Lies abound in Dubya's administration. Who could have imagined falsehoods in the White House under Dubya's reign of terror. bwhahahahahhaha too fucking funny for words.

Larry

Koolaid! Please sir, may I have another!

- The Right

You know I believe sincerely the Bushites are gnashing their teeth and their guts are just churning because they know deep down they know they support or supported a Criminal Enterprise but don't know whether to shit or go blind. It must royally suck to be them having to defend the indefensable. Welcome to hell Bushites. Be brave Bushites Be brave.

Larry

Well it sounds like they were lying before this issue was approved by congress and now have to say they were lying so the law breaking wouldn't become an issue.

I see someone else was catching up on news a MSNBC.com while I was LOL

Come on righties defend Your Manboy chimp in chief.

Larry

*chirp chirp*

Buh buh buh...the program works! LOL. Right wing Bush lovers bitch slapped by reality again, and nowhere to be found.

Sad.

BITCH SLAPPED my ASS...

The article says that the US Military (probably through interrogation techniques) provided the information.

The specific Protect America Act didn't contribute to this event BECAUSE IT HAD NOT BEEN PASSED YET!!!!!

YOU FREAKING IDIOTS will take anything you can out of context to slam this administration.

Yes McConnell misspoke and corrected himself, unless you have access to the data that they have collected through this and programs like it you have no idea what we have obtained and the gains we have made with the programs.

Maybe you freaks might try rooting for you own country sometime instead of rooting for it to constantly fail.

The specific Protect America Act didn't contribute to this event BECAUSE IT HAD NOT BEEN PASSED YET!!!!!

Then why did McConnell say it did contribute. Misspoke? Bullshit. He lied. He knew it was a lie, but they just got a big terror bust in Germany and they needed to go pump up their unconstitutional spying program, and he lied.

The ONLY problem I have with this Act is that it allows spying WITHOUT a Warrant. And nobody has ever shown the necessity of that.

Army, let's take what you say at face value. The military captures a guy, interrogates him, and learns about a terror plot.

At that point, don't they have everything they need to start wiretapping and then go get the post 72 hour FISA warrant?
Where is the need for warrantless spying?

Oh and Army, if the Constitution is violated, there's no America left to root for.

"Maybe you freaks might try rooting for you own country sometime instead of rooting for it to constantly fail."

I do. My country follows the law, proudly, as it's always proclaimed "we're a country of laws, not men."

Failure is when we DON'T live up to those principles, and people who encourage such constitution-trashing are the problem.

YOU FREAKING IDIOTS will take anything you can out of context to slam this administration.

The administration slams itself. We just point it out.

YOU FREAKING IDIOTS will take anything you can out of context to slam this administration.


Posted by armyof1 at 2007-09-13 09:18 AM | Reply

Like this????.....

"That ability to listen in on the plotters' conversations "allowed us to see and understand all the connections" they had with a breakaway cell of a Central Asian terrorist group, the Islamic Jihad Union, operating in Germany, said the official, Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence."

You bushbots will defend and spin this administration to the last minute won't ya?

This one is a RIOT!

The activity which assisted the discovery did NOT happen under the new guidelines ...

They happened before the new quideline went into effect ...

... but with the same result ...

So, that if the even had occured under the new guidelines, nothing would have been different. That is, the intelligence gathered would be the same and with the same results ...

Suck it up, losers, this form of intel assists in catching terrorists -- what are you afraid of, anyway?

Suck it up, losers, this form of intel assists in catching terrorists -- what are you afraid of, anyway?

Tadowe you prove our point for us. The intel would have been EXACTLY the same under the old guidelines, with warrant protections in place.

So it is on you to tell us why it is neccessary to have the new law, with warrantless spying, when the old law works perfectly well.

What am I afraid of? The violation of the Constitution and the government sucking up more and more power until we live in a facist police state.

Why do I have to explain the principles of limited government to a supposed conservative? Why are you fighting for Big Brother when no need has been shown?


Tadowe, I'm asking straight out. Show me a single need for blanket wiretaps without a warrant.

Show me a single need for blanket wiretaps without a warrant.

Because you're a slavish, scumsucking traitor.

OOOPpps, the propoganda didn't get launched very well this time.

I'm guessing he probably had Alberto Gonzales help him with his original testimony.

Hi Norm.

Norm asks, "Tadowe, I'm asking straight out. Show me a single need for blanket wiretaps without a warrant."

You misconstrue the issue. The policy has always been to monitor foreign calls through and into the USA. The only *change* is that the Congress has re-defined the policy to clarify the doubt raised by the public in regards to calls going THROUGH US communications lines (wire or fiber or broadcast).

If one of the calls is into the USA, then a warrant must be obtained to further monitor calls that that contact makes. Nothing has changed in that regard. Oversight is still present, the time period for review is the same and the FISA court has not been handicapped in decision making.

The whole issue is invented to discredit the president, this administration and a non-partisan intelligence agency which is vital to the security of the USA! All for partisan gain in subverting the intelligence gathering of our nation during wartime!!!

And, if you'll bother to notice -- your party is the majority and voted these clarifications into law ... if there is criminal culpability in this, as you attempt to infer ... then Democratics are the evil manipulators and spying creeps ...

No, you can't accept that reality ... I'm the nazi and I'm the one demanding that you, personally, get spied on for your innocent conversations with Iraqi terrorists ... not those who actually voted the law into reality...

This is called "fixing the story "to reflect, not the truth, but a fictional string of events which if not descovered would lead a citizen to make a false conclussion.
He gave details about a process which did not take place the way he recounted. If that is not lying under oath I dont know what is. He lied to Congress to make it appear that a program was responsible when it wasnt.
Guess Taddy doesnt much care bout Admin's Director of National Intelligence spinning yarns bout the war on Terra.
Tell us Taddy, is there anything these lying, steaming sacks of shit could do that might make you wonder why they fear telling the truth to congress?

AW come on, lets put the wall back up between the FBI and CIA so they can't talk to each other again. We haven't been hurt by thoes bumbs since 9/11/01 and there isn't any problem. Hell, Bush bombed the 5 sided building just to keep the pot sturred. What the hell is the matter with you reps?

"AW come on, lets put the wall back up between the FBI and CIA so they can't talk to each other again"

That was the wall Bush took down his first day in office, right?

No?

Well, the first week, right?

No?

The first month? The first quarter? The first six months? Anytime before 9/11?

Obviously, either Bush agreed with the policy, or was too ignorant to know about it. Either way, the blame belongs to the sentry on duty, not the guard who's shift ended 8 months earlier.

Tadowe,

Does it look like I support the bill the Dems passed? I do accept that reality, so you're wrong.
And does it look like I'm marching in lockstep? Am I saying "Pelosi passed it, so I have no complaints"??

No I'm not. I think what the Dems did is horrible. And if they don't fix their gross error when the bill comes back up for a vote, then they're no better than the Republicans.

But you're wrong again. This is not a non-issue. The Act allows for call monitoring without a warrant. But if the Feds know which call they want to monitor, they can get a warrant.

So what really is the purpose of the Act, when you admit it's not necessary to fight terrorism?

I guess the real question is, why do you suport the Dems spying on Americans? I don't.

Obviously, either Bush agreed with the policy, or was too ignorant to know about it. Either way, the blame belongs to the sentry on duty, not the guard who's shift ended 8 months earlier.

Posted by Danforth

Who put it there? You realy don't expect the new administration to clean up Bill's shit on the first day? It was such a big pile.

" You realy don't expect the new administration to clean up Bill's shit on the first day?"

No, give him a week. Or a month. But don't be an idiot: if the policy is still in place a half-year later, it's because the President agrees with it. Bush is either responsible, or irresponsible...take your pick.

Proof that the program works....

Posted by armyof1 at 2007-09-11 08:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's proof of nothing than they got lucky-there is no evidence that any eavesdropping helped in the investigation-only the CLAIM-there's a really BIG difference.

Posted by frankf55 at 2007-09-11 08:22 PM |


BITCH SLAPPED...

SanAn,

Don't bother them with the facts. They're too busy blaming Clinton for Bush's (in)actions. The truth will only confuse them.

According to Col. Randal Larsen in "Our Own Worst Enemy", the Bush DOJ signed off on a reaffirmation of the Gorelick memo shortly after taking office.

Posted by SanAntonioRogue

And this clears all the dems from any involvment? WTF over.

"And this clears all the dems from any involvment?"

Of course not. But the Dems and Jamie Gorelick don't carry ALL of the blame either, now do they?

I never said they did. I never accused Bush of being smart and not getting rid of all of Bill's appointies. He left many of them in place and it has bitten his ass more than once. For that I have to say he wasn't very smart.

"not getting rid of all of Bill's appointies."

Sorry, it wasn't a Clinton holdover that signed off on the reaffirmation of the policy.

"The whole issue is invented to discredit the president, this administration and a non-partisan intelligence agency which is vital to the security of the USA! All for partisan gain in subverting the intelligence gathering of our nation during wartime!!!

Posted by tadowe at 2007-09-13 10:57 AM"

UMMMM Bullshit...

The fact is, the President is attempting to circumvent the law. The laws are there for a reason and this president feels he is above the law which is not true.

This President believes a lot of things that are not true but this is a Constitutional issue. This President has admitted to spying on Americans in violation of the laws passed by Congress. He believes he has the right to do so but he does not.

The difference between Tadpole and Armyof none and me is that I believe we can work within our laws and Constitution to protect our National Security. I believe we are stronger when we do so. When we allow our President to bypass and weaken the Constitution it only makes us less Secure.

Remember that not ALL enemies of the Constitution are foreign ... some are domestic.

This story is another example of the Bush Admin trying to prove something that is not true with a another lie.

We are all tired of the Hollow Lies.

Suck it up, losers, this form of intel assists in catching terrorists -- what are you afraid of, anyway? ~ Tadowe

Tadowe you prove our point for us. The intel would have been EXACTLY the same under the old guidelines, with warrant protections in place.

So it is on you to tell us why it is neccessary to have the new law, with warrantless spying, when the old law works perfectly well.

Posted by Norm_ at 2007-09-13 10:06 AM

Do you think Tadowe knows he just made the point for the other side, then said suck it up losers? Lol, man that is funny.

Sorry, it wasn't a Clinton holdover that signed off on the reaffirmation of the policy.

Posted by SanAntonioRogue

What does this have to do with my statement?

Danforth: Bush was too busy ignoring 56 pre 9-11 warnings and taking a month long vacation to worry about a silly old wall. Add in, having to get "The Pet Goat" read and that's pretty well a full time job.
Now if that "wall" had been some Crawford brush, he'd have been on it like white on rice.
btw, What ever happened to all those charts the Fighty Rightys were claiming they had that showed Bill Clinton knew everything about 9-11 years in advance but ignored the datelines and airline ticket reservations and whatever....

McConnell is just using the old announce on page one, retract on page 17 method of launching propoganda.

"What does this have to do with my statement?"

Well, let's see. Your response to my statement that it was a Bush DOJ official who reaffirmed the Gorelick memo was...

"I never accused Bush of being smart and not getting rid of all of Bill's appointies. He left many of them in place and it has bitten his ass more than once."

Let's not play coy now, OK?

And in case you've been wondering John Ashcroft's deputy attorney general, Larry Thompson, formally reaffirmed the 1995 guidelines in an Aug. 6, 2001, memo addressed to the FBI and the Justice Department.

Suck it up, losers, this form of intel assists in catching terrorists -- what are you afraid of, anyway? ~ Tadowe

Tadowe you prove our point for us. The intel would have been EXACTLY the same under the old guidelines, with warrant protections in place.

So it is on you to tell us why it is neccessary to have the new law, with warrantless spying, when the old law works perfectly well.

Posted by Norm_ at 2007-09-13 10:06 AM

Do you think Tadowe knows he just made the point for the other side, then said suck it up losers? Lol, man that is funny.

Posted by bigjohn_1972


No, he doesn't. That's what makes his posts so much fun.

This is pretty funny.

Watching Armyof1 get bitch slapped with the truth and turn to complete rage was classic. I just can't understand why so many people are like this. Do you care about the Republican Party, do you care about winning the argument, or does your heart lie with your country?

So many lies and you still can't let yourself admit that you were wrong. Its ok, it happens sometimes.

ARMYOF1... "unless you have access to the data that they have collected through this and programs like it you have no idea what we have obtained and the gains we have made with the programs"

Uh... That is the point: No one has access to the information...

All we know is that this Administration broke the law in regards to unlawful wiretaps, and that they won't provide ANY evidence of how badly they circumvented our Civil Liberties...

And, regardless of the ends the means netted, if the information was garnered illegally, (by torture, illegal wiretaps, etc), the means are unjustifiable...

I think ArmyofNone might have slipped Sniper some nerve gas while he slept in the bunk next to him, and then Sniper gave ArmyofNone a 9MM frontal lobotomy as payback.

Montecore

I don't think there were two bunks in that room.