Paranoid conspiracy theories.

Yeah, luckily this administration is all about the rights of citizens.

Plus we have the Constitution, that piece of paper, protecting us.

So nothing to worry about.

We need to get both sides of this story, for balance, or else that's liberal bias and no one wants that. There's probably a good reason the Pentagon has been spying on American citizens and has been maintaining a information database. What does Donald Rumsfeld have to say about this? He's credible.

He's not just credible. He's incredible.

Nixon
Nixon
Nixon
...

Good news. One of the things Americans learned after 9/11 is we CANNOT allow terrorists to hide in our midsts. We should do everything we can do to stop the terrorists before they attack again and murder another five thousand Americans as the terrorists did on 9/11. If liberal anti-war groups are not working with the terrorist they have nothing to worry about. The only reason they have to worry is if they are aiding and abetting the enemy.

Whenever the government does something like spying on its own citizens, it is essential that the news media not say anything definitive like "this is similar to COINTELPRO in the 1960s" or "this is against the law." Those kinds of declarative, factual statements have no place in the news.

Great deference should be given to the Department of Defense all the time. When have those guys ever done bad stuff? After all, their job is to defend people! Duh! Wouldn't want to question them!

Anyway, whatever Lawrence di Rita says should be passed onto the people watching or reading the news without comment. Or else it's liberal bias and Washington Post editor John Harris says that's destroying the credibility of the news media.

Watch if you can find it the transcript of the PBS interview with Senators Sessions and Feingold.

Democracy and Civil Liberties do not pre-announce their death on Channel 8.

Goodness, you all seem to have quick access to what must be classified information. I think I will wait until some actual facts are known before pronouncing judgment. I do wonder who you would blame if an American citizen killed a million fellow citizens and it could have been prevented by exactly this spying?

Al writes, "We should do everything we can do to stop the terrorists...."

Does that include, y'know, anything? Al, we're going to send this rusty chainsaw up yer hoo-ha... but if you're not working with terrorists, you have nothing to worry about. In fact, we're going to put you under this metal plate and pile rocks on it. If you survive, that means you've got "super-hyper-mega-terrorism-power" and must be destroyed; but, if you get crushed, than yer innocent.

...get it?

Seems we've come full circle. Again. Not only the fun parallels between Iraq and Vietnam, but now we have 60s-esque spying on our own citizens enagaged in lawful activities -- shades of the FBI files on MLK Jr & his friends?

Of course, when Michael Moore talked about this in F911, everyone thought it was hyperbole. Guess not.

Isn't this illegal?

The U.S. Secret Service maintains a similar database.

...in the kid world, you're either a bully, a toady or one of the hapless rabble of victims.

Works that way when you're an adult, too.

Maybe DoD should send a few observers up this way- I drive past a little group of anti-war protestors on a regular basis. There aren't many of them, but they are the really virulent kind..... Quakers. And we all know how they are.

(Sarcasm, in case it wasn't painfully obvious)

I think I will wait until some actual facts are known before pronouncing judgment.

Totally with you on that one, dude!

I say let's wait until some news organization comes along with information that the Pentagon has spied on American antiwar protesters at least 245 times, then the reporters can talk to Pentagon spokesmen and listen to their non-denial denials and report them verbatim without comment to the people! Anything beyond that is liberal bias, and that's bad.

The U.S. Secret Service maintains a similar database.

The U.S. Secret Service is a domestic law enforcement agency. The Defense Department, on the other hand, is not and is legally barred from spying on or conducting domestic operations against United States citizens. One reason we had the American Revolution in the first place is to preven this kind of military tyranny. This sort of spying is more reminiscent of a Latin American military dictatorship than of America -- or at least, it used to be.

According to the article, out of apparently fifteen hundred incidents, about forty-eight involved protest groups, and according to the article, only some of those forty-eight involved activities not related to military sites.

MSNBC linked to some of the listings. I'm not sure what "edited for clarity" means. What was in the rest of the 400 page document, of which MSNBC linked to eight pages? What were the other 1,452 incidents about?

It's kind of funny. The 9/11 Commission just finished tearing our domestic security system a new one for not doing enough to protect us, or sharing enough information between agencies.

So long as they're only watching folks in public areas, why does it matter? Anyone has the right to watch us at anytime when we're in public. In fact, anyone has the right to film us while we're in public, without our permission.

This is the way of the Army, and DoD in general: it is not planned or necessarily malicious -- they're just dumbshits who don't know their jobs.

Note the operative phrase in the referenced article, "yet they all remained in the database". That's dumbshit laziness. Not any slick, organized Secret Squirrel collection effort.

That they did it in the first place, barring confirmation that these orders came from SecDef or some other well-placed character, is only another sign that the morons don't know basic FP/S2 duties. Much less the country's laws and their service's regs.

Isn't this illegal?

The government just passed a secret law five minutes ago so, no, it's not illegal. But the government can't show you the law, 'cuz it's way secret, like red SECRET stamp on it and everything.

By the way, if you ever ask that question again, the goverment will secretly arrest you and try you in a secret court with secret evidence and then secretly render you to Egypt to be tortured, so just zip your lips and watch some teevee, k?

Actually, Stefan, a provision of Senate bill S. 2386 (the Intelligence Authorization for 2005) was passed specifically to allow domestic spying by the Department of Defense. Senate Report 108-258 accompanying the bill describes in Section 502 why DoD needed to have domestic spying prohibition lifted. Glad to get you up-to-date.

Rad Racer - it was not "secret" and passed more than 5 minutes ago - try again.

Hey, I see Charlie/Cheney etc. has a new nom de plume as "Robert." I suppose he felt he needed a new alias after soiling the Cheney name for good with his thread spamming.

"I'm not Charlie" in 3, 2, 1....

Who is Charlie?

The section of legislation referred to is here, assuming the always-erratic Thomas legislation site link holds up. It seems to refer more to recruiting intelligence sources than to observing American citizens.

So long as they're only watching folks in public areas, why does it matter? Anyone has the right to watch us at anytime when we're in public. In fact, anyone has the right to film us while we're in public, without our permission.

They're not just watching in public areas. The linked article begins "A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House..." -- i.e they're spying inside private churches and houses of worship.

It doesn't just seem to, it does. Here's the relevant section:

"Section 503 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-359) granted Defense intelligence personnel a very limited exemption from Section 552a(e)(3), i.e., the exemption is limited to a single `initial assessment contact outside the United States.' Current counterterrorism operations highlight the need for greater latitude for assessing potential intelligence sources, both overseas and within the United States. Amending the Privacy Act to give Defense intelligence officers the same protection enjoyed by CIA when assessing and recruiting sources should serve to protect these officers and shield their operations."

>They're not just watching in public areas. The linked article begins "A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House..." -- i.e they're spying inside private churches and houses of worship.

Whoa! Maybe they're already here.

Hmm.... I bet the DoD guy was the one in the muumuu. That one always did look out of place among the Quakers.

Quakers. Mahdi Army. Close enough.

It was never a secret - I found it right here.

AL: We should do everything we can do to stop the terrorists before they attack again and murder another five thousand Americans as the terrorists did on 9/11.

Quakers. Mahdi Army. Close enough.

I well remember the terrible slaughter when the Quakers took Khartoum and murdered Chinese Gordon.

We're uncovering a nest of amish suiciders.

We should do everything we can do to stop the terrorists before they attack again and murder another five thousand [sic] Americans as the terrorists did on 9/11.

Everything we can? Like, perhaps, catching Osama bin Laden? Too bad that that seems to be beyond the abilities of the Bush regime....

Hey Robert,
You want to post the relevant text from the law that you believe gives DOD the power to conduct domestic surveilance or whatever you think it does? Cause you're not looking too credible at the moment.

>We're uncovering a nest of amish suiciders.

Hey, have you ever stopped to think of the quantity of fertilizer they have on hand, what with all those horses and livestock? I shudder to imagine the carnage caused by a few wagon-bombs of cow manure.

Really, ignore Robert. He's Cheney. He's a thread spammer and not worth engaging in discussion by adults. He'll try to respond to ac by posting every law there is in the US to "prove" his point.

"I well remember the terrible slaughter when the Quakers took Khartoum and murdered Chinese Gordon."

They were in need of a serious opium fix...which they pried away from his cold, dead hands.

It's kind of funny. The 9/11 Commission just finished tearing our domestic security system a new one for not doing enough to protect us, or sharing enough information between agencies.
Posted by: tbrosz

is flanders suggesting that the 9/11 terrorists et al would show up to legal, constitutionally protected free speech demonstrations?

even for a dipshit like tbrosz, that's pretty fucking stupid.

Any guess on who gets to play the role of Frank Church after the Plame Scandal finally brings down the presidency next August?

Seems like we as a nation have managed to go through the whole Vietnam 10-year cycle (from Tonkin bay to Nixon exit) in just under 3 and a half years. A new record!

This time instead of fabricating an incident, we fabricated the potential for an incident(WMD).

That's progress- making the same mistakes every 30 years but making them faster and more nasty.

he 9/11 terrorists et al would show up to legal, constitutionally protected free speech demonstrations?

Posted by: Nads on December 14, 2005 at 2:07 AM | PERMALINK

They would if that made them peace protesters and immunized them from police investigation.

--------

Quakers. Mahdi Army. Close enough.

Posted by: Clyde Tolson on December 14, 2005 at 1:52 AM | PERMALINK

Hey, if they checked out only Islamic religous groups - that would be racism. Adding the Quakers means they aren't racially profiling.

Seems like we as a nation have managed to go through the whole Vietnam 10-year cycle (from Tonkin bay to Nixon exit) in just under 3 and a half years. A new record!

Sure seems like the Left has been repeating itself word for word, although the fact of a volunteer army instead of a draft leaves some of the anti-military rhetoric a little flat.

BTW the Truth Project web site can be found here.

Nads:

I don't think anyone mentioned 9/11 terrorists. The military interest is in groups and people who are interacting with military recruiters and military facilities. Under some situations, observing them may be well within the rights of the military. Again, we seem to be concerned with four dozen incidents out of fifteen hundred.

I wonder if I'm on "candid camera" myself, having marched in antiwar protests in both Dallas and L.A.

As for Tbrosz and others, what you meant to say is that we are talking about four dozen currently known incidents...

"Seems like we as a nation have managed to go through the whole Vietnam 10-year cycle (from Tonkin bay to Nixon exit) in just under 3 and a half years. A new record!"

Okay, but when we're done with the Church Commission Redux, we can skip the resurgence of Disco and Scandinavian Pop Singing bands and move seamlessly into the Punk era.

Socratic: The news organization obtained a list of fifteen hundred incidents, of which a few dozen seemed to be a problem. Unless the list was severely edited before it was passed to the reporters, this is just the latest artificial crisis.

If you want to imagine that there are thousands of incidents nobody has ever heard of, fine. Won't make a very convincing news story, though.

Under some situations, observing them may be well within the rights of the military. Again, we seem to be concerned with four dozen incidents out of fifteen hundred.
Posted by: tbrosz

when do you suggest I get concerned? when YOUR personal civil rights are violated?

tbroz,

So if it only happened a few times, then it's okay? Just an aberation . . . Won't happen again. Your privacy is secure. Couldn't happen to me. No way.

This articule really opened my eys. I look at things defferently now

Wonder if they're going after the Reverend Fred Phelps and his anti-gay protests at funerals for soldiers killed in Iraq.

DevilDog:

Do any of you ever bother to ask yourself any questions about these things when they pop up?

Like, what were the nearly 1,500 incidents that MSNBC decided weren't worth making part of this story? If they weren't the violations of privacy that the four dozen incidents specifically called out were, then what were they?

Also, who tossed this document over MSNBC's transom, and why?

tbroz,

I don't know who tossed in the MSNBC's transom, but I'm glad they did. So what if there were 1,500 false alarms. Does that mean the real spying was alright? You still haven't answered my question, however. If 48 bonfide incidents of the DOD spying on U.S. citizens isn't a problem, when does it become a problem? At 49? Never?

I think they are using an exception that lets them investigate any threat to a DoD asset - and they have to maintain the database so they don't check out the same people multiple times - and engage in harassment.

we can skip the resurgence of Disco and Scandinavian Pop Singing bands

Um, Clyde, where exactly have you been hiding for the last 3 years? Outside the spiderhole here, we've been listening to nothing but Annie, Jens Lekman, Kings of Convenience, Scissor Sisters and the Go! Team.

Lovely. Especially now that the even more insane Patriot Act will make it easier to arrest citizens for protesting Frat-Boy appearances or even attending them:

The Secret Service is authorized to charge suspects with breaching security or disruptive behavior at National Special Security Events, but only if the president or another person under the protection of the service is in attendance, according to a legislative summary.

The bill adds language prohibiting people from "willfully and knowingly" entering a restricted area "where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting." The measure also applies to security breaches "in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance," according to the bill.

Penalties for such violations would increase from six months to a year in prison.

Plus there are fun new provisions that pretty much allow the FBI to obtain a secret order to look at and into anything, without having to show any connection between the private records they want to examine and suspected terrorism.

Givin' freedom to the world... cause we ain't usin' it anymore.

The first rule of effective terrorism is not to show your hand ahead of time.

Public protesting is showing your hand.

Where's the logic?

>The Secret Service is authorized to charge suspects with breaching security or disruptive behavior at National Special Security Events, but only if the president or another person under the protection of the service is in attendance, according to a legislative summary.

Hmm, what exactly is a "National Special Security Event"? Any official event where someone under SecServ protection attends? If so, maybe we could see some wingnuts put away for protesting events that ex-Pres Clinton attends.

>Where's the logic?

It's reverse-psychology terrorism! See, the terrorists get on all the worthless terrorist watchlists that everyone knows are worthless. Then when they actually do something, it's a complete surprise!

I guess Posse Comitatus is no longer valid? Oh wait the Coast Guard and Northern Command seem to think so.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-cp/comrel/factfile/Factcards/PosseComitatus.html
http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.factsheets&factsheet=5

US group exercising constitutional rights

no doubt something is being done to rectify those pesky 'constitutional rights'.

Clyde,

Be a sport and tear yourself away from that computer and climb back on top...

Amusing thread to wake up to...Rad Racer and Clyde, thanks for the laughs.

I'm Cheney.

Oops, I let it slip.

I think I will wait until some actual facts are known before pronouncing judgment
Hey! Who let the non-moonbat in?

So, after terrorists who had been residing in our country killed 3000 or so of our citizens, our government has seen fit to keep on eye on "suspicious groups". Imagine that.

No evidence that the government has broken any of it's rules, no friggin nothing but say critics. But hey, you're moonbats, right? So any wild assed conspiracy theory is enough send you into whine mode.

I love you guys, you're better than the comics.

What's this "our government" business, nut? Are you a US citizen?

Oh man, the more I think about this the funnier it is. No need for facts around here.

The Democrats have no positions on where they want to take America. Their entire platform is based on knee-jerk opposition to whatever Republicans do, say critics.

See, I can be a newspaper reporter, too!

Whenever the government does something like spying on its own citizens , it is essential that the news media not say anything definitive like "this is similar to COINTELPRO in the 1960s" or "this is against the law." Those kinds of declarative, factual statements have no place in the news.

Great deference should be given to the Department of Defense all the time. When have those guys ever done bad stuff? After all, their job is to defend people! Duh! Wouldn't want to question them!

Anyway, whatever Lawrence di Rita says should be passed onto the people watching or reading the news without comment. Or else it's liberal bias and Washington Post editor John Harris says that's destroying the credibility of the news media.

Cheney:"Perhaps the "logic" would be that peace-protestors are among the highest-value recruitment targets (as opposed to their other kind of targets) by terrorists looking for otherwise innocuous citizens ala Jose Padilla (also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir after such recruitment)."

Thank you, Cheney, for this perfect example of wingnut "thought." Americans who exercise their Constitutional rights are naturally the people most likely to become terrorists! Because from your point of view the only real American right is to get rich.

The terrorists have won! The terrorists have won!

Good news. One of the things Americans learned after 9/11 is we CANNOT allow terrorists to hide in our midsts. We should do everything we can do to stop the terrorists before they attack again and murder another five thousand Americans as the terrorists did on 9/11. If liberal anti-war groups are not working with the terrorist they have nothing to worry about. The only reason they have to worry is if they are aiding and abetting the enemy.
- Al

Actually it was less than 3,000 deaths, Al. But when people make comments like this, it is obvious to me they know nothing about the origins of the American Republic or about constitutional law. The Nazis also told the Jews in Poland that they had nothing to worry about, as long as they weren't subversive. Our Founding Fathers would be appalled if they knew Americans had become so ignorant and so willing to cede their freedoms for some cold comfort against the nebulous threat of "terra" that Bush and his cronies use to cow ignorant Americans. I really fear for the future of this country when I read crap like this.

Concerning this news about domestic spying, this Bush Administration becomes more Nixonian every day. I only hope it ends in the same manner...

>Perhaps the "logic" would be that peace-protestors are among the highest-value recruitment targets (as opposed to their other kind of targets) by terrorists looking for otherwise innocuous citizens ala Jose Padilla (also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir after such recruitment).

Of course, Jose Padilla was a convict who underwent a jailhouse conversion. Which is a much more fertile recruiting ground for extremists. Do you have any real examples of peace protestors being recruited into terrorist groups?

Not that they wouldn't be high value *if* they could be recruited. I know I'd never suspect one of the middle-aged to elderly Quaker anti-war protestors I saw this morning of being Al Qaeda. But that is a big, big, big "if".

"The Democrats have no positions on where they want to take America. Their entire platform is based on knee-jerk opposition to whatever Republicans do, say critics.

See, I can be a newspaper reporter, too!"

I kinda liked MSNBC's recent "Bush lives in a bubble, say critics" line of stories better. We can't let Bush's rating rebound too much.

People forget that all of the 9/11 hijackers were Quakers...Iraqi Quakers.

Had the Bush administration in the past given us any reason "not to jump to conclusions" that they're doing something bad, such a "cautious" stance might be warranted today. However, given that every time they've pulled a stunt like this, their actions have turned out to be worse than one could have guessed, even when you think the worst of them, I think it's fairly valid to condemn this off the bat. The problem with tbrosz isn't that he's shilling for the Bush administration. The problem with tbrosz is that he is shilling for what is essentially an immoral policy enterprise.

We can't let Bush's rating rebound too much.

Don't worry, Freedom Fighter. You can't turn toast back to white bread; Bush is done.

"The terrorists have won! The terrorists have won!"

If the liberals succeed in convincing Americans that we have lost or can't possibly win, then the terrorists have indeed won.

Poor weaseling, especially for you, Cheney.

Comedy is hard, isn't it FF?

"Don't worry, Freedom Fighter. You can't turn toast back to white bread; Bush is done."

Actually, I think Bush will beat Hillary by a landslide in 08.

Is anyone really surprised by this?

Is anyone really surprised by this?

Actually, I think Bush will beat Hillary by a landslide in 08.
The burning question is: Will Hillary! run on a platform of reincarnating HillaryCare?

I can't wait for her to take that 95 liberal rating into an election. "No really, she's moderate!"

Comedy is hard, isn't it FF?

Yeah, especially when the poor kid has no talent.

Note to self...remember to lock up my secret 400 page documents before going home at night.

As long as MSNBC has it, they ought to publish it on the web so we can all look at it and decide for ourselves the extent to which it crosses the line.

Anybody have a good reason why they wouldn't post it up?

"Yeah, especially when the poor kid has no talent."

You're right; you don't.

Hmmmm, conspiracy nut keeps forgetting to answer my question about whether he's a US citizen. Strange!

Why should it be any more surprising that Islamic extremists are often found at mosques than that Christian extremists are often found in churches?

As for the resemblance, I've seen a lot of people who look like Padilla. And I personally received a visit from two Homeland Security officers following a tip to check me out because I vaguely resembled someone on the most-wanted list.

Of course, I was a few inches too short, so after asking my height the officers decided not to pursue the investigation any further.

This is minor stuff. It’ll be tough to prove but the real concern will be peace activists, anti-military types and various other anarchists seemingly falling victim to auto accidents, falling down stairs, suicide, drug overdoses and the like. You think them watching you is a problem? Ha, wait til they start killing you, then you have problems. Oh, and woe to those that do go about trying to expose and prove it. They may find themselves tumbling down a flight of stairs also….......

they are spying on Quaker peace activists

is there no end to the waste of tax dollars?

Ah, the almightly Wikipedia - After learning of the methods of posting information on that site, much salt will be required and a great deal of cross checking from this point forward.

This is minor stuff. It’ll be tough to prove but the real concern will be peace activists, anti-military types and various other anarchists seemingly falling victim to auto accidents, falling down stairs, suicide, drug overdoses and the like.

Peace activist doesn't equate with anarchist, but anyway. If our Dear Leaders continue in the Nixonian theme, they'll just implement Liddy's plan to kidnap peace activists, drug them, drive them to Mexico and hold them there.

Good lord, the current leadership of the Republican Party is the Nixon wing! I mean, half the guys in the administration worked for frigging Nixon. One would like to think that having worked for Nixon would be a disqualifier (or at least a hurdle) for anyone seeking a position in the White House, but in this administration it appears to be a freaking resume builder!

Unbelievable.

YOU LIBS DON'T GET IT!!! If CLINTON WASN'T SO FOCUSED ON GETTING ORAL SEX IN THE OVAL OFFICE AND SELLING US OUT TO THE CHINESE, the FBI would not have to investigate groups like the quakers. AL QUEDA could easily infultrate the Amish and launch strikes in our homeland. DIDN:T YOU PEOPLE SEE "WITNESS" where Harrison Ford hid among these people COMPLETELTY UNDETECTED. George W. Bush will fight the terrorist wherever they are -- in IRAQ OR PENNSYLVANIA. Thank god he won't cut and run like you freedom hating liberals.

Funny, now that Charlie's posting as Cheney, Roberts seems to have disappeared.

Funny that.

"freaking resume builder"

They figure that if they had not been caught the first time, then, what the hey.............

Oh no! They worked for Nixon! AAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!

I agree: don't judge folks by their ideas and capabilities, but by their previous employer.

Oh no! They worked for Nixon! AAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!

I agree: don't judge folks by their ideas and capabilities, but by their previous employer. Posted by: Gideon on December 14, 2005 at 10:20 AM

Most employers do that. Are they out of line?

Speaking of recycling Vietnam rhetoric, it didn't take long for somebody to invoke the name of Richard Nixon. Remember, Vietnam was "Nixon's War."

Well, I guess Nixon would qualify as a (formerly) dangerous Quaker.

What self-respecting terrorist would be so idiotic as to attend a protest rally? If they really are that stupid, we have nothing to worry about.

Yes, tbrosz, it became Nixon's war the nanosecond that he lied that he had a secret plan to end it.

Cheney, I think it's unfair to write a Wikipedia entry and then quote it here as if that proves the point. I looked all over the indictment of Padilla and darned if I could find any mention of a dirty bomb. But,that's ok,he probably had time toload it on a truck to Syria right before he got arrested.

Tennis, anyone?

YOU LIBS DON'T GET IT!!! If CLINTON WASN'T SO FOCUSED ON GETTING ORAL SEX IN THE OVAL OFFICE AND SELLING US OUT TO THE CHINESE, the FBI would not have to investigate groups like the quakers. AL QUEDA could easily infultrate the Amish and launch strikes in our homeland. DIDN:T YOU PEOPLE SEE "WITNESS" where Harrison Ford hid among these people COMPLETELTY UNDETECTED. George W. Bush will fight the terrorist wherever they are -- in IRAQ OR PENNSYLVANIA. Thank god he won't cut and run like you freedom hating liberals.
- Patton

I really hope that posts like these are someone's idea of satire of the hard right-wing. If this sort of knuckle-dragging idiocy is for real, this country has real problems. Yeah, all liberals hate freedom. Right. Brilliant. You really nailed us there. Don't like freedom one little bit...

And Bill Clinton really "sold us out to the Chinese". Yup. Another brilliant, historically well-informed comment. Do a little research my friend - It was Saint Ronnie and Poppy Bush who presided over the biggest clandestine transfer of nuclear technology secrets to the Chinese (i.e. the W-88 warhead), see the website below:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/021601a.html

Also, George W. Bush has completely mortgaged this country and our children's future to the Chinese and Saudis, by running up egregious amounts of debt and writing piles of bad checks that they refuse to pay for.

Regarding this moron's false assertions - a good friend of mine has said, "How can we ever agree on matters of opinion, when we can't even agree what the facts are????"

How sad.

Remember, Vietnam was "Nixon's War."

I thought Bob Dole said it best when he said that World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam were all "Democrat Wars."

GO AHEAD AND LAUGH AT THE FBI!!! But terrorists could easily hide among quakers and the Amish and use it as a bse of operation. It happened not only in the movie “Witness” but multiple movies have shown how easy it is for someone – LIKE OSAMA BIN LADEN OR OTHER TERRORIST – to hide among the Amish. In “For Richer or Poorer” Kirstie Alley and Tim Allen do it. Jim Belushi did it in “Barn Raisin,” Jamie Kennedy did it in “Plowed." Even Method Man and Red did it in “You Be Buggin.”

DO YOU STUPID LIBS THINK AL QUEDA DOESN”T HAVE ACCESS TO OUR POPULAR CULTURE, AND COULD RENT THESE FILMS????

Hmm... wasn't Eisenhower the first pres to get the US militarily involved in Vietnam?

There is no reason for the DoD to care about war protests, since the protests do absolutely nothing to stop US aggression. I have been to several protests and they are a complete waste of time. The best thing to do is go to your local Congressional representative's campaign rallies and encourage the people there to join, or have their children join, the military to support the Congressperson's position of support for the war. Only when white, upper middle class children become the major casualties in the Iraq War, will popular support erode to the point of changing our politics. Until then, it is BTK as usual for the militant hegemony machine we call our homeland.

Stupid paranoid fools haven't learned a damn thing in 30+ years.

It reminds me of a Doonesbury strip, which has two old protestors reading about COINTELPRO and all the Nixon BS and goes something like this (warning: rough approximation ahead):

Guy 1: Can you believe all this crazy, paranoid infiltration garbage?
Guy2: I know, it's amazing.

Guy 1: I mean, we thought we were so powerless and ineffectual against the powers that be, but it turns out we had them shaking in their boots!

(Both with very satisfied grins):
Guy 1: Mighty gratifying, isn't it?
Guy 2: Yep.

It's kind of funny. The 9/11 Commission just finished tearing our domestic security system a new one for not doing enough to protect us, or sharing enough information between agencies.

This is the DOD we are talking about. I can't believe that it's legal for the DOD to engage in
domestic spying\law enforcement.

Isn't this the FBI's job ?

conspiracy nut keeps forgetting to answer my question about whether he's a US citizen
I'm a Mexican illegal immigrant. Good thing they don't too close here at the DNC or I might lose my job and have to work at WalMart.

On the other hand, WalMart's healthcare package is better than we have here at the DNC...

Funny, now that Charlie's posting as Cheney, Roberts seems to have disappeared.

Yeah, I don't know why he bothers with the pseudonyms. I can detect that lunatic's writing style tics after only a few sentences.

Would like to comment on this thread, but the black helicopter hovering over chimney has blown down Santa and plastic reindeer again.

Don't forget W's lackluster performance with the plane the Chinese kept, way back before "everything changed."

" . . . enemies foreign and domestic." This has been building for a long time, and on multiple fronts. From the military itself we have substantiated reports going back a few years in California. Remember too the NYC legal protesters outside the Carlisle Group being asked, as they were hauled off "What do you read? Where do you get your news?"

One can't ever forget the Quakers in Colorado being deemed a terrorist group way back when, and of course the cookie munching peace group from MMoore's movie.

After the maximum money is concentrated, consolidation of power accelerates. Pograms, suspension of habeus corpus, we're seeing it already writ small. Will it take Cheney to steal '08 and lock up your grandma incommunicado for you to care?

Don't forget W's lackluster performance with the plane the Chinese kept, way back before "everything changed."

Lackluster is a kind word for it. I prefer to say he kow-towed to them.

It's kind of funny. The 9/11 Commission just finished tearing our domestic security system a new one for not doing enough to protect us, or sharing enough information between agencies.

Of course, the US military is not and is constitutionally forbidden to be our domestic security system tbrosz is well informed enough to know this, and intellectually dishonest enough to pretend he doesn't. Shame on you, tbrosz.

I agree: don't judge folks by their ideas and capabilities, but by their previous employer.

Who a person chooses to work for and associate themselves with is a sign of their ideas and capabilities.

Why is it so hard to admit that you're not an American, conspiracy nut? It's not like there's anything wrong with your actual nationality. Some of your countrymen and -women are among the best posters here. Where's the percentage in pretending you're a US citizen?

Would like to comment on this thread, but the black helicopter hovering over chimney has blown down Santa and plastic reindeer again.

The DoD is making war on Christmas!

So, after terrorists who had been residing in our country killed 3000 or so of our citizens, our government has seen fit to keep on eye on "suspicious groups".

Hold on, c.n. -- you're supposed to be a strict constitutional constructionist, remember?

This comment isn't as funny as you accusing the Republicans and G8 of Marxism, though.

The DoD is making war on Christmas!

Ah, the War on Christmas -- finally a war the wingnuts feel safe enlisting in.

Though if George Bush ran the war pretty soon we'd be invading Yom Kippur....

Don't forget W's lackluster performance with the plane the Chinese kept
Right on! Bush should have been getting campaign contributions from the Chinese, not irritating them over some plane of ours they crashed into.

Wooden Al knows, the Chinese are great donors.

>The DoD is making war on Christmas!

No, they just identified Santa as a "person of interest." Happens all the time- he really should shave off that beard, I think that is what causes all the reports.

No, they just identified Santa as a "person of interest." Happens all the time- he really should shave off that beard, I think that is what causes all the reports.

Indeed. The redistribution of wealth in the form of toys also seems to piss off the right. They like to be the ones to decide which of the poor are "deserving."

CN,

Did you have the US Ambassador to Canada over for dinner? He was up there telling PM Martin to back off criticizing Bush during the Canadian elections. He talked about it being a "slippery slope" and to cease and desist. Geez, we would never interfere in another country's elections, now would we. Love the Ambassador's credentials. Speaker of the House in South Carolina for years. Now, he is up north blasting the Martin administration.

"You are our #l trading partner, so watch it buster" Great diplomatic skills. Oh, here comes the crapola about their Ambassador Wilkin's blasting us for not paying the lumber fines and for disregarding enviromental issues. Not the same as meddling in elections.

Hold on, c.n. -- you're supposed to be a strict constitutional constructionist, remember?
It seems to have slipped that tiny mind of yours already that there is no proof of any violation. You get that, and it'll change your mouthbreather whine-fest into a serious problem.

And I heard Dan Rather has some memos with proof...

>Indeed. The redistribution of wealth in the form of toys also seems to piss off the right. They like to be the ones to decide which of the poor are "deserving."

Of course, if he doesn't let the elves unionize, he might find himself under fire from both sides of the spectrum. I hear ol' St. Nick follows the Walmart style of management.

Did you have the US Ambassador to Canada over for dinner?
Naw, we used to go bowling but the current employee regulations here at the DNC forbid fraternizing with anyone from the Administration.

We can praise Islamofascists all we want, but we are required by contract to hate Republicans.

So, after terrorists who had been residing in our country killed 3000 or so of our citizens, our government has seen fit to keep on eye on "suspicious groups".

That's a job for DOJ\FBI, not DOD.

A terminological precision matter: COINTELPRO was the FBI and, I think, people working out of the White House doing things to screw up varous left wing groups - placing people inside them to act as agents provocateurs, actions to reduce trust of people in the groups, etc. Separate from that, it came out that the military was spying on legal domestic political activities, the same as described in this post. These were two separate scandals, and the response to them was different at the time. My recollection is that there was greater outrage about the military's spying, and that laws were passed to ban it. I think only policies were put in place to control the sabotage activities, since, while considered objectionable, they targeted a smaller group of people who were (a) much further outside the mainstream, and (b) who were more likely to be black than your randomly selected individual from society at large.

No, they just identified Santa as a "person of interest." Happens all the time- he really should shave off that beard, I think that is what causes all the reports.

And here I thought Santa was the one keeping the list of who's naughty and nice. Turns out it's the Department of Defense.

CN,

Did you fall overboard by any chance on your 7 day Caribbean cruise? Perhaps out of professional curtesy, the sharks gave you a pass.

That's a job for DOJ\FBI, not DOD.
Right, terrorism is a law enforcement problem. I see you are part of the 48% that voted for Kerry.

So tell me, after the first Trade Tower bombing, how well did that law enforcement mode work to prevent another one?

Democrats: Why make new mistakes when there are so many old ones to repeat!

It seems to have slipped that tiny mind of yours already that there is no proof of any violation. You get that, and it'll change your mouthbreather whine-fest into a serious problem.

That "no proof of any violation" standard seems to be applied rather conveniently, doesn't it? When it comes to accusations of malfeasance against the Bush regime we need absolute iron-clad proof. But when it comes to matters like taking this country into a war then mere unfounded suspicions will do.

But when it comes to matters like taking this country into a war then mere unfounded suspicions will do.
The anti-war folk lost this argument 3 years ago. If this statement were supportable, you wouldn't have.

Democrats: Why look ahead when you can re-fight old battles!

So tell me, after the first Trade Tower bombing, how well did that law enforcement mode work to prevent another one?

Why not ask Bush? He was the one in charge when the World Trade Centers were destroyed. It was his responsibility to keep them safe, a responsibility he failed at.

Actually, the law enforcement method worked quite well. We caught and convicted those responsible of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, and they sit in jail still. The 2001 attack was conducted by completely different people and a completely different organization, though, so even jailing the 1993 bombers would do nothing to "prevent" the next attack. The premise of the question is false.

Right, terrorism is a law enforcement problem. I see you are part of the 48% that voted for Kerry.

What's next ? Military strikes against suspected terrorists in Dallas ?

Doemstic intelligence gathering is not a job for the military- talk about "mission creep".

These are US citizens on US soil.

Just like to point out that in the same thread we've had the infamous "chickenhawk" argument that Stefan always pulls out, and the equally infamous "shame on you" assault employed by Gregory.

Have you guys outsourced your work? You're mailing it in today.

As for me, I want to see the 400 page document, rather than take someone else's word for what it says. NBC doesn't have a security clearance, so there's no reasonable excuse for them not sharing it.

One has to wonder why the RW trolls are defending this so voraciously.

Bush has done very little to actually DEFEND this nation against terrorist attack. Wide open borders....cargo holds on airliners still un inspected...infrastructure protection nil and underfunded...the list goes on and on.

What he HAS managed to do is pass legislation aimed at AMERICAN CITIZENS and their right to dissent and protest. He has also managed to effectively circumvent Posse Comitatus. AND has also placed PRIVATE ARMED MILITIAS on the streets of America (Blackwater in New Orleans) while at the same time disarming the citizens with mandatory confinscations of private firearms. With nary a peep from the fucking cowards that claim to be representing our interests, like the Kerry puke and the equivicating bitch Hillary.

Want a wake up?? Read up on what these fascist assholes can do if they call a "red alert" due to another "terrrrist attack" waged by the "evil doers".

When is the American public going to wake up to what the Monkey Boy and the Dick are up to??? Well, it appears we are in a deeper slumber than the Germans were when Adolph was in the kitchen.

The anti-war folk lost this argument 3 years ago. If this statement were supportable, you wouldn't have.

If this was three years ago, that might be relevant. But since time marches on we're now in the present day, where the majority of the country feels invading Iraq wasn't worth it. Republicans are far out of the mainstream since less than 40% of Americans approve of Bush's handling of Iraq.

CN,

As "Conservatives sink in a sea of conformity", glad to see you are still working at the DNC.

Wow, -14 C up there - wear your ear muffs as well as your blinkers you picked up at Woodbine.

Just like to point out that in the same thread we've had the infamous "chickenhawk" argument that Stefan always pulls out, and the equally infamous "shame on you" assault employed by Gregory.

Hey, as soon as they start enlisting to support the war they claim is so important I'll stop calling them chickenhawks. But as long as they keep acting like cowards I'll keep pointing it out.

>Republicans are far out of the mainstream since less than 40% of Americans approve of Bush's handling of Iraq.

Yeah, if only we could convince certain Dems (*cough* Joementum) to act accordingly.

We caught and convicted those responsible of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, and they sit in jail still

Uhhh, yea...after they detonated their bomb. Oh boy, the threat of arrest. That ought to deter future suicide bombers.

The only diff between 1993 and 2001 is they didn't use enough bomb in 93. The outcome if they had would have been orders of magnitude worse than 2001. The whole building, no one getting out, coming down immediately. We got lucky, but kept on doing the law enforcement approach.

""What's next ? Military strikes against suspected terrorists in Dallas ?""

Posted by: Stephen

Substitute the word "Crawford" for the word "Dallas" and I'm all for it.

Right, terrorism is a law enforcement problem.

Unless the Insurrection Act is invoked, policing the civilian population of the United States while they are within the United States is a law enforcement, not military, task.

To amplify, in the argument between the law enforcement approach and the more military approach, I say "yes" to both.

As for me, I want to see the 400 page document, rather than take someone else's word for what it says. NBC doesn't have a security clearance, so there's no reasonable excuse for them not sharing it.

Did you apply this same reluctance to take someone else's word to the Administration's claims about Iraqi WMD or their supposed successes in fighting terrorism? When Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld say something is your first response always "I won't believe them until I see the supporting documentation"?

Actually, the law enforcement method worked quite well.
Oh, then that second attack was prevented? I guess I missed that. Those terrorists must have been quaking in their boots in fear of the US legal system.

Did Ramsey Clark defend those guys?

But really, your concern for reaction instead of proaction with terrorists is touching.

Democrats: We're the reactive progressives!