Skip to main content

View Diary: Why Is Obama Continuing Unconstitutional Bush Policy of Warrantless Surveillance? (107 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  OK so let's discard the NY Times evidence (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radical def, StepLeftStepForward

    which is the only evidence we have in this thread.  What is the evidence warrantless wiretapping is continuing despite the administration's announcements to the contrary?

    Btw, the NY Times reporting that the DOJ was shutting down these programs was by the same reporter (James Risen) who broke the story that the Bush administration had carried out warrantless wiretaps.

    So if you don't believe the Times when it says the program was ending, do you believe them when they say that Bush had carried out the illegal wiretaps?  Or do you only agree with the Times when it's conclusions conform to your pre-existing opinions.

    If your response to the Times is just "puh-leeze," does that mean it's safe to conclude that the Bush administration never carried out warrantless wiretaps in the first place?

    How does that work in trying to figure out what's going on?  When do you believe a media source and when do you discard it?

    •  The question is: do I believe the government? (0+ / 0-)

      and the answer is:  NO.  The Times was merely parroting government denials . . . ff you want to believe that this administration has stopped warrantless surveillance, or torture . . . go right ahead.

      "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

      by bobdevo on Tue Apr 06, 2010 at 11:09:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And that's why your belief is an urban myth (0+ / 0-)

        You are indicating that no amount of evidence could convince you.  Your belief in the continuation of warrantless wiretapping -- despite the reporting by the very same journalist who broke the story about Bush's wiretapping in the first place, DOJ investigations, and the administration's public pronouncements -- is an article of faith not based on balancing evidence.  That's basically what you are now admitting.

        Fine.  

        I don't argue with people who have faith based views of politics anymore than I would argue with devout Catholics about the transfiguration of the communion wafer, or than I would argue with a birther about whether Obama was born in Kenya or Hawaii, or than I would argue with those who believe that Neil Armstrong actually took one small step for man on a sound stage in Los Angeles.

        But don't expect to convince anyone whose analysis is primarily fact based and who considers himself part of the reality based community.  If you want to convince us that it is continuing you would have to present some evidence other than that you just know it's continuing.

        •  Evidence? Where's your fucking evidence? (0+ / 0-)

          Take your patronizing urban myth crap and shove it. Are you retarded?  

          We know that past Administrations have warrantlessly wiretapped, some so blatantly they forced Congress to draft specific legislation making it illegal.

          When the Bush Administration began warrantlessly wiretapping American citiznes, the DoJ refused to prosecute illegal wiretappers. Obama then cooperated in retroactively protecting those criminals and the corporations that aided and abetted the crimes.

          We KNOW this to be fact.

          SO one announcement from an Attorney General who represented Chiqita banana death squads, and you claim Ino amount of evidence could convince me?

          That is disingenuous baloney, and you are the delusional actor here, not me.

          "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

          by bobdevo on Tue Apr 06, 2010 at 12:28:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's a conspiracy I tell ya! (0+ / 0-)

            It's not just Holder that's in on it.  It also has to be James Risen, the journalist who broke the wire tap story in the first place, and reported on how Holder was forcing the NSA to conform to FISA.  

            It also has to be the NY Times editorial board that wrote that it doesn't believe the wire tap program is continuing.

            And just because Obama won the election and the Democrats replaced the Republicans, just because Obama promised to end warrantless wire taps, and just because he appointed a critic of the warrantless wiretap programs to head a section of the DOJ that overseas the NSA, and just because the NY Times reports it's over don't mean it's so!!!!

            Is that your basic point?

            •  Funny thing about your New York Times . . . (0+ / 0-)

              if - AS YOU CLAIM - the NY Times editorial board says they don't believe the wire tap program is continuing . .  then please tell me WHY THE FUCK they conclude their editorial on April 4 saying:

              Senator Obama promised repeatedly in the 2008 campaign to reverse Mr. Bush’s many abuses of power. This was one of them. President Obama should read this court ruling with chagrin and eliminate warrantless spying. It is also far past time to stop hiding behind spurious, often ludicrous, claims of national security.

              If it's already eliminated, as you claim, then why are they suggesting it?

              And while your belief in the truthfulness of the government is touching . . . perhaps you'd be interested in this bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn.

              "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

              by bobdevo on Tue Apr 06, 2010 at 01:41:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And did you read what they wrote later? (0+ / 0-)

                after Risen reported in June about what appeared to be over collection of bulk electronic data?

                We do not believe that Mr. Obama is deliberately violating Americans’ rights as Mr. Bush did, and it is to his credit that the government acknowledged part of the problem in April. But this nation’s civil liberties are not predicated on trusting individuals to wield their powers honorably. They are founded on laws.

                http://www.nytimes.com/...

                These are stories about the Obama administration using the first six months to figure out what Bush had been doing and what holdover programs were continuing to do, acknowledging what they had found, and forcing the NSA to comply with FISA.

            •  And another thing!!! Your sainted Mr. Risen also (0+ / 0-)

              says, on April 1 in the NY Times:

              But since Mr. Obama took office, the N.S.A. has sometimes violated the limits imposed on spying on Americans by the new FISA law. The administration has acknowledged the lapses but said they had been corrected.

              Let me help you here - Risen does NOT say the Obama Administration has stopped warrantless wiretapping.  Rather he says they HAVE violated the law since Obama took office, but they CLAIM they no longer do.

              Maybe a remedial reading course would help.

              "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

              by bobdevo on Tue Apr 06, 2010 at 01:47:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Can't you read and understand this very article?? (0+ / 0-)

                The article is saying that since Obama took office, Holder discovered NSA programs that violated the limits imposed by FISA AND SHUT THEM DOWN OR FORCED THEM TO COMPLY WITH FISA.  The article by Risen is about that process -- the Obama administration coming in and reviewing these programs and forcing them to comply.

                Or did you think that the inauguration simply caused all these violations to magically disappear and free ponies to be delivered to all?

                Did you bother to read the article you're citing?

                Can you read?  

                •  You, sir, are muy loco. (0+ / 0-)

                  Where in this article does it mention Holder shutting down any programs? Where does it mention anyone forcing compliance?

                  "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

                  by bobdevo on Tue Apr 06, 2010 at 02:51:13 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site