BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 09:02 AM

I heard that Bush wants to build two walls one with Mexico and the other with Canada, Closing your Borders I mean what next?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 09:39 AM

GUEST -

How we gonna close the Canadian border? They're our No 1 supplier of imported oil aren't they?

(They probably think we're so nice them 'cause we like them. "Suck up" can have lots of meanings here.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 12:41 PM

Problem with these Republicans is that they just HATE THE CONSTITUTION.

Tricky Dick had problems with the rule of law (Watergate), The Gipper ditto (Iran-Contra) George the First (Gulf War BS) and now George the Second's serial offenses against the Constitution and the law of the land.

Despite all this, them boys & girls jus' keep votin' Republican.

The U.S. absolutely has the government it deserves- a majority of the population is evidentally every bit as ignorant as their Prez!

God Help America.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: DougR
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 12:56 PM

Oh my Lord! I hate to say it but I feel I must ...the sky is surely falling! Get out of the way!

Yep, Greg F., no doubt about it. The only intelligent Americans are folks who think like you do.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:02 PM

How do you explain America's stupidity, Doug? *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:34 PM

"The only intelligent Americans are folks who think like you do."

You got that right, doug.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 02:17 PM

JohninKansas -

You say, "They probably think we're so nice them 'cause we like them."

Quite the contrary.

The U.S. isn't so 'nice' to Canada. The U.S. fouls our air, refuses our beef exports, steals our salmon, does not honour trade agreements, demands our energy resources and bullies us into military defense and intelligence co-operation.

The U.S. does not 'like' Canada but needs our co-operation and depends on our energy and other resources.

We have many friends and family in the U.S. and do not wish to see our borders closed. We want to be friendly neighbors but its hard to be friends with the Bush administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 02:18 PM

That would be one long freakin' wall, BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 02:19 PM

. . . but if we asked real nice, could we have it painted in mauve? Heaven forfend it should clash with our decor.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: bobad
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 03:07 PM

Hmmm, domestic spying and building walls against neighbours, anyone else reminded of East Germany ?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 04:01 PM

dianovan -

sarcasm needs explanation?

I can't say I understand all the complaints, but I do know enough of them not to expect anyone in Canada to believe it when our politicians say "we love you."

And re the why are we so stupid: I don't know why, but I doubt if more than about 10 percent of the US population knows we get any oil from Canada. They think it all comes from "Omaria" or something like that.

I'd guess that ten percent of them couldn't name the nearest U.S. city that's half as big as the one they live in, unless it's where they have to go to buy their beer (Coors Lite, of course).

John

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 04:02 PM

"The U.S. isn't so 'nice' to Canada. The U.S. fouls our air, refuses our beef exports, steals our salmon, does not honour trade agreements, demands our energy resources and bullies us into military defense and intelligence co-operation.

"The U.S. does not 'like' Canada but needs our co-operation and depends on our energy and other resources. " dianavan

One more time: What's YOUR excuse? One cannot have a victim without its cooperation of some kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 05:08 PM

Jeeze, ease up on the Yanks, will ya? The ones here are our friends (for the most part).

HOWEVER, I INSIST on a mauve wall. (Mauve is a kinda green, right?) I do NOT want the wall to clash with our forests.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 05:30 PM

Oh, dear. Bruce, how do I break it to you? Mauve is- well, it's not really kind of - well, it's more like - it's kind of a dusty - well, hell. It's a kind of green.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: DougR
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 05:30 PM

I assume all the U. S. Mudcatters will be listening to our president tonight, right? 9:00 P.M. Eastern Time in the event that Air America hasn't notified it's listeners.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 05:41 PM

Thanks, Ebbie. That's what I thought. However, once, years ago I painted a room chartreuse at the insistence of a friend (it was his place and he was going out of town for a week). Anyway, how as I supposed to know that chartreuse wasn't a deep red colour? Sheesh. Put on two coats BTW. I couldn't figure out why he wanted the room so dark, but people have their preferences and who was I to disagree?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Amos
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 06:51 PM

Ya shoulda Googled it, man!

"The green-yellow color that is common among trees that have poor fall coloration of their foliage."

www.dnr.state.oh.us/forestry/Education/ohiotrees/glossary.html"

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 06:53 PM

Oh. Hey, BRB. I am gonna google mauve.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 06:57 PM

"Mauve is the product of serendipity and imagination. The Oxford English Dictionary's (OED) first record of the word's use is from 1859. yourDictionary.com defines it as "a moderate purple, violet, or lilac color" and adds that it is also "a dyestuff that produces a mauve color." The term is a loanword from French, in which it means "the mallow plant" or the color of its flowers."

I have never known the OED to err before. But there is a first for everything. OED--Ebbie, OED--Ebbie. Ebbie wins. Green it is. See where it says "a moderate purple, violet or mauve color"? They mean to say, and could have for the sake of clarity, 'purple, violet and green'.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 07:00 PM

Notice the beautiful green glass and scarf?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 07:08 PM

Proof: The colour green.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 08:11 PM

DougieR,

No, I won't listen to him... It's nuthin' put one more desperate PR push to save his presidency... Heck, he's allready leaked to Tim Russert that there woh't be anything new in so, like, what's to watch??? More proclaimations of just how concerned he is about "protecting the American people"??? Man, after 9/11, where he was asleep (or drunk) at the wheel and then Katrina, where he was again asleep (or drunk) at the wheel, I don't have any faith left in me that this man is capable of protecting anyone...

Might of fact, he isn't even samrt enough to understand that thou he is presiodent he has to obey laws... You all jumped all over Bill Clionton because, you say he didn't obey laws in lieing under oath about his relationship with Monika Lewinski but here you have a guy who0 has absolutely thumbed his nose at written law and he's yer hero??????

Like what is that all about??? No, don't tell me... I allready know... They call it hypocrisy...

Now come on over here an' get a big hug, Big Guy...

I still loves ya' even if you is a knothead...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Amos
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 08:24 PM

DougR:

"Our" President?

I do not consider him a legitimate leader for the United STates of America.

And his time-hooured propensity for sheer mendacity does very little to make the prospect of listening to his homey little subliterate twang very inviting. If I thought he would say anything honest, I'd be right there!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 08:35 PM

"I'm sure they had no idea that that one act would have led to the complete destruction of the rules of civilisation we've built up over so many years"

That's EXACTLY what they wanted to destroy - and was the whole intent - or didn't you listen to "Bin Laden's Declaration of War on the USA and Allies"?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 08:45 PM

Peace -

Was that link at 18 Dec 05 - 07:00 PM just to prove how effective secret stuff is. I got a "You are Forbidden to Have Access to..."

Very effective illustration.

And appropriate!

John

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 09:10 PM

gulp Ah. Bruce. Ah, I have something to tell you... but no hurry- it can wait. You're doing fine.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 09:44 PM

then why did you vote for Bush, Bobert?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Dec 05 - 10:25 PM

Ebbie, you said, "One cannot have a victim without its cooperation of some kind."

I'll remember that when the Bush administration taps your phone, monitors your e-mail, detains you indefinitely and denies you a lawyer.

BTW - Mauve is a dusty purple that is popular in Quebec.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 03:08 AM

TIC, dianavan, TIC. Mauve is what mauve is- and neither Peace nor I was born yesterday.

But don't be silly. If and when we get to the place where you can say "I'll remember that when the Bush administration taps your phone, monitors your e-mail, detains you indefinitely and denies you a lawyer.", I'll agree - cheerfully or not so cheerfully - that in some fundamental way I and my fellow countrymen have cooperated in our victimization. Wouldn't you, if it happened to you?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 07:32 AM

Some facts for Bobert Amos and the other whiners and scared rabbits:

If you read to the end of the same NYT article you will find these facts to ponder:

"the Constitution vests in the President inherent authority to conduct warrantless intelligence surveillance (electronic or otherwise) of foreign powers or their agents, and Congress cannot by statute extinguish that constitutional authority."
"Warrants are still required for eavesdropping on entirely domestic-to-domestic communications"

A secret program? No one knew? "Rockefeller, the West Virginia Democrat who became vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee that year, wrote a letter to Mr. Cheney expressing concerns about the program" "Aside from the Congressional leaders, only a small group of people, including several cabinet members and officials at the N.S.A., the C.I.A. and the Justice Department, know of the program"

If you are not communicating to a foeirgn country such as Afghanistan and if you are not on a terrorist watch list you have nothing to worry about so all of you scared rabbits can dry your eyes disassemble and go back in your individual holes and feel safe again due to the dilligence and laedership of the Bush administration.

Your asses might have already been saved by such operations and you would never know about it. But still your neurotic personalities gives you the need to complain about something. Complain about the asshole that just got elected president of Bolivia.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: curmudgeon
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:58 AM

Hey, Old Guy,   read this.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 10:26 AM

This thread seems to have two schools of thought:

1) Mauve is green

2) The US is good or bad

I am with the former school. FYI.

Thanks, Ebbie.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 11:37 AM

Yep, Greg F., no doubt about it. The only intelligent Americans are folks who think like you do.

Sorry, Douggie, but I said nothing about intelligence. I said ignorance.

Look 'em both up in the dictionary, why dontcha, and report back to the group.

[ Its not about conformity of thought, its about engaging the process critical thought PERIOD. ]

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST,rarelamb
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 01:33 PM

I don't think that we have had a great deal of information on this story yet. But, on the face, it sounds horrific. If Bush is found to have authorized illegal survalience of american citizens, I would be infavor of impeaching him.

In illegal wire tap is no different than an illegal search and seizure.
From the Bill of Rights

"Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 01:46 PM

So lead the charge, hero.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 01:51 PM

I agree with rarelamb; we don't have a lot of information just yet. On the one hand, we were hit by a horrific terrorist attack due (in part, at least) to the failure of federal officials to either obtain or process information that might have prevented it. I want our government to recognize its failure, and redouble its efforts to gather the information that might help prevent the next attack. And some of the constraints on them, at least as they have been interpreted thus far, are asinine; it's silly to say that they can listen to a conversation, but only use the half of it that wasn't spoken by a US citizen.

On the other hand, the Bush administration has shown such disregard for human rights, and for reasonable limitations on Executive authority, that they don't have a lot of credibility left on questions of this sort. In times of national emergency, I'm prepared to allow our government a certain amount of latitude (temporarily, at least), if it seems that they need it. Lincoln's transgressions against the Bll of Rights were much greater than this, as were FDR's, and yet they are regarded as perhaps our greatest Presidents, principally because they saw this nation through times of great danger. But based on the Bush administration's track record, I am skeptical that they are using their real and/or assumed authority judiciously.

I think we need a full investigation. I am prepared to withhold judgment for now, provided that I have confidence that the facts are forthcoming.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: GUEST,rarelamb
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 02:07 PM

Regardless of whether or not they are thought well of after, the suspension of Habeas Corpus and threatening to pack the courts are rightfully black marks on their presidencies.

They had the result that it was found unconstitutional by the supreme court and congress placed term limits.

The accusations thus far represent very dangerous grab of power by the executive branch.

To be fair though, it looks like some members of congress may be complicit. I think we are in the early stages of this.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 07:08 PM

Ebbie -

Are you agreeing with the following statement?

"They probably think we're so nice them 'cause we like them."

My reply was in response to someone saying that the U.S. likes Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 07:42 PM

"Countries do not have friends; they have interests."

I believe that was said by Kissinger.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 08:38 PM

dianavan, I think we're getting caught up in some kind of convolution.

Your citing 'They probably think we're so nice them 'cause we like them' from JohninKansas 9:39AM confuses me further. You must be able to understand that sentence better than I do.

My answer below is responding to your statement above. And when I asked, What's YOUR excuse, I was referring to the fact that your take on it is how awful the US is for what it does to Canada- my question iz, Why does Canada allow it? She must benefit in some way, a way that is not necessarily an obvious way to some of her citizens.

You said: "The U.S. isn't so 'nice' to Canada. The U.S. fouls our air, refuses our beef exports, steals our salmon, does not honour trade agreements, demands our energy resources and bullies us into military defense and intelligence co-operation.

"The U.S. does not 'like' Canada but needs our co-operation and depends on our energy and other resources. " dianavan

I responded: One more time: What's YOUR excuse? One cannot have a victim without its cooperation of some kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 08:50 PM

When you have the big bully, son of the Principal, in the schoolground, you can fight back, or leave the school.

It's a bit hard for Canada to pick up her skirts and leave...

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:00 PM

I am of the opinion that Canada should begin making nuclear bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:07 PM

Again?

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:10 PM

Yep. Again.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:13 PM

"Canada - Canada has a well developed nuclear technology base and large uranium reserves. While Canada has the technological capabilities to develop nuclear weapons, there is no hard evidence they have done so, nor has Canada ever shown the intention to join the nuclear club outright. Canada has been an important contributor of both expertise and raw materials to the American program. Canada accepted having American nuclear warheads under dual key control on Canadian soil in 1963 to be used on the Canadian BOMARC missiles. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau declared Canada would be a nuclear weapon free country in 1971, and the last American warheads were withdrawn in 1984. Before this time Canada also carried a compliment of AIR-2 Genie nuclear tipped air to air missiles."

But this time they would be under OUR control.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:17 PM

We've been lots like OZ in that regard.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:17 PM

"Australia – Following World War II, Australian defence policy premised joint nuclear weapons development with the United Kingdom. Australia provided uranium, land for weapons and rocket tests, and scientific and engineering expertise. Canberra was also heavily involved in the Blue Streak ballistic missile program. In 1955, a contract was signed with a British company to build the Hi-Flux Australian Reactor (HIFAR). HIFAR was considered the first step towards the construction of larger reactors capable of producing substantial volumes of plutonium for nuclear weapons. However, Australia's nuclear ambitions were abandoned by the 1960s, and the country signed the NPT in 1970 (ratified in 1973). [21]"

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:19 PM

Ahhhh, just fir the record Old Guy, the Consitiution does not allow the president to spy on US citizens... If you don' think so, go read the danged thing... No where in it does is say that a president has this right...

Don't agree with me??? Find it anywhwere in the Constition...

Might of fact, I think the Founding Fatehrs would take you an' yer hero, drunk frat boy, out back and give you both a good whuppin'...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:20 PM

Figure it this way. We build a few hundred nukes. The US invades. We set off the nukes in our oil and natural gas fields; seaways; prairies; major cities with ports. The Americans could then have the place. Should be fit for habitation in a few thousand years.

Subject: RE: BS: Domestic Spying in the U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:22 PM

Just a passing thought, BTW.