Bush Says Surveillance Law Must Be Updated to Deal With Today's Terrorists

[Osborn F Enready]

xyzer said: Osborn..I was hoping you add some reality to the fantasy and invented opinions of reality we are experiencing on this thread? You failed me!

Well, this is an area where you and I are diametrically opposed, so this should come as no suprise.

xyzer said: Some parse the actual Congressional approval to put a stop to the Saddam Hussein threat, as not an official war?

Regardless of how official the bi-partisan monopoly made it with their standard, status-quo, hypocritical vote, it still did not meet the requirements for force by the United States.

You don't see me granting ANY respect to the bi-partisan power handlers, because they are all corrupted, windbags working for their own mutual bi-partisan agenda...... growing central government, and furthering the global agenda along the lines of a police state.

xyzer said: This after some 5 years of Congressional funding for the ?expedition? And authorized use of military force?

The same people you complain and bitch about, and now you stand and hold up their "votes" as some type of legitimacy......when the standards that are to bring about those votes were ignored. Saddam had no WMD, was not a national threat, did not attack us, and Iraq had no reason to be invaded by the U.S. for any reason OTHER than corporate intrests.

xyzer said: What does the Iraq war have to do with international terrorist threats and the need to forsee factional attempts to attack our country?

Nothing. There are more extremists, terrorists and troublemakers in Iraq now than there was before we invaded. I have no problem with attacking non-national, or non-state factions once a clear and imminent threat exists, but none existed in Iraq then, and one has been more easily facillitated by our actions since.

xyzer said: These terorist bozos are non national and worldwide!

There is more anti-American sentiment in the middle east, as well as in other nations that used to be friendly toward us, BECAUSE of the Iraq war, so it should be clear how this war has made these non-national guerilla forces jobs easier, right?

xyzer said: We keep reading veiled threats and suggestions of civilians rights being threatened by the electronic surveillance program that does not meet the time frames of civilian warrant execution, and yet I'm still waiting to see evidence that a citizens rights were violated? I'm still waiting for someone to answer the three questions I've asked?

Do the research, there are tons of it, but its hard to access due to the new laws put in place and the current ongoing investigations. I have always feared my own governments restrictions on liberty more than terrorist extremists, and espeically more than Saddams "regime".

xyzer said: The reality of the situation has escaped some?

We noticed. You still keep posting the same tired excuses, misinformation, and "supposed" justifications for the war that shouldn't have happened.

xyzer said: We are at war(or if you prefer threatened by a declared enemy). When this situation occurs we need to gather all the intelligence we can on enemy moves and intentions.

Your right, with respect to individual rights in all pursuits, is what you left out. Sacrificing what makes our society great is no means to fight terror.

xyzer said: We live in an electronic age where data moves near the speed of light and we cannot always wait to mine such intelligence.

And in those cases, where imminent threat exists, I encourage government to step around the law and damn the consequences, the facts shall prove them right in the end and the people may excuse them, but, that is an accountability issue, something this administration has NONE of.

xyzer said: Thats why Congress is presently trying to ease the current foreign surveillance procedure and shape it to the rreality of the world terroist threat!

Yea, I trust congress to shape things to reality........

Did you notice their 3% approval rating due to their "grasp on reality"?

ROFLMAO

[xyzer]

´m sure you know that the oil ¨revenuse¨are a small percentage paid by the oil companies to corrupt leaders, installed and supported by the US military

Really? Which western oil company is paying "Ahwannajihad" in Iran? Some in the west may be buying or refining his crude but paying him? Not really? Commerce is not excluded with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and some others in the middle east. They hav a product we need? And they need our dollars?

[shawmutt]

xyzer.

Why are you stomping your feet and claiming your questions have not been answered when people much more patient than I have answered them multiple times?

[xyzer]

shawmutt..getting back to the thread topic..I have another question or two? If you concede that custioms or border patrol officials have a an official duty( right and mandate) to search the persons and luggage of persons entering this country(and of course security persons at terminals and airports are included) then why the furor over an electronic search of communications from known or suspected international terrorists?
Thats the routine procedure in this country and is virtually unquestioned? I think the term reasonable applies?

Next question, even if FISA searches are run through a standard sequence, is it possible that one or more parties involved are innocent US citizens? Does the execution of a FISA warrant not result in a possible innocent party being surveilled? Remember we haven't (in the FISA process) predetermined what the status of the call recipients/s is.. it could be friend or foe? Again, compare it to the process at our borders and in our air terminals?

Another point...Is the interference by the Legislative and now the Judicial Branch a violation of executive privilege(in the sense that the Commander in Chief is understood to have a duty to try to determine enemy intentions in a war against international terrorism?) If the FISA process is a reasonable means of obtaining early information of known terrorist intentions of connections in this country do the other Branches have a right to veto or nullify it?

[Praxius]

Quote by: thx1138 xyzer... Have you ever givin any thought to fact you may have been duped? You and me both after 9/11, but through studying history and the world energy crisis I'm at least not buying reasons given for the War of Terror. The simple question is who has the oil and who needs it. This is the reason behind the U.S. War on Terror, to occupy countries that have the oil or keep leaders that will supply oil to the U.S....

Question:

How out dated is that diagram? Doesn't matter I suppose, so long as you all think we don't have much oil.... *snickers*



This seems a bit more updated, although two years behind our Oil Sands production, I imagine you could add to this graph since this was released..... but it shows that you guys get most of your oil from us, and Arabia 2nd.

I stand corrected.... your graph shows who consumes oil compared to produces.... I guess it's balanced to how much Canada uses......

Nope... I stand re-corrected.... the amount of oil produced from Canada in your graph is outdated..... as it shows us 2nd last.... we're one of the largest now.

[thx1138]

Read the title "Who has the Oil?"
and then read the title of your graph.. "Where does the U.S. imported oil come from?"

The first graph is showing world oil reservers not how much the US imports from those countries. Canada stands to gain by war in the middle east. Countries like China, Japan, and The U.S. are looking for safe places to get oil and even though oil from the Oil Sands is more expesive it's a much saver place then parts of the middle east.

you guys

Don't lump me in with those guys I jumped the boat and live outside the U.S.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Captain Cardio Bush Says Surveillance Law Must Be Updated to Deal With Today's Terrorists -- 07/30/2007 I'm surprised nobody else posted this one. They're legalizing warrentless wire tapping and surveillance?

What makes you think they are going to and/or need to legalize it ?
I believe that a process of getting an information is a matter of approach, and there are variety of ways to reach that goal and/or accomplish such task(s).

The main issue is not legalizing it, but :
- subject(s)
- purpose(s)
, parts that have not beeing printed in mass-media sources at all, except for some (gerenally) well known and/or common issue(s).

[Praxius]

I've actually re-looked over your chart a few times before my last post.....

I'm only picking at the part in the small right hand side of your graph where is states the "World Reserves of Oil" which to me seems out dated.... possibly layed out prior to our discovering and production of the Oil Sands......

All I'm saying is we're a bigger and easier target then what your graph shows...... one would think

I'm just saying that hypothetically, what would happen if we cut our supply to the US based on what you said, and the graph I showed?