Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

lili462 · Jan 4, 2006, 02:57 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4574188.stm

Bush says that this program is vital to protect america from another attack. He claims that this survaillance involved calls from outside of the US from people associated with Al-Qeada.

Ok, bush authorized these survaillance activities right after 9/11. It's been over 4 years since then....think about this. If people in the united states were talking to people associated with al-qaeda over the phone..dont you think something would have happend by now? and secondly where is his proof of these calls taking place anyways? does he have some sort of access to peoples phone records. it makes no sense. In order to know that these "calls" were taking place, he would of had to seen telephone records and he would of had to notice the al-qaeda phone numbers. Did he just notice calls from iraq to america and declare that they were al-qaeda related numbers. If, so does he realize that we have iraqis that live in america and most likely have family that they talk to in iraq. Does anyone but me think that the president is lying? Does anyone think that this "program" is legit or even necessary anymore after four years of no terror attacks? discuss

Scribbler1 · Jan 4, 2006, 07:28 pm

He's a liar, that's all. He was nailed, BIG time and the only thing he can do is keep saying "look at what a good thing I did for you" until it sinks in. If there was ANY way to duck this we would be hearing Scott McClellan repeating "I'm not going to comment on an ongoing investigation" until our heads explode.

RickSp · Jan 4, 2006, 07:37 pm

Typical Bush defense of unlimited presidential power. He could have gotten warrants for all the wiretaps without endangering national security. FISA even provides for retroactive warrants. Instead Bush simply broke the law and for four years flounted the 4th Amendment and current statute. The issue is not national security but a gross abuse of power.

Milton Bradley · Jan 5, 2006, 09:29 am

I heard on C-SPAN that this issue is bleeding through the borders of the law, and prompting other violations of the constitution by the government putting permanenet gag orders on anybody who provides information on those being investigated.

An issue that does not seem to come up on the news broadcasts.

Libertarian · Jan 5, 2006, 11:19 am

This mass expantion of unchecked power is very scarry. This expands the government to new heights and has no checks for that power. The government has never gotten away with such unchecked power for too long, and I hope the same will happen with this problem.

lsbskins1 · Jan 5, 2006, 11:50 am

The Democrats really need to get hold of the Senate in the mid-terms or this guy will never have to face the music. I'm really sorry for the Republicans who serve who are not as power hungry as the neo-cons, but they better man-up and take their lumps now, as punishment for putting party above country, or, in the end, they will destroy their party. I can not believe they really support this crap. As you may have noticed, I'm a rabid Skins fan. This is the rule I always try to apply when watching replays... If that was a Redskin making that sideline catch, what would I expect the Refs to call? The Republicans better start asking themselves if they would want an opposition party President to be taking this kind of power. This is not, or rather, should not be, a partisan issue. The man has gone too far and any honest person would have to admit that.

lili462 · Jan 5, 2006, 11:59 am

Does anyone think that this program could be good lines for a Bush Impeachment?

Zeebadee · Jan 6, 2006, 08:25 pm

For the general interest, a good primer on communications intel -

http://www.iptvreports.mcmail.com/ic2kreport.htm#N_92_

NSA and Iraq -

http://www.aci.net/kalliste/speccoll.htm

Jan 4, 2006, 02:57 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
lili462 Bitchin'! Location: ohio Posts: 210	Bush Defends spying program http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4574188.stm Bush says that this program is vital to protect america from another attack. He claims that this survaillance involved calls from outside of the US from people associated with Al-Qeada. Ok, bush authorized these survaillance activities right after 9/11. It's been over 4 years since then....think about this. If people in the united states were talking to people associated with al-qaeda over the phone..dont you think something would have happend by now? and secondly where is his proof of these calls taking place anyways? does he have some sort of access to peoples phone records. it makes no sense. In order to know that these "calls" were taking place, he would of had to seen telephone records and he would of had to notice the al-qaeda phone numbers. Did he just notice calls from iraq to america and declare that they were al-qaeda related numbers. If, so does he realize that we have iraqis that live in america and most likely have family that they talk to in iraq. Does anyone but me think that the president is lying? Does anyone think that this "program" is legit or even necessary anymore after four years of no terror attacks? discuss It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on peersonal freedom is what it is, okay?. Keep that in mind at all times, thank you.

Jan 4, 2006, 07:28 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Scribbler1 Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,746	He's a liar, that's all. He was nailed, BIG time and the only thing he can do is keep saying "look at what a good thing I did for you" until it sinks in. If there was ANY way to duck this we would be hearing Scott McClellan repeating "I'm not going to comment on an ongoing investigation" until our heads explode. Not a day goes by that I don't see something that reinforces my belief that people are idiots.

Jan 4, 2006, 07:37 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
RickSp Volcanic Erupter Posts: 9,589	Typical Bush defense of unlimited presidential power. He could have gotten warrants for all the wiretaps without endangering national security. FISA even provides for retroactive warrants. Instead Bush simply broke the law and for four years flounted the 4th Amendment and current statute. The issue is not national security but a gross abuse of power. Rick "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

Jan 5, 2006, 11:19 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
Libertarian Thats Me Location: Where Am I Again?!?! Posts: 177	This mass expantion of unchecked power is very scarry. This expands the government to new heights and has no checks for that power. The government has never gotten away with such unchecked power for too long, and I hope the same will happen with this problem. "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." – John Adams

Jan 5, 2006, 11:50 am	#6 (permalink) (top)
lsbskins1 Redskins Rule Location: South-Western Virginia Posts: 2,472	The Democrats really need to get hold of the Senate in the mid-terms or this guy will never have to face the music. I'm really sorry for the Republicans who serve who are not as power hungry as the neo-cons, but they better man-up and take their lumps now, as punishment for putting party above country, or, in the end, they will destroy their party. I can not believe they really support this crap. As you may have noticed, I'm a rabid Skins fan. This is the rule I always try to apply when watching replays... If that was a Redskin making that sideline catch, what would I expect the Refs to call? The Republicans better start asking themselves if they would want an opposition party President to be taking this kind of power. This is not, or rather, should not be, a partisan issue. The man has gone too far and any honest person would have to admit that. All I see when I look down, something jumpin' on the ground, Scratchin' dirt, cluckin' in the barnyard - Tell me, could that be you? John Kay

Jan 5, 2006, 09:29 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	I heard on C-SPAN that this issue is bleeding through the borders of the law, and prompting other violations of the constitution by the government putting permanenet gag orders on anybody who provides information on those being investigated. An issue that does not seem to come up on the news broadcasts.

Jan 5, 2006, 11:59 am	#7 (permalink) (top)
lili462 Bitchin'! Location: ohio Posts: 210	Does anyone think that this program could be good lines for a Bush Impeachment? It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on peersonal freedom is what it is, okay?. Keep that in mind at all times, thank you.

Jan 6, 2006, 08:25 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
Zeebadee Volcanic Erupter Posts: 3,799	For the general interest, a good primer on communications intel - http://www.iptvreports.mcmail.com/ic2kreport.htm#N_92_ NSA and Iraq - http://www.aci.net/kalliste/speccoll.htm "Everybody knows that the boat is leaking Everybody knows that the captain lied." - Leonard Cohen