It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by dawnstar
ummm....our national debt is now unmanageable, there's a good chance that our country could be up on war crimes...ya know, sactions, blockades and all that....and well, we, the people can't be blamed can we....it was a runaway government, elected into office by faulty voting machines!!! have mercy, please????
we kicked the culprits out of office!!!
Originally posted by marg6043
As everything with the present administration it seems that the tactics of fear, intimidation and lies are the standard to defend what they are doing . . . spying on Americans.
Cheney stands behind his man defending the spying as a way to Protect the nation
One think that many seems to forget is that the spying has not been limited to foreign communications but also withing the US borders.
What does this mean . . . well if you remember Nixon spying he extended his spying to not only people around him but any groups that where tag as not friendly to his government.
Bush is using the same tactics and defending that is not illegal to do what he does, but after Nixon that is not so.
The law explicit bans wiretaps in order to maintain the Fourth amendment.
Eleven Judges form the secret FISA court and now one step down, the court was put in place to give legality to what Bush did illegal.
Why did Bush decided to go around the court? We must ask then who else was Bush secretly listening, it seems to me that he was after something more than just foreign communications.
Why is Cheney defending what Nixon did?
Well we all know that Nixon practices included the compilation of an “enemies list,” massive surveillance of anti-Vietnam War protesters, civil rights activists and political opponents, and an array of “dirty tricks” operations including break-ins and other criminal acts.
Perhaps that is what Bush is planning and have in mind all along.
We have another Nixon in power.
".... spying to not only people around him but any groups that where tag as not friendly to his government."
REPLY: See comment about Clinton, above.
Again.... THE LAW WAS WRITTEN IN 1978, AND HAS BEEN USED BY EVERY PRESIDENT SINCE THEN. Do the research!!!
Originally posted by dawnstar
"REPLY: First, the national debt is only 4% of GDP; VERY manageable.
Second, as mentioned in another (above-mentioned) thread:
Titlw 50 US Code, chapter 36, sub-chapter 1, section 1802 (enacted in 1978)
the title of which is: "Electronic Surveilance Without Court Order"
(paraphrased) "...... allows for wiretaps to be used on calls to and from foreign countries, in a time of war, as it relates to national security."
well, I have Titlw 50 US Code, chapter 36, sub-chapter 1, section 1802 (enacted in 1978) here...... caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...
...... and well, what it seems to be saying to me is that he can legally tap without a court order....in certain circumstances....
it has be be cerified by the FISA court to be legal.....although, by what I understand, he can get this certification after the fact......bush bypassed the FISA court...
REPLY: If he can get approval from the FISA court after the fact, that is not "bypassing" the court.
and well, seems to tell me that it has to be reasonable to assume that no US citizen will be involved in this tap.....ummm...by what I hear, some of these taps involved no foreign person....
REPLY: No.... if dealing with calls originating from within the US, or originating from overseas pertain to subversive activities, in a time of war, then anyone can be investigated. In this case, many of the people are foreign nationals here on visas or expired visas. Again, there were only about 300 distinct phone numbers involved... although I'm sure by now most of those numbers are no longer used, which places American citizens and out troops at risk.
so, well, we shall have to wait and see what the heavily republican population sanate and house says about this after their investigation, but well, seems to me, he just decided the laws were too bothersome for him and went his own way ignoring them.....
as far as our national debt being unmanageable...time will tell that one too.....but, didn't Greenspan say something to that effect recently also?
as far as the war crimes...let's see, we have documents from Gonzales arguing how the prisoners from Iraq and Afghanistan aren't prisoners of war, and trying to redefine torture, we have people who've been imprisoned for this torture, and we have a vice president and president who really didn't want the law to reemphasize the idea that torture is illegal......war crimes.....???
REPLY: History is rife with examples of types of torture, both used and abused. Every military around the world knows that extreme torture produces nothing of value, so why would we/they do it? Makes sense, doesn't it?
Putting panties on someones head is not torture, 'nor is having someone pose in a "naked Twister" pile. Most things done at Abu Graib were much less than what goes on at college hazing parties.
Terrorists do not fall under the rules stipulated in the Geneva Convention.
[edit on 28-12-2005 by dawnstar]
Originally posted by marg6043
Well it seems that now because Bush went after not only supposedly Alqaida connections, but also private citizens that belong to groups that are against Bush policies and handling of the war on terror, lawyers from these groups are already planing law sues against the government.
REPLY: A link to these assertions, please?
1984 decision by the supreme court allows Americans to sue the government for intentionally using wiretaps on them.
REPLY: Hmmm.... Anyone with a knowledge of receivers can listen in on cell phone calls. Is picking electromagnetic waves from the air actually a "wiretap?