The last stand of the American Republic....

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
When they came for...

[/ QUOTE ]

Brilliant. I totally didn't expect that (you know, since it's been used 1,000 times before and I figured it had gotten old already).

[TheHammer24]

[ QUOTE ]
Great article here....

My fav. quote from the article pretty much starts it out...

[ QUOTE ]

"The much-belated exposure of George W. Bush's warrantless spy program has forced the Bush-Cheney Regime to openly declare what they have long implied -- and enacted -- in secret: that the president is above the law, a military autocrat with unlimited powers, beyond the restraint or supervision of any other institution or branch of government. Outed as rank deceivers, perverters of the law and rapists of the Constitution, the Bush gang has decided that their best defense -- their only defense, really -- is a belligerent offense. "Yeah, we broke the law," they now say; "so what? We'll break it again whenever we want to, because law don't stick to our Big Boss Man. What are you going to do about it, chump?" -

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand...it makes an interesting point - if the American public is willing to take such an obvious failed human being and re-elect him and poo-poo his repeated violations of our civil rights, maybe we do deserve to be slaves to his dictatorial machine.

At least you guys who voted for him do.

RB

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a rather embarrasing assertion by you for the above poster's explanations.

For me, you don't even have to explain how your personal civil rights have been violate, it will suffice me if you explain how civil rights in general have been violated and how America is worse of because of it?

[BCPVP]

An interesting pro-tapping article from an unlikely source

Keep one thing in mind, the phone numbers were found in cofiscated computers, phones and other devices seized from terrorists.

Had the President NOT acted on the material obtained from terrorists and there WAS an attack that killed friends, family or other Americans would you be outraged that he didn't act?



"You cannot make a poor man rich by making a rich man poor"

"Please explain, in detail, how any of your civil rights have been violated. Note that I'm not talking about "our" civil rights. I'm talking about YOUR civil rights. What "right" did you have before Dubya's first term began that you do not have anymore?"

That is exactly how people in Mousilini's Italy thought. You should move to China so the rest of us can keep our freedom.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly how people in Mousilini's Italy thought. You should move to China so the rest of us can keep our freedom.

[/ QUOTE ]

no no no. You are making a claim, so you are going to justify it. None of this "that's what so and so said in such and such country. Get out of America!"

You say your civil rights have been violated. Tell me how.

If you can't, then they haven't.

[Exsubmariner]

It's not the results, it's the intent that counts.

Only this is the first debate it sticks out to me that liberals are using that one to attack someone, not simply try to defend their actions.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep one thing in mind, the phone numbers were found in cofiscated computers, phones and other devices seized from terrorists.

Had the President NOT acted on the material obtained from terrorists and there WAS an attack that killed friends, family or other Americans would you be outraged that he didn't act?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not the problem that anyone has. The use of wire taps is not the issue- the use of wire taps without judicial oversight is the issue. All the agency (whatever agency it was) had to do was go to a judge, and tell that judge what they wanted to do. This has been done a thousand times before. Why did Bush feel that he had the authority to ignore standard procedure in these cases (since it was his order that allowed them to circumvent it).

[Meech]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not the problem that anyone has. The use of wire taps is not the issue- the use of wire taps without judicial oversight is the issue. All the agency (whatever agency it was) had to do was go to a judge, and tell that judge what they wanted to do. This has been done a thousand times before. Why did Bush feel that he had the authority to ignore standard procedure in these cases (since it was his order that allowed them to circumvent it).

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. 100%.

Supposedly they are just listening to terrorists. Yeah right. And your social security number won't be used for anything else. We are here from the government and we are here to help. The mercedes is paid for....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep one thing in mind, the phone numbers were found in cofiscated computers, phones and other devices seized from terrorists.

Had the President NOT acted on the material obtained from terrorists and there WAS an attack that killed friends, family or other Americans would you be outraged that he didn't act?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not the problem that anyone has. The use of wire taps is not the issue- the use of wire taps without judicial oversight is the issue. All the agency (whatever agency it was) had to do was go to a judge, and tell that judge what they wanted to do. This has been done a thousand times before. Why did Bush feel that he had the authority to ignore standard procedure in these cases (since it was his order that allowed them to circumvent it).

[/ QUOTE ]

During wartime, (which we are in under the authorization of congress) as Commander in Chief he has authority to do so. As to your question, I can imagine that it had something to do with a concern for the information getting out.

As far as oversight goes, the senate intelligence committee knew about it.

Who did Clinton get permission from to use satellites to spy on the folks out west?


"Gun control is being able to hit your target"