so would this have any thing to do with the fema consentration "death" camps wich tottal around 800 facilitys in the u.s and with bush merging the national security with fema, if martial law was put into place god only knows what would become of us.
and what about the merge of canada mexico and the u.s and the end of individual curency to put inplace a singe curency to be used with the merge? whats hapening with our contry??
SECURITY
Extraordinary Measures
A new memo shows just how far the Bush administration considered going in fighting the war on terror.
Mar 2, 2009
-
Posted By: nick2008keith @ 09/03/2009 9:58:34 AM
-
Posted By: Kachi @ 03/04/2009 9:51:58 PM
Bush said the terrorists "hate us because of our freedoms." He & Cheney, et al apparently decided to take our freedoms away from us, just in case . . .
-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/04/2009 10:13:56 PM
Please, tell us what personal freedoms of yours were removed, and they directly affected you.
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/05/2009 4:33:23 PM
Other than amendments I, IV, V, VI, VIII, IX, and X?
Other than that, you mean?-
Posted By: Omaar @ 05/11/2009 10:36:25 AM
THE [PATRIOT ACT]
DUMB A!! READ AND GROW...
DON'T READ AND BE [MISLED] -
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/06/2009 8:08:17 AM
It seems you're looking at this as all or nothing, no matter the cost. It was an extremely limited surveillance program designed to track terrorist activity. An analogy: there's security cameras everywhere now, and I could care less if someone is watching me walk to my car. If it will help stop a rape or an abduction, I'm all for this surveillance.
Likewise, I have no problem if someone who is trying to track down terrorists accidentally hears me talking to my son about a football game. If it will help prevent another massive attack on America and save thousands of lives, it's worth that to me. If it's not worth that to you, that's your business and we'll just have to differ on this.-
Posted By: gerw0007 @ 03/06/2009 9:11:54 AM
DO YOU NOT READ THAT ARTICLE? IT IS PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO ALLOW DESPOTS AND DICTATORS TO RISE TO POWER. . .BECAUSE YOU ARE AFRAID! I SAY THAT YOU OUGHT TO BE AFRAID OF THOSE WHO ARE "PROTECTING" YOU! BECAUSE TODAY, THEY MAY ONLY BE LOOKING FOR "TERRORISTS". . >BUT TOMORROW, IT COULD BE PEOPLE WHO ARE PROTESTING A NEW GOVERNMENT POLICY, OR UNION LEADERS, OR TEACHERS WHO SAY THINGS THAT THE "GOVERNMENT" DOESN'T LIKE.
IF YOU THINK THAT THESE EXPANSIONS OF LIMITLESS POWER CANNOT HAPPEN, WHY DON"T YOU OPEN A HISTORY BOOK SOMETIME! HISTORY IS FULL OF "FREE AND OPEN" NATIONS BEING BROUGHT TO THEIR KNEES. . .FROM WITHIN, BECAUSE THE POPULOUS WAS SO SCARED THAT THEY ALLOWED THEIR GOVERNMENT UN-QUESTIONED POWER AND AUTHORITY TO DO AS THEY DEEMED FIT!
I KNOW IT SEEMS LIKE A STRETCH, BUT LOOK AT GERMANY IN THE 1920's and 1930's. . .THAT NATION WENT FROM AN OPEN AND DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT TO A COMPLETE AND TOTAL PRISON STATE IN THE MATTER OF 8 years (1930 - 1938). . .AND IF YOU THINK THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO GERMANY, A HIGHLY EDUCATED, LITERATE AND POLITICALLY ACTIVE NATION CANNOT HAPPEN HERE. . .YOU NEED TO BE AFRAID OF YOUR IGNORANCE!
FINALLY, COMPARING SECURITY CAMERAS IN THE PARKING LOT OF A WALL -MART, WHICH IS NOTHING MORE THAN A STORE COVERING THEIR LEGAL BEHINDS, TO A GOVERNMENT=SPONSERED VIOLATION OF THE 1st AMENDMENT SHOWS THAT YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE NATURE OF OUR NATON'S FOUNDING! JEFFERSON, WASHINGTON, ADAMS< ETC WOULD BE CALLING FOR A NEW AMERICAN REVOLUTION WERE THEY ALIVE TODAY. . .AND YOU WOULD PROBABLY BE ON THE SIDE OF THE TORRIES!
WAKE UP. . .TODAY THEY ARE GUNNING FOR THE TERRORISTS. . .AND IF YOU GIVE THEM THIS POWER. . .TOMORROW THEY MIGHT BE GUNNING FOR YOU!-
Posted By: Omaar @ 05/11/2009 10:34:31 AM
SEAN HANNITY: YOU ARE QUOTING SEAN HANNITY.
YOU HAVE NO PROBLEMS HAVING YOUR 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY, AS LONG AS IT GEORGE W. BUSH AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DEEMING IT NEEDED AND NECESSARY, UP UNTIL, OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR.
WOW, WHAT A COMMENTARY.
DESPOTS AND DICTATORS HUH...
BUSH-CHENEY WERE [2] OF THE BIGGEST DESPOTS AND DICTATORS EVER AND YOU LOVED THEM TO DEATH.
CHAVEZ: IF CHAVEZ IS THIS DESPOT AND DICTATOR, AS YOU CLAIM, WHY WAS HE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED AND WHY CAN'T YOU DEAL WITH THAT GLARING FACT. JUST LIKE THE PEOPLE OF VENEZUELA DEALT WITH OUR [2 DICTATORS] BUSH-CHENEY WHO WERE ALSO DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED..HMM
FOR A COUNTRY THAT HATES HUGO CHAVEZ, WE SURE PURCHASE & CONSUME A TON OF HIS [CITGO OIL] YOU DO KNOW THAT CHAVEZ'S OIL IS [CITGO OIL] VENEZUELA, BEING THE 3RD LARGEST SUPPLIER OF OIL, TO THE USA. WHY ISN'T CHAVEZ AND HIS OIL [BARRED OR BLOCKED] FROM COMING TO THE SHORES OF THE UNITED STATES AND INTO YOUR AUTOMOBILES..HMM -
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 12:29:14 PM
And it's people like you who seem to care more for the rights of terrorists than you do for the safety of your country. This was a program that was targeted for terrorists, not you. The security camera argument does hold water as it's the same thing. Tell us how that is different? They're there as a tool in crime prevention, not just to cover someone's ass. Wal Mart? You must be joking. You're being video taped on the road and virtually every time you enter a building, restaurant or movie theater. There's no difference, with the exception of with the terrorist surveillance program, terrorists are the only ones targeted. I know you think the government is highly interested in your activities, but if you're not a terrorist, I assure you they're not.
I find it amazing that half of you people want Rush Limbaugh silenced for voicing his opinion, but will give a group of maniacal terrorists the same rights as the rest of Americans.-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/06/2009 1:43:40 PM
"And it's people like you who seem to care more for the rights of terrorists than you do for the safety of your country. "
The constitution is more important than your safety. Sorry about that.-
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 7:57:12 PM
So we think differently. You're willing to trade American lives for your abhorrence with someone listening in on terrorist phone calls.
I'm not.
-
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/06/2009 1:44:44 PM
"There's no difference, with the exception of with the terrorist surveillance program, terrorists are the only ones targeted. I know you think the government is highly interested in your activities, but if you're not a terrorist, I assure you they're not."
The NSA was caught taping the phone calls of soldiers overseas calling home to their families.
Are you saying that our soldiers are terrorists? Why do you hate the troops?-
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 7:53:47 PM
May we see some unbiased proof of that? And where did I ever say I hated our troops? Off on your rewriting tangent again, I see. Take the words you read into my post as shove em'.
-
Posted By: BrainiacV @ 03/06/2009 3:58:11 PM
And exactly how do they determine who is a "terrorist" and who isn't? Do all the terrorists carry a sign? Answer their phones, "Secret terrorist cell, Abdul speaking." ? Just what are the defining characteristics that separate you from a terrorist? On TV shows, the good guys always know, in real life, it's not that simple. You could get accidentally caught up in a sweep and there you'd be in Gitmo claiming you are innocent and waiting to be waterboarded. We NEED our constitutional protections to keep this crap from happening, saying "It doesn't apply to me because I'm not a terrorist." is not to to cut it.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/06/2009 11:39:23 AM
"It seems you're looking at this as all or nothing, no matter the cost. "
Yes. You're either free or you're not. There is no in-between. Patrick Henry would have agreed.-
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 11:45:31 AM
Patrick Henry didn't have the threat of commercial jet airliners flying into buildings. You must have something to hide if you're willing to give terrorists the same rights as the rest of us. Your name suggests as much.
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/06/2009 1:39:47 PM
"Patrick Henry didn't have the threat of commercial jet airliners flying into buildings. "
No, he only had the threat of being hanged by the neck until dead. Don't project your puling cowardice onto him.
And I argued against silencing Limbaugh, if you had actually read the thread.-
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 7:50:36 PM
So now I'm a coward? LOL! You're the timid fool who would trade the lives of 3000 lives because someone might accidentally overhear you in a conversation in a one-in-million shot with your mother. Their lives may not be worth that to you, but they are to me. And did I single you out on Limbaugh? No, I didn't. Man do you libs love to rewrite posts.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 03/05/2009 2:14:38 PM
Let's see...the freedom to speak freely (publically or privately), e-mail freely, the right to privacy, the right to descent, "STOP LOSS" keeping soldiers in IRAQ, bush's WAR OF CHOICE, beyond their obligation to be there and against their will. The ability to get on an airplane w/o a cavity search..lol
just to name a few off the top of the head.-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/05/2009 3:29:49 PM
The question was what personal freedoms of his that were removed, and how they directly him. So you're telling us that you had all the things you mentioned happened to you?
BTW, you can thank the 9/11 terrorists for the "cavity search."-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/05/2009 4:34:51 PM
"The question was what personal freedoms of his that were removed, and how they directly him. So you're telling us that you had all the things you mentioned happened to you?
BTW, you can thank the 9/11 terrorists for the "cavity search."
The moment ONE person has his rights stomped on, then everyone else's rights revert to mere privilege. Yours included.-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/05/2009 8:54:34 PM
No one tapped my phone, as Bush wasn't interested in my personal conversations. My personal freedoms weren't touched. We now know that the terrorists telephoned Iraq one day prior to the WTC attack, probably for updating final instructions. Knowing that could have saved over 3000 lives and untold collateral damage. If stopping another 9/11 means listening in on phone conversations of known terrorists, so be it. I don't give a damn about their so-called rights, as they don't have any. Do you think the government is really interested in listening to a mother give her daughter a recipe for cherry pie? BTW, Obama sides with Bush on this one.
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/06/2009 11:42:12 AM
"No one tapped my phone, as Bush wasn't interested in my personal conversations. My personal freedoms weren't touched. "
Sure they were. They were turned into privelege.
Stating that having your liberty compromised is okay because you're beneath notice is the talk of a slave.-
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 11:58:22 AM
Slave? Let us know if your personal phone was tapped or if someone was peeking in your window. Did that happen? No. And you can omit the, "if it happened to a terrorist, it happened to all of us" statement. They don't have any rights. And as the poster said, this was a program targeted to only known terrorists. What part of that do you not understand? It wasn't designed to listen in on your personal phone calls. It was designed to prevent another 9/11. Also, it was mentioned that security cameras are everywhere set up to accomplish the same thing - prevent crime. You don't seem to have a a problem with that.
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/06/2009 1:41:10 PM
"Slave? Let us know if your personal phone was tapped or if someone was peeking in your window. Did that happen? No. And you can omit the, "if it happened to a terrorist, it happened to all of us" statement. "
Anytime any American's liberty is compromised unconstitutionally, then you don't have rights either, you have mere privilege.
You are too cowardly to be an American. Please move to France.-
Posted By: Forty4 @ 03/06/2009 9:54:00 PM
So this guy/gal presents an argument, but it's you that starts the name calling. You called him/her a coward. Based on what, an opinion? Everyone knows it's the weakest in a fight that resolves to that, and obviously you exposed yourself as such. What a cowardly wimp you are.
By the way, I agree with others here... your user name reveals a lot about you. -
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 03/06/2009 8:09:28 PM
No idiot, I'm an American who served our country and I am not a coward. Can you say the same? It's you who is the coward, and you show it in every post claiming "your rights" have been violated. The were not. No mention from you about those who murdered 3000 innocent people. No, just your concern for their "rights." One more time, because not only are you a coward and a brain-dead moron, you can't read! This was a program directed at terrorists, not you!
By the way, your argument is lame. You proudly wear two thirds of a murdering bastard's name, so please don't expect me to believe your bullsh!t about how much you love the constitution. You're not worth posting to.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/05/2009 8:56:08 PM
Correction: telephoned Afghanistan.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/04/2009 10:12:04 PM
-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/04/2009 10:10:16 PM
-
-
Posted By: Omaar @ 05/11/2009 10:35:32 AM
SEAN HANNITY: YOU ARE QUOTING SEAN HANNITY.
YOU HAVE NO PROBLEMS HAVING YOUR 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY, AS LONG AS IT GEORGE W. BUSH AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DEEMING IT NEEDED AND NECESSARY, UP UNTIL, OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR.
WOW, WHAT A COMMENTARY.
DESPOTS AND DICTATORS HUH...
BUSH-CHENEY WERE [2] OF THE BIGGEST DESPOTS AND DICTATORS EVER AND YOU LOVED THEM TO DEATH.
CHAVEZ: IF CHAVEZ IS THIS DESPOT AND DICTATOR, AS YOU CLAIM, WHY WAS HE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED AND WHY CAN'T YOU DEAL WITH THAT GLARING FACT. JUST LIKE THE PEOPLE OF VENEZUELA DEALT WITH OUR [2 DICTATORS] BUSH-CHENEY WHO WERE ALSO DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED..HMM
FOR A COUNTRY THAT HATES HUGO CHAVEZ, WE SURE PURCHASE & CONSUME A TON OF HIS [CITGO OIL] YOU DO KNOW THAT CHAVEZ'S OIL IS [CITGO OIL] VENEZUELA, BEING THE 3RD LARGEST SUPPLIER OF OIL, TO THE USA. WHY ISN'T CHAVEZ AND HIS OIL [BARRED OR BLOCKED] FROM COMING TO THE SHORES OF THE UNITED STATES AND INTO YOUR AUTOMOBILES..HMM
-
Posted By: Dolmance @ 03/30/2009 12:44:01 PM
America elected a spoiled, deeply unpleasant rich kid who managed to ruin everything he ever touched, from the first day of college, through every business venture he was ever involved in, to the end of his Presidency.
George Bush was a tragedy for the American people and the world, aided and abetted by the real leader of the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement in general - Rupert Murdoch. And to the American people, I can only say, using the words of the immortal Porky Pig, "You buttered your bread, now sleep in it."-
Posted By: Pocolodi @ 04/01/2009 8:32:56 AM
As a childish Bush hater you label everything he did as failure, which couldn't be further from the truth. People who become president and then serve a second term can't be failures at everything they ever did. Please, stop d!cking around and just come out and say you hate they guy! That way you won't look nearly as ignorant as you have here.
Btw, Rupert Murdoch supported BHO in the primes, said he would win the election and presumably voted for him. Do your homework next time.-
Posted By: Clintus71 @ 05/09/2009 3:55:15 PM
f you look back at what ACTUALLY happened back in 2000, when then Florida Secretary of State Harris' maneuvering, hurriedly closing the polling places, helped George W. Bush carry Florida, and with it the presidency. Later, it was discovered that Database Technologies had scrubbed 57,700 legal voters off the Florida rolls, most of whom would have probably voted for Gore. Then in 2004, the W administration used fear to convince Americans that not returning him to office would render our country more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. In an article in the Los Angeles Times, Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford University political scientist who tracks campaign ads, said the ad appeared to play to a Republican strength. It dovetailed with recent campaign statements by Vice President Dick Cheney, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and others that suggest a vote for Kerry would make the country more vulnerable to terrorist strikes. Bearing these facts in mind, your assertion that W was elected twice as President of the United States is laughable at best.
-
Posted By: Clintus71 @ 05/09/2009 3:54:24 PM
f you look back at what ACTUALLY happened back in 2000, when then Florida Secretary of State Harris' maneuvering, hurriedly closing the polling places, helped George W. Bush carry Florida, and with it the presidency. Later, it was discovered that Database Technologies had scrubbed 57,700 legal voters off the Florida rolls, most of whom would have probably voted for Gore. Then in 2004, the W administration used fear to convince Americans that not returning him to office would render our country more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. In an article in the Los Angeles Times, Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford University political scientist who tracks campaign ads, said the ad appeared to play to a Republican strength. It dovetailed with recent campaign statements by Vice President Dick Cheney, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and others that suggest a vote for Kerry would make the country more vulnerable to terrorist strikes. Bearing these facts in mind, your assertion that W was elected twice as President of the United States is laughable at best.
-
-
-
Posted By: ConservaTom @ 03/05/2009 9:25:00 PM
I know all of you liberals are just going to jump on this littel tid-bit but first let me remind you all of something. Frankline Roosevelt the all-loved champion of Democracy, who is being compared to the much loved Barack Obama (The New New Deal, MSNBC) himself didnt only prepare to violate the first amendment but the whole constitution as it is. FDR prepared to take dictatorial actions over tje U.S to restore stability, in fact he reminded the USAV (United States Association of Veterans) that they had taken an oath declaring their dutiful servitude to the president, and FDR stated "The day may come when I might have to place myself in the dictator position to restore stability in such a case I rely on you to enforce my law" This policy of suspending the constitution is normal in politics during a time of crisis and face it the only reason you dont like this is because it is Bush. Notice how FDR's prepared suspension of THE ENTIRE CONSTITUION AND IDEALS OF THIS NATION WENT SELECTIVELY UNNOTICED (all evidence and quotes from FDR from "The New Deal" the new-york times bestseller, which was authored BY A NEWSWEEK COLUMNIST!)
-
Posted By: usbear2008 @ 03/06/2009 2:44:48 AM
-
Posted By: duffgirl @ 04/22/2009 10:51:59 AM
Then Democrat or not, FDR was WRONG. It doesn't matter how great the man is or what he did to get the country through a dark time. What gives this country its strength, is it's Constitutional Freedom.
I voted for Obama. For me it was damn close between him and McCain, but there were just one too many issues I disagreed with McCain on to give him my vote, even though I think he's a good man that's served his country admirably. And I will be just as goddamn critical of Obama as I have been for McCain, Bush, and holy hell, let's add FDR in there.
REAL patriots look out for what's best for the country in the long-term, rather than the short term. REAL patriots work to preserve the fundamental rights that this country was founded in, that give it its strength, even if they might not suffer the consequences of those rights being revoked...yet. REAL patriots criticize even the people THEY vote into office and clamor for change if they fail, rather than defending their every move and making excuses for them.
And they need their freedom of speech unimpeded to do that.
It isn't the Democrats that are wrong with this country, or the Republicans, it isn't the Conservatives or the Liberals. It is the people that refuse to question to prepackaged bubble gum bullshit that ALL sides are trying to serve them. It is listening conservative hoojoo and blind Liberal propaganda. It is the people who refuse to think for themselves and constantly defend their "side," when they shouldn't be choosing ANY sides.
Liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican--it doesn't matter.
The document that formed the backbone of this nation--that is in essence its HEART, says that we should have freedom of speech unimpeded. It doesn't matter if a Democrat or Republican tries to take it away or tried to take it away in the past-- ANYONE who has tried is wrong to, and if ANYONE else tries, they must be stopped, at all costs, to preserve what makes this country great.
I will not let this country devolve into an authoritarian state because of fear of terrorism. I am willing to risk death for you to have the right to say what you think even though I think you're a blubbering idiot. I want Rush Limbaugh to be able to say whatever he wants to say, without being silenced, even though I think he's a racist fearmongering moron that can't get his facts straight.
And I will take on all comers, Bush, Obama, whoever the hell else tries to mess with the rights of the American people--to do that. FDR was wrong. Bush was wrong. And if Obama tries it, he'll be f$#%ing wrong and I'll do my damnedest to make sure he doesn't see a second term in office, just like I did my damndest to make sure Bush didn't see his second term in office. He's already pushing it.
-
-
-
Posted By: person4876 @ 03/26/2009 4:59:38 PM
This is horrifying, shocking, and disturbing news, It is terrible to find out that our own government has gone against the constitution, or even have considered going against it. I don't think that the government should just wave our first amendment rights of privacy aside so that they can get at terrorists. If the government has a suspicion about a place and want to see it, why not get a search warrant? This is in clear violation of our rights as citizens. Also, the fact that the government was thinking about taking away freedom of the press is against the first amendment. Besides, it would have been a horrible move on the government's part. Shushing up the press would have just brought more unwanted attention and caused more controversy. I don't know why the government would even think about doing this. The government is meant to protect us and lead us through hard times, and some decisions that don't benefit the people, or even some decisions that are slightly harmful to the people at certain times of crisis is understandable, but this is just crossing the line. Violating the first amendment, a crucial piece of the laws that have been our basis, is just not OK. One last thing: What happened to the eighth amendment banning cruel and unusual punishment? I would say that it is OK to lock terrorists up for life, but not torture them to get information. That also goes against our Miranda rights. We have the right to remain silent! The government has just gone too far this time. How many parts of the constitution has the government gone against? Too many.
-
Posted By: 911WasAnINSIDEJOB @ 03/09/2009 2:54:54 PM
Lee Holmes:
Sadly, like SO MANY R*ichwingers, YOU LIE!
There is NO REFERENCE on www.snopes, to B*sh???s comment that the U.S. Constitution is ??????just a goddmaned piece of paper!???
Oh-make no misstate: B*sh DID say this:
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face," Bush screamed back. "It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"
Here???s two ACTUAL soureces:
Bush - Constitution 'Just A GoddamnedPiece Of Paper'
By Doug Thompson
Capitol Hill Blue
12-9-5
http://www.rense.com/general69/paper.htm
Bush curses inconvenient Constitution during a GOP meeting on extending the Patriot Act. By Doug Thompson
Republished from Capitol Hill Blue
http://gnn.tv/headlines/6518/Bush_on_the_Constitution_It_s_just_a_goddamned_piece_of_paper
Here???s my New Year???s Wish for TRAITOROUS LIARS like you:
Our gov???t. snatched AN INNOCENT Canadian citizen, Mahar Arar from Kennedy Airport, in NYC, and ???extraordinarily rendered??? him to Syria, for a YEAR OF TORTURE. They kept him in cold, concrete, coffin-sized, underground cell, for almost a year, and BEAT HIM WITH AN ELECTRICAL CABLE. The Canadian gov???t. has since apologized, and given him $10 million. He missed a year of his infant son???s life, and suffered horrible treatment, all because ???geniuses??? like GWB THOUGHT he was a ???terrahist.??? Here???s a link to the story:
The Arar Commission released its official report on Maher Arar's case on September 18, 2006. Commissioner Dennis O'Connor cleared Maher of all terrorism allegations, and found that the actions of Canadian officials very likely lead to his ordeal.
http://www.maherarar.ca/
I SINCERELY hope YOUR SON OR DAUGHTER get???s similarly ???snatched??? up, and tortured. Actually, I REALLY hope it???s your daughter, and that, for her sake, she???s got extraordinary talents in the c*cks*cking department, so that they let her LIVE to TELL YOU THE TALE (or ???tails????)!
Because, you see, many of whom we tortured actually DIED BEING TORTURED. But I hope your little girl LIVES, so that you can learn how DANGEROUS YOUR RIGHT-WING LIES ARE!
If I could someone be one of the ???guards??? in line to take a turn with your daughter, it would make it all the sweeter.
Too bad your daughter???s father is TOO AFRAID TO DO HIS OWN REASEARCH, instead of PARROTING LIES like the one you told about snopes allegedly ???debunking??? GWB???s TRASHING OF THE U.S. CONSTITION.
The U.S. Constitution is MORE THAN ??????JUST A GODDAMNED PIECE OF PAPER,??? you spineless, Rethuglican p*ke!
Try THINKING and LISTENING for a change!-
Posted By: Forty4 @ 03/18/2009 9:13:55 AM
When someone is as delusional as 911WasAnINSIDEJOB, (the user name says it all) meds would surely help. That, and maybe lots and lots of hours of therapy.
-
Posted By: Forty4 @ 03/09/2009 3:50:08 PM
Ditto FF. However, I'll address his rant... Somebody heard somebody say they heard somebody say something? And this is credible? Lol. Odd, it seems that these so-called sources would have stepped forward, revealed themselves, and spoke to the NY Times or Washington Post. They didn't.
So much for your hate piece. Now calm down and take your meds. -
Posted By: Fortunate Fox @ 03/09/2009 3:04:54 PM
We see idiots come and go here, but you take top prize. Your comments could only come from a very disturbed, hate filled and mentally sick person. And your screen names tells us you're extremely delusional. You need help.
-
-
Posted By: Harharyouranidiot @ 03/16/2009 11:42:33 AM
Meds meds meds. If you don't like what someone says, give em their meds.
-
Posted By: webfairy @ 03/06/2009 6:05:07 PM
The 'Terrorists" were the ones trying to set up marshal law, using patsies and a script out of the NorthWoods documents.
-
Posted By: mkenney @ 03/06/2009 1:39:25 PM
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
-
Posted By: mkenney @ 03/06/2009 1:38:59 PM
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
-
Posted By: SharedThought @ 03/06/2009 1:12:38 PM
The very fact that the First Amendment was not suspended, and that that fact has NOT hurt us over these past several years following 9/11, proves that our American constitutional freedom of expression is not a danger. Our nation's freedom of expression is a strength, not a danger.
-
Posted By: GregoryU @ 03/06/2009 10:01:27 AM
A lot of people think--it's all right to take away freedoms, just as long as they aren't MY freedoms. This is so shortsighted. If these memos were allowed to stand, then the doorway is open. Maybe you're a Quaker and won't join the Armed Forces--is that aiding the enemy? Maybe your pastor is anti-war--does that mean your church can be invaded on suspicion of harboring terrorists? Maybe you'll say, that won't happen, this is America. Tell that to the Japanese-Americans who were put into a concentration camp during WWII. Or some of the peaceful Muslims who were arrested, beaten and deported for petty legal infractions just because they were Muslim. What happens when someone in power takes offence at one of the groups YOU belong to. It wasn't long ago that Catholics were regarded as subjects of a foreign power and priests suspected of being its agents.
They came first for the Communists, And I didn???t speak up because I wasn???t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn???t speak up because I wasn???t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn???t speak up because I wasn???t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
-
Posted By: HollyBerkowitz @ 03/04/2009 5:22:48 PM
The evidence has become overwhelming that:
* Bush-Cheney and others including John Yoo needed 9/11 as an "excuse" to invade Iraq for oil, profit, power and global military "supremacy" as outlined in Bush-Cheney's 2000 Project for a New American Century report. An entire year before 9/11, Bush-Cheney's 2000 PNAC report claimed that the US needed a "new Pearl Harbor"...9/11....to cause a "military transformation"... a historic escalation of military spending that our US Congress would not have approved without 9/11....of, by, for global miltiary "supremacy".....to crush other nations (and groups and political opposition) that "challenged" that "supremacy" (PNAC, 2000).
The evidence has become overwhelming that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7 fell in a "free-fall implosion," evidence of demolition, thermate at the site evidence of demolition, a "free-fall implosion" and not a scattering that would have happened, instead, if a jet had really hit the WTC.....a jet did not even hit WTC 7 that housed the CIA, IRS, Giulliani's emergency offices and the SEC that housed thousands of records of corporate fraud, including records of Enron, Enron one of the largest contributors to GW Bush's 2000 campaign for president.
The list of evidence of a conspiracy to cause 9/11 as an "excuse" to cause war for privatized profiteering and political gain has become very, very long.
I should not need to spend hours and weeks and months and years trying to protect myself, my family, my nation from these criminals.
Where are the whistleblowers? Where? Disappeared?-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/04/2009 10:17:20 PM
Holly, you really belong in Hollywood, where you could at least get paid for writing this bizarre stuff. There's more Whoppers in your post than at your local Burger King!
-
Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 03/05/2009 2:09:08 PM
LOL wow, that was reqally funny, but it is NOT this blogger who in under investigation for WAR CRIMES....HAHAHA! WMD, Sadam-Al Qaeda or Sadam - Bin Laden, now THOSE were WHOPPERS don't ya think there Palinsore also ya betcha.
-
Posted By: Pallisor @ 03/05/2009 8:45:15 PM
No, HarleyisQueer, I wouldn't say. If you can ever prove your silly rhetoric, I'm sure you'll report it here. Til then, hop a fast freight and join Holly in Hollywood land. You'll fit right in with her and Charlie Sheen.
-
-
Posted By: PKinsella @ 03/04/2009 11:43:14 PM
Your out of your mind and I can't believe what SEEMS like rational people still think these buildings were demolished. I worked at 7 WTC Security and Fire safety , Fire brought them down as hard as it is to belive including the type of construction. I think you people are still in denial about Animals that brought this tradedy amounst us. Where were you that day you freak?
-
Posted By: PKinsella @ 03/04/2009 11:42:18 PM
Your out of your mind and I can't believe what SEEMS like rational people still think these buildings were demolished. I worked at 7 WTC Security and Fire safety , Fire brought them down as hard as it is to belive including the type of construction. I think you people are still in denial about Animals that brought this tradedy amounst us. Where were you that day you freak?
-
-
Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 03/04/2009 6:46:44 PM
More propeller-head tinfoili hatism.
There was never any ''overwhelming evidence'' except that provided by science [ you know. Science. That which maintains that the earth is warming],that has shown again and again that steel does melt. That high-temerature-burning AVGAS can weaken building structure and that several of 19 jihadi hijackers did in fact slam two jet liners into the WTC on Sept.11,2001 which caused the collapse of the two towers. MIT engineers and demolition experts [WIEBERGER, a leading worlds demolition company that destroys older high-rise buildings in controlled demolition] had an ironic laugh at the Grassy Knollers expense by observing that ''controlled demolitions'' are not subject to outside forces. Such as having jet liners packed with fuel mess up the deal.
''9/11 was NOT an ''inside job''. It was done by 19 men bent on destruction''
Former President Bill Clinton,Jan 31,2008.-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/05/2009 4:41:45 PM
"More propeller-head tinfoili hatism."
Balls. Bush and Cheney flew those planes themselves, then bailed out at the last minute. This wasn't noticed because of swamp gas reflecting off of Venus, and then they edited the tapes and used orbital mind control lasers on everyone in New York. The demo charges were, of course, installed by Ari Fleischer, a notorious ninja who also used a big-ass vaccuum pump to cause Hurricane Katrina.
You can believe me on this, because I heard it directly from Art Bell. Also, the JFK assassination was simple: One of the Oswalds acted alone. Now, if you'll excuse me, the nice nurse wants me to take my happy pills.
-
-
Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 03/05/2009 4:37:46 PM
Your hat. It needs more tinfoil.
1. If the buildings had been rigged for demolition, the jet fuel fires would have either destroyed some of the charges, or set them off in the wrong order, causing a rigged implosion to fail.
2. If the buildings were rigged, why use aircraft?
3. Where did the administration get pilots willing to die?
But you "Truthers" are immune to logic or reasoning. You're a joke. -
Posted By: distantsmoke @ 03/04/2009 8:47:07 PM
What evidence? If it's so overwhelming you shouldn't have any trouble listing it right here. Source documents, not "someone said" allegations. Where is this vaunted eveidence that is so overwhelming? Will it stand up in a Court of Law? Would you like to be convicted of a murder on the same type of eveidence. Think about that. Really really think about that.
-
-
Posted By: Mimi13 @ 03/05/2009 1:15:08 AM
I'd really like to see Yoo disbarred and disgraced. I don't think you can prosecute an attorney for giving bad advice -- but certainly, he can be disciplined professionally for lack of integrity and just plain ignoring the law. Then, I'd like to see a bill enacted that clarfies presidential powers. I think the lesson of the Bush Administration is that it is very possible for an unscrupulus president to set himself (or herself) up as the supreme authority in the country -- in other words as a dictator. I think we dodged a bullet with the Bushies -- but sooner or later, there will be someone else who thinks that the president should be all-powerful and the Constitution is just an historic artifact.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 03/05/2009 11:23:55 AM
You right we have Obamination in the white house now who thinks he is Caeser Augustus already.....
-
Posted By: HDavidsonNeverDies @ 03/05/2009 2:05:44 PM
evidentially ...just you...moron. How about the jailing of a former US president...even though bush was a PINO, Pres in name only...LMAO!
-
-
-
Posted By: Dredd @ 03/05/2009 10:47:32 AM
Thank you Mr. Isikoff.
Was Bush II looking forward or looking backward when he considered it?
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/03/americas-shame-memos-2.html
-
Posted By: Ron Paul For Pope @ 03/05/2009 1:32:42 AM
If Bush, sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, thought he could abridge it, then he had better explain himself in a court of law.
And if he's found guilty, the penalties should explore the outer limits of the Eight Amendment: "cruel and unusual punishment". Dick Cheney's little experiment must never be tried again.
-
Posted By: Texas Star @ 03/04/2009 11:54:02 PM
Newsweek's priorities:
Torture of "terrorists" - "controversial".
Military attacks on apartment building where "terrorists" are "thought to be", suspension of 4th Amendment, illegal arrest and indefinite detention of American citizens, illegal wiretapping - no comment.
Suspending press freedom - an outrage!
-
Posted By: distantsmoke @ 03/04/2009 8:44:27 PM
Obviously the idea that a government should "do anything necessary" to protect it's people is dead (Bush - Cheney), while the idea that you should do anything no matter how revolting or disgusting to advance your personal ideaology on everybody you meet is perfectly acceptable (Osama bin Laden)
I don't hear ANYONE railing against what Osama bin Laden is doing. No one in the Western media thinks their ideology of hatred is worth even one story. Europe is falling all over itself to become slaves of Islam as fast as they can. Maybe they think they will be "preferred" slaves if they don't give their masters any trouble, unlike those vicious Americans who had the NERVE to defend themselves.
I think I'd like to start a new movement. A movement of non-Muslims who feel that it is perfectly acceptable to do "anything necessary" to defend ourselves from Islam. You know, the religion that says I have no right to think for myself, or even exist unless I enslave myself to it or the nearest Muslim. Who's with me on this?
-
Posted By: 7dollars @ 03/04/2009 6:44:10 PM
seems like the military-industrial complex aligned itself with the republican party and hijacked the government.
the first time i saw bush i knew he was a murderous creep....texas snake.
i just wondered why other people didn't see that.
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
- The task is to restore our conservative bona fides James Bopp Jr. on a 10-pt GOP checklist NYT
- Twenty five years feels right in my bones and right in my spirit. Oprah on ending her showCST
- It’s going to be a holy war Orrin Hatch on debate over the Senate health billNYT
- The nation and the world will see him for the coward he is Holder, on trying KSMAP
- I'm not scared of what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will have to say. Holder on terror trialsREUT
Discuss