| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/23/2006 06:08:55 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by jmritz:
Finally, a rant thread I can read thats political. Things were getting so boring with all that talk about cameras and photo taking. I was almost of the belief that the site was a photo site. This is more like it.
Please don't let me interrupt, Continue.. |
Tell me about it ... I almost had to resort to learning a new Photoshop technique just for something to do! Oh, the humanity ... |
Hehehe:) |
|
|
|
01/23/2006 06:34:00 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Bush has the balls to go against the grain and do what's right for the USA, not everybody else.
It's very easy to sit in another country who isn't a target of terrorist attacks and judge. Lets see how open mined you would be if you lost family to a major bombing in one of your major cities. |
I think that part of the problem is close-mindedness. Fundamentalism breeds in closed minded communities. And there are a number of cities that have experienced much worse bombing on a much wider scale. I hope that the citizens of those cities can see past the agression that they suffer, and do not decide to "do what is right for Iraq, not the rest of the world."
|
|
|
|
01/23/2006 07:42:13 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
wouldn't in just be easier for Bush to resign and get a real president like Clinton ? |
Clinton? You can't be serious. I'll agree that Bush isn't the greatest President we've ever had, probably far from it - but Clinton, not a chance. Most people have conveniently fogotten that the economy started it's downward spiral during the Clinton years. Oh, and have we forgotten Somalia and Haiti?
Originally posted by DanSig:
while Clinton was president of the USA the world hit an all time low warcount, but in the few years that Bush has been president the world has hit an all time high warcount, and the USA has lost more soldiers in those years than they have since WW2. |
For what it's worth to this discussion, US casualties in Korea and Viet Nam were 54 and 58 thousand respectively.
Originally posted by DanSig:
so there is obviously no reason to spy on the public, and nothing that can justify it when everything can go back to normal just by Bush resigning. |
I think Bush is in a can't win situation here. He's currently being condemned for his positon on the "spying", but if another 9/11 happens and we were not doing everything possible to provide advanced intelligence, he would be condemned for that too.
Things will never be back to "normal" the way we once knew it. And it pains me to say that.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2006 09:10:14 PM · #29 |
He pissed me off when he went through Wisconsin last year (or the year before, I can't remember which). I was made to carry my sick daughter about half a mile because they wouldn't let me cross the street in my van. This was when Bush was still 30 minutes away (in another state still). I was irate!!!
All the times I saw Clinton (and was iritated) never compared to how irate I was at Bush this time. I know, I know, it wasn't Bush's fault I couldn't get home, at least not directly, but I was pissed. Especially since they were letting people drive on the road I wanted to cross, just not letting anyone cross it. Grrrr. |
|
|
|
01/23/2006 09:23:08 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
If you don't have anything to hide, why worry about it? Spying that is.
Republican, and PROUD of it! ;^) |
One issue is, of course, whether spying on ourselves is something that we all want to tolerate in order to prevent terrorist acts. I have nothing to hide, yet don't believe that we've reached the point where I would agree that our country is at that point.
However, the MUCH larger issue is that we have a president who has broken the law, and then scoffs at those who object. And the law has to do, not with something personal like extramarital sex, but with the civil liberties that are the law of the land. This is not the first time that this president has decided that the executive branch should simply grab power as it sees fit (e.g., the detainees at Guatanamo, the twisted definitions of "enemy combatants" that seem to allow contravention of the Geneva accords as well as U.S. law, the designation of a U.S. citizen as an "enemy combatant", etc.)
I believe something much more dangerous & insidious than just a few tapped phone calls is happening here, and that the consequences of ignoring this type of action is already very serious, and heading nowhere good.
Message edited by author 2006-01-23 21:25:33. |
|
|
|
01/23/2006 10:00:16 PM · #31 |
| One little irony of the OP is that of course no American can just go to hear the current president speak if he comes to your town. Any person who is in the audience at a presidential speech is there by invitation. The ability to see the leader of our country has been discontinued, and the lack of dicord that this creates ought to insure that all future presidents do the same to keep reporting of the speach on message. as an interested American who lives near a major city I have seen presidents Ford, Carter, Regan and Clinton at public events. I will probably never see another one without paying. |
|
|
|
01/23/2006 11:22:32 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by NathanW:
He pissed me off when he went through Wisconsin last year (or the year before, I can't remember which). I was made to carry my sick daughter about half a mile because they wouldn't let me cross the street in my van. This was when Bush was still 30 minutes away (in another state still). I was irate!!!
All the times I saw Clinton (and was iritated) never compared to how irate I was at Bush this time. I know, I know, it wasn't Bush's fault I couldn't get home, at least not directly, but I was pissed. Especially since they were letting people drive on the road I wanted to cross, just not letting anyone cross it. Grrrr. |
That happens with all presidents. I lived in wisconsin when clinton was pres and recall a time he sat in his plane and got a haircut. Because he was in the plane, the airport was closed for 2 hours while he got his hair cut. No planes landed or took off.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2006 11:35:21 PM · #33 |
If my neighbor is talking to osama bin laden on the phone I hope someone listens in on the call, legal or not.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2006 11:51:35 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
If my neighbor is talking to osama bin laden on the phone I hope someone listens in on the call, legal or not. |
Agreed!
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 12:16:21 AM · #35 |
| One truth in life that is easy to understand is...that it is easy to judge another person whether right or wrong. We don't look at ourselves with the same eye. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 12:22:55 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
If my neighbor is talking to osama bin laden on the phone I hope someone listens in on the call, legal or not. |
I don't think most people here have a problem with something like that with court approval which is relatively easy to get. I'm for wiretapping with a court approved warrant. However, surveillance of US citizens should be controlled through the checks and balances between the branches of government. What most people object to in the present situation is the possibility for the kind of surveillance abuse and possible political bullying/extortion that went on in the FBI of J. Edgar Hoover. What safeguards are in place to make sure that members of the Executive branch are not infringing on your rights?
Message edited by author 2006-01-24 00:26:08. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 12:30:05 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
If my neighbor is talking to osama bin laden on the phone I hope someone listens in on the call, legal or not. |
I don't think most people here have a problem with something like that with court approval which is relatively easy to get. I'm for wiretapping with a court approved warrant. However, surveillance of US citizens should be controlled through the checks and balances between the branches of government. What most people object to in the present situation is the possibility for the kind of surveillance abuse and possible political bullying/extortion that went on in the FBI of J. Edgar Hoover. What safeguards are in place to make sure that members of the Executive branch are not infringing on your rights? |
Ditto! I would be very uncomfortable being tapped. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 03:09:46 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by petrakka:
Is it wrong that I am incredibly irritated by someone who says he wants our country to be invaded so 'we know what it feels like'
Dude was 9/11 not an invasion!?
I'm going into anything about the war, or the president blah blah, cuz I'm not a fan of war either. But please, if you are going to speak about political issues in the United States, don't do it from the safety of beautiful land up north. I'm all for visiting and becoming educated about countries all over the world, but I would not speak about the politics of the country until I had at least lived there for awhile.
It's so much easier to take what you hear and read and spew off on that, rather than living in the country. You might feel different if you lived here and were surrounded by people with other ideals. |
actually 9/11 was NOT an invasion, it was a terrorist attack made by a small group of people, a real invasion would be when 100.000.000 chineese soldiers would come marching through every street in every major city in the states.
and i wouldn't want to live in the states while Bush is president, the USA is the one of the most restricted country in the world, second to countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other really frightening places.
you American can't seee that because you live in the country and for decades the US goverment has screend the news brodcasted through the states, the first man in decades to contradict what the goverment says is Michael Moore, and he's not a big favorite in the white house ;)
we europeeans see news from all over the world made by freelance reporters that don't answer to anyone, so we see things as they are, not as the goverment wants us to see it, and the news we see from Iraq are all like this
"US troops shot and killed 20 innocent people most were women and children after a bomb went of in a car nearby, nobody got injured in the bombing"
the report you see is like this
"US troops shot 3 terrorists after they blew up a car killing 20 innocent people"
not exactly the same story, but the same event told by one US reporter that was briefed after the incident and one freelance that was on site and saw what went down.
while the US goverment behaves that way it's not a country that free people wants to move to ;)
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 03:18:09 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
Originally posted by petrakka:
Is it wrong that I am incredibly irritated by someone who says he wants our country to be invaded so 'we know what it feels like'
Dude was 9/11 not an invasion!?
I'm going into anything about the war, or the president blah blah, cuz I'm not a fan of war either. But please, if you are going to speak about political issues in the United States, don't do it from the safety of beautiful land up north. I'm all for visiting and becoming educated about countries all over the world, but I would not speak about the politics of the country until I had at least lived there for awhile.
It's so much easier to take what you hear and read and spew off on that, rather than living in the country. You might feel different if you lived here and were surrounded by people with other ideals. |
actually 9/11 was NOT an invasion, it was a terrorist attack made by a small group of people, a real invasion would be when 100.000.000 chineese soldiers would come marching through every street in every major city in the states.
and i wouldn't want to live in the states while Bush is president, the USA is the one of the most restricted country in the world, second to countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other really frightening places.
you American can't seee that because you live in the country and for decades the US goverment has screend the news brodcasted through the states, the first man in decades to contradict what the goverment says is Michael Moore, and he's not a big favorite in the white house ;)
we europeeans see news from all over the world made by freelance reporters that don't answer to anyone, so we see things as they are, not as the goverment wants us to see it, and the news we see from Iraq are all like this
"US troops shot and killed 20 innocent people most were women and children after a bomb went of in a car nearby, nobody got injured in the bombing"
the report you see is like this
"US troops shot 3 terrorists after they blew up a car killing 20 innocent people"
not exactly the same story, but the same event told by one US reporter that was briefed after the incident and one freelance that was on site and saw what went down.
while the US goverment behaves that way it's not a country that free people wants to move to ;) |
Anybody who likes Michael Moore is a fucking idiot. Enough said.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 06:25:21 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Anybody who likes Michael Moore is a fucking idiot. Enough said. |
I think that this is the kind of non-argument that is causing some people some problems regarding civility on the forums.
Michael Moore can be criticised for bias, for which reason it is unfortunate that he is often cited in support of arguments critical of Bush. However, this does not mean that all of his arguments are invalid, merely that some of them are insufficiently supported by the evidence that he produces.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 06:46:50 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
and i wouldn't want to live in the states while Bush is president, the USA is the one of the most restricted country in the world, second to countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other really frightening places.
you American can't seee that because you live in the country and for decades the US goverment has screend the news brodcasted through the states, the first man in decades to contradict what the goverment says is Michael Moore, and he's not a big favorite in the white house ;)
|
Michael Moore is a complete fool. It's almost embarrassing, the degree of effect he had and that he had become such a high profile mouthpiece for the more left leaning thinkers when there were so many people making far wiser, more factual arguments all around. His smarmy brand of politics single-handedly killed any source of honest debate in the country...at least in the mass media. Sad, sad, sad...
Now saying that the US is one of the most restricted countries in the world and comparing it to Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan is...to put it politely, incredibly far from accurate.
Message edited by author 2006-01-24 09:10:34. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 08:18:14 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
actually 9/11 was NOT an invasion, it was a terrorist attack made by a small group of people, a real invasion would be when 100.000.000 chineese soldiers would come marching through every street in every major city in the states.
and i wouldn't want to live in the states while Bush is president, the USA is the one of the most restricted country in the world, second to countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other really frightening places.
you American can't seee that because you live in the country and for decades the US goverment has screend the news brodcasted through the states, the first man in decades to contradict what the goverment says is Michael Moore, and he's not a big favorite in the white house ;)
we europeeans see news from all over the world made by freelance reporters that don't answer to anyone, so we see things as they are, not as the goverment wants us to see it, and the news we see from Iraq are all like this
"US troops shot and killed 20 innocent people most were women and children after a bomb went of in a car nearby, nobody got injured in the bombing"
the report you see is like this
"US troops shot 3 terrorists after they blew up a car killing 20 innocent people"
not exactly the same story, but the same event told by one US reporter that was briefed after the incident and one freelance that was on site and saw what went down.
while the US goverment behaves that way it's not a country that free people wants to move to ;) |
OK, you made up "facts" in stating that the conflict in Iraq is responsible for more deaths than any war since WWII - completely incorrect.
You apparently use the word of Michael Moore as the gospel regarding what is happening in the US.
You compare living in the US to Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other really frightening places.
And you top it off by saying we are spoon-fed news that has been screened by the government and don't know what is "really" happening (did you ever stop to think that some of those "freelance" reporters and newspapers that you refer to might have agendas too?). Are you suggesting that US reporters submit stories to a government agency and then they distribute it? Or the reporters are actually government agents required to put a certain spin on the news they report? Ridiculous and laughable statements. Can you say "Global Community?" Of course maybe what I see on the net has gone through some sort of scrubber too LOL.
You really need to get a grip on reality before you post.
Message edited by author 2006-01-24 10:27:53. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 09:57:32 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
Iso there is obviously no reason to spy on the public |
Every country that I can think of at the moment spy's on its own population. It is part of law enforcement. Criminal enterprises and/or suspected criminal enterprises are infiltrated, surveiled, and monitored. France, Germany, Australia, England, Ireland, Italy, Russia, China, Irag, Iran, Syria, etc, all spy on their own populations. The question on this most recent
news" item is whether it was "authorized" or "unauthorized". The left calims it was unathorized while the right believes it was done within the scope of powers. The fact that the congress was "briefed" indicates that some authorization was given. Whether it was enough considering the potential for misuse, is another question. The left is using this as a political hammer instead of addressing the more important issue of how to authorize clandestine spying on one's citizens while safegaurding their liberty. Some will argue that the system in the US was already established and was ignored. This doesn't wash with me, as it supposes that the "secret" intent of violating this system is to establish a precedent so that total and unchecked spying can occurr against the population at random. That is already the case. Cameras and monitors are everywhere. We the photographers of the world capture images of non-consenting subjects every day. Police officers spy along roadways to sting the speeders. Undercover narcotics officers make drug buys to sting dealers. Vegas has an entire subworld spying on every patron and gambler. NY, Chicago, LA, London, Belfast, Cairo, Moscow, have monitors at nearly every corner. Airports (worldwide) spy on you from the moment you enter their premises.
The issue here is whether intercepting phonecalls or emails of suspected terrorists or those with contacts to terrorists that originate in another country with known terrorist operations, should be monitored and if they should be, who has to authorize it before it takes place. The politics is quite dis-igenuous. The claim of the evil of domestic spying against one's own citizens, is false on its face. We already do that.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 10:55:46 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Sounds like too many fans of Orson Welle's '1984' and the "Big Brother" conspiracy to me. |
Let me see...
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Bush has the balls to go against the grain and do what's right for the USA, not everybody else. |
WAR IS PEACE
Originally posted by glad2badad:
If you don't have anything to hide, why worry about it? Spying that is. |
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
Originally posted by petrakka:
Dude was 9/11 not an invasion!? |
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Yep.
Message edited by author 2006-01-24 10:57:59.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 10:59:25 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Anybody who likes Michael Moore is a fucking idiot. Enough said. |
who said I liked him, he's just the only americn I've seen that tells the other side of public issues.
and about the restrictions they are acurate, not for you americans, but for us foreigners wanting to travel to the states !
Iceland is one of very few countries with A graded passports, there are no restirctions against Icelanders anywhere, exept in the states, there we have to get visa, we have to pass the coverment aproval on politic, we may not be on record anywhere, and so on...
USA is the only country that treat Icelanders in this way, ALL other countries welcome Icelanders no matter what they are like or what they think !
|
|
|
|
01/24/2006 11:06:07 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
USA is the only country that treat Icelanders in this way, ALL other countries welcome Icelanders no matter what they are like or what they think ! |
My Mama always told me "Never trust an Icelander."
;) |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 11:22:07 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Anybody who likes Michael Moore is a fucking idiot. Enough said. |
Thanks for insulting me. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 11:36:45 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Sounds like too many fans of Orson Welle's '1984' and the "Big Brother" conspiracy to me. |
Let me see...
Yep. |
Didn't Tony Orlando write "1984"?
...or maybe George Orwell???
Not to call anyone names but you'd have to be foolish to trust our government. It's for sale...make no mistake about that. This little campaign finance scandal is only the tip of the iceberg.
Message edited by author 2006-01-24 11:43:06. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 11:43:40 AM · #49 |
.
Message edited by author 2006-01-24 11:59:41. |
|
|
|
01/24/2006 12:06:55 PM · #50 |
It was George Orwell, not Orson Welles, that wrote 1984. Thanks for the correction.
BTW - Tony Orlando always makes me think of yellow ribbons. ;^)
|
|
