Originally posted by kandah
-
Strong words to attach to your signature when I'm sure you're trying to get business from US webmasters. -
Originally posted by King Adam
The first thing you need is a "high crime and misdemeanor."
Simply not liking GWB's policies does not quality.
When you find this, you will be the hero of the Looney Left. They have been looking for years..Comment
-
I'm just curious how the war in Iraq is protecting us. Have any Iraqi terrorists even tried to enter the USA? Did Sadaam have any ties with terrorists that threatened the USA?Originally posted by The Demon
What was the exact threat that Iraq posed to the USA?
I do know that Iran would not be trying to develop nukes if the Iraqi army was still next door.Comment
-
How about the phone tapping. That is illegal. What about the lies and coverups? There are high crimes he has commited, he just hasn't been charged and convicted yet.Originally posted by DaddyHalbucks
TWISTYSCASH.com - Proven to be One of the BEST Adult Programs Around
Promote These Sites : Twistys ~ Busty Ones ~ Nicole Graves
ICQ : 9 6 4 4 0 2 2 1Comment
-
You are so correct.Originally posted by SirMoby
TWISTYSCASH.com - Proven to be One of the BEST Adult Programs Around
Promote These Sites : Twistys ~ Busty Ones ~ Nicole Graves
ICQ : 9 6 4 4 0 2 2 1Comment
-
It has not been determined that the "phone tapping" is illegal and the subject has been and is still being debated, but the consensus thus far, among constitutional legal scholars, appears to be that the President not only has the power via the Constitution, but the obligation to carry out "phone tapping". In addition the consensus appears to be that the Congress cannot enact a law that places limits on the power that is provided to the President via the Constitution unless the Supreme Court agrees that the law passed by the Congress is legally binding upon the President.Originally posted by King Adam
You saying that "there are high crimes he has committed" does not make it so and unless you are a constitutional scholar your statement does not bear any credibility.Last edited by Sexxxy Sites; 04-18-2006, 02:42 PM.Comment
-
Originally posted by King Adam
Tapping foreign terrorists' phone lines is not illegal.
Are you saying that all these foreign terrorists have to do is call the good ole' USA --and then they are suddenly immune?
CUCKOO, CUCKOO.Comment
-
-
Originally posted by SirMoby
Democratic countries generally don't produce terrorism. Make Iraq democratic, and it stabilizes the Mideast. That's the theory. However, it doesn't happen overnight.
GWB said Saddam had terrorist ties.
Saddam himself was a terrorist. He ruled his own country with fear, intimidation, and outright brutality. He used chemical weapons against civilians in Halabja in 1988.
An Iraqi general, Georges Sada, said that WMD were shipped to Syria.Comment
-
This has got to be, without a doubt, the most absurd post I've ever seen on a message board. This takes the absolute cake...I honestly don't know whether to laugh or cry.Originally posted by King Adam
Here's a tip - ask people to put an "impeach bush" link on the bottom of their tgp galleries. The notion that you and/or any combination of these fuckers can in some way encourage an impeachment of the sitting president is just fucked...it's not just fucked, it's downright coke induced, self aggrandizing, deluded bizarre.
You are one stupid fucking human being.QuickRichClick
Backed by the founders of CyberAge.com & UGAS.com.Comment
-
Well.... noOriginally posted by SirMoby
Well.... noOriginally posted by SirMoby
Well.... Damn.. that was imminent. Iraq had loads and loads of nuclear arms. The country was known for this in certain circles. Anyways, Abdul's son (who was quite intelligent BTW and always wore glasses) created a special "WMD carrier" which would fly way up into the sky and land right in the middle of the US.Originally posted by SirMoby
Why he chose to make vicious threats to blow the shit out of the US with his "WMD carrier" nobody really knows except the President of the US - and it's still a secret.
Anyways, the President of the US got to hear about Abdul thru his superior intelligence services and decided to kill a lot of Iraqi's because they must have been friends of Abdul.
The world - and the US is now safe and all people like Abdul are very frightened of the US and now have freedom and democracy.
End of history lesson.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Excuse me??Originally posted by DaddyHalbucks
Because the US experienced it's first "terrorist attack" and appears to have become very knowledgable on the subject - it may be worth commenting on other democratic countries who actually do have democracy as it is generally known worldwide.
ETA in Spain has existed since Roman Times in some form or other. You are prob right there - it sure does not happen overnight
The IRA did not need democracy to spread - they never even considered it but had another Guinness instead.
BTW... Why did the US support terrorist organisations in Ireland and openly have dinners and functions (including those at the Whitehouse) to raise money for terrorism?? Ah.. sorry.. that was for "freedom fighters".
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
After having read several of your posts in various threads I have come to realize that you are not very insightful and seem to be very misinformed in addition to not making much sense but I must assume that somehow you think differently or are just a trolling board whore.Originally posted by WebbyExcuse me??
Because the US experienced it's first "terrorist attack" and appears to have become very knowledgable on the subject - it may be worth commenting on other democratic countries who actually do have democracy as it is generally known worldwide.
ETA in Spain has existed since Roman Times in some form or other. You are prob right there - it sure does not happen overnight
The IRA did not need democracy to spread - they never even considered it but had another Guinness instead.
BTW... Why did the US support terrorist organisations in Ireland and openly have dinners and functions (including those at the Whitehouse) to raise money for terrorism?? Ah.. sorry.. that was for "freedom fighters".Comment
-
Faggot please, linking the ETA to Rome is like linking Republicans in the US to Federalists.Originally posted by WebbyETA in Spain has existed since Roman Times in some form or other. You are prob right there - it sure does not happen overnight
Marxism didn't exist in Rome.
Stupid people that try to pretend they aren?t are funny.QuickRichClick
Backed by the founders of CyberAge.com & UGAS.com.Comment
-
Yes, Clinton was convicted of perjury - and then impeached.Originally posted by Heywood Jablome
HOWEVER
They were just digging for dirt and kept digging until Clinton fucked up. He answered a question about something that had nothing to do with the case on hand, and answered in a way that defended his marriage more than anything else.
I'm sorry; Perhaps it's because I'm a former Marine but I don't think anyone should be taking pot shots at the office of the President of the United States. The office needs to be respected at all costs, no matter whom or what group is in office.
This was a lie about nothing important. Granted, it was under oath. But he should never have had to answer such questions under oath.Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NYComment
-
you can refer to your constitution regarding the processComment
-
Faggot.. please... Can you learn at least something of the Basque movement before you even begin to equate it with remotely anything in US history.Originally posted by aeon
Marxism???? No.. Marxism never did exist in Rome - least as far as I ever knew. Is this what you are saying?????XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
And a nice day to you - silly fuck.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Saddam ruled his country the same way the Gov. rules ours. With a strong Fist keep people in fearOriginally posted by DaddyHalbucks
The people who have the effrontery to rule us, who call themselves our government, understand this basic fact of human nature. They exploit it, and they cultivate it. Whether they compose a warfare state or a welfare state, they depend on it to secure popular submission, compliance with official dictates, and, on some occasions, affirmative cooperation with the state's enterprises and adventures. Without popular fear, no government could endure more than twenty-four hours. David Hume taught that all government rests on public opinion, but that opinion, I maintain, is not the bedrock of government. Public opinion itself rests on something deeper: fearComment
-
The (ETA) eskadi ta askatasuna is marxist you fucking dimwit. They were an offshoot of the basque nationalist party.Originally posted by Webby
I hope lennin rapes you.Originally posted by WebbyQuickRichClick
Backed by the founders of CyberAge.com & UGAS.com.Comment
-
"Maybe I learned about the ones who rule the land behind a gun.
"Business, banks and bureaucrats sell your soul if they had a chance.
"Backed by money, trapped by greed, cut you down like you're a weed
"growing strong above the rest. Conform your self or lose your nest
"of comfort in society, a fascist form of democracy.
"tell us lies, we'll call it truth, condemn the poor and damn the lazy
"youth. Let us cut the noose."
Malcolm Mohil
"Skool"Comment
-
Originally posted by RogerV
It's kinda like that Roger, but improving!
You are 100% correct about the democracy side... got to be one of the most progressive democracies on the planet. But nothing it perfect as you prob know!
Hard to say till it happens, but smell the newly elected government may progress better and away from the traditional influence. A few ministers actually have relevant qualifications and experience - plus the new President, Oscar, has served before and already known for his ability both in and out of office.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Sheesh.. that is an awesome education.. looks like we are getting close at last.Originally posted by aeon
Are you really just totally dumb or it just looks that way??
I'm not joking BTW!!
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Why quote my post and then refuse to answer any of the questions asked? Are you trying to avoid the issues raised in my post?Originally posted by DaddyHalbucks
Have you heard of Hamas?
Iraq was a very stablizing force in the Middle East and you are seeing that now with Iran.Comment
-
Originally posted by Expo_VidsNewsflash to the sheeple:
The President is not actually running the country. The prez is just a frontman.
Got it? Good
It wouldn't do any good to impeach bush anyway because the damage has already been done. All it would achieve, is to make a statement on what American citizens think of incompetent leadership. Have you seen the approval ratings lately? Those already represent that fact.
Here's why impeachment is not the way to go: It costs a shitload of money (enough has been spent by bush dont you think?), it's too slow, it's a republican held house and senate so he wouldn't be convicted anyway (particularly since he hasn't broken any laws), and what sense does it make to put Dick-lesspieceofshit Cheney into office?"..and which one of you had the prime rib?" - Waiter
"frankly, I don't see how that's any of your business!" - Peter GriffinComment
-
There an old saying that we get the government we deserve. Of course I don't derseve it, but unfortunatly. 60 million retards also have the right to vote.Originally posted by King AdamComment
-
There are principles involved SirMoby
The first principle is ignore all awkward questions.
The second principle is post some utter bullshit or one liner abuse as an answer to cover the fact that ya don't have a clue.
I'm still wondering if I can be educated on the change of policy from US support for terrorism in Ireland and why there is a problem with terrorism in the Middle East
Wait for it!BTW... Why did the US support te rrorist organisations in Ireland and openly have dinners and functions (including those at the Whitehouse) to raise money for terrorism?? Ah.. sorry.. that was for "freedom fighters".
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
The problem is the way the constitution is being defined. The president and his administration have found ways to interperate the constitition in a way that gives them a right to do what they want. Talk to other "scholars" and they say the constitution means something else. Unfortunetly scholars don't have the power or persuasian that the US government has.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
And I may not be a scholar, but it doesn't take one to see that he has commited high crimes. There are a lot of things people know about him and his administration but they can't make progress in proving it. What about all those highly educated men and women that continue to talk how the Bush admin constently keeps them from saying certain truths to the media. The administration is a bunch of bully's and they don't want the American public knowing the truth about many things. They have so much power that they can control what people say and don't say.
If you don't think he has commited any crimes than I think you are just silly.
TWISTYSCASH.com - Proven to be One of the BEST Adult Programs Around
Promote These Sites : Twistys ~ Busty Ones ~ Nicole Graves
ICQ : 9 6 4 4 0 2 2 1Comment
-
There is a difference between freedom fighters and terrorists. "Freedom fighters" is not just a catch phrase.Originally posted by WebbyBTW... Why did the US support terrorist organisations in Ireland and openly have dinners and functions (including those at the Whitehouse) to raise money for terrorism?? Ah.. sorry.. that was for "freedom fighters".
A freedom fighter is someone who is opposed to a forced government taking their soveriegn right to rule themselves. Their methods can be guerrila or unorthodox, similar to terrorist methods, but it is towards an end. Their reasoning and justification is articluted by their leaders and their goals are made clear. The IRA, and the militants attacking Allied troops in Iraq are examples. The militants attacking other civilians on Iraq are engaging in civil war.
Now look at Al Qeada for example. What is the end to their means? They are doing these acts in the name of God. They are extreme fundamentalists mis-interpreting religious dogma. It began with the takeover of Palestine, but that message was lost to these extremists long ago. Now they enact violence because they believe it is a calling from God.
Just my humble opinion, but I think they're dillusional."..and which one of you had the prime rib?" - Waiter
"frankly, I don't see how that's any of your business!" - Peter GriffinComment
-
Sure.. there are always shades of grey. And also depends a lot on what side your on - the people in the UK never exactly considered the IRA "freedom fighters" when they went on a bombing runs to kill innocent people - no different to what is happening in Iraq.Originally posted by BluewireBrian
The history of Ireland is a sad mess and it's easy to simplify tho
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
I am not a constitutional scholar either, but I have paid attention to the hearings that have been held about the "phone taps" and in one of the hearings I paid particular attention to what a half dozen former FISA Court Judges had to say. When congress passed FISA they added the language "the exclusive way" and each of the former FISA judges agreed that the lanquage would limit the power of the President provided to him by the constitution and thus is unconstitutional and not binding upon the President unless or until the Supreme Court ruled otherwise.Originally posted by King Adam
In other words all of the former FISA Court Judges agreed that the President not only has the constitutional right to ignore the FISA Court when "phone tapping" but in addition has an obligatory right to "phone tap" and would be derelict in his duties of the Presidency if he did not "phone tap".
In other panels before the committee the majority consensus among constitutional scholars was that the President had the constitutional authority to "phone tap" without going through the FISA courts and that the "exclusive" lanquage in the passing of FISA was not constitutional in that it limits the power of the President.
As for other crimes maybe you could be specific as to what the crimes are?Comment
-
Interesting info. To be honest, I have already learned a lot from reading all these posts.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
As for other crimes, its not easy to just say he did it. Just like a lot of Americans, I see things happen and even though he has not been proven guilty of it, well that doesn't mean he isn't.
Let me give you an example. My father runs his own law firm. He is also a Judge. I know in this country a person is innocent untill proven guilty. But that doesn't mean they aren't guilty. And even if they are proven innocent in a court of law, there are many that are guilty and get off due to a technicality. I have seen with my own eyes this very thing. When I was younger, I used to go to court to see my Dad being a judge. I've seen people that I know go before him and get a not guilty verdict even though they were guilty. I know they were because it was people I know on a personal level. The judical system is as fucked up as anything. Thats why I never finished law school.
Now thats only on a state level. When you have as much power and money as the president and administration, its not that hard to have things overlooked and swept under the rug. There are payoffs, threats and blackmail.
For example, Bush went to Iraq because he wanted to get rid of WMD. All bullshit. He wanted control of oil .. period. I have family in the middle east and our media in the US sugar coats everything. You only see what they want you to see. That is just one small example. The whole 911 is a story in itself.
I very much appreciate your input and information. Learning and education are the only things that can truly make one better and more powerful. But one must open their eyes and realize that things aren't always what they seem to be. When it comes to the government, these things are usually not even close to the truth.
TWISTYSCASH.com - Proven to be One of the BEST Adult Programs Around
Promote These Sites : Twistys ~ Busty Ones ~ Nicole Graves
ICQ : 9 6 4 4 0 2 2 1Comment
-
No, but it is illegal to tap an Americans phone in the US without a warrant.Originally posted by DaddyHalbucks
FISA makes it a crime, punishable by up to five years in prison, to conduct electronic surveillance except as provided for by statute. The only defense is for law government agents engaged in official duties conducting ?surveillance authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order.? [50 U.S.C. § 1809]
"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."
GW - April 20th, 2004Comment
-
A bigger issue than the wiretapping is we damn well know Bush/Cheney was behind revealing the identity of a CIA agent in a smear campaign. That is treason.Comment
-
You apparenlty have not read the posts in this thread. The President apparently is not obligated to go through FISA. Congress cannot pass laws that limit the power the constitution provides to the President, unless or until the Supreme Court rules that the law is binding upon the President. Thus at this point in time it is not illegal for the President to "wire tap".Originally posted by SuckOnThisNo, but it is illegal to tap an Americans phone in the US without a warrant.
FISA makes it a crime, punishable by up to five years in prison, to conduct electronic surveillance except as provided for by statute. The only defense is for law government agents engaged in official duties conducting ?surveillance authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order.? [50 U.S.C. § 1809]
"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."
GW - April 20th, 2004Comment
-
No it is not. The President can legally leak any information that he chooses to. It is a part of his constitutional power. When the President leaks info it automatically falls into the declassified category.Originally posted by SuckOnThisLast edited by Sexxxy Sites; 04-18-2006, 08:32 PM.Comment
-
Oh, okay. I'll pay more attention to the posters here than the actual FISA law.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
Comment
-
You have your head so far up Bush's ass your eyes are blinded by shit.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
Isnt Bill O'Reilly on or something?Comment
-
Wrong. I will be pleased to see President Bush become Citizen President Bush.Originally posted by SuckOnThisComment
-
Since when did the name of a CIA agent become "declassified" and public knowledge before that employee was even advised and for what purpose did this individual differ under the law from other CIA employees?Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
Does Bush have a list of CIA agents and play Russian roulette for fun in who will be "declassifed" each day??
And.. it sure as fuck is not "legal" - fuck the "legalities" - it's not only immoral but treason.Last edited by Webby; 04-18-2006, 08:45 PM.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
It is not illegal and certainly is not treason and is within the Constitutional powers of the Presidency. In addition it is my understanding the CIA agent involved was not a covert agent and apparently had not been for the five year period allowed by the (I think) agency for her name to be made public by whomever.Originally posted by Webby
As for being "immoral": I am not comfortable with the term but I do think it was a bit outrageous.Comment
-
I don't know what case you are thinking of, Clinton committed the perjury in the Paula Jones sexual harassment trial.Originally posted by Rochard
email: [email protected]Comment
-
Fuck the constitution in that case - it's obviously shit. But doubt (and I mean no offence) that you have a clue on this.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
Your "understanding" of what is and what is not a covert agent is irrelevant. It's not your or my business nor that of the general public.
It does not matter one toss whether it's a US CIA agent, some other govt officer or a law enforcement officer in a covert scenario - or whether it's the President of the US or the manager of McDonalds. It can be, and often is, *highly* risky to even indicate the possibility that an individual may be "not as it seems".
There is little doubt the President of the US has one single clue about the contacts an indivdual has had over her career and what may be harmful if known to *someone*. There are things people just don't talk about - or ask questions. It is clear you have no knowledge of either the dangers or the lengths to which folks go to protect situations - I do.
For the President of the US to come out with his slimebag and smear shit over one of the people working on behalf of the US in an attempt to "get at" her husband because he does not like his report - is the height of utter amateurism and shows how utterly stupid, warped and incompetent he actually is. Tho doubt he was alone in playing these pathetic party-political games.
I may be critical of "agencies" at times, but never would dream of "declaring up" an individual under risk - I got more respect than that and that's only me - for the US President to get into that swamp is extremely damning and says a lot about him.Last edited by Webby; 04-18-2006, 09:23 PM.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Originally posted by WebbyYes it does and also about dirty politics. It was the CIA agent that recommended to the agency that her husband be sent to Africa. He went and came back with a negative report (some in Great Briton insist to this day that his report was wrong but the truth will probably never be known) and went public stating that the Vice President sent him which was a lie. He was out to get the President and the President retaliated for political reasons.and says a lot about him
What the President did, as I stated was a bit outrageous, but what he did was legal as whatever the President leaks automatically becomes declassified information.
BTW...it is "OUR" constitution and we Americans are rather proud of it.Comment
-
Some of these folks have done shit in their careers that no politician would ever come near to and deserve some respect for stuffing their necks out to remedy a problem at great personal risk to themselves - even when operating within the US in leafy suburbia. Odd they never have a rap sheet despite being jailed and committing plenty "offenses"
Seriously.. the Bush shit ain't funny and is not in the interests of the US or anyone involved. It simply means the govt can't be trusted even by their own officers.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
You are correct that the President can declassify information when he chooses however we give him that power to protect the country and not for his personal gain. Just because it's legal does not make it right. He spent years telling the public that the information becoming public was outrageous. We all know the reason that information was made public.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
While I'll admit there was no crime committed are you willing to admit that it was more then a bit outrageous?
Haven't members and friends of the administration profited from questionable policies and actions? I'm not talking a few million $$$ here and there either.Comment
-
Originally posted by SirMobyNo. There are other things that have happened in this administration and past administrations that were more than a bit outrageous.While I'll admit there was no crime committed are you willing to admit that it was more then a bit outrageous?
I don't know. I am not privy to the "members and friends" transactions and bank accounts. Maybe you can let me know what "members and friends" have made millions or more from "questionable policies and actions". Also maybe you can let me know what "questionable polices and actions" you are speaking of.Haven't members and friends of the administration profited from questionable policies and actions? I'm not talking a few million $$$ here and there eitherComment
-
You have no idea what the hell you're talking about. You hear some crap on FOX News and run around repeating it like a fucking parrot.Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
From the July 2003 edition of Newsday:
A senior intelligence officer confirmed that Plame was a Directorate of Operations undercover officer who worked 'alongside' the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger. But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. 'They [the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story] were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising,' he said.
'There are people elsewhere in government who are trying to make her look like she was the one who was cooking this up, for some reason,' he said. 'I can't figure out what it could be.' 'We paid his [Wilson's] airfare. But to go to Niger is not exactly a benefit. Most people you'd have to pay big bucks to go there,' the senior intelligence official said. (Newsday article "Columnist Blows CIA Agent's Cover," dated July 22, 2003).
Another right wing lie. Please look up facts before you continue spewing out your bullshit. This is right from the article Joe Wilson wrote in the NY Times which brought all this about:Originally posted by Sexxxy Sites
'In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake.'
'After consulting with the State Department's African Affairs Bureau (and through it with Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, the United States ambassador to Niger), I agreed to make the trip.'
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htmComment
-
BTW.. On trust - there is no second chance for Bush and his "leaks".
It is little surpise the husband of the "declassified" individual got kinda mad. If that happened to friends of mine, I'd sure have a great desire to twist George's balls off and remind him how to spell loyalty. But "redemption" comes in all forms and patience is a virtue - and all that cliche crap.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
Comment