It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush OK'd spying on americans without warrents

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
It seems that one will get their slant or will get nothing at all. That is what makes the American news industry so dangerous. It is not about bringing the facts forward, it is about bringing certain facts forward, and timing.


I couldn't agree with you more (mark it on your calendar!) It's up to the discerning people to try their very best to keep a level head (not lean too far one way or the other) and to search for the complete story.

We really must realize that it's more important to get the truth than it is to serve our agenda.

I'm glad Bush is being called out, voted against and held accountable, but I'm not so blind that I don't see the tactics.




posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Yeah, best to focus on the very last paragraph instead of the entire rest of the article. Instead of the facts:


Asked about the administration's contention that the eavesdropping has disrupted terrorist attacks, Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn't comment until it sees some evidence. "They've veiled these powers in secrecy so there's no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight."...

"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Other key bipartisan members of Congress also called on the administration to explain and said a congressional investigation may be necessary....

Neither Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice nor White House press secretary Scott McClellan, asked about the story earlier Friday, would confirm or deny that the super-secret NSA had spied on as many as 500 people at any given time since 2002.




How the book deal invalidates any of the things said above is beyond me. Maybe I just don't have the same capacity for self-deception as some people do...

I don't get it.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Wow!
It's a good thing I am listening to George Clinton, the unbelieving jerk could have been mistaken for me getting down to the funk.

If I'm not mistaken, this is the second time we've agreed on something in a public forum.

Do fries come with that shake? Dogs of the world, unite.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   
I do beleave this story is true and there are radical Muslims in America planning to kill as many innocents as they can. If anyone denies this, than your ignorant beyond words....9/11 was all the proof we needed.

After 9/11 our good president did'nt have special commisions to study weather this was good policy or not...he took decisive action to protect us from further attacks.

Thats called Leadership.

Maximu§



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus

After 9/11 our good president did'nt have special commisions to study weather this was good policy or not...he took decisive action to protect us from further attacks.

Thats called Leadership.

Maximu§


so, when bush publicly stated 6 months after 911 that he had no idea where bin laden was, nor did he care as they werent looking for him, that is decisive action and leadership? wow!



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Yuo are a gem when it comes to picking out sound bites and running with them.
Is CNN missing one of their star reporters?

What he was saying (as if you don't know and are not trying to twist facts) was that the war was going to be conducted against those trying to kill our children, regardless of the whereabouts of this particular ring-leader.

Now, as one can see in 2005, it has paid off.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
LA_MAximus:

I do beleave this story is true and there are radical Muslims in America planning to kill as many innocents as they can. If anyone denies this, than your ignorant beyond words....9/11 was all the proof we needed.


There are more average Americans killing and plotting to kill each other over stupid crap than there are radical Muslims killing or plotting to kill Americans in the USA today. Count on it. 9-11 happened in 2001 and there have been no attacks on US soil in the interim.


After 9/11 our good president did'nt have special commisions to study weather this was good policy or not...he took decisive action to protect us from further attacks.

Thats called Leadership.


What was this decisive action? To order surveillance on American citizens? THAT’S somehow called leadership?

The President SWEARS on a Bible when he is inaugurated to follow the CONSTITUTION of the United States. There’s no asterisk, there’s no special dispensations. He swears to do it.

He did not, in this case. In fact, he went contrary to the Constitution. Quite simply, he ought to be impeached for failing to do his ultimate duty as Commander in Chief. He violated the Constitution by okaying illegal surveillance.

That’s called an Impeachable Offense.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Well justyc, I won't repeat what Thomas wrote about the fallacy of your arguements, but weather Bush was right or wrong....he demonstarted a strong leadership trait.

The old saying is true....."Actions speak louder than words"

Bush goofs up at times (what Man does'nt), but I am proud to call him our Commander-in-Chief.

Maximu§



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo

9-11 happened in 2001 and there have been no attacks on US soil in the interim.


There's a reason for that skippy...



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
What was this decisive action? To order surveillance on American citizens? THAT’S somehow called leadership?


I don't understand Max's logic, but I've seen it before. Where a person BLATANTLY DISREGARDS ALL OTHER FACTORS to do what he thinks is 'right'. Some see it as 'leadership' some see it as insanity.

Yes, the president swore on his bible to uphold the Constitution, but there came a time (and it extends to today with this president) when he thought he knew better than the Constitution and he made a decision to throw away all oaths and duties because he ... changed his mind.

That's one of the really dangerous characteristics of this president. He thinks he knows better than all those who have come before him. And what makes it really dangerous is that he's so WRONG!



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Yuo are a gem when it comes to picking out sound bites and running with them.
Is CNN missing one of their star reporters?

What he was saying (as if you don't know and are not trying to twist facts) was that the war was going to be conducted against those trying to kill our children, regardless of the whereabouts of this particular ring-leader.

Now, as one can see in 2005, it has paid off.


well, for those who want to know exactly what was said you can read the whole interview here -

www.whitehouse.gov...

and people can make up their own minds about whether i am 'twisting facts', picking out 'sound bites' or just reporting what bush actually said when asked (search the page for "Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden" and read on from there for the exact quote and context)

truth is though, that the war is being conducted (in iraq) against those that werent trying to kill your children, while those guilty of 911 have got away with it and are laughing their heads off.

when more than 3000 americans have died in iraq, will you then start looking for the responsible ring-leader....



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
Well justyc, I won't repeat what Thomas wrote about the fallacy of your arguements, but weather Bush was right or wrong....he demonstarted a strong leadership trait.

The old saying is true....."Actions speak louder than words"

Maximu§


no offence, but i'm sure the nazis thought the same of hitler



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   
You people speak as if you know exactly how the world functions. You’re not privy to the intelligence; you have no idea what our relations are with foreign governments. The constitution, which was written over 200years ago, has been amended and ratified on numerous occasions. Although the basic principles remain the same as times changes so do policies and the way you deal with situations.

I love how people feel like they can live in this little bubble world where nobody has enemies nobody does any wrong and there’s never any reason for change. The world is a much different place than it was 200 years ago.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   
The Ignorant American. How proudly he/she stand there, letting the United States of America Government, take away his/her freedoms, like a blind babe, to stupid to see, because someone shook a scary rattle in his/her face, or behind his/her back.

Is Poor Diddems okay, asks Uncle Sam, when he's coddling the baby American, while holding a knife behind his back?



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
The Ignorant American. How proudly he/she stand there, letting the United States of America Government, take away his/her freedoms, like a blind babe, to stupid to see, because someone shook a scary rattle in his/her face, or behind his/her back.

Is Poor Diddems okay, asks Uncle Sam, when he's coddling the baby American, while holding a knife behind his back?


LOL,

Your post reeks of jealousy, and frankly im flattered…



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by justyc
no offence, but i'm sure the nazis thought the same of hitler



Comparing me to a Nazi and our President to Hitler? That shows your arguement is outta gas and headed for the side of the road.

Take Thomas's advice and READ...really read whats in that CNN article. -Heres a little "tidbit" you mighta missed:


Quote: Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of people inside the United States, the Times reported.


You see that word I N T E R N A T I O N A L ...that means the only people who got monitored were folk that were talking to suspected terrorists OUTSIDE our borders.

Funny what you miss when you skim over little details like that, besides Bush did inform congressional leaders of his actions....no law was broken.

Maximu§



[edit on 033131p://555 by LA_Maximus]



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I think the main topic still stand . . . how far an elected government will go with not regards of rights of the people that elected him.

A president swear to up hold the constitution but then again he can pretty much take that same bible he swore in and the constitution and step all over it.

Yes still many will defend this type of act because it has been told that is good for them and the nation.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
Quote: Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of people inside the United States, the Times reported.

You see that word I N T E R N A T I O N A L ...that means the only people who got monitored were folk that were talking to suspected terrorists OUTSIDE our borders.

Funny what you miss when you skim over little details like that, besides Bush did inform congressional leaders of his actions....no law was broken.


Funny what you come up with when you ADD words to the story's quote!

The words 'suspected terrorists' do not appear in the quote. You added that in there! I do international emails every day! I could have been monitored.

And yes he did break the law. Informing Congressional leaders is very different than getting permission from Congress and going through the proper channels.



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
He violated the Constitution by okaying illegal surveillance.


Can you show me in what way he violated the Constitution by authorizing the survellance of suspected militants that is known to roam freely about the United States?

I'll just go ahead and say it again, if you're not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about!



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus

Originally posted by justyc
no offence, but i'm sure the nazis thought the same of hitler



Comparing me to a Nazi and our President to Hitler? That shows your arguement is outta gas and headed for the side of the road.

Take Thomas's advice and READ...really read whats in that CNN article. -Heres a little "tidbit" you mighta missed:


Quote: Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of people inside the United States, the Times reported.

You see that word I N T E R N A T I O N A L ...that means the only people who got monitored were folk that were talking to suspected terrorists OUTSIDE our borders.

Funny what you miss when you skim over little details like that, besides Bush did inform congressional leaders of his actions....no law was broken.

Maximu§

[edit on 033131p://555 by LA_Maximus]


are you pretending that you dont know that the bush family made A LOT of money from financing and supporting the nazis - do you think bush jnr is any different from his grandfather? him & his friends seem to also be making a lot of money out of the iraq war don't you think?

theres some interesting and relevent quotes on here - quotes.liberty-tree.ca... ... its scary how relevent some actually are still.

oh and could someone please tell me who deleted my post and wiped my memory of even posting anything that mentions bush authorising the nsa to monitor I N T E R N A T I O N A L emails and what-not blah blah and whether it was legal or not .... its those little details that count sometimes you see




new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join