Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Judge nixes warrantless surveillance By SARAH KARUSH, Associated Press Writer 3 minutes ago DETROIT - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it. The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060817/ap_on_...ss_surveillance How to Reach 100,000 People For Under A Buck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 That's great news. I was sick and tired of Bush personally listening in on phone conversations between my wife and I discussing what to cook for dinner, or me asking my Dad how his golf game has been going. When I heard about the top secret wiretapping deal, we immediately stopped our previously nonexistant conversations detailing how to make napalm out of orange juice, 409, and rice krispies. Hey Judge Abu Bakr, ONLY THE GUILTY PEOPLE HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY ABOUT!!! Using his logic, it should be illegal for a cop to pull me over. What I do inside my own car is considered private and personal, and its no one else's business but mine what position my right foot is in. Too bad if I pick my nose, the world can see me. Hmm, sounds like talking on a phone, especially a wireless phone - the world can hear you. Now, the whole world, except for the US president can. That makes me feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 17, 2006 Author Share Posted August 17, 2006 I don't know. Until they relaease the unaltered videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I'm not biting on the official story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,122 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I don't know. Until they relaease the unaltered videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I'm not biting on the official story. What about the videos of the planes hitting the WTC towers ? Hmm? Oh, did you forget about those ? Funny, Detroit has the higest concentration of Muslims in the U.S. No wonder that a Fed Judge from there ruled this way. Look for a more sensible and learned USSC to overrule this silly crap and American can get back to defending herself against the Islamo-terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 17, 2006 Author Share Posted August 17, 2006 I don't know. Until they relaease the unaltered videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I'm not biting on the official story. What about the videos of the planes hitting the WTC towers ? Hmm? Oh, did you forget about those ? Funny, Detroit has the higest concentration of Muslims in the U.S. No wonder that a Fed Judge from there ruled this way. Look for a more sensible and learned USSC to overrule this silly crap and American can get back to defending herself against the Islamo-terrorist. Your right. That's why I'm not in charge. Political correctness is for $#!#. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 I don't know. Until they relaease the unaltered videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I'm not biting on the official story. I came across this today, you might be interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 You do realize its the same judges that oppose anything Bush does also ban such merchandise for law abiding citizens, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 That's great news. I was sick and tired of Bush personally listening in on phone conversations between my wife and I discussing what to cook for dinner, or me asking my Dad how his golf game has been going. When I heard about the top secret wiretapping deal, we immediately stopped our previously nonexistant conversations detailing how to make napalm out of orange juice, 409, and rice krispies. Hey Judge Abu Bakr, ONLY THE GUILTY PEOPLE HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY ABOUT!!! Using his logic, it should be illegal for a cop to pull me over. What I do inside my own car is considered private and personal, and its no one else's business but mine what position my right foot is in. Too bad if I pick my nose, the world can see me. Hmm, sounds like talking on a phone, especially a wireless phone - the world can hear you. Now, the whole world, except for the US president can. That makes me feel better. "Only the guilty need worry" is one of the weakest arguments there can be on this issue. It's not a question of whether you have or have not done anything wrong, or have/have not anything to worry about personally. It's a question of whether we are a nation of laws or a nation governed by Presidential whim. Saying "I don't care 'cause I have nothing to hide" is much like saying "it's okay for a criminal to mug someone in Seattle because it won't hurt me". Or perhaps more related, saying "It didn't matter whether Clinton committed perjury or not because it didn't affect me." Or, "It didn't matter if parties acting for the Nixon administation committed illegal burglaries, I had nothing to hide". If this eavesdropping is against the law, which is the essence of this judge's decision, then the President shouldn't be doing it. Now, I expect this decision will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. I won't hazard a guess as to what may happen there, because despite Bush's two recent appointments, the High Court has not fallen lock-step behind the Administration's arguments in recent decisions involving Guantanamo (sp?). If the Supremes rule in favor of the Administration on this issue, then I will agree it's legal and may continue. (Won't say I like it, but will accept its legality.) On the other hand, if the Supreme Court rules against the President, will the other side agree that it violates the Constitution or will they just play "blame the judges" again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 Only the guilty need to be worried, well heck, that's the Bush administration. Their coffers should be full of tax-free funds by now, wouldn't you say? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14378161/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCTAU 3,302 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It's a question of whether we are a nation of laws or a nation governed by Presidential whim. Whim? Whim? We are at WAR you putz. Once again you prove that there are still people out there who do not see us in a war on terror. I'm sure as soon as one of these peace-loving muslixes blew up your family, you would want to know why we weren't monitoring them. Just like a rape victim, guns are stupid till you get raped. Then its woe be unto the next guy that gets even close. Your "I can't see it from my house" attitude is what makes me want to puke about certain Americans. You're all about rights until it happens to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 It's a question of whether we are a nation of laws or a nation governed by Presidential whim. Whim? Whim? We are at WAR you putz. Once again you prove that there are still people out there who do not see us in a war on terror. I'm sure as soon as one of these peace-loving muslixes blew up your family, you would want to know why we weren't monitoring them. Just like a rape victim, guns are stupid till you get raped. Then its woe be unto the next guy that gets even close. Your "I can't see it from my house" attitude is what makes me want to puke about certain Americans. You're all about rights until it happens to you. Dude, I don't give a ####, remember that, okay. Life is too short to live in fear of government intrusion into my personal life. Heck, life's too short for fear period. So, you fight an ideology/radial extremism with violence? That's redneck. We got rednecks in the White House. That's why we are going backwards. We fought all of the idea wars in the 20th century. Why are having to redo it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 "Only the guilty need worry" is one of the weakest arguments there can be on this issue. It's not a question of whether you have or have not done anything wrong, or have/have not anything to worry about personally. It's a question of whether we are a nation of laws or a nation governed by Presidential whim. Saying "I don't care 'cause I have nothing to hide" is much like saying "it's okay for a criminal to mug someone in Seattle because it won't hurt me". Or perhaps more related, saying "It didn't matter whether Clinton committed perjury or not because it didn't affect me." Or, "It didn't matter if parties acting for the Nixon administation committed illegal burglaries, I had nothing to hide". If this eavesdropping is against the law, which is the essence of this judge's decision, then the President shouldn't be doing it. Now, I expect this decision will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. I won't hazard a guess as to what may happen there, because despite Bush's two recent appointments, the High Court has not fallen lock-step behind the Administration's arguments in recent decisions involving Guantanamo (sp?). If the Supremes rule in favor of the Administration on this issue, then I will agree it's legal and may continue. (Won't say I like it, but will accept its legality.) On the other hand, if the Supreme Court rules against the President, will the other side agree that it violates the Constitution or will they just play "blame the judges" again? You're examples are too far off the mark. The issue is monitoring terrorists, not whether some action elsewhere affects me or not. Make the issue monitoring citizens, and the examples still don't apply. No one likes the idea of someone looking over their shoulder, but honestly, that's how the law enforcement system works. If I'm "monitored" robbing a bank, I'm outside the boundaries of the law. Therefore I am punished. Personally, I wouldn't care if Uncle Sam tapped into my computer and watched what websites I visit all day, mic my phone and listen to my conversations, or put a tracking device on my car. I have nothing to hide and, I pay my taxes. Now if I start making banking transactions in Pakistan, start calling caves in Afghanistan, and drive to the docks at 3am every night, the government could note my suspicious activities and weigh them against the law - to protect other law abiding citizens. I'm not saying government monitoring should be that extreme. But really, if you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about? Some need to accept the reality and realize everyone is monitored to some extent. We're not truely free - we're free to do whatever until we start impacting others, which is the way it should be. Its too bad sinful human nature seeks out immoral and unethical activites or we could be truely free. Half of me says the governement should tighten its watch over everyone, not just terrorists. Look at all the crime that would be prevented and all the savings that could occur. However, the reality is that our government is run by the same sinful, immoral, and unethical people (some cases, they're among the worst) and such a tight program would eventually become skewed. If Bush did breach his boundary, then that's fine. However, I personally do not think he did and am thankful for what he did. Will I trust the Supreme Court's decison? Don't know. Theres many decisions they've made that I do not agree with or trust, simply because of too loose or too tight of a reading on a particular law. If they decide Bush is guilty for listening to terrorists, this will be the scenario. Clinton's pergury did affect me. It reduced his effeciency as President, and it wasted taxpayer dollars - some of which were mine. It does matter that Nixon's goons committed illegal burglaries - and they were caught because in some way, shape, or form, they were monitored (Gump made the call). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It's a question of whether we are a nation of laws or a nation governed by Presidential whim. Whim? Whim? We are at WAR you putz. Once again you prove that there are still people out there who do not see us in a war on terror. I'm sure as soon as one of these peace-loving muslixes blew up your family, you would want to know why we weren't monitoring them. Just like a rape victim, guns are stupid till you get raped. Then its woe be unto the next guy that gets even close. Your "I can't see it from my house" attitude is what makes me want to puke about certain Americans. You're all about rights until it happens to you. Dude, I don't give a ####, remember that, okay. Life is too short to live in fear of government intrusion into my personal life. Heck, life's too short for fear period. So, you fight an ideology/radial extremism with violence? That's redneck. We got rednecks in the White House. That's why we are going backwards. We fought all of the idea wars in the 20th century. Why are having to redo it? FREEDOM is an IDEA. Like I just said, we're not 100% free, but danged if we're not close. So its ok to let the rest of the world rot under dictatorships and terrorism, just because you were privileged enough to be born in a free country? Government intrusion into your personal life... how freaking arrogant! Like you're above anyone else in this world, or even the retarded, stupid, drooling, redneck state of Alabama you reside in. I've got news for you bud. You might not be willing to fight for an idea, but the bad guys are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 Okay, so what are you afraid of? I have no fear of life after earth, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Fine, take a "holier than thou" stance on a political arguement. It really shows your hypocracy. The version of the Bible I have mentions something about serving others... you familiar with that? On a related note, I saw Rick Warren on FOX the other morning. He's a pretty good guy. Basically, he had a great point that you can't fight ideaologies with guns, you have to fight with other ideaologies. Keep in mind this was not said in opposition to the war. He went on to say networks are going to be the new buisness model, churches have done it forever, cartels do it, terrorists do it, gotta use a dependable network to establish control, etc... digressing. My ammendment to his original point is that you fight ideologies with other ideaologies, and you fight other guns with other guns. If you sent a Christian mission to some parts of the Islam world, they'd be beheaded as they got off the plane. That's when we get out our much bigger swords, and remove that threat. Then the missionaries can get in and really start making a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 Well, Bush said it last week, I believe, verbatim, "We are imposing our will on them." That's what it's all about, us throwing our weight around. They hate it in all Muslim communities, even Iraq. They don't want us there, it's that simple. We don't belong there, period. As long as we have a presence in the Middle East, we'll keep getting attacked. That's why the wisdom of our Founding Father needs to be adhered to, immediately. Call it outdated, I call it common sense. Washington's stirring Farewell Address to the country not only cautioned against sectional differences and foreign entanglements but also encapsulated his philosophy of government. In relinquishing the reins of power for the last time, he reminded his fellow citizens that "the Unity of Government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main Pillar in the Edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home; your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty which you so highly prize." http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/RevWar/ss/washington.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 And again, you're calling my good buddy a flat out liar. Definately NOT what he is saying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 And again, you're calling my good buddy a flat out liar. Definately NOT what he is saying... Who are talking about, dungya? #### George Bush! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 And again, you're calling my good buddy a flat out liar. Definately NOT what he is saying... Who are talking about, dungya? They don't want us there, it's that simple. http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=27428 So, you're telling me a good friend of mine who is currently serving his second tour over there (he ASKED to go back) lied to my face when he spoke of all the positives he had PERSONALLY seen and experienced? He was screwing with me when he told me the Iraqi's personally THANK him and are more than GRATEFUL for what the US has done? Let me guess... He's been brainwashed by Bush and Rumsfeld. Everything he has seen and experienced was a hallucination. OR, since he's just in the "lowly" NG, it doesn't matter. Go ahead and pick one of those, and continue to insult every US soldier who has given up a lot, some their lives, so you and others can make ignorant statements to the world. Are you 40 or 14? Who are talking about, dungya? #### George Bush! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 And again, you're calling my good buddy a flat out liar. Definately NOT what he is saying... Who are talking about, dungya? They don't want us there, it's that simple. http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=27428 So, you're telling me a good friend of mine who is currently serving his second tour over there (he ASKED to go back) lied to my face when he spoke of all the positives he had PERSONALLY seen and experienced? He was screwing with me when he told me the Iraqi's personally THANK him and are more than GRATEFUL for what the US has done? Let me guess... He's been brainwashed by Bush and Rumsfeld. Everything he has seen and experienced was a hallucination. OR, since he's just in the "lowly" NG, it doesn't matter. Go ahead and pick one of those, and continue to insult every US soldier who has given up a lot, some their lives, so you and others can make ignorant statements to the world. Are you 40 or 14? Who are talking about, dungya? #### George Bush! I never said 100%. #### George Bush. I don't care about your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 I never said 100%. Need more verbage to communicate your point#### George Bush. So you're 14...I don't care about your friend. We've already established that you can be arrogant and hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 I never said 100%. Need more verbage to communicate your point#### George Bush. So you're 14...I don't care about your friend. We've already established that you can be arrogant and hypocritical. No. You fill in the blanks so well. If I don't know someone's name how am I to care about that person? It's unfortunate that some Iraqis feel angry towards us, but it's a fact and it's not improving. To the contrary, it's worsening. I hope your friend makes it, because they are specifically targeting US soldiers now. I guess I really do care about people I don't know. I retract my previous statements. I just dislike the whole thing. I hate war. I hate what it does to the soldiers, the economy and the debt incurred by war. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/world/mi...l?th&emc=th "When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war. War settles nothing."Dwight David Eisenhower (American 34th President (1953-61). 1890-1969) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boddatiger99 5 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Ok, that's right....now I remember why I stick to the Football Forum...cause I get stickin' boilin' mad when I read non-sense like this! Bottomfeeder, have your opinions, it's a free country, we can respectfully disagree. But you are smokin a big pipe of "I'm a complete moron who can't understand FACTS" if you think Prez Bush (who I disagree with at times by the way) was doing anything illegal by listening to these overseas phonecalls and smokin an even bigger pipe if you think any of 9/11 was conspired by our government. Hey, listen, I know I'm acting like a freakin' child by just blasting you...but I'm just sick of it....use your brain people. Use the common sense God gave you. We're in a freakin' war. Bush is not the anti-Christ. Besides being a horrible communicator, he's actually a decent guy who genuinely gives a rip about protecting us from those who want to rape our children and slash our throats. Are you that stinkin' blinded from the truth?!?! Oh....and War Eagle. Can't wait til kick off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,023 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 If I don't know someone's name how am I to care about that person? What about all those innocent bombing victims you have been whining about? Did you know them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,023 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 But you are smokin a big pipe of "I'm a complete moron who can't understand FACTS" if you think Prez Bush (who I disagree with at times by the way) was doing anything illegal by listening to these overseas phonecalls and smokin an even bigger pipe if you think any of 9/11 was conspired by our government. Hey, listen, I know I'm acting like a freakin' child by just blasting you...but I'm just sick of it....use your brain people. Use the common sense God gave you. We're in a freakin' war. Bush is not the anti-Christ. Besides being a horrible communicator, he's actually a decent guy who genuinely gives a rip about protecting us from those who want to rape our children and slash our throats. Are you that stinkin' blinded from the truth?!?! Oh....and War Eagle. Can't wait til kick off. You ask too much of some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.