Did you even read the whole thing? He goes on to mention other clues that leads him to believe that there is something to the story. What kind of evidence do you expect? Do you think Bush is going to offer a list of every phone tapped with dates and times? You have to add up small clues that together will piece together what really happened. This article points out several small clues. NBC is investigating wire taps on one if it's reporters, who is married to a Kerry spokesman. That's another clue. Just because someone doesn't have the same political view as you doesn't give you any reason to discount their information as partisan posturing.
Your question has nothing to do with why people are upset. People are upset because as rimrocker Sam Fisher, and others have pointed out, the wiretapping is being done without abiding by FISA and our constitution. I don't know of anyone who doesn't want the U.S. to wiretap al-Qaeda when possible. I surely do, as do all the other liberals I know. Nobody is upset about that.
On the contrary, it is FISA and this administration's contempt for the law that is the core of the issue. Ask yourself this... If none of this had come out and the administration were not trying to spin their arguments in the most awkward way, would this thread even exist? Again, spying is necessary. Intelligence gathering is necessary. Doing both while following the law is necessary.
From Bush's speech in April 2004 "Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires-a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution." Why would he lie?
Gotta love the D&D!! The_Conquistador can debate the liberals at a 7-on-1 disadvantage and come out unscathed. Nary a blow has been landed on The_Conquistador! If the issue is so worthy of outrage, why can't the liberals provide a *single* example of domestic-to-domestic spying? That's what they've been complaining about for so long, yet they can't cite even one example? Have the liberals been distorting the truth to try to make an issue out of nothing? NO. Can't be. Surely there are many examples that they can provide which bolsters their claims. Right? RIGHT??? Where are they, libs? .... or is this another contrived controversy that the libs are hoping to divide America and score political points with? YAWN
Since I started the thread I think I know what it is about. I started the thread to discuss the White House's incorrect assessment of the term Domestic in relation to surveillance. The lynchpin of it is FISA which I why I listed the Provisions of the Code in the initial post. Thank you for your attempt to derail the thread. You are hereby dismissed.
It's posts like this that make me realize it's useless to debate someone who is not willing to consider or even acknowlege any evidence contrary to his position.
Mulder, you obviously didn't pay any attention to the *article you posted*, which debates international vs domestic calls. Nice try at moving the goalposts there, after your side utterly FAILED to prove the Bush Administration wrong. The Bush Administration stated that at the other end of the phone calls was an international caller. This was said to dispute Senator Reid's lie about this being a "domestic spying program". This issue is obviously international vs domestic. Since your side couldn't produce a SINGLE EXAMPLE of a domestic-to-domestic wiretap, you have to change the issue. I'll accept your attempt at changing the argument as your unconditional surrender. This has to be the best example ever of the liberals getting nowhere on the spying 'controversy' and having to retreat back to their convenient technical hiding spot -- the warrants. The warrant gambit merely provides them cover. It is not the core of their argument, as Mulder's ill-fated attempt at posting an article regarding international vs domestic wiretapping confirms. EXPOSED
But now you are saying it's all about the warrants? What made you have to change your argument all of a sudden? Huh? What a great case of: Thanks Mulder!!!
I think that there is a certain percentage of the American public that just gets nervous when the government appears to be involved in "big brother" type activities. Ever since Watergate there is an always present level of mistrust by some for the federal government. This is a hard one because we need to be diligent and be on the lookout for those planning another 9-11, but we must also be careful not to throw away our personal freedoms. Who is responsible for making sure the eavedropping is used for the right purposes? I've travelled to a "big brother" country. It is called Singapore. Lovely place. Very orderly. But that beauty, safety and orderly society comes at the cost of a lot of personal freedoms. Males there are required, at least they were 12 years ago, until a certain age to serve one month in military or government service each year. If the male isn't fit for military service, then they are assigned to work say in a post office and look for things like theft or other forms of misconduct. If you don't flush the toilet in the subway restroom your picture may end up in the newspaper. I would say though it is the best city I have ever visited. Whether Bush did something illegal or not; this is never going to lead to impeachment. It is politically impossible in today's Congress.
Jorge is still pushing the idea that the court orders are incidental. Awesome. Click the link in my signature for a hilarious back and forth on this, in which Jorge warns that we'd tip off the terrorists when we served them with warrants.
HO HO HO! Bats, I welcome you back from your sabbatical. A snippet from that link that Batman directed people to: Batman, that thread examined a variety of issues, whereas this thread is examining the Bush Administration's defense of Senator Reid's reckless charge of the "domestic spying program". If you'd like to be at the wrong end of another tittie whipping, please start a new thread about the FISA warrants. If you'd like to stay on topic, please discuss the issue at hand -- International vs Domestic wiretaps. Can you be the first liberal to provide an example of domestic-to-domestic wiretapping? That really is the only way a rational debate can occur -- because otherwise Senator Reid is on record as being a charlatan.
If you are wiretapped for absolutely no good reason, you should not get nervous. You should be outraged! T_J only mentions the surveillance on international to domestic phone calls, but the calls I was talking about in my 1st post were made from me in USA to my friends and family (mostly my 76 year old mother) in China. There could be issues with connection quality since I always use prepaid phone cards, but the clicking and key pad touching sound were by no means random background noises in my judgment. To whoever is spying on me, go screw yourself real good and rotten in hell!
I'm not back from my 'sabbatical.' This forum's boring now. There's not a single poster left on the R side of the aisle that makes a single credible argument, so debate's out the window. It's not surprising. Bushco jumped the shark some time back. It makes sense the sensible conservatives would have stopped defending him (and boy howdy, have they) and that the die hard apologists would have lost their minds. I just de-lurked because this thread was an awesome opportunity to remind everybody of the most hilarious T_J meltdown in BBS history. Enjoy it, y'all.
LMAO! Seriously, T_J, great entertainment man, you bring a great sense of humor to the D&D. Keep going guys, I am enjoying this.
batman, just giving the appearances of a fair fight. oh, and sorry i couldn't make it to rudz, next time your in ny maybe
So Batman, in other words, you are incapable of offering a rebuttal to the Bush Administration's vicious slapdown of Senator Reid's slander. Quite an interesting position, given that you just finished declaring that no conservatives can put together a credible argument. Looks to me like you can't put one together right here. Why not? Why can't you defend Senator Reid's statement? Batman Jones: Lots of slander, no substance. Sorry Bats, but you failed right here. Now cram that in your pie hole.
Why are you pretending the outrage is something other than what it is? The liberals aren't outraged because of domestic/domestic spying. Liberals are outraged because the checks and balances that protect American citizens has been trounced by this administration, and American citizens have been wiretapped without having any protection. I'm sure it is very easy to win debates when you debate against what you wish the other side was arguing, instead of what they really are upset about.
