Bush Invades Privacy

[Stace]

Well I just heard General Pace the Chairman of the joint chief of staff say that its hurt morale......I will try and find a link for you.....

Here is the link:

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15882521&BRD=2212&PAG=461&dept_id=465812&rfi=6

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during a news conference Thursday that Murtha's remarks about Iraq are damaging to troop morale and to the Army's efforts to bring up recruitment numbers. Pace, the nation's top general, was asked specifically about an ABC News interview this week in which Murtha, 73, said if he were eligible to join the military today he would not join, nor would he expect others to join.


"That's damaging to recruiting," Pace said. "It's damaging to morale of the troops who are deployed, and it's damaging to the morale of their families who believe in what they are doing to serve this country."

Well of course he's going to say that.....but come on NP, I know you're smarter than that. Most of our troops don't even know who Murtha is, let alone General Pace.

 

[Navy Pride]

Well of course he's going to say that.....but come on NP, I know you're smarter than that. Most of our troops don't even know who Murtha is, let alone General Pace.

I can tell you by my own experience during the Viet Nam Conflict you are wrong about that.......Our troops in Iraq are some of the smartest people in this country and they are very cognizant of what the people and the leaders here in the states are saying.............

 

[jamesrage]

I really couldn't care less what sort of terminology you want to use....but I don't think my husband would like it too much if I suddenly sprouted a pair.

I am just tired of men being bitches whinning about the words "Turban Durban".

That being said.....sure, go ahead and blame the media. Even though, as someone that DID join the military after 9/11,

Ooh Airforce.That is like so physically demanding even infantry does not compare to it(sarcasim)

I can tell you that most troops could give a **** less what the media has to say about them.

You are telling me that you talked to all the troops and not just airforce?

They have more important things to worry about. And anyone with half a brain would realize that, too.

I am sure most of them are proably shocked how the vermin in the media has been stabbing them in the back when they get back from Iraq.

 

[jamesrage]

Could be, people don't feel the military life, fighting in ****ing iraq, is worth it.

People sign their name on the dotted line knowing full well that one day they might go to war wether they liked it or not.

Could even be, like most of us, we KNOW people in the military, and we talk to them, and they say being in the desert in full gear BLOWS.

I been in the in the military(11M and 11B) I know it sucks to wear full battle rattle in the desert.My little sister is even in the military

we're not fighting Hitler, we're not fighting the Japs, we're not fighting the British, maybe people just don't feel Iraqis are worth the sacrific.

At least you admit that you think the Iraqis are lower than dirt and not worth anyone's time helping.

They sold the war on bad information, association and illusion, could be people realize that are are just not convinced it's worthwile.

This makes it perfectly okay for the likes of Turban Durban, Coward Dean,John Benedict Arnold Kerry to make their comments?
This makes it okay for Newsweek,washington post, and other so-called american newspapers to publish damaging stuff about our country?

 

[jamesrage]

Legally? Let's see some proof.

And you are a mod how?

http://www.google.com/search?q=+fed...within+72+hours&sourceid=mozilla-search&start

 

[Axismaster]

I hate to just jump into the discussion and make a loud statement. But the news about Bush invading privacy on this site, and among the general public, took about five years too long to catch on.

 

[Stace]

I am just tired of men being bitches whinning about the words "Turban Durban".

Well, I never whined about it, now, did I?

Ooh Airforce.That is like so physically demanding even infantry does not compare to it(sarcasim)

Who cares if the Air Force is "physically demanding" or not....that's not what I joined for.

You are telling me that you talked to all the troops and not just airforce?

Well let's see here....my husband, brother in law, and his wife were all in the Army....my brother currently serves as a Navy SEAL...my cousin is a Marine Reservist.....so yeah, I think I've got just about everyone covered. And that's just my family members, we won't even start going into my friends who have husbands that have served/are serving.

I am sure most of them are proably shocked how the vermin in the media has been stabbing them in the back when they get back from Iraq.

If they are, they're wusses. I can tell you with absolute certainty that not a single person I ever knew during my time of service gave a rat's ass about what the media said, good or bad. We were too busy laughing because we got called babykillers while at Wal Mart in uniform, or some other such nonsense.

 

[Stace]

I can tell you by my own experience during the Viet Nam Conflict you are wrong about that.......Our troops in Iraq are some of the smartest people in this country and they are very cognizant of what the people and the leaders here in the states are saying.............

Maybe you guys paid more attention to that stuff back then, but I know hundreds of soldiers that have served in Iraq, and they really couldn't care less. They know what's going on, they know what's being said, but they don't care, they have better and more important things to worry about.

 

[jamesrage]

Well, I never whined about it, now, did I?

Typically some liberals somehow loose their fortitude and go off crying about making a racist remark.

If they are, they're wusses.

Just because they expected their elected officials and media to support them and not the enemy?

 

[jamesrage]

I hate to just jump into the discussion and make a loud statement. But the news about Bush invading privacy on this site, and among the general public, took about five years too long to catch on.

Privacy has been invaded before Bush.Are you aware they can right now legally even during peace time wire tap and listen to your phone conversations and then get a warrent 72 hours later?

What the hell is the point the point of a warrant if they can already wire tap phones of suspicious individuals before getting the warrants?The warrant just seems pointless almost like a judge of the FISA court is just some job you hand to the slacker son of the boss and ignor him.Because I am sure they keep notes on who they tap so that they do not waste time or resources on wire tapping a individual who has already been cleared of any suspician.

 

[Pacridge]

And you are a mod how?

http://www.google.com/search?q=+fed...within+72+hours&sourceid=mozilla-search&start

I'd tread real lightly if I were you Mr. Rage.

 

[Stace]

Alright Navy Pride, I'm having a hard time finding stuff about people reenlisting while overseas, but here's a chart for the 2005 fiscal year overall recruiting and retention....

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joiningthemilitary/a/recruitgoals.htm

(the table is at the end of the article; unfortunately, it is not an image so I can't copy it into this post correctly)


I realize that on the surface, this doesn't look too bad at all, but this is only for one fiscal year, and you have to also take into account the Air Force's Force Shaping program, in which a lot of airmen were either kicked out, allowed to separate honorably early, or were moved over to the Army.




But here's an article that I feel has some relevance here:

Marriage In the Military: Recruitment and Divorce

 

[Stace]

Typically some liberals somehow loose their fortitude and go off crying about making a racist remark.

I've known many a conservative to do the same, but that's neither here nor there.

Just because they expected their elected officials and media to support them and not the enemy?

No, because they don't have any backbone. This isn't kindergarten anymore, where you went crying to Mommy because Johnny called you stupid. What's that old thing elementary kids use as a retort? "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me?" There are a lot of people in this world that could take a page from that book. America is the land of free speech, after all. If a soldier is going to defend someone's right to free speech, he/she needs to be prepared to have that right used to speak against them.

 

[jamesrage]

No, because they don't have any backbone.

So you call being angered about the fact that some of our elected officials are playing Jane Fonda not having any a back bone?

So I guess those vets in vietnam that were **** over Jane Fonda's treason did not have any backbone?

 

[Stace]

So you call being angered about the fact that some of our elected officials are playing Jane Fonda not having any a back bone?

So I guess those vets in vietnam that were **** over Jane Fonda's treason did not have any backbone?

Being angry is one thing. Letting it lower your morale is another.

Vietnam is a whole different story, seeing as how many of those troops were drafted and probably didn't have a clue what they were getting into. Today's troops all volunteered, and should have known what they were signing up for.

 

[jamesrage]

Being angry is one thing. Letting it lower your morale is another.

Anger can cloud one's judgment.Anger can effect one's moral.

Vietnam is a whole different story, seeing as how many of those troops were drafted and probably didn't have a clue what they were getting into. Today's troops all volunteered, and should have known what they were signing up for.

So you do support the likes of the Jane Fondas out there commiting treason?

 

[Stace]

Anger can cloud one's judgment.Anger can effect one's moral.



So you do support the likes of the Jane Fondas out there commiting treason?

Treason? How do you figure?

By the way, your little strawman argument here? Not accomplishing anything.

 

[jamesrage]

Treason? How do you figure?

.

 

[Stace]

And this means what, to me exactly? Woo hoo, a picture of Jane Fonda. We're talking about people today talking smack about the troops. How is that treason?

 

[jamesrage]

And this means what, to me exactly? Woo hoo, a picture of Jane Fonda.

This is Jane Fonda with the enemy on a enemy anti-aircraft gun.

We're talking about people today talking smack about the troops. How is that treason?

THere are politicians who compare our troops to terrorist and there are Americn media orginizations who report classified information to our enemies.

 

[shuamort]

And you are a mod how?

http://www.google.com/search?q=+fed...within+72+hours&sourceid=mozilla-search&start

That didn't answer the question.

 

[Pacridge]

That didn't answer the question.

No but this probably will:


http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv1-adbe&p=us+law

 

[libertarian_knight]

The Congressional Research Service has an excellent memo regarding this issue. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m010506.pdf

my take:
People have often talked about the President's inherent authority concerning foriegn affairs resulting from Article II of the US Constitution, however there is another inherent authority that must be taken into account, that of Congress in Artilce I "To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; " and "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. "

Which has been understood that Congress has the authority even to, in part, make law concerning how the powers of other branches are executed.

For example, though the President is Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy, etc, the Congress CAN make rules on HOW the President can execute the role of Commander in Chief. See: War Powers Act. The President can engage us Armed services into Hostilities without support of congress or Declaration of War, however, the President, even as CiC can not engage in armed conflict indefinately without the express approval of congress to continue the action either periodically or until conclusion.

Though the President's primary doamin is foriegn affairs, and congress agrees Foriegn intelligence gathing a role of the President, they again, can set rules for the government and laws necessary and proper for execution of the government's powers.

It is my opinion at least (not that it really matters) that congress did just such a thing, using their consitutional authority, in creating FISA that, in part, limits the extent to which the President can gather intelligence information. In fact, the Background to FISA, the Chruch Commission, has expreseed that even though President's have used this authoirty, that it has been abused for political and ordinary crimminal activity, and therefor Congress Enacted FISA to set rules for the government.

It is also the president that is bound to uphold the laws and the consitution.


Some clarity regarding this issue came from the 44 pages CRS memo from Jan 5, 2006. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m010506.pdf

it's an excellent read.

 

[Stace]

This is Jane Fonda with the enemy on a enemy anti-aircraft gun.

Ok, well, Jane Fonda sucks, but her doing that isn't against the law. Disrespectful? To most people, yes.

THere are politicians who compare our troops to terrorist and there are Americn media orginizations who report classified information to our enemies.

Those politicians are entitled to their opinion. The only reason anyone gets their panties in a bunch over it is BECAUSE they're politicians, so more people are gonna hear about it.

And as far as the media goes, what they're doing with classified information in the first place is beyond me, but I highly doubt there is any network in this country that would intentionally give out classified information in order to help our enemies.

 

[hipsterdufus]

Why................. You got something to hide?????????? HUH HUH ... DO YA !!!!!

Let em look... If it in some odd or small way makes me safer then take a looksee. I would rather them have the ability to look at things now and maybe head off a problem. As opposed to cleaning up a situation because the system set up was to slow to react in time to stop it.

That's the same rationale the Kremlin used in The Soviet Union comrade.