Jump to content

Bush still protecting us.


Guest 2smart4u
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest 2smart4u

Terrorist plots were broken up in NY and Dallas because of policies put in place by George Bush, according to former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff..

This great president who saved us from terrorist attacks for 8 years (9/11 plans were in place when Bush took over, this was Clinton's failure) continues to protect us.

It's time for all the Loonys to stop the Bush bashing and recognize his great accomplishments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrorist plots were broken up in NY and Dallas because of policies put in place by George Bush, according to former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff..

This great president who saved us from terrorist attacks for 8 years (9/11 plans were in place when Bush took over, this was Clinton's failure) continues to protect us.

It's time for all the Loonys to stop the Bush bashing and recognize his great accomplishments.

This is the dumbest thing you've ever posted on this site. You're F**KING retarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrorist plots were broken up in NY and Dallas because of policies put in place by George Bush, according to former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff..

This great president who saved us from terrorist attacks for 8 years (9/11 plans were in place when Bush took over, this was Clinton's failure) continues to protect us.

It's time for all the Loonys to stop the Bush bashing and recognize his great accomplishments.

False. They were broken up using surveillance techniques that were available before Bush took office.

Who appointed Chertoff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False. They were broken up using surveillance techniques that were available before Bush took office.

Who appointed Chertoff?

To late he created another stupid thread, 2dumb4words like to start something but not too smart on finish it. Like his friend Bush lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False. They were broken up using surveillance techniques that were available before Bush took office.

Who appointed Chertoff?

False. Homeland Security was created and funded by Bush. The only surveillance techniques created by Clinton were the peep holes he installed in the Interns bathrooms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False. Homeland Security was created and funded by Bush. The only surveillance techniques created by Clinton were the peep holes he installed in the Interns bathrooms.

False. The FBI has been doing surveillance for a very long time, since long before Clinton (despite your fixation on him). Nothing Bush did had anything to do with the FBI breaking up this plot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False. The FBI has been doing surveillance for a very long time, since long before Clinton (despite your fixation on him). Nothing Bush did had anything to do with the FBI breaking up this plot.

Taking US leadership and "homeland security" (SAVE THE MOTHERLAND!! HEIL!!) a step more:

Nothing the US military has done in Iraq had anything to do with breaking up this plot.

Now if you want to consider what the US military has done in Iraq (and so very many other places) to INSPIRE this plot...... :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking US leadership and "homeland security" (SAVE THE MOTHERLAND!! HEIL!!) a step more:

Nothing the US military has done in Iraq had anything to do with breaking up this plot.

Now if you want to consider what the US military has done in Iraq (and so very many other places) to INSPIRE this plot...... :huh:

I'm impressed. It appears you have detailed classified information on the military. You must be a very important person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm impressed. It appears you have detailed classified information on the military. You must be a very important person.

Nothing classified about this.

By simply paying attention he knows the obvious truth, obvious to anyone who has at least the intelligence of a potato. Which leaves you out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
False. Homeland Security was created and funded by Bush. The only surveillance techniques created by Clinton were the peep holes he installed in the Interns bathrooms.

As reported by Rep. Peter King this morning on FOX, these latest terrorists were apprehended because of "roving wiretaps", part of the Homeland Security Bill. King also noted that these roving wiretaps were strongly opposed by the Loonys. Just another example of the danger these socialist Loonys can put us all in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As reported by Rep. Peter King this morning on FOX, these latest terrorists were apprehended because of "roving wiretaps", part of the Homeland Security Bill. King also noted that these roving wiretaps were strongly opposed by the Loonys. Just another example of the danger these socialist Loonys can put us all in.

Yet again, you are ignorant as dirt. A roving wiretap simply allows the government agency to follow the target/suspect even if he changes his communications device or method. The roving wiretap has been part of our law since 1968. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roving_wiretap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As reported by Rep. Peter King this morning on FOX, these latest terrorists were apprehended because of "roving wiretaps", part of the Homeland Security Bill. King also noted that these roving wiretaps were strongly opposed by the Loonys. Just another example of the danger these socialist Loonys can put us all in.

Actually roving wiretaps are allowed because of the "Omnibus Crime Control & Safe Streets Act" of 1968, the "Electronic Communications Privacy Act" of 1988, and the "Intelligence Authorization Act" of 1999.

And the provisions of these particular acts require a search warrant for the wiretaps to be used. Again, it's not the actual wiretaps that people opposed. It was W's total disregard for the law when he decided he could bypass getting search warrants first.

Anything else, Mr. Honors Graduate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As reported by Rep. Peter King this morning on FOX, these latest terrorists were apprehended because of "roving wiretaps", part of the Homeland Security Bill. King also noted that these roving wiretaps were strongly opposed by the Loonys. Just another example of the danger these socialist Loonys can put us all in.

Tumor..........get a peep, deadender:

Editorial - by Fred E. Foldvary, Senior Editor for The Progress Report

Roving Wiretaps

To "rove" means to wander from place to place, with no particular destination. A "roving wiretap" is a tap on any telephone that a suspect uses, roving from one telephone to another, with no particular locational target. The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation is now authorized to engage in roving wiretaps without having to get approval by a court.

The FBI obtained this power in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal 1999, H.R. 3694. The roving wiretap provisions are in section 604, "Wire and Electronic Communications Interception Requirements." (See www.cdt.org/legislation/calea/roving.html by the Center for Democracy and Technology; info@cdt.org).

With the power provided by this 1999 Act, the FBI may now tap your telephone to listen to and record your calls, without having to get a court warrant, even if they are not investigating you. If they suspect that someone you know, such as a friend, relative, or business contact, is using your telephone for illegal activities, they may tap your phone. The FBI may tap any phone the suspect uses or even just possible has access to, such as when he visits your house. This applies to faxes and computer messages also.

On February 4, 1999, Eric Holder, deputy attorney general of the U.S. defended this expanded FBI power in an article "Only Necessary Wiretaps" in the Washington Post, p. A26. Nat Hentoff in his January 2 column "Raid on Rights" wrote that roving wiretaps were an expansion of federal power, but Holder replied that such taps have been legal since 1986!

It's no comfort to learn that the FBI has already been rovingly tapping telephones. But Holder agrees that the 1999 law expanded the scope of the roving taps. The 1986 law required that the suspect was changing phones with the intent of escaping surveillance. Now, the FBI only needs to show that the suspect's actions have the effect of thwarting the snooping.

This expansion of wiretap authority needs to be seen in the context of ever-increasing government intrusion into privacy, liberty, and private property. U.S. Representative Bob Barr of Georgia exposed a plan by the U.S. Department of Justice to obtain massive new enforcement powers (www.house.gov/barr/p_doj.html) without any hearings or debate.

Among the powers sought by the Department of Justice in 1998 were:

an expansion of the definition of terrorism to include domestic crimes having no relationship to terrorism;

the power to seize commercial transportation assets;

expanded wiretap authority to allow greater use of roving wiretaps and wiretaps without any court authority;

enlarged asset forfeiture (confiscation) in both criminal and civil matters;

the establishment of a permanent FBI police force;

allowing more military involvement in domestic law enforcement;

authority to force telephone and internet companies to divulge information on their customers.

Barr stated that these proposals "represent a sneak attack on the most cherished principles of our democracy. If they become a part of our law, freedom and privacy in America will be permanently and severely diminished."

Even if the intent of these powers is to catch criminals, there are no real constraints on government using these powers on the innocent and to confiscate the property of those who are only suspected of violating laws or who only have innocent connections to those who are engaged in crime.

If the legitimate function of government is to protect property rights, it should be clear that the U.S. government has turned this upside down and is violating property rights to a greater degree than all the criminals. When the people's representatives hand over such powers to the law enforcers, they turn government itself into the chief criminal.

http://www.progress.org/fold79.htm

Why do dummies who complain about DISTRUSTING HUGE GOVERNMENT always:

1- Gleefully encourage ANYTHING the pentagon wants to do in the world and spend on itself?

2- Support every fricken government intrusion on privacy that comes down the pike?

All the rabid godshit, maybe? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As reported by Rep. Peter King this morning on FOX, these latest terrorists were apprehended because of "roving wiretaps", part of the Homeland Security Bill. King also noted that these roving wiretaps were strongly opposed by the Loonys. Just another example of the danger these socialist Loonys can put us all in.

Wouldn't a true socialist/comminist be someone who supported the government listening in on everything the peple say?

You got it backwards you stupid son of a B**ch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing classified about this.

By simply paying attention he knows the obvious truth, obvious to anyone who has at least the intelligence of a potato. Which leaves you out.

I'm also impressed by the way you Loonys stick up for each other, sort of like a gang mentality. Doesn't say much for you intellectually though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Actually roving wiretaps are allowed because of the "Omnibus Crime Control & Safe Streets Act" of 1968, the "Electronic Communications Privacy Act" of 1988, and the "Intelligence Authorization Act" of 1999.

And the provisions of these particular acts require a search warrant for the wiretaps to be used. Again, it's not the actual wiretaps that people opposed. It was W's total disregard for the law when he decided he could bypass getting search warrants first.

Anything else, Mr. Honors Graduate?

Actually, the Homeland Security Bill allows roving wiretaps without search warrants. Which is why the leftist Loonys were upset. Thank God Bush had the foresight to recognize the need for this and not cave in to the whinings of the Loonys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet again, you are ignorant as dirt. A roving wiretap simply allows the government agency to follow the target/suspect even if he changes his communications device or method. The roving wiretap has been part of our law since 1968. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roving_wiretap

You can't deal rationally or factually with too stupid to live.

His brain is shot either due to terminal alcoholism, syphilis or rabies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the Homeland Security Bill allows roving wiretaps without search warrants. Which is why the leftist Loonys were upset. Thank God Bush had the foresight to recognize the need for this and not cave in to the whinings of the Loonys.

False. The government still has to go to the special court for approval.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the Homeland Security Bill allows roving wiretaps without search warrants. Which is why the leftist Loonys were upset. Thank God Bush had the foresight to recognize the need for this and not cave in to the whinings of the Loonys.

Actually, it doesn't. The Homeland Security Act created the Department of Homeland Security and reorganized the government so that certain departments and agencies would fall under the authority of the DHS.

Bush created his own surveillance program through the Protect America Act of 2007. And there are numerous stipulations to the use of wireless surveillance. They are too complicated for you to understand so I'm not going to bother explaining them to you.

Thanks for trying.....and failing.....again.....and again....and again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also impressed by the way you Loonys stick up for each other, sort of like a gang mentality. Doesn't say much for you intellectually though.

Actually, guest, most of the intelligent and intellectual arguments in this forum come from the "loonies." The rest of you just post insults and garbage.

Oh, and the way you guys keep misspelling the word "loonies" is pretty hilarious.

And, if you want to talk about gang mentality - review some of the coverage of the "town-hall" meetings back in August- people trying to have an intelligent debate about an important issue being shouted down by uninformed and misguided whiners. That's gang mentality, guest.

People are free to hate, even on this forum. But hatred makes our nation weaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Actually, it doesn't. The Homeland Security Act created the Department of Homeland Security and reorganized the government so that certain departments and agencies would fall under the authority of the DHS.

Bush created his own surveillance program through the Protect America Act of 2007. And there are numerous stipulations to the use of wireless surveillance. They are too complicated for you to understand so I'm not going to bother explaining them to you.

Thanks for trying.....and failing.....again.....and again....and again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...