Slaves to George W. Bush and the Republican Party

The continued employment of the quotes from our founders in this situation is laughable. They were not talking about a president or a government. They were trying to insight the colonist to revolution. The quotes don't apply, unless you don't know your history.

 

Chuck is on the mark with this piece!

 

Baldwin sacrifices the truth for sounding good. What he ignores is that it is one of the duties of government to provide security against death, to protect us from our enemies. As I understand, the phone conversations are targeted toward those identified as enemies. Enemies who have already attacked our country, and killed Americans. To compare the threat to which Patrick Henry was responding, Great Britain's active subjugation, by armed troops, of American self-government, with active defense of our nation against declared enemies is dishonest.

I am neither in a cage nor on my knees, as the Brits were seeking to bring America. The goal is to protect Americans from future attack. There is nothing ignoble or dishonorable in that goal. Were innocent conversations between Americans monitored? Were those conversations used to punish any Americans for anything unrelated to terrorism? Were they used to punish anyone? There may have been, I must confess to being ignorant of much of the details but I suspect that much of the current outrage is based on the same ignorance.

 

Much ado about nothing.

 

If they were only using wiretaps to monitor calls related to the terrorist then I would say "Much ado about nothing", but with the numerous reports of wiretaps being used to monitor US citizens who are not tied to the terrorist, just because they are liberal anti-war groups the administration doesn't like, I believe we do have a reason to request an investigation to make sure no laws or constitutional rights have been violated. If these reports turn out to be false, and the administration is not using wiretaps against US citizens, then that is great. If the reports are true and they are illegally monitoring US citizens without a warrant, then it needs to be stopped. We can have these "war powers" given to the administration to be passed on to Hillary in 2008.

 

JG,

Great to hear from you!

I absolutely agree with you that if this is being used to target liberal anti war groups, that is wrong. It is, in fact, chilling. Much as I may hold such groups to be contemptible, they should not be intimidated for disagreeing with the war. Where we might disagree is that even if it is American citizens whose connections with terrorists are being exposed, then I'm all for the wiretaps. I would repeat a very real concern that this be investigated without jeopardizing a valuable, and perhaps subsquently determined to be legal, investigative tool. I believe that if this must be reviewed and investigated by a Congressional committee that it must be done in closed, executive, session.

 

I don't have a problem using wiretaps to monitor American citizens who are suspected to have connections with the terrorists, I believe the administration does need to do the proper paperwork to get the warrant for these citizens. The law even allows them to get the warrant after the wiretaping has begun so they don't miss an opportunity to find and stop a terrorist. Any US citizen who is found to be connected to the terrorist needs to have their US citizenship revoked, and they need to be tried for treason! If they would start limiting immigration and getting rid of the weak immigration policies they have, they wouldn't be inviting as many terrorist into the country to begin with.

We need to be carefull when giving the government broad "war powers". They won't always consider the Islamic groups to be the terrorist, one day they will target the Christians, we don't want to give them the ammo to attack us.

If they ever accomplish doing away with the Constitution completely and giving the POTUS unlimited power, they will make that office look pretty attractive to the future Antichrist.

 

JG,

The law even allows them to get the warrant after the wiretaping has begun so they don't miss an opportunity to find and stop a terrorist.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of that.

Any US citizen who is found to be connected to the terrorist needs to have their US citizenship revoked, and they need to be tried for treason!

Amen, and then shot.

We need to be careful when giving the government broad "war powers". They won't always consider the Islamic groups to be the terrorist, one day they will target the Christians, we don't want to give them the ammo to attack us.

It's certainly an understandable concern. My only worry is that if there is wiretapping that should be done but a warrant, in fact, can't be obtained in time to get the surveillance done.

 

The law allows the wiretapping to be done at least 72 hours before obtaining the warrant, in some cases it may even allow more time. The problem I have is that the Bush administration has said that they don't believe they are required to get a warrant at all, even if the wiretapping is used on a US citizen, all in the name of security and the "war on terror".

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
--James Madison

 

JG,

Do you know what the basis of the Bush Administration contention is?

 

Finally, JGrubbs, a voice of reason & knowledge reappears, and waketh me from slumber.

What PROOF do we have that it was against anti-war groups - none. All so far is here say. Correct?

 

LE,

Exactly! But it sure does make great political smear for the hate Bush crowd.

Joseph Botwinick

 

There have been numerous reports from different sources, including some FBI documents that show that they have used wiretaps on groups like PETA, anti-war groups, even a report of monitoring of some Quakers. These reports need to be investigated and if proven to be false, then so be it, but if proven to be true, then the administration needs to be found guily of violating the US Constitution.

 

Let's see them.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Bush has already admitted spying on anti-war groups including about a dozen Quakers in Florida all of whom were in their 60's or above.

Why is it that Americans agaigst ANY war are always called "liberals." Do you actually believe that all wars are just? I would call them patriots or perhaps Christians.

 

Bush admitted to spying on groups and people who had nothing to do with terrorists groups? Let's see that evidence, please.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I agree with Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty, or give me death!" I haven't lost a single liberty as the result of George Bush being president. Anyone, other than a criminal or terrorist, who says he has will have to show proof or stand accused as a liar.

 

Is the Pentagon spying on Americans?


Secret database obtained by NBC News tracks ‘suspicious’ domestic groups
By Lisa Myers, Douglas Pasternak, Rich Gardella and the NBC Investigative Unit
Updated: 6:18 p.m. ET Dec. 14, 2005
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/

WASHINGTON - A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come to the attention of the U.S. military.
A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists the Lake Worth meeting as a “threat” and one of more than 1,500 “suspicious incidents” across the country over a recent 10-month period.
“This peaceful, educationally oriented group being a threat is incredible,” says Evy Grachow, a member of the Florida group called The Truth Project.
“This is incredible,” adds group member Rich Hersh. “It's an example of paranoia by our government,” he says. “We're not doing anything illegal.”
The Defense Department document is the first inside look at how the U.S. military has stepped up intelligence collection inside this country since 9/11, which now includes the monitoring of peaceful anti-war and counter-military recruitment groups.
“I think Americans should be concerned that the military, in fact, has reached too far,” says NBC News military analyst Bill Arkin.

(Cont.)