Electronic Evesdropping

[wolfix]

As a Republican and a citizen of the US I took a interest in the electronic evesdropping controversy that is going on in the public debates on the internet... This is an issue I feel strongly about.. I know once a right is lost , it may never be brought back.
I feel this is giving the Europeans a view of what's going on that may not be accurate. I know that Europeans have serious questions concerning the US's policies and I can fully understand that. But a few things must be clarified..... This is about electronic evesdropping and not about the other policies which would be a new thread.
And as the Euro's read the internet blogs and forums they must feel as if Bush is just running rampant over American civil rights.

But let's look at this a little closer.

I must make a comment here also . If you Euro's think the public in America thinks the same way as the majority of bloggers do , consider this. Most bloggers are young. Most bloggers are college students with the laptop and time to blog. And the thing about most students is they happen to think they have all the answers. That they have inside knowledge to the way the world thinks and works. They feel as if they are above it all. But they have very little experience and their insight usually comes from a university professor who is biased and presents his arguments in a way that is slanted to his particular views. So with this limited knowledge they sit down at the coffee shop and try to inform the world of their vast knowledge.

Back to "Illegal wire tapping of the Nazi Bush." What I have figured out is this .... The liberals leave out some basic truths about the subject of evesdropping. They want the world to think Bush came up with this all on his own.....

... Let's look closer.

What is the difference between what Jimmy Carter did on May 23, 1979 when he signed EO 12139 and what is going on now?
What is EO 12139?
It is an authorization that gives the right for "the Attorney General to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order".
And that administration used it .......

I want to clear up another point about Jimmy Carter. Several of you Euro's have made the comment that Jimmy Carter is respected in your country. Jimmy Carter's presidency was so destructive to the American economy that all Democrats distance themselves from him. At many Democratic Party Headquarters they are instructed never to bring Carters name up in speeches in order not to remind the public that they were Jimmy Carters Party. The only positive comments made about Jimmy Carter in this country are from the young who most were not even alive during his Presidency. But they know he was a good President because he builds houses for the poor.....


Back to electronic evesdropping. Let's jump to the next Democratic President ..... Bill Clinton. On Febuary 9,1995 he signed EO12949 that goes by the title "Intelligence Physical Searches" and does this ..... "...the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year".
And his administration used it.

So why is everyone up in arms about this now? Could it be it's an election year? Or could it be that the people ragging on it don't really understand what it is all about?

Granted, we must be careful when using these bills. But foreign nationals do not have the protection of the bill of rights that Americans do. Not when it comes to national security. Look at the security that European countries employ. They take care of themselves and rightly so ........

But one difference between the electronic evesdropping now and then is this ..... 9/11 changed the way America has to think. We know now we can be a target in our own country.

So as you read the forum and think that most Americans agree with the posters that are always screaming things about civil rights concerning electronic evesdropping........ consider the source.

 

[darkboong]

Jimmy Carter's presidency was so destructive to the American economy that all Democrats distance themselves from him.

Care to provide a point by point list of causes and JC's part in those causes ? It doesn't have to be exhaustive, just a summary of the top ten say.

Something that I find peculiar about "Republicans" is that they think Democrats never persue hardline military actions. JC, for example, unleashed the CIA in Afghanistan. More recently Clinton's administration bombed several countries *AND* commissioned the Nuke weapon that the current bunch of Republican draft-dodging warmonkeys are drooling over.

Quite frankly, from the outside, we see the captain changing but it's the same paranoid tired old world domination ******** being pedalled.

 

[jhuskey]

Care to provide a point by point list of causes and JC's part in those causes ? It doesn't have to be exhaustive, just a summary of the top ten say.

Something that I find peculiar about "Republicans" is that they think Democrats never persue hardline military actions. JC, for example, unleashed the CIA in Afghanistan. More recently Clinton's administration bombed several countries *AND* commissioned the Nuke weapon that the current bunch of Republican draft-dodging warmonkeys are drooling over.

Quite frankly, from the outside, we see the captain changing but it's the same paranoid tired old world domination ******** being pedalled.

You are correct in the sense that everything changes as everything stays the same.

 

[darkboong]

You are correct in the sense that everything changes as everything stays the same.

FWIW same goes for Tony Blair. "New Labour" and the Conservatives over here. Dunno about the Liberal Democrats but I suspect that they have sold their soul of late.

 

[Hypnospin]

what this underscores for me is how the us already had the processes legislated and defined to conduct this type of intel, and these are the very sort of tactics expected result in dectection of the kind of threats to the us that are of valid concern.

of course, even though there was some uproar over the pre-bush intrusive policies you mention here, the results of these bills never reached the level of applied abuse of today, esp. where us citizens are concerned, did they?

who was director of the cia at that time again? oh yeah, "intelligence" has long been part and parcel of the bush family business.

however, with this popular "post 9-11"
(ever note how this is an all encompassing grab bag for rubber stamp mentality approval of all things governmental?)
hystreria backlash, all sorts of seemingly redundant bills get passed right through during the bushco reign.

in the final analysis, it seems to me the conclusion is clearly that the us does not need more invasive big brother law activity
(isn't opposition to this a true hallmark of the anti big government stance of the true conservative? how things have morphed to suit those in power...)
but to effectively use the intelligence agencies at hand than to create an endless chain of appointess and contracts that do nothing for the taxpayer over that which was not already in place.

the failure lies in ignoring and creating threats, either through gross negligence or perhaps intentionaly, rather than creating more intrusion into citizen's rights, election year or not...

As a Republican and a citizen of the US I took a interest in the electronic evesdropping controversy that is going on in the public debates on the internet... This is an issue I feel strongly about.. I know once a right is lost , it may never be brought back.
ISo as you read the forum and think that most Americans agree with the posters that are always screaming things about civil rights concerning electronic evesdropping........ consider the source.

 

[wolfix]

of course, even though there was some uproar over the pre-bush intrusive policies you mention here, the results of these bills never reached the level of applied abuse of today, esp. where us citizens are concerned, did they?

You need to point out the high level of abuse that American citizens have been subjected to.....

who was director of the cia at that time again? oh yeah, "intelligence" has long been part and parcel of the bush family business.

Think ..... You need to think ..... Who was the Cia director in may of 1979 when that was bill was authorized ???? It was Stansfield Turner if I remember right. George H Bush had not been director for several years.

however, with this popular "post 9-11"
(ever note how this is an all encompassing grab bag for rubber stamp mentality approval of all things governmental?)
hystreria backlash, all sorts of seemingly redundant bills get passed right through during the bushco reign. ]

If these bills are redundant, why the hysterical backlash of the liberal party of these bills? Where were they when Carter/Clinton wrote and authorized these bills?

 

[Hypnospin]

You need to point out the high level of abuse that American citizens have been subjected to.....

a slippery slope is initiated...
with jose padilla


Think ..... You need to think ..... Who was the Cia director in may of 1979 when that was bill was authorized ???? It was Stansfield Turner if I remember right. George H Bush had not been director for several years.

turner and bush were linked with noriega, and drug trafficing...


If these bills are redundant, why the hysterical backlash of the liberal party of these bills? Where were they when Carter/Clinton wrote and authorized these bills?

the control over these quasi-gov't agencies now rests in the hands of bushco, as does their expeditures of tax monies unchecked.
we can all feel safer already.

 

[wolfix]

the control over these quasi-gov't agencies now rests in the hands of bushco, as does their expeditures of tax monies unchecked.
we can all feel safer already.

What you feel is paronia..... These bills have been in place over 26 years.You need to point out the high level of abuse that American citizens have been subjected to.....

a slippery slope is initiated...
with jose padilla

Just another man with nothing more then a opinion . What a person needs to do is look at what really happens , not just an opinion of a man seeking book royalties.

turner and bush were linked with noriega, and drug trafficing...

And that has to with what and how pertaining to electronic evesdropping?

 

[darkboong]

If these bills are redundant, why the hysterical backlash of the liberal party of these bills?

Fair point. Maybe they aren't actually redundant.

Where were they when Carter/Clinton wrote and authorized these bills?

Where were the Republicans ? Were they sitting quiet too ?

 

[wolfix]

Fair point. Maybe they aren't actually redundant.



Where were the Republicans ? Were they sitting quiet too ?

The point I am trying to make is this ...... These bills have not changed anything in 26 years. But now the liberals are screaming ..... They want America to think the government is listening in all our calls.... And that is not remotely true. No more today then they were under Carter/Clinton.

 

[darkboong]

The point I am trying to make is this ...... These bills have not changed anything in 26 years. But now the liberals are screaming ..... They want America to think the government is listening in all our calls.... And that is not remotely true. No more today then they were under Carter/Clinton.

The trick that the proles need to swing (in the US and UK) is exploiting the *minimal* divisions between parties. At present the parties are very successful at dividing their subjects (I use that word advisedly), and *that* is why laws that erode and remove the rights of citizens have been allowed to pass unchallenged within the law-making arenas.

These folks are laughing all the way to their offshore banks. All they have to do is whinge about Liberals/Republicans and the voters are at each other's throats rather than tearing strips off their so-called representatives. I'm not asking for a revolution here, I'm asking for people to put aside labels and concentrate on issues, pledging alleigence to one party or another is simply asking for a kick in the teeth.

 

[Hypnospin]

so i need to point something out?

wolf, i need to point out it is considered at best impolite to answer a question with another question. good tactic for averting focus on the questions posed in my post #5, if only out of convenience.
look for the question marks (?) in said post, a couple went neatly avoided by you.

and one or two more comments in said post #5 are of inquisitive nature without question marks.

cheers as always.

What you feel is paronia..... These bills have been in place over 26 years.You need to point out the high level of abuse that American citizens have been subjected to.....


Just another man with nothing more then a opinion . What a person needs to do is look at what really happens , not just an opinion of a man seeking book royalties.



And that has to with what and how pertaining to electronic evesdropping?

 

[Wurm]

But now the liberals are screaming ..... They want America to think the government is listening in all our calls.... And that is not remotely true. No more today then they were under Carter/Clinton.

Can you show how the gov't is not listening to/checking all of our calls and e-mail? According to Preznit Chimpenfuhrer, "his" gov't will do whatever they feel they 'need to do' to catch the evul terrists. The problem is, the arrogant ***** does not have the right given to him to decide that.

So let's stop *****-footing around with phony nuance and convenient interpretation, because as always, you are casually sidestepping the one crucial and inescapable fact that:

BushCo is breaking the law as set down by the Founding Fathers in the U.S. Constitution.

PERIOD.

The ONLY way to change that law is for super-majorities in Congress, and then in the State's legislatures. Bush/Cheney/Rove/DoD/NSA/FBI/HS DO NOT have that power unto themselves. - not even if there had been 100 9/11's or nuclear devices set off in the U.S. since Jan. 20, 2001.

THIS is what you easily-led Repiggers have thrown out the window merely to fawn and fetch for your usurping leaders, and THAT sir is equivalent to suborning treason and sedition.

Now, why don't you stay in the present tense - such as discussing that which is relevant on this matter today, which is not the usual Repig supporter's canard about Clinton or Carter, but is about the illegalities of BushCo policies?

 

[wolfix]

Can you show how the gov't is not listening to/checking all of our calls and e-mail?

And you can prove they are? Again....You attempt to prove your points by making statements that you believe are fact.

BushCo is breaking the law as set down by the Founding Fathers in the U.S. Constitution.
PERIOD.

According to you.
Period.

Now, why don't you stay in the present tense - such as discussing that which is relevant on this matter today, which is not the usual Repig supporter's canard about Clinton or Carter, but is about the illegalities of BushCo policies?

The thread was in the present tense. Electronic evesdropping is in the news. The referances to the Clinton/Carter Administrations was to show this "current outrage" is about elections and not reality based.
I would suggest you stay on your prozac.... Otherwise you are going to end up like those guys that wander around town talking to themselves scaring little kids.

 

[Hypnospin]

seems wiretapping on us citizens by nixon was indeed illegal in '72,
according to the supreme court.

rice, during the course of interview, could not catfight her way out of this particular issue, so had to avoid it.

www.mediamatters.org/items/200512190012

to make this into a partisan argument only serves to deflect attention and focus away from the fundamental issue at hand, the protection of privacy of the us citizen.

And you can prove they are? Again....You attempt to prove your points by making statements that you believe are fact.

According to you.
Period.

up like those guys that wander around town talking to themselves scaring little kids.

 

[Wurm]

According to you.
Period.

According to the Foreign Intellegence Surveillance Act, BushCo is in violation of the law.

But don't let the law stand in your way.

 

[Hypnospin]

note question marks, these items have not been addressed by the thread starter.

respond if willing and able, else i will appear to be replying to my own posts, for the sake of it, a trait which i have always thought to be a somewhat nuerotic behaviour.

disclaimer:
nuerosis does not, by definition, involve gross distortions of reality as do psychoses.

9-11.
(ever note how this is an all encompassing grab bag for rubber stamp mentality approval of all things governmental?)

in the final analysis, it seems to me the conclusion is clearly that the us does not need more invasive big brother law activity

(isn't opposition to this a true hallmark of the anti big government stance of the true conservative?)

how things have morphed to suit those in power...

 

[Wurm]

Not to worry, hypno. The one on this thread who is afflicted with a psychosis is wolfux, not you.

Interesting how when confronted with the facts, wolfix and the other Repig water-carrier's are MIA. (ie: post #16)

 

[wolfix]

9-11.
(ever note how this is an all encompassing grab bag for rubber stamp mentality approval of all things governmental?)

9/11 did change things. It was proof that there were people out there with the desire, money and know how to pull off a attack of that magnitude. And this thread is dealing with electronic evesdropping. My posts are there to show that the authorization bill was in place before Bush was in office. Bush has not changed that authorization in anyway. Now , there are people out there screaming about abuses.
So I ask , "What abuses?"
And so far I have gotten no answers. And when common sense prevails, this authorization bill that was put in place by Jimmy Carter does not give the government permission to evesdrop on Americans for just any purpose. The bill authorizes evesdropping only when a situation that is determined to be a national security risk arises.
The liberals have a campaign going to try and make Americans think the government is evesdropping on any conversation. The tactics generally used by the liberals are the tactics used by the storybook character "chicken little." "The sky is falling , the sky is falling."

You refrenced to Nixon's 1972 evesdroppping earlier..... This has nothing to do with the topic. Nixon's evesdropping was done to citizens in a non-security risk to the country. Maybe a security risk to Nixon , but not to the nations security.

(isn't opposition to this a true hallmark of the anti big government stance of the true conservative?)

Not at all. One of the item's on the conservative platform is a strong national defense w/accountibility...... Accountibility being the key word to most conservative thought. Most conservatives do not deal in philosophical idealogy but in the tried and true.

 

[Wurm]

9/11 did change things. It was proof that there were people out there with the desire, money and know how to pull off a attack of that magnitude.

9/11 showed that their were people in the U.S. government - namely the Bush Administration - that had the desire, money, and know-how to aid and abet an attack of that magnitude.

Most conservatives do not deal in philosophical idealogy but in the tried and true.

"The tried and true ", such as:

--> gutting the national treasury for a calamitous and useless war;

--> borrowing and spending the country into ruinous debt, and to support corporate welfare and unneccesary, unfair tax giveaways to upper income brackets;

--> violating the U.S. Constitution by enacting the "Patriot" Act.

Rah! Rah! for "Conservatism".