Monday, May 15, 2006

Good Guy, Or Bad Guy

Game says:

IN A BOLD AND CONTROVERSIAL DECISION, the president authorized a program for the surveillance of communications within the United States, seeking to prevent acts of domestic sabotage and espionage. In so doing, he ignored a statute that possibly forbade such activity, even though high-profile federal judges had affirmed the statute's validity. The president sought statutory amendments allowing this surveillance but, when no such legislation was forthcoming, he continued the program nonetheless. And when Congress demanded that he disclose details of the surveillance program, the attorney general said, in no uncertain terms, that it would get nothing of the sort.

This bit of Presidential cowboyness was brought to you by none other than Democratic Icon FDR.Shall we bash him?Did his party bash him?The Supreme Court had ruled against his tactic but what did FDR say? "I am convinced that the Supreme Court never intended any dictum in the particular case which it decided to apply to grave matters involving the defense of the nation." And he did it anyway.Here we have a President at war doing his very best to defend his Country.An Icon of the Democratic party doing EXACLTY the same thing the Democratic party is so exercised about President Bush for.But this latest program is far less the what FDR did, in the first program all we know is they are listening to international conversations involving known terrorists.In the latest records of calls, with no names attached looking for patterns.I wonder if the mad at Bush types will also trash the history provided here by a liberal Icon.Man, the Democratic party really doesn't stand for anything anymore. Say and do whatever it takes to get elected...

Actually Game only said the last part.

Ron said,

Game, your source please? A rose by any other name is still a rose and so is shit disguised as pertectin us. I wouldn't care if it was a repub, dem or liberal or conservative or fdr or gwb. Unfortunately I wasn't around to fight that fight. Don't blame me or most of the people living today. You are right. Dems suck, problem is Repubs suck worse.

Well, since I gotta do all the work around here.:-) I looked it up all point toward a story in the Spectator.
For conservatives who aren't aware, Richard Mellon Scaife owns the Spectator. If you don't know who he is look it up. He is the rights version of George Soros. Using his big dollars to push his version of reality. Quoting the Spectator to a liberal is like quoting to a conservative. Just so you know how much respect you are engendering for your argument.

Now, I have a feeling that Game didn't read the entire argument to get any kind of context. First of all we were dealing with the communications act of 1934. Not the same thing as the law or laws as they are today. Secondly we have proof of people in high places abusing this power a number of times within recent history so we have reason to be suspicious. Especially after all the lies and half truths we have been told.
Here's another part of the article:

You are, therefore, authorized and directed in such cases as you may approve, after investigation of the need in each case, to authorize the necessary investigating agents that they are at liberty to secure information by listening devices direct to the conversation or other communications of persons suspected of subversive activities against the Government of the United States, including suspected spies. You are requested furthermore to limit these investigations so conducted to a minimum and to limit them insofar as possible to aliens.

This procedure is far more stringent and far less intrusive(although still seems wrong) than anything like data mining and such that we are talking about today. Again, many laws and Constitutional decisions have been passed since 1939 concerning communications and privacy. Much has also changed with the technology.

Here is the real heart of the argument. Game honestly belives the President is a good guy and wants whats best for the country and would not use information obtained legally or illegally for anything but fightin terra.
Ron thinks the Presnit is highly suspect, has a Rovain use for the information, and wouldn't hesitate to use it for that or much worse.

Spectator...If you dare!


Blogger The Game said...

What else is he going to use it for?
What did Clinton use Echalon (sp?) for?

11:20 AM, May 16, 2006  
Blogger The Game said...

I would like an explanation for why it needs to be this secret, and why it needs to side-step all the rules...
there might be one, but so far there has been nothing given

11:22 AM, May 16, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Game, my question and my problem exactly!

He could keep a data base of political enemies and all the information he needs to destroy them. There could be a new law, like dissing the pres is treason. He has a data base of all the bad guys already and has built new prisons that could hold them. They could use terrorist research for domestic matters like pot smokers or illegal oxycontin users.
Mostly Game I am worried he will use it in some kind of totalitarin way.
I know you think that is nutty and I'm not saying he will. Just that he easily could, especially when he welds or percieves power above and beyond other Chief Executives, and I really don't trust him at all. Secrets are fine and necessary but for us to all retain our rights and liberties, and privacy we must insist it is done in accordance within Constitutional rule of law.
That is the essence of what America should be about for you and for me.

3:21 PM, May 16, 2006  
Blogger The Game said...

it would be complete bullshit if he did that, and I would be very pissed..
I just believe that he is doing what he thinks it necessary to win the war on terror...

You need to be honest: you MUST be pissed about Clintons Echelon (I know that is not how you spell it) program, and all the FBI files of Republicans in the whitehouse

I do believe that you are pissed at this ISSUE, and not being political...I give you props for that...but then make sure you confirm that you spoke out against Clinton when he was gathering information on political enemies

10:44 AM, May 17, 2006  
Blogger The Game said...

You can think of it like want a pre-emptive attack on the govt's data gathering before they use it for evil..

Just like Bush had a pre-emptive war against Saddam and terrorists before they used their power and crazy religious beliefs for MORE evil

10:47 AM, May 17, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greets to the webmaster of this wonderful site. Keep working. Thank you.

7:15 PM, May 23, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Game I would have spoken out against Clinton and any program like this if I would have heard about it. Unfortunately just like he tried to warn us about osama I never heard much about it. Everybody was too busy discussing his SEX LIFE fer christsakes! That is when America started going boldly off track. The repubs and rush lamebrain and the "liberal" media et all did not want to deal with the real issues facing all Americans. They just wanted to crash clinton. I did hear about the fbi tapes deal and you are right they shouldn't have had that stuff.
Again. Is Bushs way of doing things spying, even if legal, the best way to spend our money and people for fighting terrorism. None of us know for sure cuz we don't know what he is doing. I tend to think even if it happened to come out legal it would not be as effective as other ways of doing this. The terrorist problem is down the list a ways when you talk about threats facing America. Energy independance would strengthen our country and eliminate the need to meddle in their affairs...for one.

12:20 PM, May 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I say briefly: Best! Useful information. Good job guys.

7:35 AM, July 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting website with a lot of resources and detailed explanations.

1:11 PM, July 22, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home