Try Andy McCarthy over a TV crank

jp on February 11, 2008 at 12:48 PM

And you ignore what I posted from Edwin Vieira, Jr., who holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

Nice try…

and your assumption is that the CIA, FBI, NSA, and local Police could not accomplish the prevention of terrorists attacks without abuse of civil liberties???

Riddle me this jp…if the NSA or U.S. government was so incensed on preventing these folks from coming into our country and blowing up our buildings and bridges, why haven’t they secured our borders? Why are they securing 130 other nations borders at a cost of a trillion a year?

They don’t need to blow up the Brooklyn bridge to destroy the Financial Capital of the world, they’re doing it by destroying the U.S. dollar!

Try Andy McCarthy over a TV crank

I think you’re getting bogged down in “foreign” examples of “Presidential” warrantless exceptions to the 4th amendment, when Napolitano was speaking about “domestic” constitutional violations offered by the Patriot Act.

General Washington ordered the opening and reading of all mail from England to gather intelligence during the American Revolution. Lincoln authorized warrantless intercepts of telegraph messages during the Civil War, and Wilson and Roosevelt ordered warrantless monitoring of international cable traffic during the world wars. Every President from FDR to Carter authorized warrantless electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes in the belief that there was a foreign intelligence exception to the Fourth Amendment.

David Truong was a Vietnamese national who had resided in America since 1965. The FBI suspected him of transmitting classified documents to Vietnamese diplomats in Paris. In 1977, Carter Administration Attorney General Griffin Bell authorized the warrantless bugging of Truong’s home and telephone for more than 250 days. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals noted that the Carter Administration “relied upon a ‘foreign intelligence’ exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.” It explained: “In the area of foreign intelligence, the government contends, the President may authorize surveillance without seeking a judicial warrant because of his constitutional prerogatives in the area of foreign affairs.” Both the district court and the Fourth Circuit accepted that argument.

“Napolitano: Well, I have learned that the Patriot Act, in the name of fighting terrorism, allows agents to do things that we’ve never allowed them to do in the history of the United States.

“Smith: For instance?

“Napolitano: For instance, to read our mail without us knowing it and without getting a search warrant. They can go to the post office, they can write their own search warrant and require the post office to give them your mail……

yep, “never in our history”….except for George Washington and every War Time president after him tracking down the nations enemies living within. And every modern president has had some sort of international terrorist surveillance(or Communist) and its worked like a charm.

AQ is a CIA creation? That’s a pretty interesting take on things. No Wiki articles please. No “unbiased” BBC documentaries. I understand the situation to be like this:

Bin Laden heeded a call to Jihad in Afghanistan, as did Muslims the world over. That’s the long and the short of it. The Northern Alliance was the CIA backed group fighting the Soviets.

Tone it down, blaming radical Islam for 9/11
Buzzy on February 11, 2008 at 1:37 AM

Well excuse me, but just who the hell are you blaming for 9/11? Who do you think those 19 genocidal a**holes were? Americans? Freedom fighters? Peacemakers? Starving peasants?

But what’s this? That’s funny, they seem to be radical Islamists .

All in all, as a old school conservative, I think that anyone should have the right to run for President and express their views to the voters for their consideration. To a large extent the voters responded with their support, which sadly was very low. To me the problem appears that RP’s message was too extreme for many voters. If you guys want out of Iraq and Afghanistan then say so but playing the same blame game as bin Laden makes you guys look unAmerican. Constantly talking 9/11 conspiracy theory like Rosie O’Donnell didn’t win you any votes either. Funny that you all deny you are truthers but you can’t hardly put up a post without whipping out da crazy and waving it. Tone it down, blaming radical Islam for 9/11 seems to be the vote getting plan with most campaigns. Same with the crap about doing away with the FBI and CIA. If you don’t like what those agencies do then overhaul them and set them right (they both need it) but to exist in today’s world without them is pretty darned stupid. Also I found it strange that Ron Paul never figured out that his economic plan would bring the US to its knees and hand us over to the Chinese who holds our immense debt. I agree that we need to do something about our economic plans but suicide isn’t on the top of most voters short lists. Ron Paul is also going to have to own up to his own problems with black people and the Jews. It is out there and no matter how much he or you deny it it is real and nasty. In fact, you should just purge your ranks of the white power guys and gals. The truth is, America likes black people and Jews a lot more than racists. In fact, I like Democrats better than racists and I still won’t vote for a Democrat. Doesn’t matter that RP says he only paid Lew to write that trash, RP published it and you know in your hearts he believes it too. I don’t think I could believe that RP didn’t buy into the racist stuff even if he kissed Al Sharpton on the mouth. But if RP and Al are willing I’ll give belief a chance, who knows. Honestly I think that Ron Paul’s voice cost him voters too. He’s really really whiny sounding, really, and that doesn’t play well with voters considering who to vote for as President of the USA. Maybe you should see about getting a candidate that isn’t so old either, and can speak in a lower voice without sounding like a bad Eddie Haskell imitation. Well, as I said, the wonderful thing about our Republic is that anyone can run for President and put his views before the voters. Best of luck in 2012 Ron Paul.

So, just let them rant, when they are done they will just go home, smoke another bowel and fancy themselves as actually having a clue about life in the real world.

RobertInAustin on February 10, 2008 at 10:42 PM

Smoke another bowel?

lol

RobertInAustin on February 10, 2008 at 10:42 PM

Robert,

You are fooled by the propaganda. The Taliban was/is a threat. Al Qaeda is a CIA creation. Did you even read what I posted? Did you watch the BBC documentary or look up the Wiki reference?

You claim I know nothing about Islam but that wasn’t the “issue” we were discussing now was it? I know all about the Wahibbis from Saudi Arabia via Spencers writings but isn’t it interesting that most of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia yet we didn’t go into their country pursuing the Wahibbis now did we? We went into Iraq because it was on the neocon agenda before 9/11 even happened. But you didn’t read the independent study about Bush lying now did you?

And then you try and blame it on a lib? Give me a break. Nothing I said was from a lib point of view, but rather from an “Old” Republican platform point of view…you know…that party that got us out of Vietnam and Korea? So if anyone is a lib, it’s this “New” Republican party platform with its warmongering and big spending.

And so you have one court case that was ruled in favor of the Patriot Act…big frickin deal.

He hates AQ, but not enough to actually want to see them dead and the world rid of them. Its our fault, the fact that Islam has been at war with the west for 1300 years makes him no never mind. Its all a big NeoCon conspiracy (Aka, the Hallmark way of saying vast Jew conspiracy and not come off sounding like the nut you probably are), and Islam is just a poor band of desert dwellers defending the middle east from the American imperialist swine.

I would take Paul supporters seriously, and liberals who decry the patriot act, if they spoke up about this. But, talking with the local Paul supporters it came as no surprise that not a single one of them even knew about this, and when they did they really didn’t even care.

I again state my opinion, living in the liberal Mecca of Texas, that most of Paul supporters are just neo-constitutional libs who see Pat Robertson as a greater threat to the US than they do Osama Bin Laden, have no knowledge of the history of Islam and its war against the west and couldn’t care less how much pork Paul brings home to his local voters after he has demonized others for doing the same thing. After all, they are all victims of a vast Jewish conspiracy, and when faced with real world situations and not middle earth political ideologies, they come up short for actually offering any ideas that can in anyway actually do anything.

It’s also ironic that the fact that most of Paul supporters are college students going to school on federal grants and loans that the constitution doesn’t allow for, yet, I don’t see them taking a principled stand and quitting and then paying their own way to a degree.

So, just let them rant, when they are done they will just go home, smoke another bowel and fancy themselves as actually having a clue about life in the real world.

and silverfox…I don’t work for a living…I’ve been doing a research project for the last 2 1/2 years in preparation for a book.

But enjoy the opinions of people like jp despite the digs on each other…..to see if I’m missing something…

he’s one of the few who speaks up…

some of you have too much spare time!

William Amos on February 10, 2008 at 9:01 PM

I suggest you go to the Library William…

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org

Whatever the issue, Ron Paul has it covered. Compare this to any other candidate…

Your comments about debates turning into “conspiracy mongering demogoguery” shows you’ve been hanging out in the wrong forums. Try debating with an intellectual crowd over at http://www.libertylounge.net/forums/election-2008/ – everyone is welcome…even jp!…and believe me, it’s not all Ron Paul groupies.

jp on February 10, 2008 at 5:44 PM

So the war loving neocon jp calls me “suicidal?” …

It’s interesting the guy whose side you take is a member of the CFR and didn’t even mention the 4th amendment until his third arguement. Always an afterthought for these folks! Then you try to make one believe that you have the almighty power of actually knowing what our Founding Fathers thought by saying they took the side of Bush…. Let’s see…do I take the side of Bush and his CFR cronies, who have repeatedly lied to the People (http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0530wmdexcuse.htm), or the side of non-CFR Constitutional experts like Judge Andrew Napolitano http://www.judgenap.com/ (even your beloved Bill O’Reily and Rush Limbaugh like this guy) or Edwin Vieira http://newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin28.htm – These people speak the truth without hidden agendas like those manufactured by the CFR clan.

Read the transcript from the Fox News, Sheppard Smith interview with the good judge Napolitano:

“Americans who are not in a self imposed coma are aware that Congress has once again shredded the Fourth and Fifth Amendments with their recent vote to extend certain provisions of the un-Patriot Act. The only problem is, the Constitution must be amended, not changed, altered or nullified depending on the vicissitudes dictated by political corruption. The day following the vote I watched Judge Andrew Napolitano attempt to explain to that silly fop on FOX News, Shepard Smith, what Congress in fact did with this latest shot at the Constitution. Here’s what the feds think they’re going to get away with; this is a verbatim transcript from the aforementioned segment:

“Napolitano: Well, I have learned that the Patriot Act, in the name of fighting terrorism, allows agents to do things that we’ve never allowed them to do in the history of the United States.

“Smith: For instance?

“Napolitano: For instance, to read our mail without us knowing it and without getting a search warrant. They can go to the post office, they can write their own search warrant and require the post office to give them your mail……

“Smith: …..without a judge….

“Napolitano: Without a judge involved at all. They can go to your bank, your lawyer, your doctor, your accountant, your computer server, your telephone company, again (his emphasis) without a search warrant from a judge, but with their own, self hand written search warrant and require those people, who keep confidential information on all Americans, to turn that over. You may say, ‘Well, my doctor would call me, my banker would call me.’

“Well….no. They will tell the person to whom they’re giving the self written search warrant it’s a felony for them to speak to anyone about it. They can’t tell their spouse, they can’t tell their lawyer. They can’t even tell a Federal Judge in a Federal Judge’s courtroom that they have been the recipient of one of these search warrants. That, of course, prevents them from challenging it for a year. We are not accustomed in this country to having that kind of power in the hands of federal agents.

“We have always put a neutral judge between the government agent and the target of that agent. The Patriot Act changes that.

(skip to relevance):

“Smith: What’s the fear?

“Napolitano: The fear is that Government Agents, without the restraint of a judge, will have too much power and will violate the rights that the Constitution guarantees us. Remember, we wrote the 4th Amendment because British soldiers had the right to write their own search warrants, we didn’t want any of that. 200 years later we’re back where we started.”

Now come back with something brilliant jp…

your not a libertarian, your suicidal. The 4th Amendment purposefully places the word “Unreasonable” in it for a reason.

the Federalist Society had a debate on FISA, notice that the side of the founding fathers and the constiuttion is the side Bush is on. And the side trashing the Constitution is the side Paul and “libertarians” are on. Congress is the one’s that have acted “unconstitutionally” and its a self=parody to see so called “libertarians” argue in favor of Secret Courts. And to continue the Libs crusade against a patriarchal branch like the Executive.

http://www.fed-soc.org/debates/dbtid.13/default.asp

and National Security is a Civil Liberty, so unless you think there are no terrorist in sleeper cells, here plotting attacks(i.e. an idiot and/or conspiracy theorist) you don’t have a leg to stand on.) I’ve yet to meet one person whose ‘lost liberty’ since 9/11, but i’ve seen a whole nation gain liberty in the regards of National Security.

jp on February 10, 2008 at 5:44 PM

So the war loving neocon jp calls me “suicidal?” …

It’s interesting the guy whose side you take is a member of the CFR and didn’t even mention the 4th amendment until his third arguement. Always an afterthought for these folks! Then you try to make one believe that you have the almighty power of actually knowing what our Founding Fathers thought by saying they took the side of Bush…. Let’s see…do I take the side of Bush and his CFR cronies, who have repeatedly lied to the People (http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0530wmdexcuse.htm), or the side of non-CFR Constitutional experts like Judge Andrew Napolitano http://www.judgenap.com/ (even your beloved Bill O’Reily and Rush Limbaugh like this guy) or Edwin Vieira http://newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin28.htm – These people speak the truth without hidden agendas like those manufactured by the CFR clan.

Read the transcript from the Fox News, Sheppard Smith interview with the good judge Napolitano:

“Americans who are not in a self imposed coma are aware that Congress has once again shredded the Fourth and Fifth Amendments with their recent vote to extend certain provisions of the un-Patriot Act. The only problem is, the Constitution must be amended, not changed, altered or nullified depending on the vicissitudes dictated by political corruption. The day following the vote I watched Judge Andrew Napolitano attempt to explain to that silly fop on FOX News, Shepard Smith, what Congress in fact did with this latest shot at the Constitution. Here’s what the feds think they’re going to get away with; this is a verbatim transcript from the aforementioned segment:

“Napolitano: Well, I have learned that the Patriot Act, in the name of fighting terrorism, allows agents to do things that we’ve never allowed them to do in the history of the United States.

“Smith: For instance?

“Napolitano: For instance, to read our mail without us knowing it and without getting a search warrant. They can go to the post office, they can write their own search warrant and require the post office to give them your mail……

“Smith: …..without a judge….

“Napolitano: Without a judge involved at all. They can go to your bank, your lawyer, your doctor, your accountant, your computer server, your telephone company, again (his emphasis) without a search warrant from a judge, but with their own, self hand written search warrant and require those people, who keep confidential information on all Americans, to turn that over. You may say, ‘Well, my doctor would call me, my banker would call me.’

“Well….no. They will tell the person to whom they’re giving the self written search warrant it’s a felony for them to speak to anyone about it. They can’t tell their spouse, they can’t tell their lawyer. They can’t even tell a Federal Judge in a Federal Judge’s courtroom that they have been the recipient of one of these search warrants. That, of course, prevents them from challenging it for a year. We are not accustomed in this country to having that kind of power in the hands of federal agents.

“We have always put a neutral judge between the government agent and the target of that agent. The Patriot Act changes that.

*(skip to war on terror issue…)

“Smith: But not on terror?

“Napolitano: But not on terror. They have done their best to keep evidence obtained under the Patriot Act from being introduced into Federal court because they don’t want a Federal Judge to find the Patriot Act unconstitutional. Now, five Federal Judges have ruled on it so far, two appointed by President George H.W. Bush. All five have found it unconstitutional. They’ve found the self written search warrant aspect unconstitutional. They found the part that says ‘thou shall not speak’ unconstitutional. It violates the first amendment.

“But the Justice Department keeps enforcing it and the Congress has just made it stronger, made it more difficult for people targeted under the Patriot Act, whether it’s acts of terror or whatever (Comment: Yeah, too bad if you fall under that ‘whatever’ category) to challenge the government’s behavior.

“Smith: What’s the fear?

“Napolitano: The fear is that Government Agents, without the restraint of a judge, will have too much power and will violate the rights that the Constitution guarantees us. Remember, we wrote the 4th Amendment because British soldiers had the right to write their own search warrants, we didn’t want any of that. 200 years later we’re back where we started.”

Now come back with something brilliant jp…

Wouldn’t even concede that our man was totally loony? Wouldnt you want to say something like, wouldnt even concede that Ron Paul has some flaws, to use the modifier “even”?

muyoso on February 10, 2008 at 7:57 PM

True I had to get one more dig in with my comments. My point really was that Paul is more than a little flawed but that doesnt matter to his backers who want him based on really one or two issues at best.

There is no reason for muslims to be anti-America, other than our foreign policy.

muyoso on February 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM

No, America is a land of Dar-al-Harb, where the harbi or kufr are still dominant. The Dar-al-Harb is by its very nature at war with Allah, because it has not yet submitted to his will. Until you understand the theology which underpins traditional Islam, you will not understand why they hate us.

Try reading Robert Spencer’s excellent series on the Kor’an here on HotAir – there’s another instalment today.

I mean, they’re not able to get their Message out, whatsover. It’s just terrible what has happened to the country, it really is! I mean, when’s the last time that you saw a campaign-sign for Ron Paul?!? When’s the last time you heard Ron Paulian disciples spew forth their Great Leader’s views? When’s the last time you saw a Ron Paul political ad on TV?

dmh0667 on February 10, 2008 at 7:40 PM

This was just a ploy by the Bilderbergers to lull the Paulians into a false sense of security. As we speak Baron Rothschild is leading a crackdown on this kind of excess, and has forced their Great Leader to return to Texas.

I have given up talking message with Paulies because they are dishonest debaters and refused to even conceed that their man is completely loony. Every debate turns into one vast conspiracy mongering demogoguery

Wouldn’t even concede that our man was totally loony? Wouldnt you want to say something like, wouldnt even concede that Ron Paul has some flaws, to use the modifier “even”?

How do I explain it? There is a giant population of muslims in those countries, and by living side by side, there are tensions forming due to the muslim’s religion. That is why they attack countried like Indonesia, Thailand, etc. They see it as their “culture” is being spoiled or something crazy like that. We DONT have that problem in America. There isnt a large population of muslims living here. There is no reason for muslims to be anti-America, other than our foreign policy.

I have given up talking message with Paulies because they are dishonest debaters and refused to even conceed that their man is completely loony. Every debate turns into one vast conspiracy mongering demogoguery

But…but…William Amos,the Luap Norians are absolutely correct about everyone losing their civil liberties! I mean, they’re not able to get their Message out, whatsover. It’s just terrible what has happened to the country, it really is! I mean, when’s the last time that you saw a campaign-sign for Ron Paul?!? When’s the last time you heard Ron Paulian disciples spew forth their Great Leader’s views? When’s the last time you saw a Ron Paul political ad on TV? Oh…I saw one about an hour ago on the History Channel…never mind, then.

Maybe this means we are just discriminating political animals, and not the imbecilic automatons that Ron Paulians take us for….maybe the Ron Paulians are the ones with the mental problems? Naah…

I see the ingoramus of Malkin’s site still attack the supporters, but never the message.

Fed Up on February 10, 2008 at 4:32 PM

I have given up talking message with Paulies because they are dishonest debaters and refused to even conceed that their man is completely loony. Every debate turns into one vast conspiracy mongering demogoguery