Is this enough for impeachment? - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-20-2005, 10:14 PM   #151
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


It's a catch phrase, just like the "war on drugs" or the "war on AIDS."

Melon
Ah I was just about to say that.

Great minds
__________________

__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 10:15 PM   #152
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 08:07 PM
War on Terror does kind of have the orwellian ring to it...seeing as War itself usually strikes terror in people.

^but U2dem, I beat both of you to it!
__________________

__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 10:16 PM   #153
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 07:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
War On Terror.
Just because someone at Fox came up with a nice catch phrase doesn't make it a real declaration of war.

Star Wars wasn't real either...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 10:21 PM   #154
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
War On Terror.
War on Terror is not a recognized War constitutionally.

By this logic...the President....because of the "War on Drugs" would be able to wiretap.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 10:30 PM   #155
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:07 AM
Isn't there a War on Obesity or something like that too?
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 10:38 PM   #156
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 07:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2democrat
Isn't there a War on Obesity or something like that too?
Another one America is losing we're 0 for 3.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 03:35 AM   #157
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


War on Terror is not a recognized War constitutionally.

By this logic...the President....because of the "War on Drugs" would be able to wiretap.


equals-



you lost me and most Americans on that one.

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 03:41 AM   #158
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:07 AM
It is an ill defined name for a foreign policy and national security agenda entailing the destruction of Radical Islam by means of democratic peace theory, overhauled and centralised intelligence, law enforcement apparatus and limited use of military force.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 04:11 AM   #159
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Calluna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 3,542
Local Time: 06:07 PM
I think it's great how even practically illiterate people like diamond can still communicate on internet forums by using photographs and cutting and pasting. Good for them for finding a clever way to get around their disabilities!
__________________
Calluna is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 08:08 AM   #160
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
you lost me and most Americans on that one.

There's a lot of things Americans are lost on. Maybe they need to brush up on their civics lessons, so they can understand the roles of the judiciary, legislature, and executive branch better. It would certainly do this country a hell of a lot of good.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 08:58 AM   #161
Refugee
 
cydewaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,256
Local Time: 09:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Just because someone at Fox came up with a nice catch phrase doesn't make it a real declaration of war.
Yeah but having a war on a concept like that is pretty ingeneous, because you can never really tell if you've won, so you have a pretense to basically be at war as long as you'd like - perhaps forever.

In a war against another country, you win when the other country surrenders (or I guess when all the people are dead) but in a war against "terror" you never know if there might be someone, somewhere out there who is thinking terrorist thoughts, so you have an excuse to keep spending money and recruiting soldiers and blowing things up so you can pay your friends to rebuild them, etc.

It's a great way to funnel tax dollars to you and your friends, and you even get to call people who have a problem with it "unpatriotic".
__________________
cydewaze is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 09:02 AM   #162
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 06:07 PM
Well Bush wasn't the only one who spyed on us "illegally." Jimmy Carter and Clinton did also.

http://drudgereport.com/flash8.htm
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 09:03 AM   #163
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:07 PM
So true.

In response to Drudge's usual half-assed posts.

Fact Check: Clinton/Carter Executive Orders Did Not Authorize Warrantless Searches of Americans »
The top of the Drudge Report claims “CLINTON EXECUTIVE ORDER: SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS WITHOUT COURT ORDER…” It’s not true. Here’s the breakdown –

What Drudge says:

Clinton, February 9, 1995: “The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order”

What Clinton actually signed:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) [50 U.S.C. 1822(a)] of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section.

That section requires the Attorney General to certify is the search will not involve “the premises, information, material, or property of a United States person.” That means U.S. citizens or anyone inside of the United States.

The entire controversy about Bush’s program is that, for the first time ever, allows warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens and other people inside of the United States. Clinton’s 1995 executive order did not authorize that.

Drudge pulls the same trick with Carter. expand post »

What Drudge says:

Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: “Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order.”

What Carter’s executive order actually says:

1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

What the Attorney General has to certify under that section is that the surveillance will not contain “the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party.” So again, no U.S. persons are involved. « collapse post
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 09:06 AM   #164
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,651
Local Time: 07:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond


you lost me and most Americans on that one.

Sad thing is he's probably right, most Americans probably don't know. Hell they think Saddam was behind 9/11.

This statement is exactly what's wrong with the majority of the voting populace and why Bush got elected.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 09:09 AM   #165
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 09:07 PM
Diamond--he did not lose "most American", thanks. Plenty of us understood what he meant.

Update: I have officially called my rep and senators. I said it was my expectation as their constituent that they exercise oversight and investigate. I will follow up after the New Year. Please EVERYone who is concerned about this, please call today!
__________________

__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com