about you WS?
I’ll answer your question geneo.
I have not ruled out the possibility that 911 was an inside job.
It’s not as crazy as people try to insist it is.
You have to start with the question: “Who benefited the most from the events of Sept 11?
How about you answer that question for me?
Gene, since MP didn’t answer your questions, I will.
“Had Bush done all that he has done against terrorism in the past 7 years, when he got that memo, we wouldn’t be in Iraq now, would we. You’d be okay with that.”
I’d be okay if we weren’t in Iraq, but since the invasion of Iraq had been the the neo-con plan since 1995, we would be in Iraq whether there had been a 9/11 or not. Bush would have found another equally insane justification.
“Having Saddam in power was much more preferable. Tell that to the families of those in the mass graves. Tell them they have NO RIGHT to live in freedom, to do or say what they want.”
Although accurate figures are nearly impossible to come by, the best guess that I can come by is that in the last 5 years, we’ve killed more Iraqis than Saddam did in 16. So Bush holds the current title of Butcher of Bagdad! I might also point out that Iraq is no more free now than it was under Saddam. People are still being arrested with little or no cause and imprisoned and tortured without trial. The overwhelming majority of Iraqis want us the hell out of their country.
I know those weren’t quite the answers you wanted, but given the credibility of the Bush administration, for lack of a better story the truth will just have to suffice.
“The Repiglican Party: defending the flag, and shitting on the Constitution.”
Thank you. No more needs to be said.
Nite all…
Call your Senators: Demand a filibuster unless the retroactive immunity provision is removed.
“How about you WS?”
Just answer, Generass, what did Bush do about the Cole attack?
Simple - then we can go from there…………..
Bush swore to defend and uphold the Constitution with his hand on a Holy Bible. I saw it on TV. I guess the Constitution is too weak and poor a document to withstand the assault of a handful of guys and a couple of stolen airplanes.
Bush: the most unpopular President in modern history. To his remaining, dwindling defenders: It’s all downhill from here for you guys. No end in sight to the war, the economy in ruins, unemployment up, scandal after scandal, and corruption charges after corruption charges, cronyism, no-bid contracts, toxic FEMA trailers, poisonous Chinese children toys and mortgage crimes caused by anti-regulation extremists….
Please.. keep defending Bush and his record. Please.
“DavidB” observes –
“Bush: the most unpopular President in modern history. To his remaining, dwindling defenders: It’s all downhill from here for you guys. No end in sight to the war, the economy in ruins, unemployment up, scandal after scandal, and corruption charges after corruption charges, cronyism, no-bid contracts, toxic FEMA trailers, poisonous Chinese children toys and mortgage crimes caused by anti-regulation extremists….”
In a breakthrough for physics and political science, researchers have predicted the absolute shortest unit of time. Shorter than a millisecond, a billionths of a nanosecond, even less time than it takes a Chicago cab driver to honk at you when the light turns green, this new, tiniest unite of time is called the “Obama-second.”
It marks the length of time it will take after 12 Noon, January 20, 2009 for the Republic Party Slime Machine to blame Democrats for “No end in sight to the war, the economy in ruins, unemployment up, scandal after scandal, and corruption charges after corruption charges, cronyism, no-bid contracts, toxic FEMA trailers, poisonous Chinese children toys, mortgage crimes caused by anti-regulation extremists, and teenaged loose women.”
Thats just plain funny, M-H no matter who ya are!! LOL
Thanks, “Chas” –
You might look up the Peggy Noonan profile at (I think; I’ve lost track of the specific URL) wwd.com
She’s one of those conservatives I usually disagree with, but always love to read. Unlike Limbaugh, for example, she sometimes departs from Republic Party sound bites and reveals true conservative integrity. Sort of like Barry Goldwater. “In your guts you know he’s nuts.” But at least he had a certain thought process working.
WS,
“Just answer, Generass, what did Bush do about the Cole attack?
Simple - then we can go from there…………..
I think I’ll answer that one myself. What he did was tow the damn thing home and make the American Taxpayers cough up however many Billions (with a B) it took to fix it, so he could play “who’s got the bigger dick” with Bin Laden. Bin Laden replied on 9/11.
Monk,
I think you’re on to something there! Proof of an Obama-Second would establish the unit of quantum time/space that would be symmetric to quantum mass/energy, bringing quantum mechanics into line with Superstring Theory. Of course it will need to be written up and submitted to the appropriate peer-review journals and the Vatican for final approval. This will be the greatest thing (outside of declaring war somewhere) that a United States President ever has done for science!
A question about the domestic spying that has as of yet been answered. Why did the Bush administration start the spying before 9-11? Several heads of communications business have stated that prior to 9-11 they were approached and as a condition of large Government contracts were to allow the intersection of domestic communications by the U.S. government. Nearly five months before Sept 11, 2001, why was this and on what grounds?
“Shame on you” — Bill Clinton, not long ago, during a campaign stop, when someone claimed that “9-11 was an inside job”.
I always suspected that the nut who said that was a Clinton plant, used as a foil to make the Clinton’s seem moderate.
BJ makes clear, however, that some very crazy people do exist, in the Democrat Party.
Monkey
Your partisanship is showing.
You through the “mortgage loan” issue in?
Do you have any idea how many Democrats in Congress got sweetheart deals from Countrywide?
Maggie Williams went from an executive, at a Sub Prime lender, back to the Clinton campaign.
Obama got help from convicted criminal Rezco.
GWB makes clear, however, that some very crazy people do exist, in the Republican Party.
Pall,
Y’gotta admit though that if 9/11 wasn’t an inside job, it was certainly serendipitous for the previously published neo-con agenda.
Let’s see; they were going to quickly and easily take down Iraq, install a democratic (read friendly to the Bush administration) government, and the rest of the middle east would look at Iraq and demand democracy for themselves and convert, in neo-con’s idiot’s version of the Domino Theory, and be so grateful to the US that they’d practically give Bush their oil! All they needed was an excuse to invade Iraq, which they didn’t exactly get, but close enough for horseshoes. Unfortunately, it seems not to have gone quite according to plan.
The more I learn about this bill, the more I realize that it sucks, period. Never mind immunity–it needs to be scrapped.
But if the immunity provision can be a poison pill )let’s make it one!) then so be it.
8 Trackbacks
weight telecom…
I just came across your blog and wanted to drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here. I also have websites & blogs so I know what I am talking about when I say your site is top-notch! Keep up the great w…
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
hydrocodone…
hydrocodone side affects…
countrywide mortgage co…
It sounds interesting but I am not sure that I agree with you completely….
Florida wall units directory…
[...] Below is a picture of one of them.It might be hard to distinguish, but this is a picture of a corner where the wall meets the carpet. This particular part of the wall had a lot of extra dry wall on it. [...]…
add mortgage second url…
It sounds interesting but I am not sure that I agree with you completely….
Anxiety…
nice post about this…..
Cell Phone Number Look Up…
It is a quite interesting post but quite difficult to understand for me -…