Iraq... What a mess!

[easyt65]

Yo Kidrocks, No Fallujah in Phoenix, huh? Hmmm...maybe someone ought to tell that to the 3 terrorist we just caught up north who were training with weapons and explosives, talking about killing the President, and planning on attacking us right here at home!

These guys don't have to take over a whole city here. Look at John Lee Malvo, the Sniper in Virginia. Look at Timmy McV. Look at the 9-11 terrorists. A cell here, a cell there - they could raise h@ll here at home and you think you have a 'police state' here at home because of some wire tapping that every President since JFK and before has done?!

Man, if I am an Al Qaeda operative/cell, I get my hands on some policemen's uniforms, go into some bad neighborhoods, like L.A. or up north and start shooting people. Rumor starts spreading cops are killing people, and people quickly turn against cops because they can't tell who is who. Remember that story about Border patrol uniforms being made in Mexico - get your hands on a couple of those babies and seee what you could do. Send out a sniper or two across the country. It does not take the capturing of a whole city by terrorists, bud. We are lucky there hasn't been more happening here at home.

If we pull up stakes overseas, though - with no threat over there, how qickly do you think they will turn their eyes back on the streets and populace right here in America?!

 

[Billo_Really]

UN Inspectors Found No Evidence Of Prohibited Weapons Programmes
As Of 18 March Withdrawal, Hans Blix Tells Security Council

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7777.doc.htm

 

[python416]

Both Shiite and Suni Mosques are being bombed. If you don't think Al Qaeda is behind this then you have no understanding of what is going on!

You think Al Qaeda, who wouldn't even be in Iraq if it wasn't for this war of choice, is bombing both sides to start a civil war. Are they the ones protecting in the streets. PLEASE!

Al Qaeda may be stirring the pot, but they are making miliatents our of citizens because the US has made it possible to do so.

This is the run up to civil war. Not a civil war facade of al Qaeda fighters!

 

[python416]

A cell here, a cell there - they could raise h@ll here at home and you think you have a 'police state' here at home because of some wire tapping that every President since JFK and before has done?!

The technology to do what the NSA is doing today did not exist before network equipment producers installed auditing interfaces into their equipment as per laws mandated since 911. That is only GWB's watch. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY OTHERS, no matter what Ken Mehlman wants you to believe.

And by the way, what do you think would happen if there was another big attack? If there was one before November, do you think they might cancel elections? Maybe. Point is, you are one terrorist attack away from living in something that might start to look like a police state.

 

[easyt65]

UN Inspectors Found No Evidence Of Prohibited Weapons Programmes
As Of 18 March Withdrawal, Hans Blix Tells Security Council

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7777.doc.htm

Actually, the U.N. new of the 5 tons of yellowcake uranium but LOST it, as in became unaware of its location.

If we REALLY want to dig into the WMD history again:

1. Actually, the U.N. new of the 5 tons of yellowcake uranium but LOST it, as in became unaware of its location. The Democrats are NOW saying that 500 tions of yellowcake uranium they said didn't exist but which was found in Baghdad when we rolled in doesn't count as WMD anymore. I guess if we found chemicals and biological agents they would suddenly say they don't count as WMD anymore, either.

2. The Brits and Blair still stick to their story/report that Brit Special Ops guys were patrolling the Iraq-Iran border just days before the war when they stopped a convoy going from Iraq into Iran. The convoy contained nuclear material - uranium. As the war had not started yet, the rules of engagement forbid them from seizing the shipment. They did write down the serial numbers from the nuclear material and turned them over to the nuclear Commission at the U.N. for them to check later - the convoy continued on into Iran. Badda-bing, badda-boom: a short time later, and Iran is building their own Nuke. Meanwhile the Iranians have refused to let the U.N. inspect the material or sites, so they can not check the serial numbers. The U.N. has confirmed the Brits story about turning the serial numbers over to them days before the war!

3. An Iraqi base Commander who surrendered stated that several trucks came on to his base with instructins from Hussein to use what was on the trucks against the Americans. As base commander, he had to inspect the contents of the truck, which he says was filled with Chem and Bio weapons. A few days before we rolled in, the trucks were taken out - he was told Hussein had given new orders for the trucks to take the weapons into Syria.

4. We now have translated audio-tapes of Hussein's conversations/meetings with his generals in which they discuss taking the bulk of their weapons into Syria. ABC even ran the story, remarkably, but spent extremely minimal time on it.

5. We have found weapons grenades and canisters filled with chem weopens, like Sarin yet not in great warehouse stores. some of the weapons found had serial numbers of weapons Hussein had reported as having been destroyed during the 12 years of Oil-4-Food Scandal, Sanction-breaking U.N. Black Marketing. Also, why would Hussein have fairly new Mobile chem labs, which were reported early when we went in if he had no chemical and biological stores? If he lied about destroyig the weapons we found, who is to say we should now believe him about other things just because it is what the Democrats need to criticize Bush?!

6. How about the Iraqi scientists that have testified that many of their WMD processes and equipment were just a few minor steps away from starting back up in mass production as soon as all this 'war stuff' blew over. they say Hussein never believed the U.N. (His scandal/black marketing buddies) would allow the U.S. to remove him fom power and that as soon as we cleared out they would be in the WMD business again. They said a few 'key ingredients' had been shipped to Syria and would return when the 'coast was clear'.


Now comes the part when you deny, call me a liar, say ALL these people - hundreds of them - are all lying, say this is all propoganda, maybe even challenge ME to look up stuff for you and post links because you are too lazy to do so for yourself and/or don't really want to find this out to all be true, blah, blah, blah.....

The most important thing now is that we are there, that we should see this thing through, and we should support our troops instead of attacking them by calling them Nazis and terrorists like Durbin and Kerry, stop attacking their morale by decrying we can never win, like Dean, and just be friggin' AMERICANS for a change instead of Democrats and Republicans!

 

[easyt65]

The technology to do what the NSA is doing today did not exist before network equipment producers installed auditing interfaces into their equipment as per laws mandated since 911. That is only GWB's watch. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY OTHERS, no matter what Ken Mehlman wants you to believe.

And by the way, what do you think would happen if there was another big attack? If there was one before November, do you think they might cancel elections? Maybe. Point is, you are one terrorist attack away from living in something that might start to look like a police state.

Dude, George washington ordered the interception of courier letters within our borders - even those written by Americans - written to the enemy during a time of war!

Abraham Lincoln ordered the monitoring of American communications - the telegraph lines - during a time of war!

JFK, Johnson, Nixon...JIMMY CARTER....and even the Democrat's beloved William Jefferson Clinton ordered the wire tapping of American civilians without a warrant - hell, he even authorized going into people's homes and seizing property without a warrant! He even ordered the FBI to illegally build files on all GOP and his opponents for his own personal use! And he did it during a time of PEACE!

Do some freakin' historic research, THEN try to tell me that the Democrat's squawks about un-constitutional surveillance procedures isn't BS! Where was Carter's concerned for the same program he used when Clinton was pulling off worse? Was he in cryogenic sleep and came out just in time to catch Bush using it? And more importantly, why isn't someone's nuts frying over the release of the top secret program to our enemy? Millions of dollars was spent to get Libby for lying about something that wasn't even a secret, at least not a well-guarded secret since most Washington Reporters said they already knew Plame worked for the CIA, and NOTHING is being done to find the leaker of information on a secret program, the release of which HAS actually hurt this nation's security!

 

[python416]

Dude, George washington ordered the interception of courier letters within our borders - even those written by Americans - written to the enemy during a time of war!

Abraham Lincoln ordered the monitoring of American communications - the telegraph lines - during a time of war!

JFK, Johnson, Nixon...JIMMY CARTER....and even the Democrat's beloved William Jefferson Clinton ordered the wire tapping of American civilians without a warrant - hell, he even authorized going into people's homes and seizing property without a warrant! He even ordered the FBI to illegally build files on all GOP and his opponents for his own personal use! And he did it during a time of PEACE!

Do some freakin' historic research, THEN try to tell me that the Democrat's squawks about un-constitutional surveillance procedures isn't BS! Where was Carter's concerned for the same program he used when Clinton was pulling off worse? Was he in cryogenic sleep and came out just in time to catch Bush using it? And more importantly, why isn't someone's nuts frying over the release of the top secret program to our enemy? Millions of dollars was spent to get Libby for lying about something that wasn't even a secret, at least not a well-guarded secret since most Washington Reporters said they already knew Plame worked for the CIA, and NOTHING is being done to find the leaker of information on a secret program, the release of which HAS actually hurt this nation's security!

READ MY COMMENT:

The technology to do what the NSA is doing today did not exist before network equipment producers installed auditing interfaces into their equipment as per laws mandated since 911. That is only GWB's watch. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY OTHERS, no matter what Ken Mehlman wants you to believe.

Do you see what I am saying? George Washington didn't have Cisco installing audit interfaces on communication equipment. THERE WAS NO ABILITY TO DO COMPLETE MONITORING BEFORE GWB.

I am not saying wiretapping hasn't happened in the past, but all you guys who are trying to say thta it is the "same thing that has been going on for ... years" ARE ABSOLUTLY WRONG! IT ISN'T THE SAME, CAUSE THE SAME THING WAS FLAT OUT NOT POSSIBLE - even under the last President.

 

[easyt65]

The debate has nothing to do with technology. The argument is the constitutionality of the monitoring of communications within our own borders without warrants!

Delving into the technical aspect now seems like Clinton trying to say the REAL argument is based on the definition of the word 'Is'!

And the answer is YES, it is Constitutional and the President HAS the right to conduct such an operation, as precedence has been set and the right exercised by many, many other Presidents conducting similar/same operations of monitoring communications within our borders without warrants!


><><><><><><>
Anyone notice how Iran has stepped up their propoganda about how the bombing of Mosques is the American's and Israeli's fault? You probably won't find the story on the headlines - I had to find it a few pages in on the papers, but connect the dots, and they lead right back to Iran and the insurgents trying to start up an Iraqi Civil War!

 

[SixStringHero]

READ MY COMMENT:

The technology to do what the NSA is doing today did not exist before network equipment producers installed auditing interfaces into their equipment as per laws mandated since 911. That is only GWB's watch. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY OTHERS, no matter what Ken Mehlman wants you to believe.

Do you see what I am saying? George Washington didn't have Cisco installing audit interfaces on communication equipment. THERE WAS NO ABILITY TO DO COMPLETE MONITORING BEFORE GWB.

I am not saying wiretapping hasn't happened in the past, but all you guys who are trying to say thta it is the "same thing that has been going on for ... years" ARE ABSOLUTLY WRONG! IT ISN'T THE SAME, CAUSE THE SAME THING WAS FLAT OUT NOT POSSIBLE - even under the last President.

Did you ever hear of a thing called Project Echelon?

 

[JOHNYJ]

Iraq ia a living reason why the American people will never allow George Bush .To involve us in another, foreign adventure !
Chances of a war with Iran diminish as Iraq become s bigger and bigger disaster.
He and his generals are incompetent, who in their right mind wold trust them in another war.

 

[python416]

Did you ever hear of a thing called Project Echelon?

Echelon (pre-Bush) was foreign only, and based on signal interception - NOT MANUFACTORER INSTALLED AUDIT INTERFACES for use on America soil for all inbound calls.

 

[python416]

The debate has nothing to do with technology. The argument is the constitutionality of the monitoring of communications within our own borders without warrants!

Delving into the technical aspect now seems like Clinton trying to say the REAL argument is based on the definition of the word 'Is'!

And the answer is YES, it is Constitutional and the President HAS the right to conduct such an operation, as precedence has been set and the right exercised by many, many other Presidents conducting similar/same operations of monitoring communications within our borders without warrants!

It has everything to do with technology. You are saying that previous presidents did them same thing. I am saying that wasn't possible.

Then you are saying that monitoring select communications is the same thing as monitoring all communications and selecting ones that met realtime critria. There is a difference, and the constituionality of the operation is affected by that difference.

The bottom line is that Bush has comtempt for the law. Other presidents may have stretched the law with presidental orders, but Bush blows it away and doesn't even bother with presidental orders. Case in point, the current NSA operation.

 

[easyt65]

Did you ever hear of a thing called Project Echelon?

Of course - from space.com:

Earth-orbiting listening posts are on active duty in the United States-led war on terrorism. Signal-seeking spacecraft not only play a critical role in eavesdropping on nations from on high, but also within the borders of the U.S itself.

Hints and speculations about the true nature and capabilities of these "all ears" spacecraft have reached folkloric proportions.

Some reports suggest that cell phone traffic, ground line chats and faxes, telexes and satellite telecommunications links, as well as Internet emails are intercepted around the planet. Once electronically gobbled up, the information is sifted by supercomputers loaded with souped-up software to flag keywords of special interest to a network of must-know-it-all intelligence communities.

This worldwide chunky-style data interception is purportedly run by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), under the rubric of Project Echelon. Sister intelligence agencies in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and other like-minded governments or organizations are apparently in cahoots with the United States in operating this super-secret network of ground, airborne, and satellite gear.

In the United States, not surprisingly, officials are mum on whether Echelon even exists. Real or not, for some individuals, the very hint of such a system conjures up images of Big Brother, out-of-control snooping, willy-nilly wiretapping and civil liberties violations.

Still, many hope such high-tech electronic surveillance is on full alert and doggedly trying to uncover the whereabouts of terrorist Osama bin Laden and his gang.

Others even encourage the use of listen-in-and-learn spacecraft to spy within U.S. borders, and see it as one more potential tool for the efforts of the new Office of Homeland Security.

Some, however, feel that Echelon's time has already come and gone.

And in regards to not going after Iran - don't count on it! The Iranian Leader believes the Muslim equivalent to Jesus is returning in 2 years, to be ushered in by a 'Cataclysmic event', which many believe he means to be the NUKING of Israel! Experts have already said Iran will have a nuke inside of 2 years. You connect the dots!

Iran hates Israel. They aided (gave food, shelter, and supplies to and helped) some of the 9-11 terrorists get into the U.S. Thnk they wouldn't like to hand over a small Nuke to a terrorist who would take it into the U.S., even into New york harbor and detonate it from the bay? We are talking about a nation trying to get a Nuke who has already stated he intends on setting off a cataclysmic event that could bring about/be the equivalent to Armagedon! If we do not take action, Israel will, and everyone knows THAT would set off a MASSIVE war - a game of 'Pile on Israel' - resulting in our joining in to stand beside Israel in this World War, potentially meaning Armagedon. Even the Iranian President said it himself: "If we eliminate Israel, they will be wiped off the face of the Earth. If Israel strikes Iran for the reason of self-preservation, the countries of the Middle east will rise up against Israel, resulting in the end of Israel. Either way, Israel is finished."

To say the Iraq war automatically means we won't go after Iran is way off. Even the latest poll (Zogby, I believe) taken showed that just over 50% of American polls believed Iran is a bigger threat than Iraq was and needs to be militarily dealt with. another 30% are unsure of what action to take yet.

If you want the definition of the Evil Empire, just look under the dictionary under 'Iran' right now. And their leader is a cross between Jeffery Dahmer, Hitler, and 'Chuckie'!

 

[easyt65]

It has everything to do with technology. You are saying that previous presidents did them same thing. I am saying that wasn't possible.

Then you are saying that monitoring select communications is the same thing as monitoring all communications and selecting ones that met realtime critria. There is a difference, and the constituionality of the operation is affected by that difference.

The bottom line is that Bush has comtempt for the law. Other presidents may have stretched the law with presidental orders, but Bush blows it away and doesn't even bother with presidental orders. Case in point, the current NSA operation.

You start out by saying it IS a question of technology. Bush did not use any illegal technology! You end by saying 'Bush has contrempt for the law' which jumps back to this whole thing being a question of Constitutionality of his wiretaps - the monitoring of communications within our borders.'

The whole debate is over the legality/Constitutionality of his program of monitoring communications within the U.S. without warrants - the SAME thing Washington did, lincoln did, JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Carter...and even Skick Willey (though he used ILLEGAL FBI files and even authorized search and seisure of private property without warrants during a time of PEACE). It is Cionstitutional and within a President's right to implement such a program, as the precedence has been set and exercised by former Presidents!

When it is shown not to be Un-Constitutional, the very 1st argument against bush's program, the Dems use the legalistic/definition of 'is defense and switch tactics...."No, it is because of the technology he used to do the same things presidents have been doing since Washington!"

I swear, the Democrats remind me of a swimmer going down for the 3rd time, grasping at ANYTHING to grab on to on that final time down!

 

[Navy Pride]

You start out by saying it IS a question of technology. Bush did not use any illegal technology! You end by saying 'Bush has contrempt for the law' which jumps back to this whole thing being a question of Constitutionality of his wiretaps - the monitoring of communications within our borders.'

The whole debate is over the legality/Constitutionality of his program of monitoring communications within the U.S. without warrants - the SAME thing Washington did, lincoln did, JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Carter...and even Skick Willey (though he used ILLEGAL FBI files and even authorized search and seisure of private property without warrants during a time of PEACE). It is Cionstitutional and within a President's right to implement such a program, as the precedence has been set and exercised by former Presidents!

When it is shown not to be Un-Constitutional, the very 1st argument against bush's program, the Dems use the legalistic/definition of 'is defense and switch tactics...."No, it is because of the technology he used to do the same things presidents have been doing since Washington!"

I swear, the Democrats remind me of a swimmer going down for the 3rd time, grasping at ANYTHING to grab on to on that final time down!

Bottom line is President Bush broke no law.......He used his authority as commander in chief in a time of war to do the things he did............Case closed..........

 

[python416]

You start out by saying it IS a question of technology. Bush did not use any illegal technology! You end by saying 'Bush has contrempt for the law' which jumps back to this whole thing being a question of Constitutionality of his wiretaps - the monitoring of communications within our borders.'

I am not saying Bush used illegal technology. I am saying that law now require technology companies to INSTALL AUDIT INTERFACES into new equipments. And ONLY WITH THESE INTERFACE is the type of monitoring Bush is doing possible. Therefore to say that he is doing something that others have done in the past is a misrepresentation of the facts. Bush is doing something a whole lot different.

I swear, the Democrats remind me of a swimmer going down for the 3rd time, grasping at ANYTHING to grab on to on that final time down!

You make it sound like this is black letter law, but everyone from both sides who really understands the issue should be able to acknowledge that it is a grey area.

This "everything is so clear", "Bush good", "Dems support terrorist", etc, type of rhetoric is a gross simplification of the complexity of these issues, and evidence that not only you don't understand the complete issue, but that you don't even want to. This attitude is a product of the marketing machine at work.

Please don't tell me "what the NSA is doing today is the same as it was before", cause I heard you the first bunch of times. I have laid out my technological case for why this can't be the case due to today's technology being the enabler for this operation.

Attack my technological case, if you can. How do you think COMPLETE monitoring of international calls could have been made possible before the laws passed after 911 required telco and equipement companies to install audit interfaces?

 

[easyt65]

The only discussion, the only charge the Democrats have had and still insist they have against Bush's wire-tapping is his right as a President to do so, based on the constitution. They are wrong in saying he has done anything illegal.

If you want to send your opinion and recommendastion to Kerry, I am sure he would be eager to get his hands on any new angle through/with which to attack the President.

 

[python416]

The only discussion, the only charge the Democrats have had and still insist they have against Bush's wire-tapping is his right as a President to do so, based on the constitution. They are wrong in saying he has done anything illegal.

If you want to send your opinion and recommendastion to Kerry, I am sure he would be eager to get his hands on any new angle through/with which to attack the President.

Most Presidents have stretched the 4th amendment, Bush has broken it. If you can't see that then too bad for you. They are your rights getting pissed away. And if there is another attack, your rights will be even less. Too bad. I am Canadian, and don't care anyway. All I care about having a world whos leading governments follow the rule of law - and today's US doesn't.

I got on to this site to see how brainwashed the right-voting public is. Not all of them are, but a lot.

Let the Canada trashing begin; you must be dying to let it rip!

 

[easyt65]

I am Canadian, and don't care anyway.

Well, there won't be any Canadian-Trashing from me, but that does explain a LOT!

What is truly amazing, especially from the Bush-haters, is the ability to isolate Bush and his actions from the same actions taken by every other leader and make only HIM the 'criminal'.

The idea of wire tapping was brought to bush. He went to the lawyers, and they researched it and informed him that it is legal and within his Constitutional Rights - AMERICAN Constitution, not open to Canadian or Democratic party translation/bending for personal benefit. Not only is it legal, but Numerous presidents throughout History have exercised the same right.

Yet, still, you use the Clinton 'definition of IS' legalistic approach, and try to twist the argument into something other than what it is - does he have the constitutional right to do what he did! The answer has come back:YES!

I like how you have totally shy-ed away from the only President who has broken any law as of yet in any wire-tapping/Intel-gathering program, and that would be Cinton. He authorized not only wire-tapping but entry, search, and seisure of private property from homes and businesses in a time of PEACE without a warrant. He also ILLEALLY gathered FBI files on GOP and opponents to use for personal benefit! Where was Carter's and the Democrats' (and Canadian's) call for Justice and freedom and rights THEN?

And just because we point out the hypocrisy and lies of the Liberal Left that makes us "Brain-washed"?!

That's like Nancy Pelosi's claim that the GOP has created a 'Culture of Corruption' after their last President was convicted of Felonious Perjury and was Impeached, after SHE was caught taking numerous trips paid for by Lobbyists after she tried to charge DeLay with the Same thing, etc.....You can keep that Canadian Liberal BS north of the Border because we have enough of it down here from our own Liberals!

 

[oldreliable67]

UN Inspectors Found No Evidence Of Prohibited Weapons Programmes
As Of 18 March Withdrawal, Hans Blix Tells Security Council

Not sure about the point of that post, but I'm guessing that it is supposed to suggest the idea that Saddam had no interest in WMDs. But reading the source that you provided gives a different picture:

Mr. Blix, the Commission’s Executive Chairman, said significant quantities of proscribed items had also not been found, apart from the Al Samoud 2 missiles, 50 of which had been destroyed under the Commission’s supervision. That did not necessarily mean that such items could not exist. But long lists of items remained unaccounted for and “it is not justified to jump to the conclusion that something exists just because it is unaccounted for”.

The long list of proscribed items unaccounted for had not been shortened by inspections or Iraqi declarations, explanations or documentation, he continued. It was up to Iraq to present items unaccounted for, or present evidence convincing the inspectors that the items did not exist. If that was not done, the international community could not have confidence that past programmes had been terminated. [emphasis added] However, “an effective presence of international inspectors would serve as a deterrent against efforts aimed at reactivating or developing new programmes of weapons of mass destruction”, he said.

Significant quantities of proscribed items included a couple of types of missles and various chemical and biological weapons. Blix was quite right in warning about jumping to the conclusion that "something exists just because it is unaccounted for”. However, the history of Iraq non-cooperation and concealment suggests a tendency to obfuscate, as noted elsewhere in this report:

In the context of destruction of proscribed items, Appendix I of the report showed that the weapons that had been destroyed before inspectors left in 1998 had, in almost all cases, been declared by Iraq and the destruction had occurred before 1994. The existence of the biological weapons programme had been uncovered by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) in 1995 despite Iraq’s denials. Only a few remnants of that programme had been found. A great deal -- Iraq asserted all – had been unilaterally destroyed in 1991. [emphasis added]

In conclusion, if you're choice of language is meant to suggest that Saddam had not had WMDs in the past and had no interest in pursuing them in the future, you need a better source. Even that darling of the anti-US crowd, Hans Blix, realized that left unchecked, it was highly likely that Saddam would re-start his WMD programs.

 

[NYStateofMind]

Whether or not Bush's NSA warrantless wiretapping program is legal or not is very much an open question. There are good arguments on both sides. It's far from case closed, and it's far from a partisan issue, as some on this thread insist on portaying it. Once again, I must point out that MANY Republicans have grave reservations about this program. This is an issue of separation of powers, Executive VS Legislative. The Congressional Research Service's report on the subject suggests that rather than the President being at the peak of his power (the argument being that the AUMF gave the President the authority,) his power is actually at its lowest ebb since he is acting against Congress' will by not complying with FISA. I still say, let the court decide. If both sides are so convinced that they are right, there should be no reason not to do so. It's an important issue, it needs to be decided. But it's NOT a partisan issue.

From the foregoing analysis, it appears unlikely that a court would hold that Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized the NSA electronic surveillance operations here under discussion, and it would likewise appear that, to the extent that those surveillances fall within the definition of “electronic surveillance” within the meaning of FISA or any activity regulated under Title III, Congress intended to cover the entire field with these statutes. To the extent that the NSA activity is not permitted by some reading of Title III or FISA, it may represent an exercise of presidential power at its lowest ebb, in which case exclusive presidential control is sustainable only by “disabling Congress from acting upon the subject.” While courts have generally accepted that the President has the power to conduct domestic electronic surveillance within the United States inside the constraints of the Fourth Amendment, no court has held squarely that the Constitution disables the Congress from endeavoring to set limits on that power. To the contrary, the Supreme Court has stated that Congress does indeed have power to regulate domestic surveillance, and has not ruled on the extent to which Congress can act with respect to electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information. Given such uncertainty, the Administration’s legal justification, as presented in the summary analysis from the Office of Legislative Affairs, does not seem to be as well-grounded as the tenor of that letter suggests.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m010506.pdf

Now, regarding the original topic of this thread: Civil war is a very real possible outcome of our intervention in Iraq. The events of the last couple of days certainly are alarming. Even if they are far from the first cases of sectarian violence, this is the most serious situation we have seen for some time.

Let's all hope that the Iraqis can step back from the brink.

 

[python416]

Well, there won't be any Canadian-Trashing from me, but that does explain a LOT!

I'm glad, on both counts.

What is truly amazing, especially from the Bush-haters, is the ability to isolate Bush and his actions from the same actions taken by every other leader and make only HIM the 'criminal'.

What amazes me is the ability to pull the old "Clinton did too" agrument for everything that becomes an issue. Find someway to connect it to Clinton and that will keep the right-side's talking points list from being exhausted.

The idea of wire tapping was brought to bush. He went to the lawyers, and they researched it and informed him that it is legal and within his Constitutional Rights - AMERICAN Constitution, not open to Canadian or Democratic party translation/bending for personal benefit. Not only is it legal, but Numerous presidents throughout History have exercised the same right.

I never suggested that Bush came up with the idea, just that Bush allowed it to be done at levels NOT DONE BY ANYONE ELSE.

Yet, still, you use the Clinton 'definition of IS' legalistic approach, and try to twist the argument into something other than what it is - does he have the constitutional right to do what he did! The answer has come back:YES!

Does a persident need the ability to tap people without a warant, yes. Does the president need the ability to tap EVERYONE without a warant, NO.

I like how you have totally shy-ed away from the only President who has broken any law as of yet in any wire-tapping/Intel-gathering program, and that would be Cinton. He authorized not only wire-tapping but entry, search, and seisure of private property from homes and businesses in a time of PEACE without a warrant. He also ILLEALLY gathered FBI files on GOP and opponents to use for personal benefit! Where was Carter's and the Democrats' (and Canadian's) call for Justice and freedom and rights THEN?

Please supply link to support claim.

And just because we point out the hypocrisy and lies of the Liberal Left that makes us "Brain-washed"?!

Because you buy into the fear-based marketing program, and the illusion that you are being made safer, to let the administration disable every check and balance put into the system by the founders - and you still support him. Your democracy is being picked apart and you are cheering him on!

That's like Nancy Pelosi's claim that the GOP has created a 'Culture of Corruption' after their last President was convicted of Felonious Perjury and was Impeached, after SHE was caught taking numerous trips paid for by Lobbyists after she tried to charge DeLay with the Same thing, etc.....You can keep that Canadian Liberal BS north of the Border because we have enough of it down here from our own Liberals!

Yes Clinton's lie will always be on the top of the list for right-side comebacks. And Pelosi and DeLay aren't the only ones to have trip paid for that shouldn't have been. But that is like saying Abramoff is a Dmeocratic issue just because he knew a few Dems. The Culture of Corruption today is GOP based by far - be proud!

 

[easyt65]

What amazes me is the ability to pull the old "Clinton did too" agrument for everything that becomes an issue. I never suggested that Bush came up with the idea, just that Bush allowed it to be done at levels NOT DONE BY ANYONE ELSE.

WRONG! The Clintons WROTE THE BOOK on going to levels not done by anyone else!

- Clinton sold banned missile technology to the Chinese allowing them to finally reach the U.S with their nukes. TREASON to a level NEVER matched by any other U.S. President!
- Clinton committed and was prosecuted for a felony of perjuring himself under oath before a Federal Grand Jury investigation of his Sexual Harrassment charge, in which he sought to deny a citizen her Constitutional right to a fair trianl, a right he swore under oath to protect as President!
- Ms. Clinton broke a police crime scene line by stepping over yellow tape to raid Vince Foster's Office to retrieve a box of files. She then lied about doing so to investigators, saying she never knew the files existed. The file box was later found in the living quarters of the White House with her fingerprints all over them!
- Clinton lied about ever being briefed by Able Danger then had poor Sandy Berger break in, steal, and shred Federal documents pertaining to the briefs he got from Able Danger to cover up the truth and 'save his legacy' some 5 years AFTER leaving office!
- Clinton authorized wire taps AND search and seisure of personal property during a time of PEACE without warrants! (LOOK IT UP, YOURSELF. I am sure your computer can connect to Google as well as mine can. I've already researched and posted the link once before and am not doing it again. I am sure if you REALLY care about the truth and/or aren't too lazy you won't mind doing it!)
- Clinton illegally gathered FBI files on all GOP and opponents to use againstthem/for his personal use!

And you say Bush's use of a Constitutionally afforded right, the use of which he got prior approval by the justice department and numerous lawyers, means HE has done things no other President had done? :shock:

Yes Clinton's lie will always be on the top of the list for right-side comebacks. And Pelosi and DeLay aren't the only ones to have trip paid for that shouldn't have been. But that is like saying Abramoff is a Dmeocratic issue just because he knew a few Dems. The Culture of Corruption today is GOP based by far - be proud!

And THIS is your BS response/justification to my pointing out the continued Democratic Party trend of criminal and unethical history yet poiniting fingers at the Republican Party saying THEY are the reason for political corruption?!

As far as Abramoff goes, its just like ENRON! They were paying and playing both sides of the fence! I find it amusing, though, the difference between the GOP and Democratic responses, almost completely along party lines, after the story on Abramoff broke. The GOP politicians explained they had no idea how Abramoff had gotten the money and offered to return, or did so, all the money they had received from Abramoff. The Democratic politicians announced, one by one, that they did not know him personally, did not know how he had come across his money but did not care - they were keeping the money!

The Culture of Political Corruption and the politics of Personal Destruction are NOTuniquely Democrat or Republican oriented, and to decry that it is one party's fault or the other, as Pelosi did, just highlights the hypocrisy like a NOVA!

Talk about hypocrisy: Dude, only 3 Presidents have been Impeached in the entire History of the U.S. - ALL DEMOCRATS - The last being Bill Clinton after being found guilty of felonious Perjury! If anyone should 'be proud', it's the Democrats!

 

[jfuh]

Actually, the U.N. new of the 5 tons of yellowcake uranium but LOST it, as in became unaware of its location.

If we REALLY want to dig into the WMD history again:

1. Actually, the U.N. new of the 5 tons of yellowcake uranium but LOST it, as in became unaware of its location. The Democrats are NOW saying that 500 tions of yellowcake uranium they said didn't exist but which was found in Baghdad when we rolled in doesn't count as WMD anymore. I guess if we found chemicals and biological agents they would suddenly say they don't count as WMD anymore, either.

2. The Brits and Blair still stick to their story/report that Brit Special Ops guys were patrolling the Iraq-Iran border just days before the war when they stopped a convoy going from Iraq into Iran. The convoy contained nuclear material - uranium. As the war had not started yet, the rules of engagement forbid them from seizing the shipment. They did write down the serial numbers from the nuclear material and turned them over to the nuclear Commission at the U.N. for them to check later - the convoy continued on into Iran. Badda-bing, badda-boom: a short time later, and Iran is building their own Nuke. Meanwhile the Iranians have refused to let the U.N. inspect the material or sites, so they can not check the serial numbers. The U.N. has confirmed the Brits story about turning the serial numbers over to them days before the war!

3. An Iraqi base Commander who surrendered stated that several trucks came on to his base with instructins from Hussein to use what was on the trucks against the Americans. As base commander, he had to inspect the contents of the truck, which he says was filled with Chem and Bio weapons. A few days before we rolled in, the trucks were taken out - he was told Hussein had given new orders for the trucks to take the weapons into Syria.

4. We now have translated audio-tapes of Hussein's conversations/meetings with his generals in which they discuss taking the bulk of their weapons into Syria. ABC even ran the story, remarkably, but spent extremely minimal time on it.

5. We have found weapons grenades and canisters filled with chem weopens, like Sarin yet not in great warehouse stores. some of the weapons found had serial numbers of weapons Hussein had reported as having been destroyed during the 12 years of Oil-4-Food Scandal, Sanction-breaking U.N. Black Marketing. Also, why would Hussein have fairly new Mobile chem labs, which were reported early when we went in if he had no chemical and biological stores? If he lied about destroyig the weapons we found, who is to say we should now believe him about other things just because it is what the Democrats need to criticize Bush?!

6. How about the Iraqi scientists that have testified that many of their WMD processes and equipment were just a few minor steps away from starting back up in mass production as soon as all this 'war stuff' blew over. they say Hussein never believed the U.N. (His scandal/black marketing buddies) would allow the U.S. to remove him fom power and that as soon as we cleared out they would be in the WMD business again. They said a few 'key ingredients' had been shipped to Syria and would return when the 'coast was clear'.


Now comes the part when you deny, call me a liar, say ALL these people - hundreds of them - are all lying, say this is all propoganda, maybe even challenge ME to look up stuff for you and post links because you are too lazy to do so for yourself and/or don't really want to find this out to all be true, blah, blah, blah.....

The most important thing now is that we are there, that we should see this thing through, and we should support our troops instead of attacking them by calling them Nazis and terrorists like Durbin and Kerry, stop attacking their morale by decrying we can never win, like Dean, and just be friggin' AMERICANS for a change instead of Democrats and Republicans!

Ok then, source?

 

[easyt65]

Ok then, source?

Source for WHICH part? Man, I have posted links to these issues so many times on here it ain't even funny. Pick a topic and <Google" it, man! None of this is a secret or right-wing propoganda! CNN was even the one who broke the initial story on the Brits stopping the nuclear convoy into Iran. They ran the story about how Blair was sticking to his story on it when he was under fire during the last elections. Like I said, none of this is hard to find...even though Google is making it harder to find certain things - most things pro-GOP/anti-Lib. But its there.