Author Topic: anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr  (Read 852 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« on: October 26, 2005, 10:09:00 PM »
Anyone?  Anyone at all?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2005, 10:57:00 PM »
I never did in the 1st place.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2005, 01:15:00 PM »
Me neither but we did have a few die hard Bushies around.  Just curious as to what they think of their WonderBoy (Chimpy McFlightsuit) now.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2005, 11:22:00 PM »
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2005, 04:15:00 PM »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/no ... erties.htm

Ex-intel Official: Bush Admin Will Restrict   Liberties After Next Terror Attack
North Jersey Media/RICHARD   COWEN | November 13 2005

MAPLEWOOD - The man who leaked thousands of   pages of top secret documents to the media in 1971 to expose the U.S. government's handling  
of the Vietnam War warned Saturday that another   terrorist attack could permanently damage civil   liberties.

Daniel Ellsberg, the former U.S. intelligence official responsible for leaking the so-called Pentagon Papers to The New York Times and 18  
other newspapers, told an audience of about 400 that the Bush  administration most likely would respond to any terror attack on U.S. soil by severely restricting freedom of the press and the  individual's right to speak out.

"In a time of fear, I believe that the majority of the American people will cling to authority,"  Ellsberg told the gathering at Columbia High  
School for New Jersey Peace Action's annual luncheon.

"And if there is another terror attack,"   Ellsberg added sarcastically, "I believe the president will get what he wants. And what he wants is a new Patriot Act, one that will make   the current Patriot Act look like the Bill of Rights."

The Patriot Act, originally passed by Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, is up for renewal.

To combat terrorism, it gave law enforcement leeway into probing the private lives of Americans - allowing for easier wiretaps,  
incarceration without charges, monitoring of computer use and even checking on books borrowed from libraries. Some members of Congress  
expressed alarm recently that the FBI had initiated 30,000 investigations of private e-mail accounts last year.

Now the Patriot Act is up for renewal, and the Bush administration is seeking even tougher measures. Ellsberg, 74, said he worries that with
the Iraq war at a stalemate, a terrorist attack on American soil was "not just possible, but highly likely." Were that to happen, Ellsberg  
predicted that Bush would respond by escalating the war on terror - possibly to include military action against Syria or Iran - while pushing for harsher restrictions against dissent at home.

Ellsberg said that as part of Patriot Act revisions, Bush most likely would push for an Official Secrets Act - one that would make it a crime for whistle-blowers to reveal government secrets to the public. And he added, such a ban probably would apply to journalists as well.

Ellsberg worked as an analyst for the RAND Corp. in the 1960s, which conducted a huge study of U.S. policy in Vietnam. That study, which was  
top secret and eventually numbered 7,000 pages, is the story of what went wrong in Vietnam. Once leaked to The Times, the document became known as the Pentagon Papers, and it told of the official lies by the Johnson and Nixon administrations that the war in Vietnam was winnable.

The Nixon administration tried to prevent publication of the Pentagon Papers, but the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the public's right to  
know. Ellsberg eventually stood trial for leaking official secrets, but the government eventually dropped the case.

Ellsberg said Saturday that he had grave doubts he would enjoy the same freedom today.

"I don't think the current Supreme Court would see it that way," he told the audience. He added that should an Official Secrets Act be adopted, "leaks would be a thing of the past."

He drew parallels between the Valerie Plame affair and the beginning of the Vietnam War. Plame was outed as a CIA agent after her   husband, Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, said the Bush administration lied about the reason for the invasion of Iraq. Wilson disputed the administration's claim that Saddam Hussein had attempted to purchase uranium from Niger to make nuclear weapons.

Ellsberg pointed out that the government said the Johnson administration also lied about the second Gulf of Tonkin incident on Aug. 2, 1964. At the time, President Lyndon Johnson claimed that a   U.S. destroyer had been attacked by a North Vietnamese patrol boat in the Gulf of Tonkin, but Ellsberg said the incident never happened.

Ellsberg said that like Vietnam, America was in for a long war in Iraq, one that could possibly spread around the Middle East. "There are other  
wars ahead, and a long way to go," he said.

Members of the audience gave Ellsberg a standing ovation at the end of his hourlong presentation. As he hurried out the door to catch a train,    
attendees were left to contemplate what to do after the applause died down.

"I felt terrified by what he said," said Zella Geltman of West Orange. "What can we do to save ourselves?"

Eleanor Mason of Morris Plains said the best thing to do is keep speaking out. "We are   patriotic Americans, and we don't want war," she  
said. "We need to keep saying this until the government is forced to listen to us."

Ellsberg is scheduled to speak at 3:30 p.m. Monday at Ramapo College in Mahwah and at 12:30 p.m. Tuesday at Wiliam Paterson University in  
Wayne.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Antigen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12992
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://wwf.Fornits.com/
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2005, 09:23:00 PM »
Oh Jaaaaaasoooooon.... woo hoo! Where are ya', Jason? Please tell us how good and right and noble and honorable the smirking chimp is.

Seriously, what is it about him that you support?

A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312878214/qid=1122338640/circlofmiamithem' target='_new'>Arthur C. Clark

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Don\'t let the past remind us of what we are not now."
~ Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Sweet Judy Blue Eyes

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
anyone still think G.W. & Co. are fit for leading the countr
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2005, 04:34:00 PM »
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/p ... 7779.shtml
Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'
By DOUG THOMPSON
Dec 9, 2005, 07:53
 Email this article
 Printer friendly page


Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial USA Patriot Act.

Several provisions of the act, passed in the shell shocked period immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, caused enough anger that liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union had joined forces with prominent conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Bob Barr to oppose renewal.

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

?I don?t give a goddamn,? Bush retorted. ?I?m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.?

?Mr. President,? one aide in the meeting said. ?There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.?

?Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,? Bush screamed back. ?It?s just a goddamned piece of paper!?

I?ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution ?a goddamned piece of paper.?

And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the shit that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that ?goddamned piece of paper? used to guarantee.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the ?Constitution is an outdated document.?

Put aside, for a moment, political affiliation or personal beliefs. It doesn?t matter if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent. It doesn?t matter if you support the invasion or Iraq or not.  Despite our differences, the Constitution has stood for two centuries as the defining document of our government, the final source to determine ? in the end ? if something is legal or right.

Every federal official ? including the President ? who takes an oath of office swears to ?uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says he cringes when someone calls the Constitution a ?living document.?

?"Oh, how I hate the phrase we have?a 'living document,?? Scalia says. ?We now have a Constitution that means whatever we want it to mean. The Constitution is not a living organism, for Pete's sake.?

As a judge, Scalia says, ?I don't have to prove that the Constitution is perfect; I just have to prove that it's better than anything else.?

President Bush has proposed seven amendments to the Constitution over the last five years, including a controversial amendment to define marriage as a ?union between a man and woman.?  Members of Congress have proposed some 11,000 amendments over the last decade, ranging from repeal of the right to bear arms to a Constitutional ban on abortion.

Scalia says the danger of tinkering with the Constitution comes from a loss of rights.

?We can take away rights just as we can grant new ones,? Scalia warns. ?Don't think that it's a one-way street.?

And don?t buy the White House hype that the USA Patriot Act is a necessary tool to fight terrorism. It is a dangerous law that infringes on the rights of every American citizen and, as one brave aide told President Bush, something that undermines the Constitution of the United States.

But why should Bush care? After all, the Constitution is just ?a goddamned piece of paper.?


© Copyright 2005 by Capitol Hill Blue
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »