WHAT I AM

[Overpaid Union Thug]

I must have Alzheimers too, cuz i don't remember that! Can you provide a (credible) link?

I'm sure there was more to the story. I'm wondering what else was attached to the bill that made him veto it? Or what other program that he thought needed the money more? Liberals don't stop to think about that before they accuse Republican presidents of vetoing their bills. But then again....if they were to ever make a habit of thinking logically before speaking or acting on anything then they wouldn't be liberals any more.

 

[diesel96]

Originally Posted by diesel96
I think you left out one more issue.....What am I.....I am one who has been for years without permission or warrants been illegally listening to your phone conversations and viewing your E-mail and computer habits disreguarding your fourth amendment rights in the name of less liberty for security.

geez I must have bored those eavesdroppers to tears.

BS probably had them working overtime. They probably thought his ramblings were in some type of elite code. I can just imagine their chagrin when they realized it was uncoded rantings and ravings.

Another poster on this board probably cost them a small fortune in ink and toner. With his "why say it in a sentence when thirty paragraphs will do" style of speaking they probably had a hard time keeping up with their eavesdropping


Tie, you would'nt be a happy camper if the gov't was eavesdropping and found out you planned on bringing your gun to church because to many illegals were joining and attending your parish, now would you.

Do a graph on the number of terrorist attacks on our soil since 9/11 and you can see what the money accomplished. Since most of our spending increases have been dedicated towards our very successful war on terror I'm not sure the tag socialsit fits. You should probably find some other derogatory term such as libertarian. Well maybe not they're too wacky to ever get a consensus on anything. In fact I don't know why they bothered naming theirselves anything when liberal democrat fits so well.

How bout a graph on how many deaths and injuries occurred to young americans in their prime and innocent Iraq civilians since 9/11. Hard to imagine all your phanthom terrorist would have cause that kind of collaterall damage here in the states no matter who was in charge. Calling for tighter domestic security was a no-brainer for any president, even without breaking fourth amendment rights by going thru proper channels called "warrants".

Categorizing Libertians as liberal democrats...lol...I leave that one alone and let Wkmac school you with a text book context on what's so wrong with that statement. you ask for it...I'll bring the coffee and doughnuts....

 

[av8torntn]

Originally Posted by diesel96
I think you left out one more issue.....What am I.....I am one who has been for years without permission or warrants been illegally listening to your phone conversations and viewing your E-mail and computer habits disreguarding your fourth amendment rights in the name of less liberty for security.

Whose phone conversations have they listened to?

 

[tieguy]

Categorizing Libertians as liberal democrats...lol...I leave that one alone and let Wkmac school you with a text book context on what's so wrong with that statement. you ask for it...I'll bring the coffee and doughnuts....

Hate to dissapoint you but Wkmac Knows I'm jerking his chain with that comment. I keep hoping to draw him out with one of those outrageous comments so I can post the howling dogs video but he's just too slick for me.

 

[diesel96]

Whose phone conversations have they listened to?

If telecom co's are asking for, and being granting immunity from prosecution via the FISA bill, then they must be "tapping" citizens w/o warrents. Otherwise, why are they asking for immunity? I'm all for tapping suspected characters, but going thru proper channels with granting warrants which can be easily obtain with reasonable suspicion.

 

[wkmac]

Hate to dissapoint you but Wkmac Knows I'm jerking his chain with that comment. I keep hoping to draw him out with one of those outrageous comments so I can post the howling dogs video but he's just too slick for me.

 

[av8torntn]

If telecom co's are asking for, and being granting immunity from prosecution via the FISA bill, then they must be "tapping" citizens w/o warrents. Otherwise, why are they asking for immunity? I'm all for tapping suspected characters, but going thru proper channels with granting warrants which can be easily obtain with reasonable suspicion.

Oh so what you are saying is that as far as you know there is not anyone from the Government listening to yours or any other citizens phone conversation. Just in case you may want to wrap your phone in tin foil when you call cousin Fred.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

To actually think that the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc., are constantly or randomly monitoring the phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens is naive. It's only being done when the person sending or receiving a call or email is a suspected terrorist.

 

[diesel96]

Oh so what you are saying is that as far as you know there is not anyone from the Government listening to yours or any other citizens phone conversation. Just in case you may want to wrap your phone in tin foil when you call cousin Fred.

I'm trying to figure out why your so willing to give your gov't "carte blanche" as far as your freedom of privacy. Maybe I'm sterotyping, but aren't non-conservatives types the ones who depend on gov't for everything.

The issue is not about giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Instead, does any President, have the right to unilaterally decide what does and does not constitute a threat to national security? We are a Republic founded on the principle that the power of the Federal Government is limited. It does not matter if George W. Bush is sincere or his intentions benign. What matters is his past practices has chosen to ignore the Fourth Amendment because he, and he alone, has decided that the end justifies the means.

To actually think that the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc., are constantly or randomly monitoring the phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens is naive. It's only being done when the person sending or receiving a call or email is a suspected terrorist.

Wrong Again BigA.....another emotional response.
US spy agencies act like a giant vacuum cleaner, sucking in signals/communications from around the globe and now unwarranted, here domestically. So what is Bush up to? Allowing unfettered data mining on domestic targets without probable cause.
An old fashioned "fishing" trip. You cast out a net and pull it in, picking over the contents, and hoping you snared the oyster with the big pearl. This nonsense works in a Tom Clancy novel but not in the real world. Even with the most robust computer power you have no simple way to find "actionable intelligence".
If you don't exploit that information it is useless. Don't be surprised to discover that most of the info collected by the NSA is never exploited.


It would also be useful to have the phone numbers and emails used by known bad guys. But even this explanation does not hold water. Why? Because if you have phone numbers/emails that were used by known terrorists there is not a FISA judge in the history of the program who would deny the Government a chance to find out what the terrorist pen pals were doing.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

I'm trying to figure out why your so willing to give your gov't "carte blanche" as far as your freedom of privacy. Maybe I'm sterotyping, but aren't non-conservatives types the ones who depend on gov't for everything.

The issue is not about giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Instead, does any President, have the right to unilaterally decide what does and does not constitute a threat to national security? We are a Republic founded on the principle that the power of the Federal Government is limited. It does not matter if George W. Bush is sincere or his intentions benign. What matters is his past practices has chosen to ignore the Fourth Amendment because he, and he alone, has decided that the end justifies the means.





Wrong Again BigA.....another emotional response.
US spy agencies act like a giant vacuum cleaner, sucking in signals/communications from around the globe and now unwarranted, here domestically. So what is Bush up to? Allowing unfettered data mining on domestic targets without probable cause.
An old fashioned "fishing" trip. You cast out a net and pull it in, picking over the contents, and hoping you snared the oyster with the big pearl. This nonsense works in a Tom Clancy novel but not in the real world. Even with the most robust computer power you have no simple way to find "actionable intelligence".
If you don't exploit that information it is useless. Don't be surprised to discover that most of the info collected by the NSA is never exploited.


It would also be useful to have the phone numbers and emails used by known bad guys. But even this explanation does not hold water. Why? Because if you have phone numbers/emails that were used by known terrorists there is not a FISA judge in the history of the program who would deny the Government a chance to find out what the terrorist pen pals were doing.

LOL! So now we have a liberal, who doesn't even understand how these things work, explaining how our security agencies aren't doing their jobs correctly. LOL! Now that folks......that is hilarious.

 

[av8torntn]

The issue is not about giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Instead, does any President, have the right to unilaterally decide what does and does not constitute a threat to national security? We are a Republic founded on the principle that the power of the Federal Government is limited. It does not matter if George W. Bush is sincere or his intentions benign. What matters is his past practices has chosen to ignore the Fourth Amendment because he, and he alone, has decided that the end justifies the means.

Nice rant.I am guessing that means you must not know or even have heard of anyone that the government has listened to their phone call.

 

[diesel96]

LOL! So now we have a liberal, who doesn't even understand how these things work, explaining how our security agencies aren't doing their jobs correctly. LOL! Now that folks......that is hilarious.

Being that this Adminstration and "security agencies" are coming under fire from a few brave stand up Congressman and Senators calling for hearings for impeachable offenses while the rest of these spinless, panty-wearing, worthless politicians suck their thumbs indicates not all are doing their jobs correctly and legally.

Who's the naive one my friend? Here's your statement;

"To actually think that the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc., are constantly or randomly monitoring the phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens is naive. It's only being done when the person sending or receiving a call or email is a suspected terrorist."

Where's the logic to this BigA? Once again...if we knew who were the suspected terrorists any judge would grant a warrant for spying, there would be know FISA controversy! There would be no Telecom Companies seeking immunity! Why are you so pro-limited Gov't and yet allow them to take one of our basic principle rights away that so many had died for? Why would you grant the executive branch of gov't (who commands and directs our military) more power and un-checked capabilities and possibly interfere with the checks and balances of the other branches of Gov't. Your argument and stance is so paper thin only supported because your beloved Republicans remain in power, that if the tables were turned around guaranteed you'd be up in arms over this. it's ok to break ranks on issue's BigA, that makes you your own man not an indentured servant.

Nice rant.I am guessing that means you must not know or even have heard of anyone that the government has listened to their phone call. I found a little youtube video that made me think of you.

It's a funny movie...But not true of Mel Gibson, his deal is that when he gets tanked up, it's the Jew's fault with all the conspiracys in the world.

As far as my rant, I stand by the above statement and previous posts I've made. But I didn't hear a solid rebuttle from you so I guess that means your in agreement. But if people knew they were under surveilance than the gov't wouldn't be doing their job correctly, now would they.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Being that this Adminstration and "security agencies" are coming under fire from a few brave stand up Congressman and Senators calling for hearings for impeachable offenses while the rest of these spinless, panty-wearing, worthless politicians suck their thumbs indicates not all are doing their jobs correctly and legally.

Who's the naive one my friend? Here's your statement;

"To actually think that the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc., are constantly or randomly monitoring the phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens is naive. It's only being done when the person sending or receiving a call or email is a suspected terrorist."

Where's the logic to this BigA? Once again...if we knew who were the suspected terrorists any judge would grant a warrant for spying, there would be know FISA controversy! There would be no Telecom Companies seeking immunity! Why are you so pro-limited Gov't and yet allow them to take one of our basic principle rights away that so many had died for? Why would you grant the executive branch of gov't (who commands and directs our military) more power and un-checked capabilities and possibly interfere with the checks and balances of the other branches of Gov't. Your argument and stance is so paper thin only supported because your beloved Republicans remain in power, that if the tables were turned around guaranteed you'd be up in arms over this. it's ok to break ranks on issue's BigA, that makes you your own man not an indentured servant.



It's a funny movie...But not true of Mel Gibson, his deal is that when he gets tanked up, it's the Jew's fault with all the conspiracys in the world.

As far as my rant, I stand by the above statement and previous posts I've made. But I didn't hear a solid rebuttle from you so I guess that means your in agreement. But if people knew they were under surveilance than the gov't wouldn't be doing their job correctly, now would they.

Shhhhh....you hear that? I think the NSA is monitoring this board. What are you waiting for? Why aren't you at your local ACLU office yet? Make sure you aren't being followed on the way down there. And for the love of god don't use your cell phone to call ahead and tell them you are coming. You'll have two rather large men in black suits waiting for you in the parking lot.

LOL! Liberals......LOL!

 

[moreluck]

2 men in dark suits ??

Blues Brothers?
J. and K. ??

 

[av8torntn]

As far as my rant, I stand by the above statement and previous posts I've made. But I didn't hear a solid rebuttle from you so I guess that means your in agreement. But if people knew they were under surveilance than the gov't wouldn't be doing their job correctly, now would they.

Come you cannot think that anyone would take a rant about limited government from you very seriously after some of the things you have posted on here about the expansion of government. How is someone supposed to have a solid rebuttal to you when you say that if you do not know you are under surveillance that means you are under surveillance. You have posted some pretty funny things on here but this may take the top prize. I do not think the government is listening to my phone conversations. I also do not think we have a guarantee to privacy as you have said. Just look at the federally mandated drug test you have to subject yourself to. I do not think invisible people are following me around just because I cannot see them. I do not think black helicopters follow me. If you could produce even one victim I might feel differently. If you are just a truck driver like you say I think you are suffering from paranoia if you think the government is listening to your phone calls just because you do not know they are there. I personally think that nobody cares about what you say to your aunt Jenny. Come up with a victim. Someone who has been subject to prosecution for something, anything. A transcript of a phone conversation that the government captured and recorded something, anything. Find me a victim, until then there are very real problems we face without having to fabricate some.

 

[tieguy]

Shhhhh....you hear that? I think the NSA is monitoring this board. What are you waiting for? Why aren't you at your local ACLU office yet? Make sure you aren't being followed on the way down there. And for the love of god don't use your cell phone to call ahead and tell them you are coming. You'll have two rather large men in black suits waiting for you in the parking lot.

LOL! Liberals......LOL!

I know I see and hear them everywhere. The guy coughing in the background when I pick up the phone, cameras everywhere. Shoot there is that ticking noise again, I think one of my observers has a loud wrist watch. OH my I feel so violated. I should have the right to engage in illegal activity without having to worry about big brother spying on me without asking my permission first.

 

[JustTired]

The democrats claim they were duped into the iraq war by the same person they called the village idiot.

That is rather ironic!

Chalk one up for the "village idiot"......!!!!

 

[diesel96]

Come you cannot think that anyone would take a rant about limited government from you very seriously after some of the things you have posted on here about the expansion of government. How is someone supposed to have a solid rebuttal to you when you say that if you do not know you are under surveillance that means you are under surveillance. You have posted some pretty funny things on here but this may take the top prize. I do not think the government is listening to my phone conversations. I also do not think we have a guarantee to privacy as you have said. Just look at the federally mandated drug test you have to subject yourself to. I do not think invisible people are following me around just because I cannot see them. I do not think black helicopters follow me. If you could produce even one victim I might feel differently. If you are just a truck driver like you say I think you are suffering from paranoia if you think the government is listening to your phone calls just because you do not know they are there. I personally think that nobody cares about what you say to your aunt Jenny. Come up with a victim. Someone who has been subject to prosecution for something, anything. A transcript of a phone conversation that the government captured and recorded something, anything. Find me a victim, until then there are very real problems we face without having to fabricate some.

I know I see and hear them everywhere. The guy coughing in the background when I pick up the phone, cameras everywhere. Shoot there is that ticking noise again, I think one of my observers has a loud wrist watch. OH my I feel so violated. I should have the right to engage in illegal activity without having to worry about big brother spying on me without asking my permission first.

The Victim AV8, is all of us, every american citizen you meet and greet, from your Uncle Fester to your Aunt Jamina. History does have a tendencey to repeat itself.
Imagine White House operatives were caught illegally wiretapping Democratic National Committee headquarters during the coming Presidential election. That according to the head of the DNC, those listening in had overheard the conversations of every prominent Democrat in America. Imagine White House operatives with the help of current and former U.S. intelligence agency personnel conducted illegal break-ins, illegal wiretapping, and illegal espionage against ordinary citizens, journalists, Democratic Party candidates, and even members of its own administration for the purposes of political dominance and electoral victory. Now imagine the President justified it all and sought to conceal its existence with a claim of national security and executive privilege.

It was called Watergate, and it may be more relevant today than it has been at any time since Cheney's ex-boss Nixon resigned the presidency in disgrace more than 30 years ago.

In the end, all eyes must return to Nixon. If the Nixon administration now occupied the White House, with access to modern day surveillance technology, what does history tell us about its probable course of action during the coming election? How might that group of men go about leveraging government spy power against opposition party candidates? How are we to safeguard our democracy against the hand of unchecked politically-motivated surveillance?

 

[av8torntn]

The Victim AV8, is all of us, every american citizen you meet and greet, from your Uncle Fester to your Aunt Jamina.

Nah I'm no victim. You be a victim all you want that is your choice and seems a common theme for liberals. As far as I can tell I'm not a foreign government, foreign citizen, nor do either of these attempt to contact me.

 

[tieguy]

The Victim AV8, is all of us, every american citizen you meet and greet, from your Uncle Fester to your Aunt Jamina. History does have a tendencey to repeat itself.

Uncle fester and Aunt Jemima? odd reference.

Imagine White House operatives were caught illegally wiretapping Democratic National Committee headquarters during the coming Presidential election. That according to the head of the DNC, those listening in had overheard the conversations of every prominent Democrat in America.

Were that to happen they would have to employ a third grader to translate.

Imagine White House operatives with the help of current and former U.S. intelligence agency personnel conducted illegal break-ins, illegal wiretapping, and illegal espionage against ordinary citizens, journalists, Democratic Party candidates, and even members of its own administration for the purposes of political dominance and electoral victory. Now imagine the President justified it all and sought to conceal its existence with a claim of national security and executive privilege.

I have no problem with the point you wish to make. Simply bring forth these alleged victims so we may assess the crime. The problem with this argument has been it lacks any victims unless you wish to label the terrorist as such.

It was called Watergate, and it may be more relevant today than it has been at any time since Cheney's ex-boss Nixon resigned the presidency in disgrace more than 30 years ago.
In the end, all eyes must return to Nixon. If the Nixon administration now occupied the White House, with access to modern day surveillance technology, what does history tell us about its probable course of action during the coming election? How might that group of men go about leveraging government spy power against opposition party candidates? How are we to safeguard our democracy against the hand of unchecked politically-motivated surveillance?

Nixon had victims ...the DNC . Bring forth the victims from this alleged crime and lets assess it. No victims ..no crime.