obama making us less safe..

?? no discussion/speculation on the recent terrorist bust? oops guess that would mean nobama is doing his job and has reliable people in place who arent ignoring info?

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=11136043

I didn't think Obama would make us less safe. I just thought the rest of the world would stop hating us.

floridafun wrote:?? no discussion/speculation on the recent terrorist bust? oops guess that would mean nobama is doing his job and has reliable people in place who arent ignoring info?

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=11136043

I apoligize. I was mowing the yard and paying the bills.

floridafun wrote:?? no discussion/speculation on the recent terrorist bust? oops guess that would mean nobama is doing his job and has reliable people in place who arent ignoring info?

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=11136043

From your link, "A senior member of Congress says the effort was intended to disrupt the plans of a terror suspect whose phone calls had been intercepted." They're listening to phone calls? Isn't this a violation of our civil rights? You were outraged when the Bush Administration undertook such deeds? Now you commend the Obama Administration? Does your hypocrisy know no ends?

the investigation has been going on for almost a year. i cant find anything that says WARRANTLESS wiretaps contributed in any way. there is a legal process of getting warrants for wiretapping of suspected terrorists without using patriot act non-guidelines fyi. fisa?

Fighter59 wrote:

floridafun wrote:?? no discussion/speculation on the recent terrorist bust? oops guess that would mean nobama is doing his job and has reliable people in place who arent ignoring info?

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=11136043

From your link, "A senior member of Congress says the effort was intended to disrupt the plans of a terror suspect whose phone calls had been intercepted." They're listening to phone calls? Isn't this a violation of our civil rights? You were outraged when the Bush Administration undertook such deeds? Now you commend the Obama Administration? Does your hypocrisy know no ends?

I second FF... as soon as it is determined that these wiretaps were implemented outside the the legal auspices of FISA I will hold the Obama administration to the same task that I held the bush administration. If anything, it proves that the Bush administration was even more nefarious than originally thought, and that wiretaps outside the auspices of FISA were not only illegal, but must have Been for other purposes than the prevention of terror.

Fighter, I like your passion, but you misunderstand the liberal mindset in this regard. I have no desire to protect terrorists, I have only a desire for the due process of law. As soon as we give up our right to due process in favor of some misguided notion that we cannot be safe under due process of law, we have lost. This is not hypocrisy, it's just asking for accountability.

i agree with senator franken on warrantless wiretaps. he seems to be working at being good at his job..

http://washingtonindependent.com/60611/al-franken-reads-the-4th-amendment-to-justice-department-official

Franken, who opened by acknowledging that unlike most of his colleagues in the Senate, he’s not a lawyer, but according to his research “most Americans aren’t lawyers” either, said he’d also done research on the Patriot Act and in particular, the “roving wiretap” provision that allows the FBI to get a warrant to wiretap a an unnamed target and his or her various and changing cell phones, computers and other communication devices.
Noting that he received a copy of the Constitution when he was sworn in as a senator, he proceeded to read it to Kris, emphasizing this part: “no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
“That’s pretty explicit language,” noted Franken, asking Kris how the “roving wiretap” provision of the Patriot Act can meet that requirement if it doesn’t require the government to name its target.
Kris looked flustered and mumbled that “this is surreal,” apparently referring to having to respond to Franken’s question. “I would defer to the other branch of government,” he said, referring to the courts, prompting Franken to interject: “I know what that is.”

At the risk of sounding like a frickin' broken record player (do they make those anymore)...look at the time that the Patriot Act was passed. We'd just been attacked. Our government was trying to do everthing it could to prevent another attack from happening, and I fully support them for doing so.

It's a Catch 22...if nothing had been done and we got attacked again...people would be screaming in the streets about why isn't more being done to protect innocent civilians.

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a frickin' broken record player (do they make those anymore)...look at the time that the Patriot Act was passed. We'd just been attacked. Our government was trying to do everthing it could to prevent another attack from happening, and I fully support them for doing so.

It's a Catch 22...if nothing had been done and we got attacked again...people would be screaming in the streets about why isn't more being done to protect innocent civilians.

Had this led to actual arrests that could have not been made without warrantless wiretapping, I'd be right there with you. IMO, There is NO patriotic, political, or seasonally fear-based reason for trashing the constitution violating civil rights and breaking the law. Rule #722: Live by it, die by it. We don't trust the government to run a health care insurance provider, but we trust it to police our private lives.

Interesting, When it's Bush is fuXing the Constitution-the single most important American document you say "Our Government", when it's Obama it's called "Rham-ing".

Oh, The Irony!

meta4 wrote:....Rule #722: Live by it, die by it. We don't trust the government to run a health care insurance provider, but we trust it to police our private lives. ...

meta, this is a spectacular observation, and is a viewpoint that I had not considered.... ::

meta4 wrote:

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a frickin' broken record player (do they make those anymore)...look at the time that the Patriot Act was passed. We'd just been attacked. Our government was trying to do everthing it could to prevent another attack from happening, and I fully support them for doing so.

It's a Catch 22...if nothing had been done and we got attacked again...people would be screaming in the streets about why isn't more being done to protect innocent civilians.

Had this led to actual arrests that could have not been made without warrantless wiretapping, I'd be right there with you. IMO, There is NO patriotic, political, or seasonally fear-based reason for trashing the constitution violating civil rights and breaking the law. Rule #722: Live by it, die by it. We don't trust the government to run a health care insurance provider, but we trust it to police our private lives.

Interesting, When it's Bush is fuXing the Constitution-the single most important American document you say "Our Government", when it's Obama it's called "Rham-ing".

Oh, The Irony!

I guess we all have our play on words around here...bushco, world nut daily, faux news, obamacare, obamaco, tech-support nut jobs, party of no, party of yes, rahm job, liberal whackos, right-wing haters, monroeville hillbillies, aboite snobs, etc....

I've been waiting for a good Patriot Act thread?

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a frickin' broken record player (do they make those anymore)...look at the time that the Patriot Act was passed. We'd just been attacked. Our government was trying to do everthing it could to prevent another attack from happening, and I fully support them for doing so.

It's a Catch 22...if nothing had been done and we got attacked again...people would be screaming in the streets about why isn't more being done to protect innocent civilians.

there was already a process in place. warrants could have been obtained relatively quickly and with some but minimal suspicion of a terrorist problem.

i think it was overkill out of guilt for ignoring the numerous warnings by cia and fbi prior to 9/11 which allowed 9/11 to happen on their watch, plus tricky dick was permitted to exercise his secret veep rights of accountability and info is moot.

floridafun wrote:

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a frickin' broken record player (do they make those anymore)...look at the time that the Patriot Act was passed. We'd just been attacked. Our government was trying to do everthing it could to prevent another attack from happening, and I fully support them for doing so.

It's a Catch 22...if nothing had been done and we got attacked again...people would be screaming in the streets about why isn't more being done to protect innocent civilians.

there was already a process in place. warrants could have been obtained relatively quickly and with some but minimal suspicion of a terrorist problem.

i think it was overkill out of guilt for ignoring the numerous warnings by cia and fbi prior to 9/11 which allowed 9/11 to happen on their watch, plus tricky dick was permitted to exercise his secret veep rights of accountability and info is moot.

FISA even allows for warrantless wiretaps provided they are subject to oversight by a court within x days after the wiretap is conducted... I Have no problem with that, so long as there is accountability... Bush had every opportunity to make his actions legit, if in fact they were legit... which at the time certainly forced me to wonder what he was up to... red flag city.