Bush Secretly Lifted Some Limits on Spying in U.S.

You did not read what Rice said. She said that one of the complaints about Nine Eleven was that there were terrorists in San Diego and we were not listening to their conversations. With all of the aliens that we have in this country, there has to be some sleeper cells. Also, some on both the left and the right are for the Islamofascists.

Here are the exact words of Rice from page 9 of this thread:

And I think we don't ever want to be caught again in a situation in which we were before 9/11, where we know, for instance, the terrorists in San Diego were communicating inside the United States and we didn't know about it.

 

KenH, can you imagine no scenario where we may need to use technology to screen communications. Most likely, there is a private company that has a list of every web site you visit and every purchase you make. They (government) are just screening for Key words that no private citizen is going to use routinely.

 

Thanks to the Patriot Act, there may technically be no more protection against secret searches of your communications or property.

The sad thing is, we are now arguing whether or not we can fight terrorism and retain our freedoms.

Bush says we can't. I say if we surrender our freedoms, the terrorists have won.

 

You are correct, Galatian. Apparently there are a some white flag Bush supporters in this country.

 

Then obey the law, go to court, and get a warrant.

 

The President of the USA has powers to act without going to court in certain cases. He is acting under those powers and The New York Times is guilty of treason.

It is clear from the statement of Rice today that the President is on legal ground.

The terrorists will certainly win if you tie the hands of the government and make them run to the judge everytime some high-level operative calls OBL via some website. If you have hostile operatives working in your country, the commander in chief from the statement by the Secreatary of State has some authority to deal with the problem. Congress should ease the requirements for seeing a judge when the country is at war and the person being investigated is linked to the enemy war effort even if the enemy is not a foreign nation per se but nevertheless is an international organizational threat such as Islamofascism.

You lot act like FDR and the Democrats never did any black bag jobs. And you compound it by calling us white flag types.

As the President of the USA said Saturday, our security was breached by the New York newspaper. I think that we should give the editor a lethal injection and after that we should put him on trial for treason.

 

1) Is this the same Condi Rice you are usually bashing on in this forum?

2) The truth hurts, doesn't it?

 

Ken, I do hope that this means the end of your support for Condi for President since she clearly supports the President on this issue and is 100% against your viewpoint. That would be some good out of this mess if you no longer supported her for President.

 

Prove it.

 

Condi isn't running for president.

Maybe Senator Hagel will. He's keeps looking better as a potential president to me.

 

Can a newspaper be convicted of treason? I would think that would be confined to a case made against whomever within the government leaks classified information.

 

The newspaper is guilty of treason for revealing classified information that was leaded to it.

Rice said:

Well, in fact, the administration is using FISA and using it very actively to try to deal with the threats, but the president also has additional authorities, and he's drawing on those to deal with this different kind of war. I'm not a lawyer,....

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179054,00.html

Glad that you have backed off Condi, Ken. I never did support her for President. However, I give her credit for loyalty, which is more important than cleverness.

Maybe, Ken, you will go back to the Libertarians or the Constitution Party on this issue. What is amusing about you is that Condi did not issue a political statement as you yourself did, but a legal statement, but you yourself did not heed it, although Reid did. But you have been on the bandwagon for Condi for weeks telling us how she was not pro-choice and was the greatest Secretary of State, yada, yada, yada, and then when an issue comes, we find out that you are a summer soldier.

 

Condi Rice is one of the greatest Secretaries of State in U.S. history. Condi Rice is not pro-abortion. And if she runs for president in 2008 I will support her even though I will not agree with her on everything any more than I agree with anyone else on everything.

But at this point her running in 2008 is only a dream of mine and I must be prepared to support someone else in 2008, and hopefully the Democrats and/or the Republicans will nominate someone I can support.

 

Well, this page rolled from page 10 to 11 before a closing warning was issued. So, this will act as the closing warning. This thread will be closed no sooner than 4:00 a.m. ET by one of the Moderators.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator

 

Does this really not bother some of you?

Amazing........

Regards to all,

BiR

 

Don't worry Ken, they'll pick out just the right globalist for ya. They got handle on it, they got it under control.

 

BIR, does what really bother us--that the thread is being closed--no. That the New York newspaper is guilty of treason--yes.

Poncho, Condi is no globalist. If you think about it, the globalist would want the USA to be defeated in the war on terrorism because of Christian influence in the USA. Globalists are saying that the USA exploited Islamism and that is the reason for the new nazism. Globalists would be for the US defeat and withdrawal from this war. US nationalism stands in the way of globalists.

 

Closed -- Page 11