|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/25/2004 03:18:23 PM · #1101 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Because of few terrorists we are restricting many freedoms to 260 mil people,this is going too far !
They should educate citizens to become a part of the national defense,to watch,listen and report, but restricting freedom to protest or to photograph is ridiculous ! |
I kinda see what you are saying......however a few terrorists can kill thousands of people...thats a fact.
If people were taken out and jailed because they had anti-Bush tee shirts...thats just silly. |
1700 people are murdered in Chicago every year,30000 + in the States,there are lot of street terrorists out there,but you do not need KGB style measures to protect the people ! |
|
|
|
07/25/2004 03:37:02 PM · #1102 |
| I think what you are saying is that it is better to maintaun all our freedoms and be destroyed. If all the dead could come back from the World Trade center bombing what do you think they would say? No, I am not affraid of death. We can meet death at any turn, but I am concerned about another key attack which can reder this country helpless. |
|
|
|
07/25/2004 03:59:53 PM · #1103 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Riggs:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Because of few terrorists we are restricting many freedoms to 260 mil people,this is going too far !
They should educate citizens to become a part of the national defense,to watch,listen and report, but restricting freedom to protest or to photograph is ridiculous ! |
I kinda see what you are saying......however a few terrorists can kill thousands of people...thats a fact.
If people were taken out and jailed because they had anti-Bush tee shirts...thats just silly. |
1700 people are murdered in Chicago every year,30000 + in the States,there are lot of street terrorists out there,but you do not need KGB style measures to protect the people ! |
No doubt there are WAY to many murders...not just in the USA...but everywhere...there is alot of hatred in this world...unfortunatly.
But they did not fly jets into buildings with the sole intention of killing thousands.
For the record...I said it was stupid to arrest people that had anti-Bush tee shirts. |
|
|
|
07/25/2004 05:58:07 PM · #1104 |
<<< There is no way for the demonstrators to pass written materials to the convention delegates. >>>
Yes there is; it is called mail...............
|
|
|
|
07/25/2004 09:54:11 PM · #1105 |
Originally posted by frychikn:
<<< There is no way for the demonstrators to pass written materials to the convention delegates. >>>
Yes there is; it is called mail............... |
You're kidding, right?
========================
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Anything the Congress is forbidden to do by the Constitution is similarly proscribed to all State and local authorities. These delegates are part of the formation of the new government, and are supposed to be representing the general population -- to say you can't tell your own representatives what you think borders on the inane ... |
|
|
|
07/25/2004 10:10:54 PM · #1106 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by frychikn:
<<< There is no way for the demonstrators to pass written materials to the convention delegates. >>>
Yes there is; it is called mail............... |
You're kidding, right?
========================
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Anything the Congress is forbidden to do by the Constitution is similarly proscribed to all State and local authorities. These delegates are part of the formation of the new government, and are supposed to be representing the general population -- to say you can't tell your own representatives what you think borders on the inane ... |
No, I'm not kidding. What, if somebody doesn't agree with you 100% they have no credibility? I have the right of free speech too as you have so sanctimoneously (sp?) quoted above, and I am going to use it as I please whether you like it or not. |
|
|
|
07/25/2004 10:41:50 PM · #1107 |
Originally posted by frychikn:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by frychikn:
<<< There is no way for the demonstrators to pass written materials to the convention delegates. >>>
Yes there is; it is called mail............... |
You're kidding, right?
========================
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Anything the Congress is forbidden to do by the Constitution is similarly proscribed to all State and local authorities. These delegates are part of the formation of the new government, and are supposed to be representing the general population -- to say you can't tell your own representatives what you think borders on the inane ... |
No, I'm not kidding. What, if somebody doesn't agree with you 100% they have no credibility? I have the right of free speech too as you have so sanctimoneously (sp?) quoted above, and I am going to use it as I please whether you like it or not. |
So to paraphrase, you think they shouldn't peaceably assemble, but send their petition in by mail ? Next it'll be that that silly right to bear arms against the current government bit should be removed too...
Message edited by author 2004-07-25 22:42:34.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2004 11:36:43 PM · #1108 |
<<< So to paraphrase, you think they shouldn't peaceably assemble, but send their petition in by mail ? Next it'll be that that silly right to bear arms against the current government bit should be removed too...
>>>
Paraphrase my foot, you are simply (mis)quoting out of context and then following it up by jumping to unwarranted conclusions. |
|
|
|
07/25/2004 11:47:04 PM · #1109 |
Originally posted by frychikn:
<<< So to paraphrase, you think they shouldn't peaceably assemble, but send their petition in by mail ? Next it'll be that that silly right to bear arms against the current government bit should be removed too...
>>>
Paraphrase my foot, you are simply (mis)quoting out of context and then following it up by jumping to unwarranted conclusions. |
This "section" started with my posting an announcement that demonstrators at the DNC were going to be locked up in a compound with double fences and razor wire, and you suggested they should just mail their petitions in, and they didn't "need" to assemble.
I then supported my position by quoting the US Constitution. Your response seemed to consider the constitutional issue unimportant, and chose instead to focus on the implication that my goal was to undermine your credibility. Actually, I think your credibility speaks for itself quite adequately. |
|
|
|
07/26/2004 03:32:44 AM · #1110 |
Originally posted by frychikn:
<<< So to paraphrase, you think they shouldn't peaceably assemble, but send their petition in by mail ? Next it'll be that that silly right to bear arms against the current government bit should be removed too...
>>>
Paraphrase my foot, you are simply (mis)quoting out of context and then following it up by jumping to unwarranted conclusions. |
Perhaps you'd like to explain what you meant by the comment that they should just mail in their protests then, if it didn't mean that they shouldn't have a right to assemble and express their grievancies directly to their elected employees ?
|
|
|
|
07/26/2004 12:44:31 PM · #1111 |
ON THIS DAY
On July 26, 1947, President Truman signed the National Security Act, creating the Department of Defense, the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
|
|
|
|
07/26/2004 01:22:03 PM · #1112 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
ON THIS DAY
On July 26, 1947, President Truman signed the National Security Act, creating the Department of Defense, the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. |
Evil democrats. ;) |
|
|
|
07/26/2004 01:27:22 PM · #1113 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
ON THIS DAY
On July 26, 1947, President Truman signed the National Security Act, creating the Department of Defense, the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. |
Evil democrats. ;) |
Yet even President Eisenhower wasn't able to derail the shift of power from the citizenry to the Military-Industrial Complex, which so benefitted so many of his successors.
 |
|
|
|
07/26/2004 07:52:46 PM · #1114 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by frychikn:
<<< So to paraphrase, you think they shouldn't peaceably assemble, but send their petition in by mail ? Next it'll be that that silly right to bear arms against the current government bit should be removed too...
>>>
Paraphrase my foot, you are simply (mis)quoting out of context and then following it up by jumping to unwarranted conclusions. |
This "section" started with my posting an announcement that demonstrators at the DNC were going to be locked up in a compound with double fences and razor wire, and you suggested they should just mail their petitions in, and they didn't "need" to assemble.
I then supported my position by quoting the US Constitution. Your response seemed to consider the constitutional issue unimportant, and chose instead to focus on the implication that my goal was to undermine your credibility. Actually, I think your credibility speaks for itself quite adequately. |
You know, this is getting to be ridiculous. I want somebody to show exactly where, in any of my posts, where I stated (or even implied, for that matter) that demonstrators should not be allowed to assemble. Also kindly show me where I stated (or even implied) that a constitutional issue was unimportant.
You stated that the demonstrators had no way to pass any written materials to the convention delegates. My reply was that they could use the mail to do so. Actually, if the mail is too slow they can use any messenger service. I'm sorry if my reply got you all bent out of shape, but like I said I have first amendment rights also and I will use them.
You said the demonstrators are 'locked in' to the set-aside demonstration area. Are you implying they are not allowed to leave the area if they wish to do so? I find that rather hard to believe.
The Boston authorities need to balance the rights of the demonstrators (many of whom have threatened to disrupt the convention) to assemble with the rights of others, such as the right of the conventioneers to also assemble, the rights of Boston residents to go to and from their jobs, residences, business, etc. without being impeded.
I'm getting a little tired of you and your self-righteous leftist preaching to those who don't agree with you. I remember a couple of weeks ago when one of your lefist friends was whining about being insulted in a political arguement, and I reminded him that he had called the person a 'chickenhawk'. You then replied to MY post (which didn't insult anybody) talking about 'cut out the name-calling, etc. or I will have to take further action'.
Yes, you are correct; my credibility speaks for itself. Unfortunatly, so does yours. |
|
|
|
07/29/2004 10:37:26 PM · #1115 |
Originally posted by frychikn:
I'm getting a little tired of you and your self-righteous leftist preaching to those who don't agree with you. I remember a couple of weeks ago when one of your lefist friends was whining about being insulted in a political arguement, and I reminded him that he had called the person a 'chickenhawk'. You then replied to MY post (which didn't insult anybody) talking about 'cut out the name-calling, etc. or I will have to take further action'.
Yes, you are correct; my credibility speaks for itself. Unfortunatly, so does yours. |
"Chickenhawk" is an established part of the political argot of the day, although you will note that I assiduously (and occassionally with some effort) refrain from any such name-calling myself. Note too that I thought it would be obvious that my comment was addressed to the previous several posts, in which the name-calling was starting to escalate. If you thought it was directed solely at you I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Maybe you'd like to read this article on the meaning of the Fourth of July and Patriotism by a true Korean War (excuse me, "Police Action") veteran, and long-time Republican Congressman from San Mateo County, California, Pete McCloskey. |
|
|
|
08/02/2004 01:31:57 PM · #1116 |
   Another F.B.I. Employee Blows Whistle on Agency
    By Eric Lichtblau
    New York Times
    Monday 02 August 2004
    Washington - As a veteran agent chasing home-grown terrorist suspects for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mike German always had a knack for worming his way into places few other agents could go.
    In the early 1990's, he infiltrated a group of white supremacist skinheads plotting to blow up a black church in Los Angeles. A few years later, he joined a militia in Washington State that talked of attacking government buildings. Known to his fellow militia members as Rock, he tricked them into handcuffing themselves in a supposed training exercise so the authorities could arrest them.
    So in early 2002, when Mr. German got word that a group of Americans might be plotting support for an overseas Islamic terrorist group, he proposed to his bosses what he thought was an obvious plan: go undercover and infiltrate the group.
    But Mr. German says F.B.I. officials sat on his request, botched the investigation, falsified documents to discredit their own sources, then froze him out and made him a "pariah." He left the bureau in mid-June after 16 years and is now going public for the first time - the latest in a string of F.B.I. whistle-blowers who claim they were retaliated against after voicing concerns about how management problems had impeded terrorism investigations since the Sept. 11 attacks.
    "What's so frustrating for me," Mr. German said in an interview, a copy of the Sept. 11 commission report at his side, "is that what I hear the F.B.I. saying every day on TV when I get home, about how it's remaking itself to fight terrorism, is not the reality of what I saw every day in the field."
    Mr. German refused to discuss details of the 2002 terrorism investigation, saying the information was classified.
.......................
 Some law enforcement officials remain somewhat skeptical of Mr. German's claims. But several prominent senators who have been privately briefed on the case in recent weeks said they were troubled by what they learned.
    "Retaliating against F.B.I. agents and employees who point out problems or raise concerns seems to be becoming the rule, not the exception," said Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa. He noted that Robert S. Mueller III, acting director of the bureau, "has said many times that whistle-blower retaliation is unacceptable, yet it looks like some F.B.I. bureaucrats haven't gotten the message."
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.) |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 02:13:33 AM · #1117 |
The New York Times
Ashcroft's Quiet Prisoner
By BOB HERBERT
Published: August 13, 2004
Miami — David Joseph is a little guy, about 5-foot-5, maybe 115 pounds. He's 20 years old, looks younger, and has the sluggish demeanor and sad expression of one who is deeply depressed. He has nightmares and headaches. He spends his days dressed in the blue fatigues of detainees at the federal Krome Detention Center, washing dishes at mealtimes, staring listlessly at television images broadcast in a language he doesn't understand, and praying.
"I thought I would come here for a few days and be released," he told me in a soft voice, his words translated by an interpreter. "But I watch the other people come and go, and I am stuck here."
Mr. Joseph is a refugee from Haiti who is seeking asylum in the United States. He is not a terrorist, and no one has even suggested that he is a threat to anyone. And yet he's been in federal custody for nearly two years.
An immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals have ruled that he should be freed on bond, pending a final ruling on his asylum request. But the attorney general of the United States, John Ashcroft, won't let him go.
Playing his ever-present, all-encompassing terrorism card, Mr. Ashcroft personally intervened in Mr. Joseph's case, summarily blocking his release. According to the attorney general, releasing this young Haitian would tend to encourage mass migration from Haiti, and might exacerbate the potential danger to national security of nefarious aliens from Pakistan and elsewhere who might be inclined to use Haiti as a staging area for migration to the U.S.
Mr. Ashcroft has been out in the Washington sun too long. Terrorism is not an issue here. Mr. Joseph is a nervous, nail-biting young man who has an uncle in Brooklyn who's a U.S. citizen and would be only too happy to take in his nephew. Keeping Mr. Joseph imprisoned for years is inhumane.
What's really at work here is the Bush administration's unwillingness to budge even an inch from its unfair and frequently cruel treatment of Haitians seeking refuge in the United States.
Mr. Joseph and a younger brother, Daniel, were among more than 200 Haitians aboard a boat that landed at Key Biscayne, Fla., in October 2002. The boys' immediate family had been viciously attacked in the political turmoil that wracked their homeland, and David Joseph still does not know whether the mother and father he left behind are alive. (Daniel, a teenager, is reportedly in foster care in New York.)
The United States may be a beacon of liberty, but when someone like David Joseph sails toward that beacon he can find himself perversely embraced in the barbed wire of a place like Krome.
"He was fleeing persecution,'' said Selena Mendy Singleton, a vice president of TransAfrica Forum, a research and policy group that is among several organizations supporting Mr. Joseph's request for asylum. "He is not a threat to the community. He is not a terrorist. And he meets the criteria to be released on bond. David needs to be let out."
Mr. Ashcroft was pointedly questioned about the Joseph case by Senator Arlen Specter during an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June.
"On April 17 of last year," said Mr. Specter, "an issue came before you where there was a young Haitian refugee where there had not been any showing of a problem with respect to terrorism. And you overruled both the immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals. And then the inspector general of the Department of Justice criticized the department for the failure to distinguish between immigration detainees who are connected to terrorism and those who don't have any reason for detention.''
Senator Specter urged Mr. Ashcroft to consider a policy in which the Justice Department would address cases like Mr. Joseph's on a less sweeping, "more individual" basis, which would enable officials to determine whether there was any real basis for concern about terrorism.
Mr. Ashcroft was unmoved. He told Senator Specter: "Sometimes individual treatment is important. Sometimes it's important to make a statement about groups of people that come."
So David Joseph, a threat to no one, sits and waits and prays at Krome. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 02:57:41 AM · #1118 |
If you want TRUE freedom not just an illusion created by systematic brainwashing move to Australia.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 03:34:02 AM · #1119 |
Originally posted by BooZon:
If you want TRUE freedom not just an illusion created by systematic brainwashing move to Australia. |
We'll save Australia
Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo
We'll build an All-American amusement park there
They got surfin' too ...
--Randy Newman, Political Science
Message edited by author 2004-08-15 03:34:17. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 10:31:10 AM · #1120 |
Those stories are all too common General :/
This is a very interesting story about the Washington Post taking a self look at its pre-war stories and questioning that had the rest of the media been more challenging of the administration we may not have gone to war. After all, the media is our only source into what the people running our world are doing.
The Post on WMDs: An Inside Story
Prewar Articles Questioning Threat Often Didn't Make Front Page
Washington Post Article
Also, here are peoples reactions to that article.
On a similar note, has anyone seen "Outfoxed" yet?
Message edited by author 2004-08-15 10:33:40. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 02:42:15 PM · #1121 |
Link to Original
On Tuesday, August 10th, 2004, George W. Bush nominated Florida Rep. Porter Goss to head the Central Intelligence Agency.
Rep. Porter Goss, appeared briefly in Michael Moore's 'Fahrenheit 9/11.' But part of his March 3, 2004 interview for the movie, which did not make it into the film, has suddenly taken on major significance. The following is an excerpt from the interview:
INTERVIEWER: You come from intelligence. This is what you did, this is what you know.
REP. GOSS: Uh, that was, uh, 35 years ago.
INTERVIEWER: Okay.
REP. GOSS: It is true I was in CIA from approximately the late 50's to approximately the early 70's. And it's true I was a case officer, clandestine services office and yes I do understand the core mission of the business. I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified. I don't have the language skills. I, you know, my language skills were romance languages and stuff. We're looking for Arabists today. I don't have the cultural background probably. And I certainly don't have the technical skills, uh, as my children remind me every day, "Dad you got to get better on your computer." Uh, so, the things that you need to have, I don't have.
-- Rep. Porter Goss, March 3, 2004, Washington, DC
These statements directly contradict President Bush's comments on Mr. Goss. Pointing to his CIA experience, Bush said, "He knows the CIA inside and out" and "He's the right man to lead this important agency at this critical moment in our nation's history."
================================
The man must have been taking night courses at Langley for the last few months to become re-qualified so quickly ... |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 03:32:22 PM · #1122 |
Original
Goss's Wish List
Bush's CIA nominee has alarmed civil libertarians with a plan that would authorize the agency to arrest U.S. citizens. Plus, the real threat to the Olympic games
WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek
Updated: 6:39 p.m. ET Aug. 11, 2004
Aug. 11 - Rep. Porter Goss, President Bush's nominee to head the CIA, recently introduced legislation that would give the president new authority to direct CIA agents to conduct law-enforcement operations inside the United States--including arresting American citizens.
The legislation, introduced by Goss on June 16 and touted as an "intelligence reform" bill, would substantially restructure the U.S. intelligence community by giving the director of Central Intelligence (DCI) broad new powers to oversee its various components scattered throughout the government.
But in language that until now has not gotten any public attention, the Goss bill would also redefine the authority of the DCI in such a way as to substantially alter--if not overturn--a 57-year-old ban on the CIA conducting operations inside the United States.
The language contained in the Goss bill has alarmed civil-liberties advocates. It also today prompted one former top CIA official to describe it as a potentially "dramatic" change in the guidelines that have governed U.S. intelligence operations for more than a half century.
"This language on its face would have allowed President Nixon to authorize the CIA to bug the Democratic National Committee headquarters," Jeffrey H. Smith, who served as general counsel of the CIA between 1995 and 1996, told NEWSWEEK. "I can’t imagine what Porter had in mind." |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 03:34:49 PM · #1123 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Link to Original
On Tuesday, August 10th, 2004, George W. Bush nominated Florida Rep. Porter Goss to head the Central Intelligence Agency.
Rep. Porter Goss, appeared briefly in Michael Moore's 'Fahrenheit 9/11.' But part of his March 3, 2004 interview for the movie, which did not make it into the film, has suddenly taken on major significance. The following is an excerpt from the interview:
INTERVIEWER: You come from intelligence. This is what you did, this is what you know.
REP. GOSS: Uh, that was, uh, 35 years ago.
INTERVIEWER: Okay.
REP. GOSS: It is true I was in CIA from approximately the late 50's to approximately the early 70's. And it's true I was a case officer, clandestine services office and yes I do understand the core mission of the business. I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified. I don't have the language skills. I, you know, my language skills were romance languages and stuff. We're looking for Arabists today. I don't have the cultural background probably. And I certainly don't have the technical skills, uh, as my children remind me every day, "Dad you got to get better on your computer." Uh, so, the things that you need to have, I don't have.
-- Rep. Porter Goss, March 3, 2004, Washington, DC
These statements directly contradict President Bush's comments on Mr. Goss. Pointing to his CIA experience, Bush said, "He knows the CIA inside and out" and "He's the right man to lead this important agency at this critical moment in our nation's history."
================================
The man must have been taking night courses at Langley for the last few months to become re-qualified so quickly ... |
This is just stupid, though as there's already been a thread pointing out how stupid it is, it probably isn't worth rehashing the stupidity on display. |
|
|
|
08/30/2004 11:12:34 AM · #1124 |
|
|
|
08/30/2004 11:35:14 AM · #1125 |
Damn, talk about telling it like it is. Lots of colorful analogies and metaphors; very well said. Its not as long as the scroll bar on the right would lead to believe, have a read. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 06/13/2025 10:51:43 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/13/2025 10:51:43 AM EDT.
|
