Posted on 12/16/2005 2:25:18 PM PST by SirLinksalot
a surprising and dramatic rebuff to President Bush that reflected rising concern over his handling of the war on terrorism.
Oh spare me LA Times. This has nothing to do with "concern over his handling of the war on terrorism" which has been enormously successful. This is a Democratic party out to thwart the president at every turn no, in absolute knee-jerk obstructionism mode, aided and abetted by a few useful idiot Republicans who clearly don't even understand the Patriot Act as was obvious from their comments about it. Nerd Sununu, Nepotism Murkowski and Red Neck Craig made the country more vulnerable today, and based on little that's real. I expect that from the Traitorcrats. Not from supposedly good Republicans, including one like Murkowski that the GOP spent a hell of a lot of time and effort getting re-elected.
I love how the MSM always makes every thing Democrats do in opposing the president look like a principled stand based on "concern" and worry for the nation's well-being by people more enlightened than Bush on what needs to be done to win a war. The Democrats couldn't be less concerned for the nation's well-being than they are. The only thing they care about is ensuring they win elections by opposing the president at every turn. Why is it if Republicans opposed a Democratic president on anti-terrorism legislation they'd be labelled as "partisan" and "extreme" by the media, not to mention "right wing?"
No, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with "concern about how the war on terrorism is being conducted." The Patriot Act has been 100% successful in preventing further attacks on US soil. So where is the room for concern there if it's been a complete success? These idiots are only fighting against success--and ensuring we get struck again. Al Qaeda has got to be loving this development.
Senators FRIST joined Hagel and Crag in voting against renewal. Just damn.
Well, you make some great points for me to chew on.
I second that motion..
You made your point very well.. I have nothing to add..
Patriot Act needs to be removed or else you disarm law enforcement against terrorists.
You need wiretaps to track terrorists in the u.s, you need to be able to obtain hotel records if you believe a terrorist is in a city.
Either the patriot act will be restored to stop attacks or it will be restored to stop attacks.
The terrorists have scored huge victory in the last few days. No more waterboarding to get info out of them, no more wiretaps, no more tracking down info of them in u.s hotels.
If I was in law enforcement I would resign this congress has abandoned them. Why should they get the blame when they have been disarmed.
If I were Bush I would resign saying he can't as president continue to constitutionally protect u.s citezens as he pledged to do if congress is not giving him that power.
Because of the patriot act and the wiretaps with the nsa we stopped the brooklyn bridge from being blown up.
If that attack happened the libs would be saying you missed the warnings blaming Bush.
The dem aim is to weaken u.s anti terrorism so much an attack occurs so they can blame Bush. The next attack we will hear from Leahy how it is Bush's fault.
We now have no way to get intelligence. No aggressive interogations, no patriot act. America has been greatly weakened by the dems and their NY Times allies to spread the info right before the vote in the senate on the Patriot Act.
All our secrets from renditions to secret prisons, to waterboarding, to nsa wiretaps have been put out on the front pages of the papers.
Waterboarding got sheik mohammed to tell us info which stopped an attack. We found Padilla from that tactic too.
The nsa wiretaps stopped the brooklyn bridge from being blown up.
Bush either stops an attack but gets blamed by wiretapping terrorists from foreign countries communicating to the u.s or gets blamed if their is an attack.
Bush should go to the nation and resign and say the congress has taken away all the power of the presidency and it is useless now.
The congress has taken away all the powers of the presidency. Bush now can't fulfill his mission to protect americans but will be blamed for an attack. The presidency is nothing more than a pr firm now the way congress has weakened it. What a disgrace.
It's not as though law enforcement doesn't have the power to do any of these things at all without the Patriot Act. To the extent that it may have enhanced those abilities, is there any indication that they would have prevented 9/11? As I alluded to earlier, the FBI had failed to make effective use of the powers it already had prior to the attack. We had Condi Rice after the attack making the breathtakingly implausible claim that it never occurred to anyone in government that terrorists might fly a plane into a building. $30 billion annual budget for the CIA, and it never occurred to anyone. These are the problems that need to be addressed.
Frist again. Crud.
According to this article on the Brooklyn Bridge case:
Justice Department spokesman Kevin Madden said Faris was captured using powers granted under Sections 203 and 218 of the Patriot Act, which allows law enforcement and intelligence agencies to share information they have collected.I don't have an objection to allowing information to be shared between intelligence and law-enforcement agencies. But I've come across nothing saying that the wiretap provisions of the Patriot Act came into play here.
NRO has 16 policies that would be taken away without the patriot act.
FBI has said time and again they need the patriot act.
After reading the 16 policies and without being able to interrogate suspects anymore we will pay the price dearly.
Secret prisons out of europe, no more extrodinary renditions in europe. No more nsa wiretaps of terrorists in u.s. And court actions take way too much time when you need to act right away.
The bill of rights of al queda is what this is all about not our civil liberties.
In order to be on one of these wiretaps you have to be communicating with someone on a terrorist watch list overseas. Who do you know that is communicating with a radical jihadist overseas.
U.S should just say to the public in the name of civil liberties for al queda we can't protect you. Be honest because law enforcement is now impotent.
Guess we'll have to outsource.
Justice Department spokesman Kevin Madden said Faris was captured using powers granted under Sections 203 and 218 of the Patriot Act, which allows law enforcement and intelligence agencies to share information they have collected.
... I've come across nothing saying that the wiretap provisions of the Patriot Act came into play here.
203(b) is a provision that permits sharing wiretap information.
USA Patriot Act Sunset: Provisions That Expire on December 31, 2005
http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32186.pdf
Bush will get the job done, with or without the patriot act, just like reagan did in South America, with the help of Ollie North and others.
He will make protecting our nation his priotity, even if he must risk impeachment to do it.
The alternative is for us all to lock and load on suspected terrorists as our own city's streets become a mirror of Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s, taking up residence here and organizing without good intelligence to prevent them from doing so.
Many don't mind that alternative. Certainly the Dems and RINOs would risk it for a chance at resuming power.They should be increasingly outed as betrayers of our nation.
and its history of maintaining a secure environment for our people. Or will it be necessary to become like Sydney , Australia is right now, with groups of vigilante citizens prowling for conflicts with Muslim gangs as Churches and Mosques burn, each in their turn?
The Dims are playing with the fire of future social disorder, as we all begin to stock up on self defense guns and ammo. Fortress America. Who would have thunk it?
That still doesn't answer the question of whether that provision had actually come into play in that case.
Reagan was a conservative. Bush is a blood-sucking liberal. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.
He will make protecting our nation his priotity, even if he must risk impeachment to do it.
His priority is power, and he is obtaining it in the typical liberal manner; his problem is that he needs 100% co-operation in the Senate, and he doesn't have it. He will never be impeached by the House, as long as his party has a majority. Only a complete idiot would think otherwise.
The Dims are playing with the fire of future social disorder, as we all begin to stock up on self defense guns and ammo. Fortress America. Who would have thunk it?
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that. I also have no idea what you mean by trying to link the happenings in Australia with anything going on in this country. The Dims have always been playing with the fire of social disorder, and I don't personally know anybody that isn't always stocked up on ammo.
Are you trying to tell me that you are a bit light on ammo? Need some? What caliber? I have some .30-06 and .223 that I could spare, if I thought that it would be going to somebody worthwhile. In other words, I have nothing to spare.
Anything goes as the hate of the President by the MSM marches on.
"Are you trying to tell me that you are a bit light on ammo? Need some? What caliber? I have some .30-06 and .223 that I could spare, if I thought that it would be going to somebody worthwhile. In other words, I have nothing to spare."
Thanks for the kind thoughts neigbor.
The point is that a lack of the patriot act will prevent interagency intel sharing, and add to the time lapse between getting intel and using it, i.e. opportunities lost. Therefore we will have to ptotect ourselves and we will look like Northern Ireland in a few years.
The Dims are willing to do that to reachieve power.
If you have any spare Dem phto targets , send them on over.
Gots plenty of ammo, just breaking in a new Benelli Nova tactical pump!
I don't have any problem with inter agency intel sharing, I just don't see why the government needs to have full warrant-less access to every aspect of my life in order to achieve it. What do my banking activity, library book choices, book purchases, telephone conversations, mail, email, computer activity, personal possessions, etc have to do with whether or not the FBI can communicate with the CIA?
Nothing. That's the point. Government law enforcement agencies should be able to communicate with each other without their having unfettered access to every aspect of my life. I don't understand why the government is demanding that the two be connected, and I don't understand anybody who does.
Considering the way much of the country, all of the MSM, all of the Democraps, and most sorry Republicans are acting, I think we probably do need another blow to wake us up again. This is all just unbelievable to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.