NSA scandal demands impeachment and arrest!

[teacher]

Whatever you say bub. Did you have anything else to say or did you only want to attack me? Thanks for your contribution. You call yourself teacher but you provide no education. How ironic!

It's bub now is it? My we are getting close. You said to who? Trojan? Prove it. I think the onus is on you there, bub. Half the nation is now trying to find Bush in non compliance with the law. The best you come up with is some people you know think so. You don't cite the law, statutes of any kind, bla bla bla. I can. But where is the fun in that? Go research that 1978 law. Just a hint. You picked the right name. A good teacher teaches his students HOW to learn. I'm not doing the work for you. You learn more by finding out for yourself. Ask yourself this. Why did Bush come out so fast on this topic saying, yes, he did do this? You don't think they allready did not have this figured out? Before they went ahead and did it?

The crime here is the one who leaked it. THAT, for sure, is against the law.

And they did so for political reasons. And you swallowed it.

Shame.

And the invitation stands. Careful though, I'm the master of copy/paste. But we've been there once, you and I, haven't we? Shame you don't see the fun in it.

 

[Conflict]

Oh good. I was so afraid you would like me and I would have to hurt your feelings by telling you how very wrong you are. Bush admitted to no wrong doing--quite the contrary. And he will be found of no wrong doing on this issue no matter how much the anti-Bush crowd wishes to hang him up to dry. To do so will require them to admit that they turned a blind eye when every other president has utilized the same methods in the interest of national security. There is only so much ammunition they can afford to hand over to their opponents for use in ads in the next campaign.

I don't know that any other administration had, without the consent of FISA, or any other arbitrary body, directly allowed and admitted to allowing the NSA to spy on American citizens.

Like I've said before... this has always been a virtue of the NSA... ... the fact that Bush admitted this fact is a much more far reaching breach of our national security.

Echelon and the relative telemetry has existed for years. Aside from such facts no president has any reason to so boldly admit such fact. It's as if he is greatly overstepping his bounds and proclaiming himself to be our saviour.

 

[Conflict]

It's bub now is it? My we are getting close. You said to who? Trojan? Prove it. I think the onus is on you there, bub. Half the nation is now trying to find Bush in non compliance with the law. The best you come up with is some people you know think so. You don't cite the law, statutes of any kind, bla bla bla. I can. But where is the fun in that? Go research that 1978 law. Just a hint. You picked the right name. A good teacher teaches his students HOW to learn. I'm not doing the work for you. You learn more by finding out for yourself. Ask yourself this. Why did Bush come out so fast on this topic saying, yes, he did do this? You don't think they allready did not have this figured out? Before they went ahead and did it?

The crime here is the one who leaked it. THAT, for sure, is against the law.

And they did so for political reasons. And you swallowed it.

Shame.

And the invitation stands. Careful though, I'm the master of copy/paste. But we've been there once, you and I, haven't we? Shame you don't see the fun in it.

Sounds to me like you hold some type of emotional bias (subjectivity) on the issue. I could care less who supports who. I am, and have only been, looking for any inclination of sincerity from people such as yourself. I hold myself accountable for any misgivings that I may have been guilty of. Bring them to me directly and I will provide an explanation. Do not hint and or attempt to threaten me with your naive political strategem.

 

[teacher]

I don't know that any other administration had, without the consent of FISA, or any other arbitrary body, directly allowed and admitted to allowing the NSA to spy on American citizens.

Like I've said before... this has always been a virtue of the NSA... ... the fact that Bush admitted this fact is a much more far reaching breach of our national security.

Echelon and the relative telemetry has existed for years. Aside from such facts no president has any reason to so boldly admit such fact. It's as if he is greatly overstepping his bounds and proclaiming himself to be our saviour.

NSA. Jokingly referred to by those in the know as No Such Agency.

Echelon. Big word for you. Now look up Tempest. It's on the net. Just being a good teacher...

No President has had to before because there have not been the scumbags to point this out for political gain. Until now.

Simple intelligence SOP Conflict.

And let's get that "spying on American citizens" bit right, shall we? When "American citizens" talk to those that do such things as 9/11, I want them spyed on.

There is a reason we have not suffered another 9/11. And it's not dumb luck.

 

[Conflict]

NSA. Jokingly referred to by those in the know as No Such Agency.

Echelon. Big word for you. Now look up Tempest. It's on the net. Just being a good teacher...

No President has had to before because there have not been the scumbags to point this out for political gain. Until now.

Simple intelligence SOP Conflict.

And let's get that "spying on American citizens" bit right, shall we? When "American citizens" talk to those that do such things as 9/11, I want them spyed on.

There is a reason we have not suffered another 9/11. And it's not dumb luck.

Right. Bush is a Genius. I almost forgot.

Funny that the intelligence community disagrees with you on the issue.

I would know.

Nevertheless.... I am done responding to you on this issue. Intelligence is not about politics...

 

[teacher]

Sounds to me like you hold some type of emotional bias (subjectivity) on the issue. I could care less who supports who. I am, and have only been, looking for any inclination of sincerity from people such as yourself. I hold myself accountable for any misgivings that I may have been guilty of. Bring them to me directly and I will provide an explanation. Do not hint and or attempt to threaten me with your naive political strategem.

This sounds familiar, coming from you. My bias is professional, not emotional. I've been nothing but sincere. That cold hard fact of the matter is the USA has at it's disposal the greatest ability to garner intelligence than any other. 9/11 was an failure. Which by all appearances has been corrected. We are the good guys Conflict. No matter who is in office at any given time, the intelligence professionals are career people. Parties come and go. It's in how the administration chooses to use, or not use it, that makes the difference. You make it sound like there is some giant changing of the guard with an election. Nothing could be further from the truth.

So now the bringing to you directly part. All Presidents have always had and have always used these TOOLS. That people such as yourself can be so easily swayed by one party or the other into thinking that the normal intelligence SOP is political speaks to your....ah...nevermind. We are the good guys Conflict, this ***** goes on day and night, they know everything. It's the way it is.

Sincerity. I am glad that we have this ability. I trust those in power to use it for good. Now go to the tittie bar and use your ATM card before you cheat on your taxes. They allready know this.

That is not what they care about.

 

[AlbqOwl]

I don't know that any other administration had, without the consent of FISA, or any other arbitrary body, directly allowed and admitted to allowing the NSA to spy on American citizens.

Like I've said before... this has always been a virtue of the NSA... ... the fact that Bush admitted this fact is a much more far reaching breach of our national security.

Echelon and the relative telemetry has existed for years. Aside from such facts no president has any reason to so boldly admit such fact. It's as if he is greatly overstepping his bounds and proclaiming himself to be our saviour.

Then check back in this thread for the executive orders signed by both Carter and Clinton (and there are probably similar orders on file signed by other presidents as well). Then look at the reasons such executive orders are necessary and how they aren't being used to listen on on a country party line or typical 900 number. There are plenty of reasons to be paranoid about what your government might be up to. This isn't one of them.

 

[Conflict]

Then check back in this thread for the executive orders signed by both Carter and Clinton (and there are probably similar orders on file signed by other presidents as well). Then look at the reasons such executive orders are necessary and how they aren't being used to listen on on a country party line or typical 900 number. There are plenty of reasons to be paranoid about what your government might be up to. This isn't one of them.

It's amazing to me how such apologists do whatever they can in attempt to discredit and obfuscate educated dissent. They are basically stating that I'm dumb and they're smart. I'll let the people decide. (yeah, I'm a huge fan of Clinton ) There is much to be gathered here in the perception of intent. It's not that I have proven my case so much as the common persecution of my opposition on this issue have presented no logical case. I haven't even begun yet all of the sycophants are attempting to pull out all of the stops. It's funny to me... declaring that I implicate Clinton just as I do Bush... that it is only the Bush apologists' and sycophants who take issue with my claims. No further comment.

 

[teacher]

Right. Bush is a Genius. I almost forgot.

Funny that the intelligence community disagrees with you on the issue.

I would know.

Nevertheless.... I am done responding to you on this issue. Intelligence is not about politics...

You're right about one thing. You're done. Nice comeback. In all posts. You could have narrowed it down for all of us though. By just saying "waaaa".

Many of us know.

Speaking of monkeys, King Kong was again the money leader. Now who you gonna believe, Conflict, or the guy who stands by his word that any movie can be made better by involving a monkey? Make a movie about a monkey? See? Yea, you're done.

 

[Caine]

I doubt much of anything happened between 2004 and 2005. But every president in this century has had private citizens under surveillance for some reason or another and have done so without court authority.

So, your saying he lied in 2004? Okay Cool, Bush is now a liar, so I won't trust him.

A recent poll shows that almost 70% of Americans have no problem with tapping conversations between Americans and suspected or known terrorists or Al Qaida operatives which is what was being done after 9/11.

Yep, that poll said nothing about the requirement of court order. I already stated nobody gives a ****, I guess you can't read. I don't give a **** that he is spying on me, if he were, however, I WOULD care if he were doing it without going through proper authority. Nobody have proven that he has done otherwise yet.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that such taps would be impossible should the consent of a judge be needed for each one individually.

Well then, what do you do? Go to congress and ask for a change in law, don't just go undermining the laws.

And most thinking people agree that it isn't a good idea to inform those you have under surveillance that they are under surveillance. It sort of defeats the purpose.

Ummm... where did I say this? Stop throwing in useless points that have nothing to do with my arguments on this debate.

The President takes an oath of office to defend the Constitution and that Constitution requires that the government provide the national defense. This is the president's authority and so far there has not been one credible instance or credible shred of proof that the president has overstepped his jurisdiction at any time or gone snooping around on your gossip or anybody else's conversations that were not reasonably included in the process of national defense.

The US Senate disagrees. I think I trust them more than I trust "your word", or that of the other Bush apologists on his forum. He could take a handgun and blast someone in the head on national TV, and your types would try to say that he was "within his constitutional rights".

The investigation should be directed toward those who 'outed' the process as this may very clearly have been an illegal act at least so far as policy goes. It's just peachy to give the edge to those who would like to blow up trains or bridges or shopping malls. I certainly hope that Justice is taking that into consideration.

Yes, I agree, there SHOULD be an investigation on both sides of this situation. One going into the legality of the warantless wiretaps, and the other to find out who broke the trust of the government and flapped thier gums.

If you will go back earlier in this thread you will see that both Carter and Clinton utilized the same authority that President Bush is utilizing and there was not one murmer of dissent from anybody about it.

And? What does that have to do with the legality of Bush's situation? Hm? Hm?

 

[AlbqOwl]

I don't know that any other administration had, without the consent of FISA, or any other arbitrary body, directly allowed and admitted to allowing the NSA to spy on American citizens.

Like I've said before... this has always been a virtue of the NSA... ... the fact that Bush admitted this fact is a much more far reaching breach of our national security.

Echelon and the relative telemetry has existed for years. Aside from such facts no president has any reason to so boldly admit such fact. It's as if he is greatly overstepping his bounds and proclaiming himself to be our saviour.

This is patently absurd. The only reason it came up is that big media decided to make an issue of it and have done so dishonestly as usual. They aren't giving you the history behind this activity but are using it to inspire contempt for a sitting President that they dislike. There was no FISA until the Carter administration and he quickly signed an executive order to get around it during the Iranian crisis. As previously posted, my own phone was tapped early in the Reagan administration. Everybody knew this was going on but the media was responsible and did not see any reason to thwart law enforcement efforts.. Clinton signed an executive order identical to that signed by Carter so that surveillance via wiretaps, etc. could be conducted without the necessity of a warrant for each one.

The Bush administration was forced, due to unethical and irresponsible media reporting, to acknowledge that he had ordered what all the others had done. And he did so after 9/11 which made it all the more urgent in the fact of a crisis that none of those other presidents faced.

Criticize the policy if you wish though according to polls conducted this past week, the vast majority of Americans approve the policy. But don't emulate all the others who attempt to use anything, however distorted and erroneously portrayed, to perpetuate hated and prejudices related to a sitting President.

 

[Caine]

Criticize the policy if you wish though according to polls conducted this past week, the vast majority of Americans approve the policy. But don't emulate all the others who attempt to use anything, however distorted and erroneously portrayed, to perpetuate hated and prejudices related to a sitting President.

Again, the poll question contained nothing about the fact that the wiretaps being conducted are warrantless and unchecked.

It all depends on how a poll is questioned, I think most of us has discovered this already.

To continue to deny that the poll wasn't placed in the same context as you are trying to make is sound is being purposefully dishonest.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Again, the poll question contained nothing about the fact that the wiretaps being conducted are warrantless and unchecked.

It all depends on how a poll is questioned, I think most of us has discovered this already.

To continue to deny that the poll wasn't placed in the same context as you are trying to make is sound is being purposefully dishonest.

The poll asked if the pollees approved of the feds listening in on calls orgininating in the US to known or suspected terrorist persons, groups, or sympathizers. The poll did address the issue of this being done without warrants for each tap. The answer was overwhelmingly yes. This is what the feds have been doing, legally, without individual warrants for each tap. The feds aren't listening in on you or me unless we are making international calls to groups that might have terrorist ties.

Now you tell me what problem you have with this? The Feds have done this since telephone communications have become commonplace. Can you honestly say that your anger isn't directed at Bush and his administration but is foused on the issue of wiretaps? Can you honstly say you had the same problem with all the other presidents who have done this in this century?

If you're going to have a problem, then at least make it consistent and reasonable and uniform. Otherwise it sounds like just another reason for chronic Bush bashers to do more irrational bashing.

 

[Conflict]

This is patently absurd.

Patents deal with conjecture and feasibility. Few things are patently absurd just as few things are patently concise. Patents deal in conjecture and not in empirical fact. It is easy to take a stance on such issues but the real test comes when one is forced to understand the legitimate application of such a conjecture. It just isn't panning out.

 

[Caine]

The poll asked if the pollees approved of the feds listening in on calls orgininating in the US to known or suspected terrorist persons, groups, or sympathizers. The poll did address the issue of this being done without warrants for each tap. The answer was overwhelmingly yes. This is what the feds have been doing, legally, without individual warrants for each tap. The feds aren't listening in on you or me unless we are making international calls to groups that might have terrorist ties.

Besides statements made by the administration itself, how are we certain? There is no system of checks in place if it is just between the President, his Administration, and the NSA. Who is to know? He has already lied, how do I trust any of them anymore?

Now you tell me what problem you have with this? The Feds have done this since telephone communications have become commonplace. Can you honestly say that your anger isn't directed at Bush and his administration but is foused on the issue of wiretaps? Can you honstly say you had the same problem with all the other presidents who have done this in this century?

Why does everyone have to bring up "other Presidents".
Why don't I bring up another president myself then? Nixon.

If you're going to have a problem, then at least make it consistent and reasonable and uniform. Otherwise it sounds like just another reason for chronic Bush bashers to do more irrational bashing.

I have a problem, but guess what? The "past presidents" issue is of no concern anymore, So lets mark that ignoramity off the list.
Hmm.. lets see, We don't know who they are listening to when there is no warrant, and I can't trust the administration after they sent me to war on what they say was "bad Intelligence" and have already lied. So lets mark that off the list. What does that leave me with? Bush knowingly approving of warrantless searches, with no system of checks in place, not going by the standards of FISA.
So, no, its not more "chronic Bush bashing".

Nice attempt at a personal attack though.

 

[oldreliable67]

It is easy to take a stance on such issues but the real test comes when one is forced to understand the legitimate application of such a conjecture.

Quite true.

It just isn't panning out.

Conjecture.

 

[oldreliable67]

There is no system of checks in place if it is just between the President, his Administration, and the NSA.

Lets see, how many congresspersons were briefed how many times on the program? How long did Rockefeller sit on his letter expressing his reservations before finally making it public and why did he choose, after all that time, to make his letter public? Pelosi said what to whom and when?

 

[Lefty]

How is that a checks and balances system? Here we have someone saying the senators should be impeached and arrested! I think it's ridiculous to say so... but that's just my opinion.

The system of checks and balances that was put into place by Congress to prevent warrentless wiretappings, was this FISA court, so that the executive branch could easily and secretly obtain a warrent for a wiretap in very little time. When the president passed over the court, he eliminted the "checks and balances" system put in place to make sure that he wasn't breaking the law.

 

[oldreliable67]

Here we have someone saying the senators should be impeached and arrested! I think it's ridiculous to say so...

Wow, who said that? Did I miss that in this thread somewhere? You're right, its ridiculous. But I say that in the belief that no Senator or Congressman leaked classified info - they usually have staffers for that. If it is proven that one did leak classified info, though, then what would you do?

BTW: Like your avatar. George C. Scott from "Dr. Strangelove", isn't it? Was at Circle in the Square theater in NYC a number of years ago, where he was starring in something-or-other. Circle-In-the-Square is theater in-the-round; Scott made an entrance from directly behind me - I was in an aisle seat and focusing on the stage, did not notice him standing behind me until he spoke his entrance line in a quite loud booming voice. I jumped and came up off that seat at least three inches. I could see him trying to suppress a laugh as he went down the aisle beside me to the stage.

 

[Lefty]

Wow, who said that? Did I miss that in this thread somewhere? You're right, its ridiculous. But I say that in the belief that no Senator or Congressman leaked classified info - they usually have staffers for that. If it is proven that one did leak classified info, though, then what would you do?

BTW: Like your avatar. George C. Scott from "Dr. Strangelove", isn't it? Was at Circle in the Square theater in NYC a number of years ago, where he was starring in something-or-other. Circle-In-the-Square is theater in-the-round; Scott made an entrance from directly behind me - I was in an aisle seat and focusing on the stage, did not notice him standing behind me until he spoke his entrance line in a quite loud booming voice. I jumped and came up off that seat at least three inches. I could see him trying to suppress a laugh as he went down the aisle beside me to the stage.

Actually this thread is called "NSA scandal demands impeachment and arrest!" And the very first post when one clicks the links clearly says:

"The NSA scandal demands the impeachment of any senator or representative who leaked the classified information to the New York Times and any reporter who refuses to disclose their source for the story."

As posted by "Trajan Octavian Titus" December 19, 2005 at 1:35 PM.

And as for the claim that a senator or representative leaked the information... well I think it's wild speculation. Honestly I don't think any of them would risk their carrers in leaking this information. I'm not sure if they would be trusted again within the government, and would probably lose security clearance. Perhaps appropriate. But I would shake his/her hand in revealling this information at such personal risk.

I love Dr. Strangelove. Everytime I watch it I find it strange how this movie was made in 1956 and yet I can still laugh at all the jokes and most of the references they make. Great film. I remember after I saw it the first time I went through this stage where I was obsessed with Peter Sellers movies. Great movie, I can't believe you got to see George C. Scott in person, that's great.

 

[oldreliable67]

LoL. You're absolutely right! The very first post and the intent of the thread...and all this time I was thinking that the thread title referred to impeaching Bush! I'm paying very close attention. Not.

Dr. Strangelove: a classic. Slim Pickens riding that bomb down like it was a buckin' bronc at a rodeo! Peter Sellers, of course, in his multiple roles, was just awesome. Just a great flick.

 

[teacher]

The NSA is us. The people that make up the NSA are from America. These people have Parents, Aunts, Uncles, Sisters, Brothers, Mothers, Fathers, Grandparents, Sons, Daughters, Nieces, Nephews, Cousins, friends, girlfriends, boyfriends, mistresses, and any damn person that you can give a name to someone that cares about someone. They are not elected. They drive home to go to ballgames, argue with their spouses, mow the friggin lawn, need I go on? Presidents come and go. They know things you do not know. If they told you a secret you would run and tell someone else. That's why they don't tell you. They are the good guys. That you distrust the knowledge they have does not bother them. If they told you that someone was going to such, at such a time, at such a place, you would drink two beers and grovel to find a member of the opposite sex to tell so you could impress them them with your "knowledge" to get into their pants. It's like that folks. Those in charge know this. That's why they have deemed you unfit to have this knowledge.

Those that leaked this little NSA thing and the radionic detection ability we have should be shot at dawn.

There are smart, patriotic, caring people in charge of this informations folks. That they don't acquiesce to the pressure to tell you should tell you something of their character.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

The NSA is us. The people that make up the NSA are from America. These people have Parents, Aunts, Uncles, Sisters, Brothers, Mothers, Fathers, Grandparents, Sons, Daughters, Nieces, Nephews, Cousins, friends, girlfriends, boyfriends, mistresses, and any damn person that you can give a name to someone that cares about someone. They are not elected. They drive home to go to ballgames, argue with their spouses, mow the friggin lawn, need I go on? Presidents come and go. They know things you do not know. If they told you a secret you would run and tell someone else. That's why they don't tell you. They are the good guys. That you distrust the knowledge they have does not bother them. If they told you that someone was going to such, at such a time, at such a place, you would drink two beers and grovel to find a member of the opposite sex to tell so you could impress them them with your "knowledge" to get into their pants. It's like that folks. Those in charge know this. That's why they have deemed you unfit to have this knowledge.

Those that leaked this little NSA thing and the radionic detection ability we have should be shot at dawn.

There are smart, patriotic, caring people in charge of this informations folks. That they don't acquiesce to the pressure to tell you should tell you something of their character.

Not only that they're made out of the best of the best of us, and what the **** do these people do besides critisize the people who protect our way of life daily?!

 

[aps]

There are smart, patriotic, caring people in charge of this informations folks. That they don't acquiesce to the pressure to tell you should tell you something of their character.

There are smart, patriotic, caring people in the judiciary who have been appointed to the NISA court and grant warrants in almost all requests. There are smart, patriotic, caring people who have been voted by the people to represent them in congress. There is a reason our country is based upon checks and balances.

I commend the people who leaked the information. :clap:

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

There are smart, patriotic, caring people in the judiciary who have been appointed to the NISA court and grant warrants in almost all requests. There are smart, patriotic, caring people who have been voted by the people to represent them in congress. There is a reason our country is based upon checks and balances.

I commend the people who leaked the information. :clap:

Then you would have commended Benedict Arnold for giving the strategy at West Point to the British because that's exactly what the people who leaked this info did they gave our strategy to AlQaeda, how can you commend that ****?