Bush's spy program 'lawful' and 'vital'

[Steve Savicki]

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/06/news/intel.php?rss

Umm, what exactly is the program here?

[Hardrock69]

Ex-President Carter: Eavesdropping Illegal
Feb 06 7:40 PM US/Eastern

By KATHLEEN HENNESSEY
Associated Press Writer

HENDERSON, Nev.

Former President Jimmy Carter criticized the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping program Monday and said he believes the president has broken the law.

"Under the Bush administration, there's been a disgraceful and illegal decision _ we're not going to the let the judges or the Congress or anyone else know that we're spying on the American people," Carter told reporters. "And no one knows how many innocent Americans have had their privacy violated under this secret act."

Carter made the remarks at a union hall near Las Vegas, where his oldest son, Jack Carter, announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate.

The former president also rebuked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for telling Congress that the spying program is authorized under Article 2 of the Constitution and does not violate the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act passed during Carter's administration. Gonzales made the assertions in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which began investigating the eavesdropping program Monday.

"It's a ridiculous argument, not only bad, it's ridiculous. Obviously, the attorney general who said it's all right to torture prisoners and so forth is going to support the person who put him in office. But he's a very partisan attorney general and there's no doubt that he would say that," Carter said. "I hope that eventually the case will go to the Supreme Court. I have no doubt that when it's over, the Supreme Court will rule that Bush has violated the law."

The former president said he would testify before the Judiciary Committee if asked.

"If my voice is important to point of the intent of the law that was passed when I was president, I know all about that because it was one of the most important decisions I had to make."


http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/06/D8FJUP882.html

[Warham]

Ex-President Carter?

ROTFLMAO!!!

:)

[FORD]

Yeah, laugh at a Christian President who actually obeyed the laws of this nation, while promoting a criminal who thinks laws are meaningless because they're 25 years old.

[Warham]

Originally posted by FORD
Yeah, laugh at a Christian President who actually obeyed the laws of this nation, while promoting a criminal who thinks laws are meaningless because they're 25 years old.

Him being Christian has nothing to do with his inept failures while holding the highest office in the world. I'm not cutting him any slack for his religious beliefs.

He obviously would praise his signing the FISA court act. It's one of the few things he actually did right while in office.

[ULTRAMAN VH]

Mr. Ford without starting a major fight with expletives, how would you suggest we defend ourselves against terrorists. I am not a big fan of Bill Maher but he banged it last night when he told Bill O'Reilly that the terrorists are planning a new attack and are very patient and methodical in doing it. O'Reilly was defending The President on the fact that we have not been attacked in 4 years. Al Qaeda will patiently wait until America falls asleep and hammer us again. I agree with Maher on this one. Our borders are wide open thanks to the fact that Bush is in Vincente Foxes shorts. You can bet your bottom dollar that terrorists are easily crossing over on to American soil.

[FORD]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Mr. Ford without starting a major fight with expletives, how would you suggest we defend ourselves against terrorists.

The same way all the legally elected Presidents did it. Within the existing laws. No changes neccessary, and no need to break those laws. These laws were good enough to catch Tim McVeigh. They were good enough to catch Ahmed Rassam and Zacarias Moussaui before they could act. They were good enough to convict those who bombed the WTC in 1993. There's no reason to change them, and no excuse to shred the Constitution.

I am not a big fan of Bill Maher but he banged it last night when he told Bill O'Reilly that the terrorists are planning a new attack and are very patient and methodical in doing it. O'Reilly was defending The President on the fact that we have not been attacked in 4 years. Al Qaeda will patiently wait until America falls asleep and hammer us again. I agree with Maher on this one. Our borders are wide open thanks to the fact that Bush is in Vincente Foxes shorts. You can bet your bottom dollar that terrorists are easily crossing over on to American soil.

It doesn't take much to beat O'Reilly in an argument when he doesn't control the microphone. But of course Maher is right. The fact is that Chimpy hasn't done one fucking thing to secure THIS country. He's too busy with the PNAC agenda, invading countries that had NOTHING to do with the attack on 9-11-01.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Warham
Him being Christian has nothing to do with his inept failures while holding the highest office in the world. I'm not cutting him any slack for his religious beliefs.

He obviously would praise his signing the FISA court act. It's one of the few things he actually did right while in office.

Actually, i kind of have to take a side step here, lol.
Carter was too nice of a guy to be an effective President.
But in my opinion he is closer to the definition of a Christian than George W. Bush is.

The lesson learned, and it is only by comparison now, is that no Governement and Religion can live together in harmony, they are designed to be two seperate entities and are direct contradictions of each other..

Maybe in a perfect world where evil doesn't exist?
well, that's called Heaven and we aren't there yet.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Mr. Ford without starting a major fight with expletives, how would you suggest we defend ourselves against terrorists. I am not a big fan of Bill Maher but he banged it last night when he told Bill O'Reilly that the terrorists are planning a new attack and are very patient and methodical in doing it. O'Reilly was defending The President on the fact that we have not been attacked in 4 years. Al Qaeda will patiently wait until America falls asleep and hammer us again. I agree with Maher on this one. Our borders are wide open thanks to the fact that Bush is in Vincente Foxes shorts. You can bet your bottom dollar that terrorists are easily crossing over on to American soil.

They could start by getting warrants through the FISA court for conducting electronic surveillance...

And we haven't been attacked in four years because the American Muslim population rejects Islamic militancy on the whole, as opposed to the European Muslim communities ironically...

Fucking Bin LADEN figured out (ala the US media) that his cell phone was being tracked in the late 90's....

Terrorists know enough to circumvent surveillance for the most part. Authorities need to investigate and follow up on leads.

[ULTRAMAN VH]

From what I understand, getting warrants through FISA court is to time consuming. And yes, the laws were good enough to catch the individuals you mentioned, but not good enough to foil there plans of destruction. I guess there is a fine line between privacy and the protection of human life.

[FORD]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
From what I understand, getting warrants through FISA court is to time consuming. And yes, the laws were good enough to catch the individuals you mentioned, but not good enough to foil there plans of destruction. I guess there is a fine line between privacy and the protection of human life.

And as Ben Franklin said, those who are willing to give up liberty for safety, deserve neither. You might feel comfortable in that camp, but I don't. I've already quoted specific examples of how the existing laws work. I'm satisfied that they will continue to do so.

The BCE had enough information to prevent the attacks of 9-11-01 under existing laws. They simply refused to act on it.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
From what I understand, getting warrants through FISA court is to time consuming.

So? It's also the law. So ignore it because it takes a few hours? Actually, a warrant can be executed in a matter of hours. And if the powers that be believe an attack is about to take place, they can spy now, get a warrant later, as authorities did under the Clinton administration when they searched the house of traitor ALDRICH AMES.


And yes, the laws were good enough to catch the individuals you mentioned, but not good enough to foil there plans of destruction.

Really? Why is that. Here's a quiz, how many "leads" were generated out of the spying on thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of Americans?


I guess there is a fine line between privacy and the protection of human life.

Yeah, and it's a fine line between total bullshit and truth... C'mon, we're talking about an Administration that called dozens of faulty terra-alerts during the elections to terra-ize voters into voting for the big, tough-talking BUSH administration...

[ULTRAMAN VH]

Oh and Ford, c'mon give me a break. I know this isn't the correct forum, but Ref's 21 Seahawks 10. PPlleeeaase. Being a Ravens fan I despise the Steelers, but your receivers couldn't catch a cold. Yeah you got some bad calls, but 2 missed field goals and several dropped passes did not help matters. I do admit you have one of the best quarterbacks in the league though. The Hawks will definitly be back in the hunt next year. Maybe they will meet the Ravens in Super Bowl 41.

[Nickdfresh]

I think you're confused. UNCHAINME has the same avatar, and the crying about the ref's statement...

[ULTRAMAN VH]

Nick, we can go round and round on this one and bringing Clinton into this debate is not helping your argument on this debate. He is no better than Bush. He had several opportunities to stop Bin Ladin and refused. Anyway when the smoke clears we still have about 900 elites running this country into the ground while billions of Americans just stand by and watch. It staggers the imagination. We need a 3rd party of Independants to shake things up, because the two party system is just not working. But the Dems and the Reps have it set up so well that it will never happen. Well gents thanks for the debate, I am off to get some shut eye. ULTRAMAN OUT.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Nick, we can go round and round on this one

Really? You, like your pResident, have yet to give one good reason warrantless electronic surrveillance is a good idea.


BTW, you haven't answered my question yet...


and bringing Clinton into this debate is not helping your argument on this debate.

Actually, partisan syncophant defenders brought him in a while ago to show how "he did the same thing" which isn't true at all...



He is no better than Bush. He had several opportunities to stop Bin Ladin and refused.

He tried to kill Bin Laden no less than three times, and routinely had meetings on him, considering him a serious threat. Of course, when you're being impeached over a blowjob, it's tough to do much without being accused of "wagging the dog." That's what happened when CLINTON fired cruise missiles at the camps in Afghanistan. Partisan Repukes like to forget that....

Of course BUSH never attended a single meeting regarding terrorism. And his admin. ignored 52-warnings regarding hijackings between April 2001 and September 2001, including a very specific memo in August of that year. But trust him, he's our salvation against the jihadists.:rolleyes:


Anyway when the smoke clears we still have about 900 elites running this country into the ground while billions of Americans just stand by and watch. It staggers the imagination. We need a 3rd party of Independants to shake things up, because the two party system is just not working. But the Dems and the Reps have it set up so well that it will never happen. Well gents thanks for the debate, I am off to get some shut eye. ULTRAMAN OUT.

Domestic spying doesn't even require a third party, in fact several prominent Republicans (roughly half) have spoken out against it. SEN. ARLEN SPECTOR is quoted as saying that Att. Gen. Alberto GONZALES is "smoking Old Dutch Cleanser©" when he says that the warrantless searches were justified under the same congressional vote that okayed the use of force against IRAQ...

How's that for smoke? Vapors from an Old Dutch bong pour from the van....
http://www.stutt.com/tins/images/2403.jpg

[Nickdfresh]

"BTW, you haven't answered my question yet..."

A total of 10-leads were generated as the result of the electronic surveillance....

Ten persons that the FISA Court could have approved warrants for in a matter of hours...

[FORD]

Who's the new troll, anyway?

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Nick, we can go round and round on this one and bringing Clinton into this debate is not helping your argument on this debate. He is no better than Bush. He had several opportunities to stop Bin Ladin and refused. Anyway when the smoke clears we still have about 900 elites running this country into the ground while billions of Americans just stand by and watch. It staggers the imagination. We need a 3rd party of Independants to shake things up, because the two party system is just not working. But the Dems and the Reps have it set up so well that it will never happen. Well gents thanks for the debate, I am off to get some shut eye. ULTRAMAN OUT.

Hold that thought, the Green Party in Ohio is going to have some folks on the ballot this year and I'm going to be walking a petition around to get more of them elected personally.

It is way past time to send a message to both parties, "We've jihad enough". yes, the pun was intended, lol.
Hey, record people have registered with the Green Party in the last month alone, and not just Republicans jumping ship either.

I think we of differing ideologies have finally figured out that it isn't the voters that are the problem, it's the politicians on both sides and it's time to start over with the basics, as the Constitution intended.

I'm hoping the next 1,000 days leads this entire country to the middle, then it won't be so hard to look at your own people and see the flaws.

It ain't easy being green, but it sure sucks to be red or blue anymore.

It's our country, we out number them, and we're taking it back, period.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh

Yeah, and it's a fine line between total bullshit and truth... C'mon, we're talking about an Administration that called dozens of faulty terra-alerts during the elections to terra-ize voters into voting for the big, tough-talking BUSH administration...

And there's not a shred of proof out there that supports your assertion that voters were 'terrorized' into voting for Bush.

I don't think most voters even knew what the alert color was or is most of the time. Ask an average person on the street what the Terror Alert color is this week and see what kind of answer you get back.

Besides, John Kerry is a war hero. Why wouldn't the public buy his tough talk?

[Cathedral]

The alert should be at RED all of the time, since the borders are swinging wide open like a wild western saloon, lol.

That color coded crap is a huge waste of resources, why do we need a code in the first place?
Last i checked we still had the Emergency Broadcasting System.

As a matter of fact i see it being tested more than i've ever seen the Terror Code thingy....what gives?

It could very well have influenced people's thoughts, but i bet nobody would ever admit to it influencing them...they don't want to appear weak.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Warham
And there's not a shred of proof out there that supports your assertion that voters were 'terrorized' into voting for Bush.

I don't think most voters even knew what the alert color was or is most of the time. Ask an average person on the street what the Terror Alert color is this week and see what kind of answer you get back.

Besides, John Kerry is a war hero. Why wouldn't the public buy his tough talk?


LMMFAO, because he's John (flip-flop-flip-flop-flip-flop) Kerry...

But mostly, I believe it was because people didn't want Lily Munster living in the White House with him.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Cathedral
LMMFAO, because he's John (flip-flop-flip-flop-flip-flop) Kerry...

But mostly, I believe it was because people didn't want Lily Munster living in the White House with him.


http://hammeroftruth.com/images/articles/481-laura_bush_joker_wonkette.jpg
So you think they like "the Joker" better?

[Warham]

Theresa Heinz looks like dogmeat compared to Laura Bush.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
And there's not a shred of proof out there that supports your assertion that voters were 'terrorized' into voting for Bush...


Posted 5/10/2005 11:21 PM

Ridge reveals clashes on alerts
By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-10-ridge-alerts_x.htm)
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level, Ridge now says.

Ridge, who resigned Feb. 1, said Tuesday that he often disagreed with administration officials who wanted to elevate the threat level to orange, or "high" risk of terrorist attack, but was overruled.

His comments at a Washington forum describe spirited debates over terrorist intelligence and provide rare insight into the inner workings of the nation's homeland security apparatus.

Ridge said he wanted to "debunk the myth" that his agency was responsible for repeatedly raising the alert under a color-coded system he unveiled in 2002.

"More often than not we were the least inclined to raise it," Ridge told reporters. "Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don't necessarily put the country on (alert). ... There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?' "

Revising or scrapping the color-coded alert system is under review by new Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff. Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said "improvements and adjustments" may be announced within the next few months.

The threat level was last raised on a nationwide scale in December 2003, to orange from yellow — or "elevated" risk — where the alert level is now. In most cases, Ridge said Homeland Security officials didn't want to raise the level because they knew local governments and businesses would have to spend money putting temporary security upgrades in place.

"You have to use that tool of communication very sparingly," Ridge said at the forum, which was attended by seven other former department leaders.

The level is raised if a majority on the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council favors it and President Bush concurs. Among those on the council with Ridge were Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI chief Robert Mueller, CIA director George Tenet, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Ridge and Ashcroft publicly clashed over how to communicate threat information to the public. But Ridge has never before discussed internal dissention over the threat level.

The color-coded system was controversial from the start. Polls showed the public found it confusing.

Contributing: Associated Press

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y240/Nickdfresh/naked2.jpg

[Warham]

So if the public found it confusing, then how did that help Bush get more votes?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
So if the public found it confusing, then how did that help Bush get more votes?

It got more votes because of the implicit threat laid out.... (and has disappeared since after the election).

It was used as a color coded game piece to bolster the phantom threat...

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
It got more votes because of the implicit threat laid out.... (and has disappeared since after the election).

It was used as a color coded game piece to bolster the phantom threat...

I still don't see any proof in that article you posted.

I see you went from A to C without a B.

A=Color Coded System Confusing to Public
C=Bush wins Election

Where's the B? The B would presumably be the public being scared into voting for Bush, but where's the proof. Where's the people saying they were scared shitless and voted for Bush again?

And if they were so scared, why didn't they go with a military hero like John Kerry?

The reasons Democrats give for losing national elections change about as much as I change my kid's diapers. One week, it's Diebold, the next week it's Terrorist Alerts Scared Voters, the week after that it's Voter Disenfranchisement. You never hear the real reason: the Democratic candidate sucked and the party has no direction.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by FORD
http://hammeroftruth.com/images/articles/481-laura_bush_joker_wonkette.jpg
So you think they like "the Joker" better?

You're reaching, bro...Laura Bush is an elegant woman, Nicholson however, is not.

But to answer your question, Yes, i know I prefer Laura to Mrs. Ketchup, and i believe there were polls that backed me up on that across the country.
Theresa's mouth is a loose canon and i know she embarrassed John while he was campaigning, in fact i am quite sure she helped keep Kerry from winning.
If he'd have been married to a Hillary Clinton type who knew how to kiss ass and when to shut the hell up, you seriously might have won in '04.
Deny it until your blue in the face, Heinz was a factor that cost Kerry votes.

Word Up!

[Warham]

No Cat, the real reason Kerry lost was because the Terraist Alert was Bright Red on Election Day.

:rolleyes:

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Warham
I still don't see any proof in that article you posted.

I see you went from A to C without a B.

A=Color Coded System Confusing to Public
C=Bush wins Election

Where's the B? The B would presumably be the public being scared into voting for Bush, but where's the proof. Where's the people saying they were scared shitless and voted for Bush again?

And if they were so scared, why didn't they go with a military hero like John Kerry?

The reasons Democrats give for losing national elections change about as much as I change my kid's diapers. One week, it's Diebold, the next week it's Terrorist Alerts Scared Voters, the week after that it's Voter Disenfranchisement. You never hear the real reason: the Democratic candidate sucked and the party has no direction.

Preach it to the people, brother Warham!!!!

Someone needs to make a video called, "Why Democrats Lose" before they can even see their own party objectively.

If my folks drift off course, you'll hear me bitching from the back row.
But if their guy drifts off course they re-draw the damn map and pretend they were already going that way.

It reminds me of the scarecrow from Wizard of Oz, they point in both directions.
Trouble is, equal weight pulling against itself goes nowhere.

[FORD]

Don't look at me...... Judas wasn't my choice for a candidate.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Warham
No Cat, the real reason Kerry lost was because the Terraist Alert was Bright Red on Election Day.

:rolleyes:

Was it?
I'm one of those who didn't notice, or care, because i stand with Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln on matters of security.

Y'all just shut the borders and i'll watch my own back yard, thanks...

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by FORD
Don't look at me...... Judas wasn't my choice for a candidate.

I know, i don't fault you at all for that abortion, or lack of.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Was it?
I'm one of those who didn't notice, or care, because i stand with Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln on matters of security.

Y'all just shut the borders and i'll watch my own back yard, thanks...

Could you see my sarcasm in that reply? lol

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Warham
Could you see my sarcasm in that reply? lol

With unmistakable clarity, Sir. ;)

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Warham
Him being Christian has nothing to do with his inept failures while holding the highest office in the world. I'm not cutting him any slack for his religious beliefs.

He obviously would praise his signing the FISA court act. It's one of the few things he actually did right while in office.

LMFAO!!! A sheep calling out Carter for inept failures while in office?! Feel free to name ANYTHING Carter did that compares to the war. Or Dubya's handling of Katrina. Or the new Medicare "plan". Or illegal wire-tapping. Etc. Etc. Etc....

[Hardrock69]

Carter was not an inept President.

He just was not able to accomplish a lot due to the Congress in session while he was in office.

And furthermore, it does not matter if voters were "terrorized" or not....Chimpy had enough votes to win, no matter who actually won....
:rolleyes:

[Warham]

Here's Jimmy Carter at work with his Chief of Staff, his daughter, Amy:

http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/USPics2/78501.jpg

[FORD]

And here's Ronald Reagan, bailing George Bush Jr. out of jail for his 1972 cocaine arrest....
http://www.moviesunlimited.com/bonzo.jpg

[ULTRAMAN VH]

Again Nick, the applications for FISA take hours maybe even a day or two to fill out. Now say your the President and you have received vital information on a possible terror attack the magnitude of 9-11. Are you going to make a command decision or are you going to take a seat and fill out the application??? I admit I am a bit unnerved about my civil liberties being violated and fear that this country is headed down a path toward socialism. But this is a tough call.
If you are such an ardent supporter of the LAW, I invite you to spend the day at your local courthouse and see what your taxes are paying for. The justice system is a joke. The CFC [aka] Crybabies For Criminals are out in full force.

[FORD]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
The CFC [aka] Crybabies For Criminals are out in full force.

As is evidenced everytime a Republican defends Chimp, Cheney, Rove, DeLay, Jack 'off,
Boner, Cat Murderer or the rest of the indicted or soon to be indicted criminal bastards

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Again Nick, the applications for FISA take hours maybe even a day or two to fill out.

I know, I just told you it was hours. So what? I also mentioned that they can go ahead and spy, then get a warrant after the fact. That's completely legal.


Now say your the President and you have received vital information on a possible terror attack the magnitude of 9-11. Are you going to make a command decision or are you going to take a seat and fill out the application???

I'm "going to make the command decision" to gather intelligence, then I'm going to get a retroactive warrant from the FISA Court, so it's legal....



I admit I am a bit unnerved about my civil liberties being violated and fear that this country is headed down a path toward socialism. But this is a tough call.
If you are such an ardent supporter of the LAW, I invite you to spend the day at your local courthouse and see what your taxes are paying for. The justice system is a joke. The CFC [aka] Crybabies For Criminals are out in full force.

Well, that has nothing to do with this particular issue. And a lot of people feel that the Bush Administration is a fraudulent waste of money as well...

Just check his spending record...

[ULTRAMAN VH]

Ford, I am not defending anybody. I am just debating some issues and learning from the likes of Nick, Warham, Cat and others. And if I am mistaken you called me the new Troll??? Thanks alot. Sorry I invaded your little bubble of far left internet safety.

[ULTRAMAN VH]

Yes, I think several conservatives are stunned and outraged by the spending spree of the current administration. I am one of them. Basically after 9-11 America had the sympathy of the world. Bush really had an opportunity to set things right and go after the terrorists. I truly believe he took the wrong advice in listening to the Neo Cons and went after Iraq, hence the huge spending spree began. The Neo Cons are hell bent on global domination.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Warham
Here's Jimmy Carter at work with his Chief of Staff, his daughter, Amy:

http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/USPics2/78501.jpg

Once again Warham fails to back up his statements....:rolleyes:

[Warham]

Once again, blueturk shows he has no sense of humor.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Warham
Once again, blueturk shows he has no sense of humor.

Yes I do. I laughed like hell when you called Carter inept. I'm not a big Jimmy Carter fan, but compared to Dubya, Carter is Abraham Lincoln....

[Warham]

Originally posted by blueturk
Yes I do. I laughed like hell when you called Carter inept. I'm not a big Jimmy Carter fan, but compared to Dubya, Carter is Abraham Lincoln....

Dishonest now, I see.

[blueturk]

Let's get back on topic and make a more valid comparison between Dubya and other presidents...


http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/13817593.htm

Is president above the law?

Yes, said Nixon, when the president decides national security requires it

An excerpt from David Frost's interview with former President Richard Nixon, which aired on television in 1977-- five years after Nixon resigned in the face of impeachment:

Frost: The wave of dissent, occasionally violent, which followed in the wake of the Cambodian incursion, prompted President Nixon to demand better intelligence about the people who were opposing him. To this end, the deputy White House counsel, Tom Huston, arranged a series of meetings with representatives of the CIA, the FBI and other police and intelligence agencies. These meetings produced a plan, the Huston Plan, which advocated the systematic use of wiretappings, burglaries, or so-called black bag jobs, mail openings and infiltration against antiwar groups and others.
Some of these activities, as Huston emphasized to Nixon, were clearly illegal. Nevertheless, the president approved the plan. Five days later, after opposition from J. Edgar Hoover, the plan was withdrawn, but the president's approval was later to be listed in the Articles of Impeachment as an alleged abuse of presidential power.

Frost (to Nixon): So what in a sense, you're saying is that there are certain situations, and the Huston Plan or that part of it was one of them, where the president can decide that it's in the best interests of the nation or something, and do something illegal.
Nixon: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal. ...If the president, for example, approves something because of the national security, or in this case because of a threat to internal peace and order of significant magnitude, then the president's decision in that instance is one that enables those who carry it out, to carry it out without violating a law....

Frost: ...[T]he dividing line is the president's judgment?

Nixon: Yes, ... and, just so that one does not get the impression that a president can run amok in this country and get away with it, we have to have in mind that a president has to come up before the electorate. We also have to have in mind, that a president has to get appropriations from the Congress. We have to have in mind, for example, that as far as the CIA's covert operations are concerned, as far as the FBI's covert operations are concerned, through the years, they have been disclosed on a very, very limited basis to trusted members of Congress. I don't know whether it can be done today or not.

Frost: ...[I]n an interrogatory filed with the [Sen. Frank] Church Committee, you stated, quote, "It's quite obvious that there are certain inherently government activities, which, if undertaken by the sovereign in protection of the interests of the nation's security are lawful, but which if undertaken by private persons, are not." What, at root, did you have in mind there?

Nixon: Well, what I ... had in mind I think was perhaps much better stated by Lincoln during the War between the States...: "Actions which otherwise would be unconstitutional, could become lawful if undertaken for the purpose of preserving the Constitution and the Nation." Now that's the kind of action I'm referring to. Of course in Lincoln's case it was the survival of the Union in war time ... and, who knows, perhaps the survival of the nation....

Frost: But when you said..., "If the president orders it, that makes it legal," as it were: Is ... there anything in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that suggests the president is that far of a sovereign, that far above the law?

Nixon: No, there isn't. ...[B]ut I do know this: That it has been, however, argued that as far as a president is concerned, that in war time, a president does have certain extraordinary powers which would make acts that would otherwise be unlawful lawful if undertaken for the purpose of preserving the nation and the Constitution, which is essential for the rights we're all talking about.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Warham
I still don't see any proof in that article you posted.

I see you went from A to C without a B.

A=Color Coded System Confusing to Public
C=Bush wins Election

Where's the B? The B would presumably be the public being scared into voting for Bush, but where's the proof. Where's the people saying they were scared shitless and voted for Bush again?

Give me a fuckin' break logic-boy. Are you going to sit there and type that in the last 4 years gw&friends haven't done their very finest work to scare the shit out of us? The terror threats are scary whether or not all the retards out there understood them. It was probably scarier if you didn't understand them! And how hard was it to understand all the bullshit about California bridges being targeted and buying duck tape and tarp. Fucking bullshit.

And the lies gw&friends told to scare Congress, the US people and the world about how dangerous Saddam was.

It's just pathetic and comparing it to anything in the past is pathetic. It needs to be stopped.

[Nickdfresh]

WARHAM duck-tapes the plastic bag around his head he's wearing while he posts here...

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by Cathedral
But if their guy drifts off course they re-draw the damn map and pretend they were already going that way.




sounds like you're talking about tom delay and the texas legisltature..;)

[Warham]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
Give me a fuckin' break logic-boy. Are you going to sit there and type that in the last 4 years gw&friends haven't done their very finest work to scare the shit out of us? The terror threats are scary whether or not all the retards out there understood them. It was probably scarier if you didn't understand them! And how hard was it to understand all the bullshit about California bridges being targeted and buying duck tape and tarp. Fucking bullshit.

And the lies gw&friends told to scare Congress, the US people and the world about how dangerous Saddam was.

It's just pathetic and comparing it to anything in the past is pathetic. It needs to be stopped.

Didn't scare me when I went to vote last year.

Were you scared, OD? Did you take your security blanket with you when you went to the booth last November?

"Mama!! Mista Bush is scawing me!"

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
sounds like you're talking about tom delay and the texas legisltature..;)

sounds like you're right...

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Warham
Didn't scare me when I went to vote last year.

Were you scared, OD? Did you take your security blanket with you when you went to the booth last November?

"Mama!! Mista Bush is scawing me!"


sheeeit. I was scared shitless the next day when I saw that you mongos somehow elected his incompetent ass again.

[Warham]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
sheeeit. I was scared shitless the next day when I saw that you mongos somehow elected his incompetent ass again.

Just think. Your vote for Bush helped make that possible.

:D

[scamper]

Is anyone really worried when the terror alert is raised?

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by scamper
Is anyone really worried when the terror alert is raised?

I'm worried every time i see truck loads of Mexicans at the local Deli every morning.
I'm worried when i used to inspect homes where Muslim men lived with no furniture, just sleeping bags and coolers in a $200,000 house, and this happened several times in a short period of time.
I'm worried when I see the president bring up a 4 year old attack nobody knew about just when his Patriot Act is about to expire, or a terror tape surfaces at that same time, or any discussion is ratcheted up at such an opportune time.

I'm worried about our own Administration possibly using this shit as a tool to manipulate the public , congress and the Senate.

MY terror alert is always up, I don't need nor do I rely on any color coded system. And it keeps me from being paranoid and scared, it keeps me ready to drop a mother fucker in their tracks if I see any threats to myself or the people around me.

The government cannot keep you safe, and i wish people would stop buying into the illusion that they can because here is the deal point blank.

If you are blown up by a bomb there isn't a thing you can do about it but be ready to meet God. worrying, running scared, and bieng gullible to an idea of safety that simply does not exist is NOT any way you or I should be living.
Be proactive, buy a few guns and learn how to use them safely, security begins with the individual, not the government.

Look, when shit hits the fan our leaders will be running to shelters, we'll be left alone to fend for ourselves...thinking anyone will be there for you is a dream people should wake up from.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by scamper
Is anyone really worried when the terror alert is raised?

Apparently some soccer moms get spooked, because they believe this shit...

Well, they used to sort of trust their gov't...