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.

 

McCain: I'd Spy on Americans Secretly, Too

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Damn it ATS! You make me want to slam my head into my keyboard. I started a thread about this yesterday with only one reply.


McCain Flip-Flops On Domestic Spying and Executive Power

Anyway, it's a very important development that I think the Dems should pursue. Just exactly where does McSame stand with regard to the constitution and civil rights? The flip-flop should be high-lighted as well, as it shows he is perfectly comfortable lying to get the nomination. As if we didn't suspect that anyways.




posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
thats another reason iwould not vote for mccain the first reason is i seen him hug george w. on tv. i dont want another bush type in the whitehouse



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
You all are aware that the clinton administration is also responsible for a warrant less wiretap of their own? Additionally, during WWII, FDR had a warrant less wiretap of his own. The day after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt authorized the interception of all communications traffic into and out of the United States, etc.

This is not some new concept that was concocted under Bush Co., the United States has been conducting such operations for quite some time. For what purpose? The same kind of purpose that it has always served, National Security.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


McInsane, Obamessiah, Billary.....

They all work for the same guys and will all use (and increase) government power to intrude on the American citizen in one way or another.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
If any American is talking to terrorists, and planning attacks against Americans, and our government sits back and does nothing to prevent this. I would call for that Presidents impeachment.

This is nothing more than collecting battlefied intelligence. Since 9/11/01 America is a battlefield. No one will ever know how many attacks have been prevented because of these measures. How can you agree with not monitoring potential terrorists plots. How easy do you want the terrorists to have it?

We haven't been attacked since 9/11/01 yet there are people out there who want to take away a huge reason for that. It makes no sense.


Even if I assume the the 9/11 "attack" was actually perpetrated by "real" terrorists without the help or mismanagement of top US govt. leaders, I would still not want to live in such a "battlefield". Just because we have not been attacked, does not mean we have been attacked.

Having open borders on both sides of the US does not seem like a good way to keep a "battlefield" secure. How many illegal aliens get across the US borders? How many of those could have been carrying a potential "battlefield" weapon?

According to govt. statistics, the top two "terrorist" killers in America are the Heart Attacks (652,091) and the Cancers ( 559,312). Would the $3+ trillion dollars the Iraq war is going to cost us have been better spent defeating these domestic "terrorists"?

We have lost more people (4000+ soldiers to date) in Iraq than in 9/11 (2976 +/-). On the other hand, we have definitely helped place everyone but the top elite in America in dire financial straits by funding these never-ending "battlefields" (foreign and domestic).

I wonder how many people will lose their lives, jobs, homes, retirement, savings, sanity and freedom as America passes into what some are finally saying is an economy potentially worse than the "Great Depression". Some 7 million people lost their lives in the "Great Depression" in the US, according to US Census statistics.

Instead of spending $5K a second in Iraq, we could have been buying every head-of-household in America a Prius and a Solar Energy system to power their homes. Which of these would have kept the price of gas down ($1.40 gal. 2001 vs. $4+ gal. today) and helped buy down our $759 billion trade deficit, do you think?

I am reminded of something that Ray McGovern, a veteran Army intelligence officer and ex-CIA analyst said recently:

"Two years ago I lectured at the Naval Academy in Annapolis. I found it highly disturbing that, when asked about the oath they took upon entering the academy, several of the “Mids” thought it was to the commander in chief. This brought to my mind the photos of German generals and admirals (as well as top church leaders and jurists) swearing personal oaths to Hitler. Not our tradition, and yet….. I was aghast that only the third Mid I called on got it right — that the oath is to protect and defend the Constitution, not the president."

Like John Stewart, I believe that living in a "free" society has inherent dangers. But like our 1776 Forefathers, I would be willing to give it a try. Unfortunately, "my" government does not appear to want to allow me that option.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack

Just exactly where does McSame stand with regard to the constitution and civil rights? The flip-flop should be high-lighted as well, as it shows he is perfectly comfortable lying to get the nomination.



The second post of mine on the 1st page kinda shows that's the way he works.

Before voting on whether to give the communication companies immunity he said:

John McCain's Summary of Positions


Every effort in this struggle and other efforts must be done according to American principles and the rule of law. When companies provide private records of Americans to the government without proper legal subpoena, warrants, or other legal orders, their heart may be in the right place, but their actions undermine our respect for the law.

I am also a strong supporter of protecting the privacy of Americans



Then when it was time to vote, he gave them immunity!

Your right, he IS a flip-flopper, he flips and flops more than a fish out of water!



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
We've all heard of how Mccain acts...how angry he gets, how intolerant of others he is and now we know his intentions. I always laugh when I see Mccain at a rally and all the idiots behind him voting for him smiling. If elected- Bush's plans will continue as planned through Mccain.

Obama's no saint either...Too many mysteries and controversies surrounding him. The public's behind him and they don't even know anything truly about him besides the fact that he's black and "represents change"...nobody cares to really research and look closely at these candidates- Unfortunately its been about Hillary being a woman, Obama being a black man, and Mccain being old...its utterly ridiculous.

This race is a waste in my opinion...Bad candidates that won't help this economy, country, or world in any way. Greed and corruption will still continue with either one of these candidates. The power of presidency is too much power for one person to have...The whole government needs to be flushed out and the people should vote who they want in- not senators or politicians who've been screwing us over for decades. Our government is creating our demise.

But hey...at least clinton's out of the race.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
the government has been listening to our phone calls for over 60 years people. i have a newspaper from world war two that tells the story of a mother talking to her daughter who was in hawaii. the daughters husband was in the military but it doesnt say if the daughter was on base or not but, the mom asked the daughter when she was going to come home for a visit and a censor came on the line and told them that they werent allowed to discuss things of this nature because they didnt want ship routes and timetables to fall into enemy hands. so not just taping conversations, they were actively listening in and preventing people from certain conversations. dont get me wrong, i dont agree with these sorts of things happening, but its nothing new.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by prepped
 


The thing that is sooooo disturbing about the way they are doing it now though is that they are doing it in the name of "The War on Terrorism".

When will they EVER say this war is over!

There has always been a group of people somewhere who wish another group of people somewhere else harm. So the US government will just be able to keep on doing this until the "end of times".

There will never come a time when they will say the "War on Terror" is over!

People knew when WWII was over, how will we know when threat of terrorists is over? Wait for the government to tell us?

[edit on 6/5/2008 by Keyhole]



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Wow that really makes me want to run out and vote for John McCain right this minute. I already feel secure.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 05:00 PM
link   
If the government spent $1 trillion on improving people's lives in the U.S. and in the rest of the world instead of on the war, I doubt that there would be very many terrorist threats. The solution to the terroism threat is not war. With 1,000,000 dead in Iraq and another 4,000,000 displaced, how many new terrorists have we created? This will only create long term hatred. And now they want to attack Iran?

The solution to the terrorist threat is a change to foregn policy. We need to stop supporting the Israeli lobby and instead support the huge number of Israelis supporting peace initiatives and the end to the genocide in the occupied territories. This is the biggest reason that the Arab world is so against the U.S. Of course none of this benefits the military industries or Haliburton that control the government.

Ralph Nader is the only person running for President that I see that would agree with these ideas. I have no idea why he has so little support.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Keyhole
 


Um, I'm just putting this out there, but that hug looks very awkward. It looks so awkward to the point it looks fake. Much like that picture of Obama with a cigarette, which was fake. Though this photo could just be bad photography and taken at a wrong angle, still an unnerving position for two of them.

I just wanted to point that out ever since I glanced at that picture. Though the media has been quite hard on the old republican candidate while they praise Obama, I have to say I'm pretty sure they are all in this together. Forgive my High School Musical pun.


[Edited for spelling]

[edit on 5-6-2008 by UnforgiveableSin]



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   
I am not really sure what to think at this point. Whatever happens will happen whether we vote or not.

Obama would spy on us, Hillary will deceive us, and McCain...um...loves George Bush.


[edit on 5-6-2008 by UnforgiveableSin]



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by blasphemusbudda
thats another reason iwould not vote for mccain the first reason is i seen him hug george w. on tv. i dont want another bush type in the whitehouse


Well, I hate to break it to you, but all of them are basically George Bush, except one is black, one lacks the equipment, and the other looks like he is going to burst into dust because he is so old.
They all seem to have a hidden agenda which I'm sure most of us know about and I won't be surprised if it is carried out within a year.

[Edited for the love of sentence structure]

[edit on 5-6-2008 by UnforgiveableSin]



posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Well, I hate to break it to you, but all of them are basically George Bush, except one is black, one lacks the equipment, and the other looks like he is going to burst into dust because he is so old.

oh man..thank you sooo much for that last part about mccain. i almost shot soda out of my nose. i really needed that. but seriously, whos to say any of the eavesdropping ever stopped. perhaps it just came back into the light again. and i agree that it may never end. cheerful thought, huh?



posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unit541
Privacy became a nostalgic memory long ago.

It should be more than just a "nostalgic memory." Remember the Privacy Act? That's a leftover memory from the Nixon Era, but it's supposed to be upheld now as it was then.

Not only that, but there's also the Constitution...You know, the document that all Government Officers of all three Branches at both State & Federal levels must swear/affirm a legally-binding Oath to obey? The Patriot Act violates most in particular the 4th & 5th Amendments as well as the specific powers & limitations vested in the Executive Branch.

Bush is an Oath breaker! Bush is an Oath breaker! Bush is an Oath breaker!...As well as the vast majority of Congress & Judiciary! (Whew! I feel better getting that off my chest!
)

Originally posted by Unit541
My opinion is that the same would be true if either Obama or Clinton were elected also. Three different flavors of the same bad medicine.

Yep...All of these people are Oath breakers too!

Originally posted by Finn1916
I would vote independant if i knew who was running.

The only candidate I can find that is not an Oath breaker is Ron Paul.


Originally posted by Equinox99
The revolution should end companies that lobby for Israel and end corruption and frankly most US people are not ready for that.

IMO, lobbying should be banned altogether...The People should rely on phoning/mailing to their elected reps & the 1st Amendment Right to Petition for Redress of Grievances. Even though telephones weren't invented back then, this is one of the reasons that the Framers of the Constitution wrote the 1st Amendment & authorized Congress to establish Post Offices & Postal Roads (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7).



Originally posted by Keyhole
John McCain's Summary of Positions


"The struggle against Islamic fundamentalism is the transcendent foreign-policy challenge of our time."

Oh, do you notice how no one in the government will also mention that it was the government during the Cold War Era that created the terrorist problem for America in the first place?

Originally posted by jsobecky
And I don't think that his support for the war or terrorist surveillance is altogether bad. If you want bad, think Obama the appeaser.

Is it a revelation to you that the CIA trained Osama bin Laden (& many others) in terrorist tactics during the Cold War?...Reputedly for the purpose of resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Since then, US "foreign policy" has kept screwing around with Middle Eastern politics, society, economics, etc. All in the name of "spreading Democracy," of course. It's the US government itself that provided the reasons for "the appeaser" to be attached to Obama's name.

Oooops! Did I mention "spreading Democracy?" But the USA shouldn't be a Democracy & has no business spreading Democracy either! Wow! How could anybody have forgotten that?

This is one of the same kind of tactics that Hitler used to gain power in Democratic Germany! Hitler had members of his Nazi party commit acts of terrorism so that Hitler could use a good PR campaign to rid the Germans of terroism...Once he gained the power of a dictator, he called back his buddies, fulfilling his "promise" to end the terrorism! Does anyone see this corallary to the USA right now? The only difference is that Bush isn't getting votes to gain dictatorial powers...He's just using "executive priviledge," "soveriegn immunity" & "signing statements" to grab power. All of this, aside from the fact that the Executive Branch has no such "priviledge," it's "sovereignty" has been stolen from the People & only Congress has the power of legislation...All against Constitutional Oaths to the contrary!


Originally posted by Unit541
If anyone, American or not, is caught collaborating, or even suspected of collaborating with terrorists, by all means, tap their phone. The problem is that they're fishing with dynamite. How would you feel if the cops showed up and demanded to search your home for drugs, not because there were any indications that you had any, but just to see if they could get lucky and find some.

That's what the "due process of law" is all about...Providing enough evidence for suspicion so that the Courts will issue a warrant. And the very same "due process" that's violated by the government (with the Patriot Act, which was not vested with Constitutional "due process" in the first place) literally hundreds of times each day.


Originally posted by West Coast
This is not some new concept that was concocted under Bush Co., the United States has been conducting such operations for quite some time. For what purpose? The same kind of purpose that it has always served, National Security.

No, this is not new news. However, "National Security" is not the same as "providing for the common defense," which is what the Constitution Framers envisioned. By violating the Constitutionally-described Rights of Citizens, the government only violates our security...The Constitution-Preamble phrase of "promoting the general welfare" & "provide for the common defense" are the most misinterpreted phrases that has led to the most widely-abused reasons for the insinuation of corruption into government: The Founding Fathers knew that no government could provide for the welfare & security of the nation on the same level as each individual Citizen...That's why they used the term general welfare & "common" defense, to provide for the Citizen body as a whole, not for each & every person.

However, the Founding Fathers provided for our personal security with the 2nd Amendment...Another part of the Constitution that the modern government violates as much as they think they can get away with.

Bill of Rights: First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

You know, it's not just these particular Rights mentioned in the 1st Amendment that should never be "abridged"...It's all of the Rights that the government must not be allowed to touch, including the 2nd Amendment! So then, what are all of these "regulations" in place for requiring permits, licensing, etc? They are nothing less than continual "abridging" of 2nd Amendment Rights.


Originally posted by wutone
They all work for the same guys and will all use (and increase) government power to intrude on the American citizen in one way or another.

Which are just more violations of Constitutional Oaths/Affirmations of Office...The very same Oaths that provide the nation for a limited government.


Originally posted by seircram
I am reminded of something that Ray McGovern, a veteran Army intelligence officer and ex-CIA analyst said recently:
"...I was aghast that only the third Mid I called on got it right — that the oath is to protect and defend the Constitution, not the president."

Like John Stewart, I believe that living in a "free" society has inherent dangers. But like our 1776 Forefathers, I would be willing to give it a try. Unfortunately, "my" government does not appear to want to allow me that option.

I remember the Oath of the military I took & I was always aware of the meaning of that Oath. Even though I've long-since completed my terms of service, I still try to live up to the Oath.

And yes, I'm also aware that for each & every Right we have, there also comes certain responsibilities in the exercise of those Rights. The main responsibility lies in not violating the Rights of others when you exercise your own Rights. Another responsibility is that we are the ones responsible for keeping & maintaining our Rights free from government interference. The government has (unfortunately) gotten well-practiced in violating Citizens' Rights...Because too many Citizens have been deceived as to their responsibilities to keep their Rights sancrosect.

IMO, politics is the problem: Politics has been described as the "art of compromise," but there's nothing in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that allows for such "compromise" as has been committed against the People. Therefore, there's really no room in the US government for Politics. By legally-binding Oath, the entirety of government are supposed to act as "employees" to their "boss (The People)" under the Constitution as a "contract of employment"...In short, Civil Service is what government's supposed to be about. However, there are too many of our "employees" (now & in the past) who have usurped the position of "boss." This, I believe, is where America mostly went wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join