Obama Civilian Security?

[jrrtoken]

That is your own ignorant and scaremongering opinion. It is based on little credible evidence and is an outright smear. If you'd like to provide hardcore evidence of a Democrat gestapo, then I'd like to see it. Because if I remember correctly, we've already had an authoritarian regime post-9/11, and that was with Republicans in control of every branch of the government.

[Jae Onasi]

Keep it civil, folks. You can disagree without name-calling.

[GarfieldJL]

That is your own ignorant and scaremongering opinion. It is based on little credible evidence and is an outright smear. If you'd like to provide hardcore evidence of a Democrat gestapo, then I'd like to see it. Because if I remember correctly, we've already had an authoritarian regime post-9/11, and that was with Republicans in control of every branch of the government.

 

No we didn't, President Bush didn't have people's tax information gone through because they asked him a tough question.

 

This isn't a smear, in fact I'm getting a little annoyed that whenever someone finds something that isn't falling all over itself praising Obama, it's called a smear job.

 

Seriously, if anyone has been unfairly smeared this year it's been Senator Clinton, Senator McCain, Governor Palin, and Joe the Plumber.

[mimartin]

Last I checked Bush's wiretaps were of phone calls where at least one party was in another country. That's a big difference from illegally going through someone's tax records without probable cause.

I have no problem with wiretaps, so you can stop right there. I have a problem with no judicial oversight and that does not matter if you are calling ten miles away or half way around the world. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 gave Bush the means to wiretap, but it also required judicial oversight in the form of a special court. However Bush gave the secret order to NSA saying they did not need the FISA court’s approval.

[GarfieldJL]

I have no problem with wiretaps, so you can stop right there. I have a problem with no judicial oversight and that does not matter if you are calling ten miles away or half way around the world. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 gave Bush the means to wiretap, but it also required judicial oversight in the form of a special court. However Bush gave the secret order to NSA saying they did not need the FISA court’s approval.

 

So you're saying they should have hung up immediately when a terrorist overseas suddenly calls a cell phone that happens to be in the United States.

 

They weren't tracking phone convos that were entirely in the United States, they were tapping the phone calls from phones they knew the terrorists were using outside the United States and ended up listening into a conversation with someone whom was in the United States, that the terrorists called. That's a big difference from getting into someone's personal records via government computers without probable cause.

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/27/copy/joe28.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

[Litofsky]

So you're saying they should have hung up immediately when a terrorist overseas suddenly calls a cell phone that happens to be in the United States.

 

They weren't tracking phone convos that were entirely in the United States, they were tapping the phone calls from phones they knew the terrorists were using outside the United States and ended up listening into a conversation with someone whom was in the United States, that the terrorists called. That's a big difference from getting into someone's personal records via government computers without probable cause.

 

Garfield, it seems as though you've just missed mimartin's entire point. He said that he was fine with wiretapping. Why? Because it might help save American lives, and the fact that it is/was overseen by the Judicial Branch. However, what Bush did was to give the NSA the ability to wiretap anyone without judicial oversight. That's what his problem is.

[GarfieldJL]

Garfield, it seems as though you've just missed mimartin's entire point. He said that he was fine with wiretapping. Why? Because it might help save American lives, and the fact that it is/was overseen by the Judicial Branch. However, what Bush did was to give the NSA the ability to wiretap anyone without judicial oversight. That's what his problem is.

 

The Judicial Oversight applied to domestic wiretapping, not wiretapping foreign nationals in another country.

 

The gray area was when it was a foreign/domestic phone call, in the incident of the terrorists calling someone in the US, it is my opinion that the only permission that would have to be asked for the wiretapping is if they wiretapped the phone in the United States, otherwise in my opinion it was fair game.

 

Wiretapping terrorists is totally different from raiding someone's personal records without probable cause. Which is partially what indicates that Obama is trying to create a Secret Police Force.

[mimartin]

So you're saying they should have hung up immediately when a terrorist overseas suddenly calls a cell phone that happens to be in the United States.

Not without judicial oversight. Why should the citizens be expected to follow laws when our own government does not follow the rules the government itself created. Also something in the Oath of Office that says the presents swears to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Seems to me illegal wiretaps goes against that pledge.

 

Are you saying it is all right to listen to two citizens’ personal conversation just because one happens to be vacationing in England? Or is everyone that goes on vacation outside the good ol’ US of A considered a terrorist threat?

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Oh so now you're concerned about security. I guess it's cause a Democrat will be in office. Seriously, there is the NSA and FBI, what Obama's program sounds like quite honestly is a secret police.

too busy wiretapping us. and how is the nsa different from a secret police force?

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/17/are-the-media-airbrushing-obamas-speeches/

thank god random hotair.com blogger is on the case

 

No just that you're completely making up the part about Obama creating another Schutzstaffel.

waffle ss

[GarfieldJL]

Not without judicial oversight. Why should the citizens be expected to follow laws when our own government does not follow the rules the government itself created. Also something in the Oath of Office that says the presents swears to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Seems to me illegal wiretaps goes against that pledge.

 

They weren't citizens though, we were wiretapping the terrorist (some of these intercepts were from cell phones in the middle of Afghanistan). They happened to call someone in the United States, were we supposed to simply shut down the link at that point? Would they need a warrent to tap the phone in the United States, yes they would need a warrent to tap the phone in the United States. It's counter intuitive to hang up when they are plotting to bomb targets in the United States. As long as the wiretap was on the phone that was in places like Afghanistan, and they happened to call someone in the US. They could listen in without a warrant to that conversation, but they would then need to obtain a warrant to tap the cell phone that is in the United States.

 

Are you saying it is all right to listen to two citizens’ personal conversation just because one happens to be vacationing in England? Or is everyone that goes on vacation outside the good ol’ US of A consider a terrorist threat?

 

I wasn't aware that Osama bin Laden was a US citizen. Furthermore, the phone calls in question were from locations that it would be highly unlikely to be a vacation site (Afghanistan).

 

As I said there is a big difference between the wiretapping and what happened in Ohio and Missouri which indicates Obama's intention is to form a Secret Police.

 

too busy wiretapping us. and how is the nsa different from a secret police force?

 

I wasn't aware that you lived in Afghanistan.

[mimartin]

They weren't citizens though, we were wiretapping the terrorist (some of these intercepts were from cell phones in the middle of Afghanistan).

Then why not get Judicial Approval?

[GarfieldJL]

Then why not get Judicial Approval?

 

Whose to say they didn't try to obtain judicial approval after the conversation was concluded (permission to listen in on phone conversations that occur with the phone that is in the United States). Seriously, do you honestly think the NSA knew beforehand that the cell phones in Afghanistan they were tapping would end up being used to call a specific individual in the United States so they could obtain the Judicial Approval? You can't get blanket approval, you need to have a specific name or specific group with some probable cause to obtain a warrant. They couldn't get that information beforehand.

 

 

 

That picture is a real laugh but isn't remotely accurate. One of the callers was on foreign soil (in fact that was the phone they were tracking (the one on foreign soil)), furthermore the phones they were tracking tended to be in Afghanistan in the middle of a war zone or other countries that are known sponsors of Terrorism (such a Syria or Iran).

 

This isn't even remotely equivalent to the secret police that Obama apparently wants set up.

[mimartin]

You can't get blanket approval, you need to have a specific name or specific group with some probable cause to obtain a warrant.

Just in case someone is actually reading this looking for facts. Blanket Wiretaps It seems when they wanted one they got one and it was done legally.

 

This isn't even remotely equivalent to the secret police that Obama apparently wants set up.

Very true, since Obama does not want to set up the secret police.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

I wasn't aware that you lived in Afghanistan.

razor sharp wit itt.

 

oh wait all you did is dodge the question and regurgitate a bush administration talking point about how the nsa isn't illegally wiretapping people. thanks.

[Yar-El]

 

(~16:45)

 

Why do we need a 'second' military when we already have a very strong military?

 

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security" -Benjamin Franklin

You get what you vote for. Police state here we come.

[GarfieldJL]

oh wait all you did is dodge the question and regurgitate a bush administration talking point about how the nsa isn't illegally wiretapping people. thanks.

 

If this were true, wouldn't a lot of the Mainstream Media and President Bush's other enemies be in jail by now?

 

 

Seriously, this isn't even remotely similar to how the Obama campaign went after an American Citizen.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

If this were true, wouldn't a lot of the Mainstream Media and President Bush's other enemies be in jail by now?

your logic is flawless good sir

 

 

Seriously, this isn't even remotely similar to how the Obama campaign went after an American Citizen.

wat

[EnderWiggin]

If this were true, wouldn't a lot of the Mainstream Media and President Bush's other enemies be in jail by now?

No.

This doesn't even make sense. What would they be arrested for? And who's to say that the media isn't being wiretapped? And the NSA is wiretapping.

 

_EW_

[ET Warrior]

Is my tin foil hat just not on tight enough? I don't understand how it flows logically that if Obama wants a security force to protect the internals of the country from terrorism that directly equates to Secret Gestapo Thought Police force of Socialism.

[EnderWiggin]

Secret Gestapo Thought Police force of Socialism.

 

Don't forget we're abbreviating it as KGB.

 

_EW_

[GarfieldJL]

This doesn't even make sense. What would they be arrested for? And who's to say that the media isn't being wiretapped? And the NSA is wiretapping.

 

Well the objective of abusing power like that would usually be towards eliminating political rivals. Like what Obama Campaign and Co. tried to do in Missouri and Ohio.

 

Speech by Missouri Governor Transcript

 

It's the reason why I know this blog is telling the truth.

 

And also shows why this civilian security whatever that Obama is proposing is nothing more than a Secret Police like what we see in a dictatorship.

[mimartin]

Is my tin foil hat just not on tight enough?

You need to tighten the tin foil hat around your neck to have it make sense.

[GarfieldJL]

Is my tin foil hat just not on tight enough? I don't understand how it flows logically that if Obama wants a security force to protect the internals of the country from terrorism that directly equates to Secret Gestapo Thought Police force of Socialism.

 

Here are some reasons and I imagine Yar-El can add to them.

1. Obama is a socialist
   
2. Obama's Campaign was involved in threatening people in Missouri for Criticizing him
   
3. Obama supporters illegally used government computers to get into Joe the Plumber's tax records and other personal information
   
4. The Black Panthers are now involved in voter intimidation in Pennsylvania
   
5. Hugo Chavez wants Obama to win
   
6. Obama's radicial associations
   
7. The Democrats trying to push through the "fairness doctrine"
   
8. Obama campaign blacklisting a news station for asking Senator Biden tough questions
   
9. Obama Campaign Contributing over $800,000 to an organization that specializes in voter fraud
   
10. Obama campaign accepting money from credit cards that can't be tracked (which is probably from illegal donors), as well as foreign contributions (which are definately illegal (specifically the Middle East))
    

[EnderWiggin]

1. Obama is a socialist
   
2. Obama's Campaign was involved in threatening people in Missouri for Criticizing him
   
3. Obama supporters illegally used government computers to get into Joe the Plumber's tax records and other personal information
   
4. The Black Panthers are now involved in voter intimidation in Pennsylvania
   
5. Hugo Chavez wants Obama to win
   
6. Obama's radicial associations
   
7. The Democrats trying to push through the "fairness doctrine"
   
8. Obama campaign blacklisting a news station for asking Senator Biden tough questions
   
9. Obama Campaign Contributing over $800,000 to an organization that specializes in voter fraud
   
10. Obama campaign accepting money from credit cards that can't be tracked (which is probably from illegal donors), as well as foreign contributions (which are definately illegal (specifically the Middle East))
    

1. Obama is NOT a socialist, even if some of his policies have socialist tendencies.

2. I don't know enough on the issue, but I'm inclined to disagree with anything you think.

3. If these things were illegal, why wouldn't he be called on it?

4. Obama's not a Black Panther, Obama's not controlling the Black Panthers, that was in one spot in PA, go away.

5. Al-Qaeda wants McCain to win. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/22/al-qaeda-supporters-endor_n_136779.html

6. William Ayers isn't even a point that anyone cares about anymore.

7. This has nothing to do with Obama, especially because he "does not support reimposing the fairness doctrine on broadcasters" quote.

8. Those questions weren't tough, they were just dumb. "Isn't Obama a socialist?" Anyway, its their prerogative to choose where to take their interviews.

9. ACORN is not even a relevant point. ACORN does a lot of positive things for communities, and even though they were involved in a few incidents, those members are not indicative of ACORN's overall objectives.

10. Allegedly.

 

 

AND STILL: none of these reasons indicate that Obama would want a personal SS.

 

Hope this helps.

 

_EW_

[jrrtoken]

Obama is a socialist

Sorry, but the last thread about this proved you wrong. Next.

 

Obama's Campaign was involved in threatening people in Missouri for Criticizing him

Need proof.

 

Obama supporters illegally used government computers to get into Joe the Plumber's tax records and other personal information

Alright, this just sounds completely overblown and frankly ridiculous. I'd like some proof.

 

The Black Panthers are now involved in voter intimidation in Pennsylvania

Oh noes, the Black Panthers are back! Proof?

 

Hugo Chavez wants Obama to win

And? Almost every other world leader probably wants Obama to win. It doesn't mean jack.

 

Obama's radicial associations

Smear tactics, plain and simple.

 

The Democrats trying to push through the "fairness doctrine"

Proof?

 

Obama campaign blacklisting a news station for asking Senator Biden tough questions

We've also deemed that the interviewer was warmongering and ultra-conservative.

 

Obama Campaign Contributing over $800,000 to an organization that specializes in voter fraud

Again, there is no connection that proves that the Obama campaign gave money to ACORN to specifically manipulate votes, therefore, your argument has no merit.

 

Obama campaign accepting money from credit cards that can't be tracked (which is probably from illegal donors), as well as foreign contributions (which are definately illegal (specifically the Middle East))

Alright, unless if you can prove any of your claims with more moderate, no BS proof, then I can't see your point.