Author Topic: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?  (Read 79561 times)

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« on: January 07, 2006, 03:53:59 pm »
According to this Chronicle article, it sounds as if it is a possibility.  Link

Soooo.... Screw Castro and Cuba? Or should the U.S. cut them a break since its basically punishing the players when it's Castro that they are pissed at?  Option three would be that nobody gives a shit about the World Baseball Classic so it doesn't matter.  Discuss amongst yourselves...

Found a good thread that has decent arguments for both cases.  Link
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

OldBlevins

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 633
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #1 on: January 07, 2006, 04:50:08 pm »
Quote:

According to this Chronicle article, it sounds as if it is a possibility.  Link

Soooo.... Screw Castro and Cuba? Or should the U.S. cut them a break since its basically punishing the players when it's Castro that they are pissed at?  Option three would be that nobody gives a shit about the World Baseball Classic so it doesn't matter.  Discuss amongst yourselves...

Found a good thread that has decent arguments for both cases.  Link





I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.
blah, blah, blah . . .

Texifornia

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 2275
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2006, 12:17:14 am »
Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




Nice.
He breezed him, one more time!

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2006, 04:18:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




Nice.




I'm at a loss to understand why we maintain an embargo on Cuba - who threatened to nuke our cities 40 years ago, yet are best buddies with China - who threatened to nuke our cities in 2005.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2006, 04:51:45 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




Nice.



I'm at a loss to understand why we maintain an embargo on Cuba - who threatened to nuke our cities 40 years ago, yet are best buddies with China - who threatened to nuke our cities in 2005.




Because there's something to be gained, financially, from China.  Once Castro kicks the can, I figure relations will be re-established.  He's an easy target for anyone who wants to tout the evils of communism.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2006, 05:25:14 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




Nice.



I'm at a loss to understand why we maintain an embargo on Cuba - who threatened to nuke our cities 40 years ago, yet are best buddies with China - who threatened to nuke our cities in 2005.




Because there's something to be gained, financially, from China.  Once Castro kicks the can, I figure relations will be re-established.  He's an easy target for anyone who wants to tout the evils of communism.




You are correct sir!  The sooner old man Castro cashes in, the sooner we can get the worlds best cigars at a reasonable price.  Of course Castro is on track to push 100 so don't hold your breath.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Col. Sphinx Drummond

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16760
  • art is a bulwark against the irrationality of man
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #6 on: January 08, 2006, 09:13:14 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




Nice.



I'm at a loss to understand why we maintain an embargo on Cuba - who threatened to nuke our cities 40 years ago, yet are best buddies with China - who threatened to nuke our cities in 2005.




Because there's something to be gained, financially, from China.  Once Castro kicks the can, I figure relations will be re-established.  He's an easy target for anyone who wants to tout the evils of communism.




You are correct sir!  The sooner old man Castro cashes in, the sooner we can get the worlds best cigars at a reasonable price.  Of course Castro is on track to push 100 so don't hold your breath.




The Party will never let him die, and when he finally does, they'll hide the carcass and wheel out the look-a-like frankenstein puppet Castro with all of his speeches programmed and a randon phase generator to go with it. No one will know the difference. Hell, it might have already happened.
Everyone's talking, few of them know
The rest are pretending, they put on a show
And if there's a message I guess this is it
Truth isn't easy, the easy part's shit

LonghornCDR

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1208
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2006, 09:56:05 am »
Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




You're not completely factual in your claim that the GTMO detainees don't have legal representation or aren't receiving trials.

Every detainee in GTMO has been through a Combatant Status Review Tribunal during which their status as an enemy combatant was reviewed. All of the information pertaining to their detention was reviewed by a board of military officers.

Those that are determined not to be enemy combatants are transferred back to their home countries or another third party nation that will receive them.

Those that are determined to be enemy combatants are then sent through an adminstrative review board (ARB) process to determine whether or not they would still present a threat to the US or its allies if released.  Those that are determined to present a low threat are transferred to their home countries or third party countries.  Those that are determined to still present a threat remain at GTMO until the next ARB.  The ARB process is an iterative process that repeats on an annual basis.

As far as no legal representation goes...  GTMO is crawling with habeas lawyers.  Every detainee that has wanted to has been able to contest their detention in the US courts under a writ of habeas corpus.  It should be noted that no POWs in history have been allowed the right to legal representation while hostilities are still ongoing.

And everyone who can plug into a media outlet can find out that military commission trials commence this week.

So... the illegal detainment with no legal representation or trials makes for a great sound bite, but isn't exactly true.
60% of the time... it works everytime.

Trey

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1249
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #8 on: January 09, 2006, 10:09:29 am »
Quote:

Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




You're not completely factual in your claim that the GTMO detainees don't have legal representation or aren't receiving trials.

Every detainee in GTMO has been through a Combatant Status Review Tribunal during which their status as an enemy combatant was reviewed. All of the information pertaining to their detention was reviewed by a board of military officers.

Those that are determined not to be enemy combatants are transferred back to their home countries or another third party nation that will receive them.

Those that are determined to be enemy combatants are then sent through an adminstrative review board (ARB) process to determine whether or not they would still present a threat to the US or its allies if released.  Those that are determined to present a low threat are transferred to their home countries or third party countries.  Those that are determined to still present a threat remain at GTMO until the next ARB.  The ARB process is an iterative process that repeats on an annual basis.

As far as no legal representation goes...  GTMO is crawling with habeas lawyers.  Every detainee that has wanted to has been able to contest their detention in the US courts under a writ of habeas corpus.  It should be noted that no POWs in history have been allowed the right to legal representation while hostilities are still ongoing.

And everyone who can plug into a media outlet can find out that military commission trials commence this week.

So... the illegal detainment with no legal representation or trials makes for a great sound bite, but isn't exactly true.


Oh, really?
Let me explain something to you. Um, I am not "Mr. Lebowski". You're Mr. Lebowski. I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.

LonghornCDR

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1208
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #9 on: January 09, 2006, 10:30:27 am »
The Uighurs are a special case.  They were determined not to be enemy combatants during the Combatant Status Tribunal Review.  The problem is that their home country is China.  If we send them back there, they are dead men.  No third country will step up to take them.  My gut feeling is that they will eventually be granted political asylum in the US.  They are getting separate and special treatment down here due to their unique status.  They have their own camp in which they have almost complete freedom of movement and several amenities.
60% of the time... it works everytime.

LonghornCDR

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1208
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #10 on: January 09, 2006, 10:39:38 am »
And by the way... the basic fact of this case which is often overlooked is that these Uighurs were in Afghanistan to receive training at known terrorist facilities.  They didn't intend to use their newly acquired skills against the US or its allies, but they are in fact terrorists.
60% of the time... it works everytime.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #11 on: January 09, 2006, 11:04:31 am »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I believe no country holding prisoners in Cuba without legal representation or trials should be allowed to participate.




Nice.



I'm at a loss to understand why we maintain an embargo on Cuba - who threatened to nuke our cities 40 years ago, yet are best buddies with China - who threatened to nuke our cities in 2005.




In 5 years, we will have better relations with Cuba than with Venezuela - and that is a major problem.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Taras Bulba

  • Contributor
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3988
    • View Profile
    • Wing Attack Plan R
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #12 on: January 09, 2006, 11:10:15 am »
Don't worry.  Harry Belafonte and Danny Glover are on the spot.
Purity of Essence

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #13 on: January 09, 2006, 11:31:53 am »
Quote:

So... the illegal detainment with no legal representation or trials makes for a great sound bite, but isn't exactly true.



Jose Padilla - an American citizen - was arrested three and a half years ago on allegations that he was plotting to detonate a dirty bomb in the US.  In all those three and a half years, he has been deprived of the due process of law and held in Gitmo as an "enemy combatant".

In order to press charges which, incidentally, are different from those for which he was detained (he is to be charged with plotting to assist terrorists abroad) it was necessary to transfer him to the civil jurisdiction so that he can be processed through civilian courts.

The administration fought to keep him in military custody while being tried, but they had no justification.  He's is, and always was, a civilian under US law and was being illegally denied his rights as such.  A civilian court will be hearing a motion for bail in his case this afternoon.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

bubba

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2006, 11:59:55 am »
Is an American citizen who is conspiring with foreign nationals or foreign governments to perpetrate acts of war within the boundaries of the U.S and upon U.S. citizens an enemy combatant?  Were the Americans of German descent who committed acts of sabotage during WWII enemy combatants?  This is a sticky situations and one for which there are compelling arguments on both sides.  I, for one,  would hate to see missions like September 11 carried out again while the governments hands were tied by lawyers arguing over the details.  If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.
P.S.  And this is hardly the forum for these types of arguments.

LonghornCDR

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1208
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2006, 12:00:38 pm »
Jose Padilla has never set foot in GTMO.  He's been in a brig in South Carolina since shortly after his arrest.  

This little discussion started with a clever quip about prisoners being held in Cuba.  I don't see how Padilla fits that description.
60% of the time... it works everytime.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #16 on: January 09, 2006, 12:36:51 pm »
Quote:


GTMO detainees...Every detainee in GTMO...their detention...Every detainee...their detention...detainment





Out of curiosity, when does someone stop being a "detainee" and start being a "prisoner"?


Quote:


It should be noted that no POWs in history have been allowed the right to legal representation while hostilities are still ongoing.





It should also be noted that Bush declared an end to combat operations against Iraq on May 1, 2003.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2006, 12:48:44 pm »
Quote:

Is an American citizen who is conspiring with foreign nationals or foreign governments to perpetrate acts of war within the boundaries of the U.S and upon U.S. citizens an enemy combatant?  Were the Americans of German descent who committed acts of sabotage during WWII enemy combatants?  This is a sticky situations and one for which there are compelling arguments on both sides.  I, for one,  would hate to see missions like September 11 carried out again while the governments hands were tied by lawyers arguing over the details.  If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.
P.S.  And this is hardly the forum for these types of arguments.




There was never any impediment to the US intelligence services wiretapping citizens or foreigners alike.  The only caveat to that being that the Foreign Intelligence Securities Act requires that the tapping of any communication expected to involve a US citizen (or involving a domestic phone line because of the very high possibility that such a line would be used by a US citizen) should be the subject of a court order.  This is required because of the 4th Amendment.

FISA made this very easy, however, by establishing a secret court (to ensure the secrecy of such operations) and allowing that court orders could be obtained retroactively.  In this way, the intelligence agencies could move swiftly and silently, surveilling whomever they needed to.

The FISA courts, established in 1979, proved themselves to be a rubber-stamp on the intelligence agencies.  Between 1979 and 2002, the courts were presented with 15,247 orders for wiretaps on US citizens - they denied none of them.  That's an average of just under two a day, every day (including weekends and holidays) for twenty-four years, and zero denials.

Go here for a year-by-year breakdown of the above numbers.  You will see that there was a huge ramp up in orders presented to the court since 9/11.  However, despite the fact that the Patriot Act lessened the standard required to achieve a court order (lessened - not eliminated) you will also see the court's first denials of such orders - 4 denied out of 1,727 in 2003.

FYI, the judges appointed to the 11 secret FISA courts are appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States - Chief Justice Rehnquist would've been the man making those appointments during most of this time.  There aren't any activist judges sneaking onto the FISA courts.

You will recall from the above that the FISA law allows for wiretaps to be retroactively approved.  Despite the exponential leap in court orders sought since 9/11, the administration did not present a single request for a retroactive warrant arising out of the warrantless wiretapping program.  Not a single one.

What this long-winded expostition is intended to show is that the debate isn't - as the administration has framed it - between wiretapping or letting terrorists kill us.  It's between wiretapping US citizens legally and wiretapping US citizens illegally.

You are correct that this is not the forum for this debate.  That forum is Congress, and thus far its leaders seem to be unwilling or unable to hold that debate.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2006, 12:49:21 pm »
There are no IRAQI detainees at GTMO. IRAQI detainees go to places like Abu Gharayb.  I have been to Abu G, and I think I would rather GTMO
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2006, 12:53:05 pm »
Quote:

There are no IRAQI detainees at GTMO. IRAQI detainees go to places like Abu Gharayb.  I have been to Abu G, and I think I would rather GTMO




What other countries are there, with whom the US is engaged in formal hostilities?
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2006, 12:54:22 pm »
Quote:

Jose Padilla has never set foot in GTMO.  He's been in a brig in South Carolina since shortly after his arrest.  

This little discussion started with a clever quip about prisoners being held in Cuba.  I don't see how Padilla fits that description.




My bad on Gitmo.  Everytthing else about Padilla is accurate.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #21 on: January 09, 2006, 12:56:01 pm »
Quote:

If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.





This is a chilling definition of "liberty".
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #22 on: January 09, 2006, 01:02:20 pm »
Quote:

This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



They hate us for our freedom.  So do the terrorists.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #23 on: January 09, 2006, 01:04:18 pm »
"What other countries are there, with whom the US is engaged in formal hostilities?"


None...That has nothing to do with detainees at GTMO
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #24 on: January 09, 2006, 01:17:10 pm »
Quote:

According to this Chronicle article, it sounds as if it is a possibility.  Link

Soooo.... Screw Castro and Cuba? Or should the U.S. cut them a break since its basically punishing the players when it's Castro that they are pissed at?  Option three would be that nobody gives a shit about the World Baseball Classic so it doesn't matter.  Discuss amongst yourselves...

Found a good thread that has decent arguments for both cases.  Link





Johns Hopkins Blue Jays played a game in Cuba in 1986, Orioles played at home and in Cuba in 1999.  People in Miami, Florida, were in a tizzy but the games caused no noticeable damage to capitalism anywhere else.  Except for a few exceptions, Korea, Japan, Cuba, (who else?) the teams for this tournament are going to be composed of MLB players divided amongst the countries they identify with.  Their training, livelyhood and continued professional participation in baseball depend overwhelming on being employed by MLB.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2006, 01:37:32 pm »
Quote:


None...That has nothing to do with detainees at GTMO





If they are considered POWs and denied legal representation under the premise that the US is still under formal hostilities with their home country it does.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2006, 01:40:47 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.





This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2006, 01:45:47 pm »
Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #28 on: January 09, 2006, 01:48:18 pm »
Quote:

And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.



Known terrorists have no right privacy.  This is not the issue (seem my missive above).  If you believe it is, then I have a bridge in London to sell you.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #29 on: January 09, 2006, 01:48:25 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




You and Ben Franklin.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2006, 01:50:09 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

bubba

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2006, 01:51:43 pm »
Islamo-fascist-terrorist organizations such as those who controlled and trained in Afghanistan prior to the American invasion and many of whose members are roaming the surrounding areas covertly and presumably plotting more terrorist actions against the U.S. and its civilian population similar to those they have attempted in the past.

cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2006, 01:52:19 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




You and Ben Franklin.


No, not the same.  Americans get a "little privacy," but terrorists do not.  That's why the law allows for such exceptions.
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2006, 01:53:31 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




That's how it starts.  Are we aware that the IRS has the capability to synch tax returns with voter registration records?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #34 on: January 09, 2006, 01:54:48 pm »
Quote:

No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.



Whatever happened to "Give me liberty or give me death".

PS  The President's oath of office includes the promise to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States".  No where does it, nor the Constitution itself, allow for the President to break the constitution to protect the citizenry.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #35 on: January 09, 2006, 01:56:01 pm »
Quote:


While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?





Let's clarify....I'm not against the government doing their job if necessary.  I'm against the government doing it illegally.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #36 on: January 09, 2006, 01:56:33 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




That's how it starts.  Are we aware that the IRS has the capability to synch tax returns with voter registration records?




also, when the Patriot Act gave the govt. warrantless access to your library records, librarians pitched a fit and were called unamerican by the Attorney General.  The newest wrinkle is warrantless searches of business records.  That put the Patriot Act reauthorization in a pickle.  The problem seems to be somewhere in the middle of these two issues.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #37 on: January 09, 2006, 01:57:06 pm »
Quote:

That's why the law allows for such exceptions.




Then the government needs to follow the law.  That's the problem.  They are not above the law.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #38 on: January 09, 2006, 01:58:50 pm »
Quote:

While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?



ARRRRRRRGH!  The law allows for spying on anyone at anytime.  If the target happens to be a US citizen, the law requires, and provides easy access to, a court order.  THIS IS NOT THE DEBATE.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #39 on: January 09, 2006, 02:00:03 pm »
Quote:

Islamo-fascist-terrorist organizations such as those who controlled and trained in Afghanistan prior to the American invasion and many of whose members are roaming the surrounding areas covertly and presumably plotting more terrorist actions against the U.S. and its civilian population similar to those they have attempted in the past.




Is there more to this than one giant prepositional phrase?
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #40 on: January 09, 2006, 02:01:44 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.





This is a chilling definition of "liberty".


And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




Is anyone else imagining a 50-year rewind and substituting "Communists" for "terrorists"?
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #41 on: January 09, 2006, 02:01:44 pm »
Quote:

I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




That's irrelevant.  The government exists to protect individual liberty, not the other way around.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #42 on: January 09, 2006, 02:01:49 pm »
Quote:

That's how it starts.  Are we aware that the IRS has the capability to synch tax returns with voter registration records?



Are we aware that schools who take a single penny in funding from "No Child Left Behind" are required to provide the military with the names, contact details and grades of all their students?  Parents are not required to be informed.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #43 on: January 09, 2006, 02:02:40 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

That's how it starts.  Are we aware that the IRS has the capability to synch tax returns with voter registration records?



Are we aware that schools who take a single penny in funding from "No Child Left Behind" are required to provide the military with the names, contact details and grades of all their students?  Parents are not required to be informed.




I am.  I am also aware that the last federal election was all about dudes kissin.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #44 on: January 09, 2006, 02:03:34 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




That's how it starts.  Are we aware that the IRS has the capability to synch tax returns with voter registration records?




No, I wasn't.  To what benefit would connecting tax returns and voter registration serve?  

My concern is, there has to be a balance between the U.S. Constitution, as it's not detailed enough to address every contingency, and a practical enforcement of laws.  

If you were to ask me if I felt my personal liberties were impacted by the Patriot Act, I'd have to answer no.  Do I see potential dangers?  Certainly.  There's no such thing as a perfect law.  

I'm no Hillary Clinton fan but even she recognized the foolishness of looking for perfection or absolute guarantees when she said (and I have to paraphrase) that if we waited until we eliminated every obstacle before we did something we'd never do anything.  Maybe it's just me but there's some wisdom in that statement.  

Personally, I'm of the opinion that so long as there are reasonable people around to report and address abuses, we should survive any failures.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #45 on: January 09, 2006, 02:06:17 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




That's how it starts.  Are we aware that the IRS has the capability to synch tax returns with voter registration records?




No, I wasn't.  To what benefit would connecting tax returns and voter registration serve?  

My concern is, there has to be a balance between the U.S. Constitution, as it's not detailed enough to address every contingency, and a practical enforcement of laws.  

If you were to ask me if I felt my personal liberties were impacted by the Patriot Act, I'd have to answer no.  Do I see potential dangers?  Certainly.  There's no such thing as a perfect law.  

I'm no Hillary Clinton fan but even she recognized the foolishness of looking for perfection or absolute guarantees when she said (and I have to paraphrase) that if we waited until we eliminated every obstacle before we did something we'd never do anything.  Maybe it's just me but there's some wisdom in that statement.  

Personally, I'm of the opinion that so long as there are reasonable people around to report and address abuses, we should survive any failures.




For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.

OldBlevins

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 633
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #46 on: January 09, 2006, 02:06:22 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




Supporting the opposition to the party in power?  Without any court supervision whatsoever, the definition of "known terrorists" can easily be expanded to include people like Michael Moore or Harry Belafonte.  Or whoever.
blah, blah, blah . . .

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #47 on: January 09, 2006, 02:08:04 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?





Let's clarify....I'm not against the government doing their job if necessary.  I'm against the government doing it illegally.





That's fair enough.  I'm not disagreeing with the concern over the eaves dropping done w/o court order.  I'm just not ready to declare a decisive opinion on either side.  More needs to be learned.  The way our media reports, we are unlikely to learn all the facts. That goes for FOX, CNN, MSNBC and any other commericial outlet that sells the news.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #48 on: January 09, 2006, 02:08:17 pm »
Quote:


Personally, I'm of the opinion that so long as there are reasonable people around to report and address abuses, we should survive any failures.





I agree.  I just feel that there is an alarming decrease in reasonable people around these days.  Too many people are falling for the President's "If you don't let me do whatever I want with impunity, then the terrosits win"
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #49 on: January 09, 2006, 02:08:25 pm »
Quote:

I am.  I am also aware that the last federal election was all about dudes kissin.  



Dudes kissin' is as distasteful to me as cabbage.  And I really don't like cabbage.  Difference is, there's no party out there trying to amend the constitution to ban cabbage.  If there was, there's one non-citizen's vote here for starters!
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #50 on: January 09, 2006, 02:10:39 pm »
Quote:

Supporting the opposition to the party in power?  Without any court supervision whatsoever, the definition of "known terrorists" can easily be expanded to include people like Michael Moore or Harry Belafonte.  Or whoever.



The last President to authorise the warrantless wiretapping of US citizens; who did he spy on...?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #51 on: January 09, 2006, 02:11:17 pm »
Quote:


For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.





Sorry, poorly worded response.  Perhaps it's my forgetting what information is reported on a voter registration form.  Beyond address, citizenship, etc... what information is on a voter registration form that correlates to tax returns?  I don't recall detailing my income on a voter registration form.

Beyond that, what's wrong with using public records to audit or validate Tax Returns?
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #52 on: January 09, 2006, 02:11:33 pm »
Quote:

Without any court supervision whatsoever, the definition of "known terrorists" can easily be expanded to include people like Michael Moore or Harry Belafonte.  Or whoever.




Or Herbert Biberman, or Alvah Bessie, or Lester Cole, or Edward Dmytryk, or Ring Lardner, or John Howard Lawson, or Albert Malz, or Samuel Ornitz, or Adrian Scott, or Dalton Trumbo.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #53 on: January 09, 2006, 02:12:23 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.





Sorry, poorly worded response.  Perhaps it's my forgetting what information is reported on a voter registration form.  Beyond address, citizenship, etc... what information is on a voter registration form that correlates to tax returns?  I don't recall detailing my income on a voter registration form.

Beyond that, what's wrong with using public records to audit or validate Tax Returns?





Have you ever been through an audit?

There's a lot wrong with using any non-tax related criteria to audit returns.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

das

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3465
    • View Profile
    • Faith Home Ministries
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #54 on: January 09, 2006, 02:13:17 pm »
Quote:

Is there more to this than one giant prepositional phrase?



I'm stuck in proposal writing hell.  This one made me laugh.
Another trenchant comment by a jealous lesser intellect.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #55 on: January 09, 2006, 02:16:30 pm »
Quote:

That's fair enough.  I'm not disagreeing with the concern over the eaves dropping done w/o court order.  I'm just not ready to declare a decisive opinion on either side.  More needs to be learned.  The way our media reports, we are unlikely to learn all the facts. That goes for FOX, CNN, MSNBC and any other commericial outlet that sells the news.



The President went on national TV and told us all that he has, and will continue to, authorise wiretapping of US citizens without obtaining a court order.  The fact of the program is not in question - what is in question is it's legality.

Numerous lawmakers who voted to authorise the use of force against Iraq have affirmed that authorisation was not in that legislation and they would not have allowed it if it was.  It is not in the Patriot Act.  It is not in the FISA law.

I'm looking for someone to hold up the piece of paper that gives Bush his authorisation.  And I'm paying close attention waiting for this.  It hasn't happened yet.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #56 on: January 09, 2006, 02:17:48 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


This is a chilling definition of "liberty".



And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




No, my definition would be letting American citizens have a little privacy.  I don't believ in sacrificing freedom for security.  Not at all.  You and I obviously have radically differnt ideas about liberty.




While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?




Supporting the opposition to the party in power?  Without any court supervision whatsoever, the definition of "known terrorists" can easily be expanded to include people like Michael Moore or Harry Belafonte.  Or whoever.




I believe the last guy to do that resigned in disgrace.  Are you concerned a potential perpetraitor would not be caught?  

Regarding the specific individuals listed (Moore and Belafonte) I'm all for making those pompous bastards lives as difficult as possible.  You can add O'Reilly, Olberman, Limbaugh, Stern, and that supposed religious nut who said Sharon's illness was an act of God.  Some people need to employ a full time editor to sensor their stupid-ass ideas.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #57 on: January 09, 2006, 02:20:20 pm »
Quote:

Regarding the specific individuals listed (Moore and Belafonte) I'm all for making those pompous bastards lives as difficult as possible.  You can add O'Reilly, Olberman, Limbaugh, Stern, and that supposed religious nut who said Sharon's illness was an act of God.  Some people need to employ a full time editor to sensor their stupid-ass ideas.




Then don't go to their movies, don't watch their shows, don't buy their books, don't give money to their causes, devote your life to picketing outside their homes, write letters to their sponsors...

... just don't let that "full time editor" be the United States federal government.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #58 on: January 09, 2006, 02:24:06 pm »
Quote:

Regarding the specific individuals listed (Moore and Belafonte) I'm all for making those pompous bastards lives as difficult as possible.  You can add O'Reilly, Olberman, Limbaugh, Stern, and that supposed religious nut who said Sharon's illness was an act of God.  Some people need to employ a full time editor to sensor their stupid-ass ideas.



They don't need their lives made more difficult.  They just need to be pointed at and ridiculed for the crazy people that they are.

Last week David Letterman had O'Reilly on his show.  He let O'Reilly prick on about the War on Christmas for a little while, and then said "I have the feeling about 60 percent of what you say is crap."  I think Dave was being generous, but he made his point.

Freedom means that nutjobs get to speak too.  We don't have to listen.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #59 on: January 09, 2006, 02:26:37 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.





Sorry, poorly worded response.  Perhaps it's my forgetting what information is reported on a voter registration form.  Beyond address, citizenship, etc... what information is on a voter registration form that correlates to tax returns?  I don't recall detailing my income on a voter registration form.

Beyond that, what's wrong with using public records to audit or validate Tax Returns?




Have you ever been through an audit?

There's a lot wrong with using any non-tax related criteria to audit returns.




No.  I haven't had the misfortune of an audit.  Although, I try to be prepared (I have the 4 drawer filing cabinet to prove it!).  Without doubt, I have that lingering fear I will be audited by the IRS.  I'm still at a loss as to how a VOTER REGISTRATION form poses a conflict.  Voter Registration forms are totally different than any "non-tax" related document.  I'm referring to one public document, not some credit card/loan application.  If I understand, so long as you don't use a VA loan, your loan application is personal documentation and is only reviewable after an audit is initiated.  I'm not a CPA or Tax Attorney so I could be wrong.  Please correct me if I am.  

Although, I did recently start a 529 for my son and was surprised by the requirement that a copy of my driver's license be included.  My financial planner said it was a requirement related to the Dept of Home Land Security.  He couldn't explain how or why though.  I thought it would be required for the sake of official identification but not DHLS.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #60 on: January 09, 2006, 02:26:38 pm »
Quote:


While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?





For people in power, the end-all, be-all number one priority is to keep that power. What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. I'll write that again: What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #61 on: January 09, 2006, 02:27:14 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.





Sorry, poorly worded response.  Perhaps it's my forgetting what information is reported on a voter registration form.  Beyond address, citizenship, etc... what information is on a voter registration form that correlates to tax returns?  I don't recall detailing my income on a voter registration form.

Beyond that, what's wrong with using public records to audit or validate Tax Returns?




There are two rolls, those that vote in Democratic primaries and those who vote in Republican primaries.  It is more than possible to use voting affiliation to select who is to be audited.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #62 on: January 09, 2006, 02:30:25 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Regarding the specific individuals listed (Moore and Belafonte) I'm all for making those pompous bastards lives as difficult as possible.  You can add O'Reilly, Olberman, Limbaugh, Stern, and that supposed religious nut who said Sharon's illness was an act of God.  Some people need to employ a full time editor to sensor their stupid-ass ideas.




Then don't go to their movies, don't watch their shows, don't buy their books, don't give money to their causes, devote your life to picketing outside their homes, write letters to their sponsors...

 




I take the more passive approach (everything prior to picketing and writing letters).  Although, it's getting awfully difficult to find entertainment.  I've digressed to reading children's books and watching movies based on children's books.  If Rowling starts spouting some political view, I'm screwed.  But I do feel more prepared for my 2 1/2 yr old's future development.  I'll have a variety of books that he's going to love!

Quote:

... just don't let that "full time editor" be the United States federal government.




And no, the federal gov't should not be their full time editor.  Unfortunately, that 1st Amendment is the standard and it set the standard awfully low, if at all.  Again, there's always the "Off" button or other options for entertainment/education.  I have to say, I love the History Channel.  They have some kick-ass shows.  
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #63 on: January 09, 2006, 02:33:54 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?





For people in power, the end-all, be-all number one priority is to keep that power. What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. I'll write that again: What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.





Who's ditching it?  Last I read, it looked like the "checks and balances" portion was kicking into action.  Bush authorized something questionable.  Now, let's find out if what he did  was illegal.  So far, it doesn't look good.  Although, it's awfully early to be making conclusions on what we know at this point.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #64 on: January 09, 2006, 02:38:30 pm »
Quote:

There was never any impediment to the US intelligence services wiretapping citizens or foreigners alike.  The only caveat to that being that the Foreign Intelligence Securities Act requires that the tapping of any communication expected to involve a US citizen (or involving a domestic phone line because of the very high possibility that such a line would be used by a US citizen) should be the subject of a court order.  This is required because of the 4th Amendment.




What the Fourth Amendment requires is that "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."

So what you are really dealing with is (1) whether the warrantless wire taps were consistent with the Fourth Amendment and, (2) if so, whether FISA imposed an additional requirement beyond the Fourth Amendment, and whether FISA could impose such an additional requirement on the exercise by the president of executive power under Article II.

These are the questions that will likely be presented to the Supreme Court when the matter arrives there in a year or two.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #65 on: January 09, 2006, 02:40:46 pm »
Quote:

And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




Clinton WAS impeached.  And it wasn't for the BJ, it was for trying to keep it a secret from his wife.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #66 on: January 09, 2006, 02:41:20 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.





Sorry, poorly worded response.  Perhaps it's my forgetting what information is reported on a voter registration form.  Beyond address, citizenship, etc... what information is on a voter registration form that correlates to tax returns?  I don't recall detailing my income on a voter registration form.

Beyond that, what's wrong with using public records to audit or validate Tax Returns?




There are two rolls, those that vote in Democratic primaries and those who vote in Republican primaries.  It is more than possible to use voting affiliation to select who is to be audited.  




Ah, now I see.  That's a good point.  I had forgotten about registering Dem/Rep on your voter registration.  I've never registered one way or the other.  

To that point, I divulge  only what is required.  I recently went thru the sale of a home and purchase of a new one.  I mention that because mortgage brokers and home buyers try to gain information they are not entitled to (not to mention Insurance Agents trying to get my credit scores...) and offers nothing relevant to the contract in question.  If it seems unrelated, I ask why they want the information and if it is unnecessary or unrelated, I refuse to provide the information.  It just seemed to me like a good idea to keep my personal information as private as possible, unless otherwise required.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #67 on: January 09, 2006, 02:42:29 pm »
Quote:


Who's ditching it?  Last I read, it looked like the "checks and balances" portion was kicking into action.  Bush authorized something questionable.  Now, let's find out if what he did  was illegal.  So far, it doesn't look good.  Although, it's awfully early to be making conclusions on what we know at this point.





What's to find out?  It's clearly illegal.  There is no argument about that.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2006, 02:43:55 pm »
Quote:

...And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




I was referring explicity to Hilary Clinton, not her husband.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #69 on: January 09, 2006, 02:46:27 pm »
Quote:

Although, I did recently start a 529 for my son and was surprised by the requirement that a copy of my driver's license be included.  My financial planner said it was a requirement related to the Dept of Home Land Security.  He couldn't explain how or why though.  I thought it would be required for the sake of official identification but not DHLS.



The creation of the Department of Homeland Security was the largest goverment reorganisation in history.  I'm not sure even they know how far their tendrils go.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #70 on: January 09, 2006, 02:46:44 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


For the purpose of selecting which tax returns are to be audited.





Sorry, poorly worded response.  Perhaps it's my forgetting what information is reported on a voter registration form.  Beyond address, citizenship, etc... what information is on a voter registration form that correlates to tax returns?  I don't recall detailing my income on a voter registration form.

Beyond that, what's wrong with using public records to audit or validate Tax Returns?




There are two rolls, those that vote in Democratic primaries and those who vote in Republican primaries.  It is more than possible to use voting affiliation to select who is to be audited.  




Ah, now I see.  That's a good point.  I had forgotten about registering Dem/Rep on your voter registration.  I've never registered one way or the other.  

To that point, I divulge  only what is required.  I recently went thru the sale of a home and purchase of a new one.  I mention that because mortgage brokers and home buyers try to gain information they are not entitled to (not to mention Insurance Agents trying to get my credit scores...) and offers nothing relevant to the contract in question.  If it seems unrelated, I ask why they want the information and if it is unnecessary or unrelated, I refuse to provide the information.  It just seemed to me like a good idea to keep my personal information as private as possible, unless otherwise required.




The thing is, it doesn't matter what information you provide, these records record what you do.  If, (and I'm not sure when you can vote as a registed Independent) you vote in a Rep. or Dem. primary that is recorded.  Course if you fail to vote in a Rep or Dem primary that is recorded (by default) too...

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #71 on: January 09, 2006, 02:49:30 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?





For people in power, the end-all, be-all number one priority is to keep that power. What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. I'll write that again: What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




Who's ditching it?  Last I read, it looked like the "checks and balances" portion was kicking into action.  Bush authorized something questionable.  Now, let's find out if what he did  was illegal.  So far, it doesn't look good.  Although, it's awfully early to be making conclusions on what we know at this point.




In this case the check was provided by the 4th Estate, the press, specifically the NY Times via secret informants.  The only other opinion on whether the taps are illegal came from the DoJ.  The Executive branch was telling the Executive branch that what it was doing was OK.  The Legislative branch has checked it's responsibilities at the door.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #72 on: January 09, 2006, 02:56:45 pm »
Quote:


In this case the check was provided by the 4th Estate, the press, specifically the NY Times via secret informants.  The only other opinion on whether the taps are illegal came from the DoJ.  The Executive branch was telling the Executive branch that what it was doing was OK.  The Legislative branch has checked it's responsibilities at the door.





LOL!  Do we have substantial contempt for our federal gov't or what?  Sadly, I am aware and agree with what I read as your contempt.  

HH, interpretation of the law, let alone the enforcement, is never clear cut.  I'm no lawyer and from the outside looking in, the necessity of a lawyer to deal with law documents not only seems a requirement but also self-preservation. The few times I needed a lawyer were for misdemeanor type activity and only once did I make the mistake of not opting to employ one.  After that first encounter, I've never hesitated to pay them to do their thing.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

EasTexAstro

  • Pope
  • Posts: 5748
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #73 on: January 09, 2006, 02:57:29 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


While I agree with you in principle, I also wonder what any law abiding citizen is doing in private that they'd have to be concerned the gov't might be eaves dropping or spying on them?





For people in power, the end-all, be-all number one priority is to keep that power. What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. I'll write that again: What an incredibly dangerous and slippery slope it is to completely ditch the United States constitution without approval. And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




Who's ditching it?  Last I read, it looked like the "checks and balances" portion was kicking into action.  Bush authorized something questionable.  Now, let's find out if what he did  was illegal.  So far, it doesn't look good.  Although, it's awfully early to be making conclusions on what we know at this point.




In this case the check was provided by the 4th Estate, the press, specifically the NY Times via secret informants.  The only other opinion on whether the taps are illegal came from the DoJ.  The Executive branch was telling the Executive branch that what it was doing was OK.  The Legislative branch has checked it's responsibilities at the door.





...and to make it even more fun, the secret informants seem to be breaking the law by sharing information about possibly breaking the law.
It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of 'em was one kinda sombitch or another.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #74 on: January 09, 2006, 02:58:08 pm »
Quote:

...If Rowling starts spouting some political view, I'm screwed.  ...  




Can't chapter 1 of The Half Blood Prince be read as a critique of Blair's policies in Iraq?  Now if politics starts getting mixed in with baseball... DOH!

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #75 on: January 09, 2006, 02:58:39 pm »
Quote:

What the Fourth Amendment requires is that "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."

So what you are really dealing with is (1) whether the warrantless wire taps were consistent with the Fourth Amendment and, (2) if so, whether FISA imposed an additional requirement beyond the Fourth Amendment, and whether FISA could impose such an additional requirement on the exercise by the president of executive power under Article II.

These are the questions that will likely be presented to the Supreme Court when the matter arrives there in a year or two.




It has been established in the courts that wiretaps on US citizens require a warrant.  FISA provides the procedure under which such warrants can be obtained.  There are those (not me) who argue that FISA itself is a breach of the 4th Amendment, but this challenge has never been upheld by the courts.

Someone has to file suit before this thing even starts on the ladder to the Supreme Court.  In the meantime, Congress has the authority to initiate it's own investigation; they are currently choosing not to.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #76 on: January 09, 2006, 02:59:47 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

...And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




I was referring explicity to Hilary Clinton, not her husband.




Yeah, Clinton almost got removed from office would be precise.

Major Tom: I wasn't referring to your comments on H.Clinton.
But as for J.K. Rowlings you wrote, 'If Rowling starts spouting some political view, I'm screwed.'

 I thought this link was kinda amusing on that topic

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #77 on: January 09, 2006, 03:00:10 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

...If Rowling starts spouting some political view, I'm screwed.  ...  




Can't chapter 1 of The Half Blood Prince be read as a critique of Blair's policies in Iraq?  Now if politics starts getting mixed in with baseball... DOH!





You just had to go and fucking do it... didn't you?!

Seriously, I read it the same way.  But it was UK politics so who gives a shit?
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #78 on: January 09, 2006, 03:01:23 pm »
Quote:


HH, interpretation of the law, let alone the enforcement, is never clear cut.  I'm no lawyer and from the outside looking in, the necessity of a lawyer to deal with law documents not only seems a requirement but also self-preservation. The few times I needed a lawyer were for misdemeanor type activity and only once did I make the mistake of not opting to employ one.  After that first encounter, I've never hesitated to pay them to do their thing.





I will refrain from giving my opinion on lawyers as many in here are such.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #79 on: January 09, 2006, 03:03:08 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


In this case the check was provided by the 4th Estate, the press, specifically the NY Times via secret informants.  The only other opinion on whether the taps are illegal came from the DoJ.  The Executive branch was telling the Executive branch that what it was doing was OK.  The Legislative branch has checked it's responsibilities at the door.





LOL!  Do we have substantial contempt for our federal gov't or what?  Sadly, I am aware and agree with what I read as your contempt.  

HH, interpretation of the law, let alone the enforcement, is never clear cut.  I'm no lawyer and from the outside looking in, the necessity of a lawyer to deal with law documents not only seems a requirement but also self-preservation. The few times I needed a lawyer were for misdemeanor type activity and only once did I make the mistake of not opting to employ one.  After that first encounter, I've never hesitated to pay them to do their thing.





I do not have contempt for the institutions of the US government, only the current inhabitants who are making a case that they are above the law.  At any time we're about 2 hours from martial law in this country.  That was one of the snafus that messed up the Katrina response.  The Feds were itching to declare martial law.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #80 on: January 09, 2006, 03:03:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

...And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




I was referring explicity to Hilary Clinton, not her husband.




Yeah, Clinton almost got removed from office would be precise.

Major Tom: I wasn't referring to your comments on H.Clinton.
But as for J.K. Rowlings you wrote, 'If Rowling starts spouting some political view, I'm screwed.'

 I thought this link was kinda amusing on that topic




FUCK IT ALL... now what do I do?  

I read the first page or so and started having flashback to highschool AP English.  This, in turn, prompted me to crawl under my desk for 15 minutes of cryinng and holding myself while in the fetal position.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #81 on: January 09, 2006, 03:03:56 pm »
Quote:


...and to make it even more fun, the secret informants seem to be breaking the law by sharing information about possibly breaking the law.





Yeah, but breaking the law to preserve liberty is the right thing to do.  Laws exist to protect our liberty.  When in conflict, personal liberty should always supercede law.  As Thomas Jefferson said, "law is often but a tyrant's will".
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #82 on: January 09, 2006, 03:06:09 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

...And Clinton almost got impeached for a BJ.




I was referring explicity to Hilary Clinton, not her husband.




Yeah, Clinton almost got removed from office would be precise.

Major Tom: I wasn't referring to your comments on H.Clinton.
But as for J.K. Rowlings you wrote, 'If Rowling starts spouting some political view, I'm screwed.'

 I thought this link was kinda amusing on that topic




FUCK IT ALL... now what do I do?  

I read the first page or so and started having flashback to highschool AP English.  This, in turn, prompted me to crawl under my desk for 15 minutes of cryinng and holding myself while in the fetal position.




 Could always go see a flick

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #83 on: January 09, 2006, 03:07:14 pm »
Quote:

...and to make it even more fun, the secret informants seem to be breaking the law by sharing information about possibly breaking the law.



Loose lips in the administration let slip the secret identity of the CIA's Non-Official Cover operative Valerie Plame-Wilson; no investigation initiated by the DoJ (the investigation was initiated by the CIA, who has the authority to require such).

Loose lips in the administration let slip the presence of a warrantless wiretapping program; the DoJ is all over it within days of the NY Times article.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

EasTexAstro

  • Pope
  • Posts: 5748
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #84 on: January 09, 2006, 03:10:29 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


...and to make it even more fun, the secret informants seem to be breaking the law by sharing information about possibly breaking the law.





Yeah, but breaking the law to preserve liberty is the right thing to do.  Laws exist to protect our liberty.  When in conflict, personal liberty should always supercede law.  As Thomas Jefferson said, "law is often but a tyrant's will".





Do we really know that they were trying to preserve liberty, or were the leaks politically motivated? Is there another way to persue the issues without going to the public forum? Should the leaking be investigated?
It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of 'em was one kinda sombitch or another.

strosrays

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #85 on: January 09, 2006, 03:10:44 pm »
Quote:

Dudes kissin' is as distasteful to me as cabbage.  And I really don't like cabbage.  Difference is, there's no party out there trying to amend the constitution to ban cabbage.  If there was, there's one non-citizen's vote here for starters!





It was Bush, Sr., who boldly and bravely declared his utter contempt for broccoli.  I think most non-vegan Americans, even lefties, could feel an affinity with the President on that one.  And broccoli is a hybrid or derivative of cabbage, I believe.  Or if it isn't, it should be.

What I am trying to say is, you have my assent on the dudes kissin' thing... long as you stay clear of first cousin territory.

The reason Bush and his AG (who is AG because he lost his last senate election to a dead guy, no?) don't get to fuck with the Constitution for trivialities is the same reason Clinton and his AG didn't, and the presidents before them didn't.  Parties in power come and go, laws can be changed and re-changed according to the current political expediency, but YOU DON'T FUCK WITH THE CONSTITUTION.  Every 1st grader knows that.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #86 on: January 09, 2006, 03:13:49 pm »
Quote:

I do not have contempt for the institutions of the US government, only the current inhabitants who are making a case that they are above the law.  At any time we're about 2 hours from martial law in this country.  That was one of the snafus that messed up the Katrina response.  The Feds were itching to declare martial law.



During the first week of the ongoing Katrina disaster, police authorities confiscated civilian-held firearms.

So the 4th Amendment applies except when it doesn't; ditto now, the 2nd.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #87 on: January 09, 2006, 03:14:56 pm »
Quote:


Do we really know that they were trying to preserve liberty, or were the leaks politically motivated? Is there another way to persue the issues without going to the public forum? Should the leaking be investigated?





If someone blows the whistle on illegal government activity aimed at circumventing the Constitution, then yeah, I'd say they were trying to preserve liberty.  How do you propose to bring attention to the matter without making the matter public?
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #88 on: January 09, 2006, 03:15:16 pm »
Quote:

Seriously, I read it the same way.  But it was UK politics so who gives a shit?



Cut to lone ally, off in the distance, waving furiously.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #89 on: January 09, 2006, 03:15:40 pm »
Here's hoping the pendulum swings fairly soon, cause many would say that there's some scary shit going on out there.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #90 on: January 09, 2006, 03:17:29 pm »
Quote:


So the 4th Amendment applies except when it doesn't; ditto now, the 2nd.





The 2nd Ammendment has never been interpreted as a guarantee for individual citizens to own firearms.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #91 on: January 09, 2006, 03:19:47 pm »
Quote:

who is AG because he lost his last senate election to a dead guy, no?




No, that was the previous AG.  Alberto Gonzalez is from Texas, IIRC, and was legal counsel to the president prior to his appointment to AG.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

EasTexAstro

  • Pope
  • Posts: 5748
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #92 on: January 09, 2006, 03:26:56 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


Do we really know that they were trying to preserve liberty, or were the leaks politically motivated? Is there another way to persue the issues without going to the public forum? Should the leaking be investigated?





If someone blows the whistle on illegal government activity aimed at circumventing the Constitution, then yeah, I'd say they were trying to preserve liberty.  How do you propose to bring attention to the matter without making the matter public?





Was it illegal or was it just possibly illegal?

Can the matter be taken, legally, to representatives in congress?

I have been following both sides of this issue without completely reaching any conclusions. Because some posters here seem to be following the story more closely and with more knowledge than I possess, I really was just trying to ask some questions more than make a point. Even the most respected reporters and pundits approach this with bias, so reading doesn't always give me all the answers I would like. I hope there is more to an opinion on this than "it is the Bush administration, so he should prove that he is following the law," or "it is the federal government, so there should be proof of wrongdoing before this is made public."
It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of 'em was one kinda sombitch or another.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #93 on: January 09, 2006, 03:27:31 pm »
Quote:

If someone blows the whistle on illegal government activity aimed at circumventing the Constitution, then yeah, I'd say they were trying to preserve liberty.  How do you propose to bring attention to the matter without making the matter public?



As pravata touched on above, the 4th estate - the press - are intended to do exactly this type of digging in the dirt.  That's why they are (mostly) allowed to keep their sources secret.  The NY Times was doing exactly what the framers intended them to do.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #94 on: January 09, 2006, 03:32:17 pm »
Quote:

No, that was the previous AG.  Alberto Gonzalez is from Texas, IIRC, and was legal counsel to the president prior to his appointment to AG.



Correct.  Alberto Gonzales called the Geneva Convention "quaint and outdated" and re-defined torture to be inflicting pain equivalent to that of organ failure or death (hence anything less than that is not considered "torture").
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #95 on: January 09, 2006, 03:37:05 pm »
Quote:

Was it illegal or was it just possibly illegal?

Can the matter be taken, legally, to representatives in congress?

I have been following both sides of this issue without completely reaching any conclusions. Because some posters here seem to be following the story more closely and with more knowledge than I possess, I really was just trying to ask some questions more than make a point. Even the most respected reporters and pundits approach this with bias, so reading doesn't always give me all the answers I would like. I hope there is more to an opinion on this than "it is the Bush administration, so he should prove that he is following the law," or "it is the federal government, so there should be proof of wrongdoing before this is made public."




The story is out, so anyone can raise it with their representatives in Washington if they have a grievance.  Bush has admitted to the program, so the question is only that of legality.  Congress has the authority to launch any investigation it sees fit (MLB...steroids...anyone...), so the only question regarding an investigation into wiretapping is "will they or won't they?"
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

EasTexAstro

  • Pope
  • Posts: 5748
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #96 on: January 09, 2006, 03:38:58 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

If someone blows the whistle on illegal government activity aimed at circumventing the Constitution, then yeah, I'd say they were trying to preserve liberty.  How do you propose to bring attention to the matter without making the matter public?



As pravata touched on above, the 4th estate - the press - are intended to do exactly this type of digging in the dirt.  That's why they are (mostly) allowed to keep their sources secret.  The NY Times was doing exactly what the framers intended them to do.





I don't suggest the NY Times did anything wrong. In some cases, there are some ethical questions about sharing all the details of leaked information, but that isn't illegal. The leakers of information, from the administration, congress, CIA, or my son's elementary school, can be breaking the law.

I do like to keep in mind, though, that no one directly elects the representives in the 4th estate. If the NY Times, or Fox News, wants to keep the bias in the reporting, and reporters, more in the line of their outlook on life, what we are fed can be quite misleading.
It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of 'em was one kinda sombitch or another.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #97 on: January 09, 2006, 03:41:47 pm »
Quote:


Was it illegal or was it just possibly illegal?





Illegal, cut and dried, as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:


Can the matter be taken, legally, to representatives in congress?





Theoretically, yes.  However, as pravata has noted, this particular Congress has basically abdicated their Constitutional responsibility in the "checks and balances" process of running the federal government in favor of a massive power grab in really important matters such as steroids in MLB.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #98 on: January 09, 2006, 03:49:35 pm »
Quote:

Theoretically, yes.  However, as pravata has noted, this particular Congress has basically abdicated their Constitutional responsibility in the "checks and balances" process of running the federal government in favor of a massive power grab in really important matters such as steroids in MLB.



Guess who is replacing the convicted and corrupt Randy "Duke" Cunningham on the House Military Appropriations Committee?

[Drum roll please]

Tom DeLay

[Rimshot]
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #99 on: January 09, 2006, 03:52:40 pm »
Quote:

These are the questions that will likely be presented to the Supreme Court when the matter arrives there in a year or two.



Almost forgot...this from the Yale Law School review of the body of work put forward by proposed Supreme Court Justice Samual Alito:

From these cases, we identified several trends in Judge Alito?s judicial approach: he rules in favor of institutional actors and defers to agency decisions in many settings while showing skepticism toward individual litigants? claims; he appears to support a narrow view of civil rights, prisoners? rights, and workers? rights but a broad view of religious freedoms; he appears willing to uphold legislative restrictions on abortion; and he is willing to limit congressional power. When able, he has sought to move the law to achieve the broad philosophical purposes articulated in the memorandum he submitted in November 1985 as part of his application to become Deputy Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #100 on: January 09, 2006, 03:53:51 pm »
Fuck, I hate the Void.
Goin' for a bus ride.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #101 on: January 09, 2006, 04:01:32 pm »
Quote:

It has been established in the courts that wiretaps on US citizens require a warrant.  FISA provides the procedure under which such warrants can be obtained.  There are those (not me) who argue that FISA itself is a breach of the 4th Amendment, but this challenge has never been upheld by the courts.




But the courts have also found, rightly or wrongly, that the president has inherent constitutional authority to use warrantless searches to acquire information for foreign intelligence purposes, as opposed to law enforcement purposes.  On its face, the Fourth Amendment contains no such distinction, but then the Fourth Amendment also contains no express requirment that all searches and seizures require a warrant; it expressly requires only that all searches and seizures be reasonable, and that warrants issue upon probable cause.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #102 on: January 09, 2006, 04:08:53 pm »
Quote:

Yeah, but breaking the law to preserve liberty is the right thing to do.  Laws exist to protect our liberty.  When in conflict, personal liberty should always supercede law.  As Thomas Jefferson said, "law is often but a tyrant's will".




If someone is forbidden by the law not to reveal classified information, is he to be his own judge of whether the law may be violated in a particular circumstance to preserve liberty?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #103 on: January 09, 2006, 04:12:23 pm »
Quote:

But the courts have also found, rightly or wrongly, that the president has inherent constitutional authority to use warrantless searches to acquire information for foreign intelligence purposes, as opposed to law enforcement purposes.  On its face, the Fourth Amendment contains no such distinction, but then the Fourth Amendment also contains no express requirment that all searches and seizures require a warrant; it expressly requires only that all searches and seizures be reasonable, and that warrants issue upon probable cause.



Warrantless searches, yes.  But wiretapping has always been treated separately, and more gingerly, by the law.  Clinton ordered warrantless searches - but of physical premises.  Carter did something similar but neither went outside the existing law - their executive orders making specific mention that compliance with FISA was to be maintained.

FISA allows the president and the attorney general to conduct surveillance without a court order for the purpose of gathering "foreign intelligence information" for a period of no more than 15 days following a declaration of war by the Congress.  No help for King George there either.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #104 on: January 09, 2006, 04:28:32 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Seriously, I read it the same way.  But it was UK politics so who gives a shit?



Cut to lone ally, off in the distance, waving furiously.





By the way, this made my day... and I was worried you'd miss my "subtle" barb....
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

lc_db

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 522
    • View Profile
    • I_dont_need_no_stinkin_homepage.com
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #105 on: January 09, 2006, 04:35:46 pm »
Quote:

By the way, this made my day... and I was worried you'd miss my "subtle" barb....




What does the former First Lady have to do with all of this?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #106 on: January 09, 2006, 04:44:36 pm »
Quote:

Warrantless searches, yes.  But wiretapping has always been treated separately, and more gingerly, by the law.  Clinton ordered warrantless searches - but of physical premises.  Carter did something similar but neither went outside the existing law - their executive orders making specific mention that compliance with FISA was to be maintained.




The case finding that warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes are within the president's inherent constitutional power involved electronic survellience, not physical searches.

Quote:

The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President?s constitutional power.



cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #107 on: January 09, 2006, 04:52:18 pm »
Quote:

I do not have contempt for the institutions of the US government, only the current inhabitants who are making a case that they are above the law.  


Indeed.  This perfectly describes the pattern of governance and legislation by the congressmen and senators in the Democratic Party over the past 50 years or so.  But really, I think it's best if we keep the two-party system anyway.
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #108 on: January 09, 2006, 04:56:48 pm »
Quote:


If someone is forbidden by the law not to reveal classified information, is he to be his own judge of whether the law may be violated in a particular circumstance to preserve liberty?





Basically yes.  I think citizens have a moral responsibility to defend liberty and protect against tyranny, even if at their own peril.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #109 on: January 09, 2006, 05:00:04 pm »
Quote:

This perfectly describes the pattern of governance and legislation by the congressmen and senators in the Democratic Party over the past 50 years or so.  But really, I think it's best if we keep the two-party system anyway.




And it perfectly describes the Republican Party.  Nepotism knows not political boundaries.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #110 on: January 09, 2006, 05:04:25 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


If someone is forbidden by the law not to reveal classified information, is he to be his own judge of whether the law may be violated in a particular circumstance to preserve liberty?





Basically yes.  I think citizens have a moral responsibility to defend liberty and protect against tyranny, even if at their own peril.





Fair enough.  I certainly think there can be moral justification to break the law.  But that does not necessarily mean that breaking the law in such circumstances should be without consequences.

cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #111 on: January 09, 2006, 05:14:33 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.





This is a chilling definition of "liberty".


And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




Is anyone else imagining a 50-year rewind and substituting "Communists" for "terrorists"?


Please.  Al Quaida's a little different.

Last time I checked, the war we're in now didn't have "cold" in front of it.  Wartime often calls for exigent circumstances.  If a temporary loss of my privacy (what law is really going to keep a government from engaging in this sort of thing without our knowledge anyway?  For all we know, it's happening now and has been for decades - certainly long before the Patriot Act) saves my childrens' school building from being blown to bits, I'm all for it.
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #112 on: January 09, 2006, 05:19:22 pm »
Quote:


But that does not necessarily mean that breaking the law in such circumstances should be without consequences.





Oh I agree.  But I think sometimes breaking the law should be done despite and with full knowledge of those consequences.  Granted, it's not something to take lightly.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #113 on: January 09, 2006, 05:19:47 pm »
Thanks to  section 113 of Public Law No: 109-162 all ya'll are now in violation of federal statutes,

"Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity."
The Link

see

in the case of subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(1), includes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet (as such term is defined in section 1104 of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note)).'.
The Link

which used to read,

Title 47 section 223
...
(C) makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who receives the communications;
The Link

My definition of "annoy" is pretty broad.  (fyi, in case you can't figure it out, I'm kidding.  And, it's possible this law doesnt apply here.  But who knows?  As long as you think they're only after the "other guy" they can come up on you sideways.)

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #114 on: January 09, 2006, 05:21:56 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If an American citizen is getting phone calls from known terrorists, then by all means listen in on them.





This is a chilling definition of "liberty".


And your definition would include letting known terrorists have their cute little privacy while potentially discussing how they might bomb their next target?  That's more than chilling; right now I don't have words for it.




Is anyone else imagining a 50-year rewind and substituting "Communists" for "terrorists"?


Please.  Al Quaida's a little different.

Last time I checked, the war we're in now didn't have "cold" in front of it.  Wartime often calls for exigent circumstances.  If a temporary loss of my privacy (what law is really going to keep a government from engaging in this sort of thing without our knowledge anyway?  For all we know, it's happening now and has been for decades - certainly long before the Patriot Act) saves my childrens' school building from being blown to bits, I'm all for it.




Did you ever hide under your desk at school?

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #115 on: January 09, 2006, 05:22:15 pm »
Quote:

If a temporary loss of my privacy (what law is really going to keep a government from engaging in this sort of thing without our knowledge anyway?  For all we know, it's happening now and has been for decades - certainly long before the Patriot Act) saves my childrens' school building from being blown to bits, I'm all for it.




Wow, talk about an extreme false dichotomy.

But the bottom line is, I'm not willing to give up my Constitutional rights, at any level, even if you think it may prevent another 9/11.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #116 on: January 09, 2006, 05:31:55 pm »
Quote:

Thanks to  section 113 of Public Law No: 109-162 all ya'll are now in violation of federal statutes,

"Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity."
The Link

see

in the case of subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(1), includes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet (as such term is defined in section 1104 of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note)).'.
The Link

which used to read,

Title 47 section 223
...
(C) makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who receives the communications;
The Link

My definition of "annoy" is pretty broad.  (fyi, in case you can't figure it out, I'm kidding.  And, it's possible this law doesnt apply here.  But who knows?  As long as you think they're only after the "other guy" they can come up on you sideways.)







Holy Crap. This entire board could be going to jail. I better get my stuff ready for Huntsville. Just doesn't seem real. This part of the article stuck out to me:


"He's right. Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else.

It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets.

If President Bush truly believed in the principle of limited government (it is in his official bio), he'd realize that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he swore to uphold."

Russ99

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 281
    • View Profile
    • www.thrustjet.com
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #117 on: January 09, 2006, 05:47:30 pm »
I'm definately a detractor of the current heavy-handed regime, but...

...what does all this have to do with the (doomed) World Baseball Craptacular?

---

PS - If I hear the phrase "The War on Terror" one more time, I think my head will implode. What a crock!  

Quote:

Thanks to  section 113 of Public Law No: 109-162 all ya'll are now in violation of federal statutes,




" He is a throwback to the old days, when a player's most honored badges were mud and blood"

- Larry Dierker on Bill Doran -  The Scouting Report 1987

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #118 on: January 09, 2006, 05:50:14 pm »
Quote:


If President Bush truly believed in the principle of limited government (it is in his official bio), he'd realize that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he swore to uphold."





When has Bush ever tried to square his actions with the Constitution?

As for anonymity in the press...

"Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all. . . . Before the Revolutionary War colonial patriots frequently had to conceal their authorship or distribution of literature that easily could have brought down on them prosecutions by English-controlled courts. . . . It is plain that anonymity has sometimes been assumed for the most constructive purposes." - United States Supreme Court, 1960.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #119 on: January 09, 2006, 05:53:18 pm »
Quote:


...what does all this have to do with the (doomed) World Baseball Craptacular?





Nothing really.  It's a little thing we call "thread wobble".  This thread has strayed from "the effects of political ideology on baseball", but it has remained remarkably civilized.  Levity can be granted under special circumstances.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #120 on: January 09, 2006, 06:04:15 pm »
Quote:


Nothing really.  It's a little thing we call "thread wobble".  This thread has strayed from "the effects of political ideology on baseball", but it has remained remarkably civilized.  Levity can be granted under special circumstances.





I was wondering why this thread had continued without the attention of Spack.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #121 on: January 09, 2006, 06:08:18 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


Nothing really.  It's a little thing we call "thread wobble".  This thread has strayed from "the effects of political ideology on baseball", but it has remained remarkably civilized.  Levity can be granted under special circumstances.





I was wondering why this thread had continued without the attention of Spack.





As long as we stay civil, and keep it in this thread, Spack's got other things he's working on.  After all, Spack is not apolitical, having run for President in 1904, 1908, and 2000.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #122 on: January 09, 2006, 06:14:38 pm »
Quote:

As long as we stay civil, and keep it in this thread, Spack's got other things he's working on.  After all, Spack is not apolitical, having run for President in 1904, 1908, and 2000.



I understand that, on an unofficial full recount, Spack actually took Florida in 2000.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #123 on: January 09, 2006, 06:20:21 pm »
Quote:

As long as we stay civil, and keep it in this thread, Spack's got other things he's working on.  After all, Spack is not apolitical, having run for President in 1904, 1908, and 2000.




Didn't he lose a tough primary to McKinley in 1900?

Or is that Jim R. I'm thinking of?

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #124 on: January 09, 2006, 06:21:39 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


Nothing really.  It's a little thing we call "thread wobble".  This thread has strayed from "the effects of political ideology on baseball", but it has remained remarkably civilized.  Levity can be granted under special circumstances.





I was wondering why this thread had continued without the attention of Spack.




As long as we stay civil, and keep it in this thread, Spack's got other things he's working on.  After all, Spack is not apolitical, having run for President in 1904, 1908, and 2000.




I had no idea Spack was so closely related to Zell Miller.

I can just see Spack now, challenging wayward trolls to a duel...
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

strosrays

  • Guest
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #125 on: January 09, 2006, 07:03:49 pm »
Quote:

Thanks to  section 113 of Public Law No: 109-162 all ya'll are now in violation of federal statutes,

"Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity."
The Link






...the feds are dragging me out the back door of this head shop, and I'm screaming, "I did disclose my true identity, you fascist fucks!  I'm stros-rays, motherfuckers!  Stros-fuckin'-rays! S-T-R-O...."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Annoyed? (way NonBB by now)
« Reply #126 on: January 09, 2006, 08:32:18 pm »
Quote:


Didn't he lose a tough primary to McKinley in 1900?

Or is that Jim R. I'm thinking of?





When asked by reporters who the first candidate he voted for in a Presidential election, Spack said "Johnson".  The reporter said "well, LBJ was a popular President.  Spack replied, "Andrew Johnson".
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #127 on: January 09, 2006, 08:46:42 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


None...That has nothing to do with detainees at GTMO





If they are considered POWs and denied legal representation under the premise that the US is still under formal hostilities with their home country it does.





They are not denied legal representation. Stop watching CNN.

Iraqis are kept in jails in Iraq when they break IRAQI law.

And, detainees are kept in GTMO because they were training to KILL YOU. If they are released back into the wild, they will KILL YOU. This is not happy world you live in, this is an ugly epidemic that has spread throughout the world. Foreign countries happily give these people up who are foreigners to those countries because they dont want them either.

Dude, I do this for a living and trust me, I dont like the  Patriot Act anymore than you do but it is a necessary evil at this point. My fear is it will eventually get abused as it evolves into other roles. But for now, it is in your/our best interest. One more thing...This has been going on long before 9/11. Without blowing my career on a baseball chat forum, I will tell you GITMO has had detainees for various reasons for a long time.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #128 on: January 09, 2006, 10:15:32 pm »
Quote:

detainees are kept in GTMO because they were training to KILL YOU. If they are released back into the wild, they will KILL YOU. This is not happy world you live in, this is an ugly epidemic that has spread throughout the world. Foreign countries happily give these people up who are foreigners to those countries because they dont want them either.

Dude, I do this for a living and trust me, I dont like the  Patriot Act anymore than you do but it is a necessary evil at this point. My fear is it will eventually get abused as it evolves into other roles. But for now, it is in your/our best interest.  





Finally somebody said it!  Thanks Browneye.  I've been trying to figure out the best way to say it, but Browneye got it covered....  Defending civil liberties is all fine and good but there has to be a middle ground.  I just can't imagine anybody seriously saying that exploding schoolhouses, busses, etc..are just a price to be paid to live in a "free" society.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #129 on: January 09, 2006, 10:29:45 pm »
Quote:


They are not denied legal representation. Stop watching CNN.





Try and keep up.  It was pointed out in reference to the "detainees" that POWs are not afforded representation while formal hostilities are still going on.  I pointed out that Iraq is the only country with whom the US had had formal hostilities recently, and even those have ended; therefore, the "detainees" in GTMO aren't the same as POWs.  

Quote:


Iraqis are kept in jails in Iraq when they break IRAQI law.





And Americans are kept in jails in the US when they break US law.  

Quote:


And, detainees are kept in GTMO because they were training to KILL YOU. If they are released back into the wild, they will KILL YOU.





I'll stop watching CNN if you'll think for yourself and stop blindly believing everything George Bush tells you.


Quote:


Dude, I do this for a living and trust me





Trust what?  That the rest of world is training to kill me and that if we don't imprison them, they will?  Sorry, I'm not that easily scared.

Quote:


, I dont like the  Patriot Act anymore than you do but it is a necessary evil at this point.





The Patriot Act is more evil than anything the terrorists have done.

Quote:


 My fear is it will eventually get abused as it evolves into other roles.





Eventually?  It's been happening.  Where have you been?


Quote:


But for now, it is in your/our best interest.





No, it's not in my best interest.  You can speak for youself though.

Quote:


 One more thing...This has been going on long before 9/11. Without blowing my career on a baseball chat forum, I will tell you GITMO has had detainees for various reasons for a long time.





I'm sure they have.  No one is disputing that.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #130 on: January 09, 2006, 10:34:08 pm »
Quote:

I just can't imagine anybody seriously saying that exploding schoolhouses, busses, etc..are just a price to be paid to live in a "free" society.




This is simply a ridiculous statement.  Why do you set up such and extreme false dichotomy:  "either we give up our liberty or our schoolhouse will start exploding and our children will die"?  This is the exact same scare tactic that Bush uses to justify his circumventing the Constitution and it's as absurd as it is insulting.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #131 on: January 09, 2006, 10:57:19 pm »
Quote:


I'll stop watching CNN if you'll think for yourself and stop blindly believing everything George Bush tells you.





Browneye never said he even supported the President.  Maybe he does, maybe not.  He has mentioned being active duty military so just  maybe he has experience and perspective that the rest of us don't.

I personally am a fan of the President in spite of him being wrong on domestic spending, immigration, and laughing at his own jokes.  I am convinced that he is the best man for the job in terms of security.  This country has not been attacked since 9/11 in spite of attempts to do so.  I think it unfortunate that not more credit is given to the people trying to defend this county(including CIA, FBI, and NSA).  If you are afraid to get on an airplane because they are falling out of the sky on a daily basis, afraid to go to work because busses are exploding, then what good are your civil liberties?

Quote:

The Patriot Act is more evil than anything the terrorists have done.





Huh??? Are you serious??? The Patriot Act is  SO MUCH worse than crashing airplanes into buildings and killing thousands of innocent people <sarcasm intended>.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #132 on: January 09, 2006, 11:30:18 pm »
Quote:


Browneye never said he even supported the President.





I didn't say he did.  I said he apparently has been listening to the President, which is just as bad.


Quote:


I personally am a fan of the President in spite of him being wrong on domestic spending, immigration, and laughing at his own jokes.  I am convinced that he is the best man for the job in terms of security.





I an not a fan of the President, but not just because of his being wrong on just about everything, but rather because he's the worst possible person for the job in terms of security.

Quote:


  This country has not been attacked since 9/11 in spite of attempts to do so.





And you think that's because of Bush and if he had not been President that the US would have been taken over Muslim extremists from Iraq by now?  I'm sorry, but that's not enlightened thinking.  That's the kind of logic people used to justify human sacrifice.  "We sacrificed a virgin yesterday, and the sun came up the next day.  We'd better keep sacrificing virgins if we want to the sun to keep shining".  But that's exactly the kind of scare tactic that the current "leadership" uses on you.


Quote:


  I think it unfortunate that not more credit is given to the people trying to defend this county(including CIA, FBI, and NSA).





They get nothing BUT praise heeped on them ad naseum.

Quote:


  If you are afraid to get on an airplane because they are falling out of the sky on a daily basis, afraid to go to work because busses are exploding, then what good are your civil liberties?





You're telling me that if not for the Patriot Act you'd be afraid of airlplanes falling out of the sky?  That you'd worry about schoolbuses exploding? This is simply a logical fallacy.  You've set up this either/or with your only two alternatives at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.  That is simply not the way grown up, intelligent people ought to look at things.

Quote:


Huh??? Are you serious??? The Patriot Act is  SO MUCH worse than crashing airplanes into buildings and killing thousands of innocent people <sarcasm intended>.





If it means denying liberty to the citizenry it's designed to protect, then yes, it's much worse.  Many people believe that there are worse things than death, and that liberty and freedom are worth dying for.  The purpose of life is not to simply exist as long as possible regardless of how torturous that existence is.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

OrdinaryAvgGuy

  • Clark
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #133 on: January 10, 2006, 12:03:57 am »
Is listening to the President any worse than listening to the liberally biased media? Who do you think pulls more shit out of their asses, the President or CNN?

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #134 on: January 10, 2006, 12:07:20 am »
Quote:

Is listening to the President any worse than listening to the liberally biased media? Who do you think pulls more shit out of their asses, the President or CNN?




Oh no question...the President.  

And we can have debate, but let's keep this civil.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #135 on: January 10, 2006, 12:11:58 am »
Quote:

Quote:


Browneye never said he even supported the President.





I didn't say he did.  I said he apparently has been listening to the President, which is just as bad.


Quote:


I personally am a fan of the President in spite of him being wrong on domestic spending, immigration, and laughing at his own jokes.  I am convinced that he is the best man for the job in terms of security.





I an not a fan of the President, but not just because of his being wrong on just about everything, but rather because he's the worst possible person for the job in terms of security.

Quote:


  This country has not been attacked since 9/11 in spite of attempts to do so.





And you think that's because of Bush and if he had not been President that the US would have been taken over Muslim extremists from Iraq by now?  I'm sorry, but that's not enlightened thinking.  That's the kind of logic people used to justify human sacrifice.  "We sacrificed a virgin yesterday, and the sun came up the next day.  We'd better keep sacrificing virgins if we want to the sun to keep shining".  But that's exactly the kind of scare tactic that the current "leadership" uses on you.


Quote:


  I think it unfortunate that not more credit is given to the people trying to defend this county(including CIA, FBI, and NSA).





They get nothing BUT praise heeped on them ad naseum.

Quote:


  If you are afraid to get on an airplane because they are falling out of the sky on a daily basis, afraid to go to work because busses are exploding, then what good are your civil liberties?





You're telling me that if not for the Patriot Act you'd be afraid of airlplanes falling out of the sky?  That you'd worry about schoolbuses exploding? This is simply a logical fallacy.  You've set up this either/or with your only two alternatives at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.  That is simply not the way grown up, intelligent people ought to look at things.

Quote:


Huh??? Are you serious??? The Patriot Act is  SO MUCH worse than crashing airplanes into buildings and killing thousands of innocent people <sarcasm intended>.





If it means denying liberty to the citizenry it's designed to protect, then yes, it's much worse.  Many people believe that there are worse things than death, and that liberty and freedom are worth dying for.  The purpose of life is not to simply exist as long as possible regardless of how torturous that existence is.





Fact
1. No I am an intelligence analyst, I look at facts. I can give a damn who the president is.
2. He is put more money into the military and intel agencies than Bush Senior and Clinton combined. But your coment is  a matter of opinion.
3. The majority of the muslim extremists committing the terror acts in Iraq are not from Iraq. They are from all the surrounding sewer holes and using the lack of law as a chance to do what they do. Most terrorist from the world come from Pakistan Saudi Arabia, Yemen etc. Sadam did not put up with this kind of extremism in Iraq. He was the king and would not have a rival nor share power with a terror org. However, under the no fly zones pre war some organizations operated freely which is what helped fuel the fear of terror and WMD in Iraq.
4. if they did get enough praise than you would have heard of the other organizations that are out there such as DIA, ISG etc. Instead people are sacrificing there lives to protect you in ways you wouldnt believe..
5. you might not be afraid of the buses exploding and planes falling but this is the kind of threat that gets thrown out there. You have to take it as credible, just ask Isreal.
6. I dont know what you are trying to say on that last one but, I have been to Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and any other shit hole you can think of and I can tell you without a doubt that this country is worth dying for.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #136 on: January 10, 2006, 12:19:08 am »
Quote:


I didn't say he did.  I said he apparently has been listening to the President, which is just as bad.





Who should he listen to?  Just curious.  Bush is the elected president and like him or hate him you're forced to listen to him.  Especially active duty military.


Quote:

I an not a fan of the President, but not just because of his being wrong on just about everything, but rather because he's the worst possible person for the job in terms of security.




Just for grins I'd be curious as to whom you might suggest as being a better fit.


Quote:

And you think that's because of Bush and if he had not been President that the US would have been taken over Muslim extremists from Iraq by now?




Nope.  Never said that.  I do think that we would be lobbing Cruise misssles at Afghanistan and wagging our fingers at those mean-spirited terrorists.  Meanwhile between laugh breaks, enemies of the U.S. continue training new recruits.



Quote:

I'm sorry, but that's not enlightened thinking.  That's the kind of logic people used to justify human sacrifice.  "We sacrificed a virgin yesterday, and the sun came up the next day.  We'd better keep sacrificing virgins if we want to the sun to keep shining".


 

Heh heh heh... he said "virgin"

Quote:

They get nothing BUT praise heeped on them ad naseum.




Really? Where? Fox News? A.M. Radio?


Quote:

You're telling me that if not for the Patriot Act you'd be afraid of airlplanes falling out of the sky?  That you'd worry about schoolbuses exploding? This is simply a logical fallacy.  You've set up this either/or with your only two alternatives at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.  That is simply not the way grown up, intelligent people ought to look at things.




Nope.  Again, never said that.  What I did say was that your civil liberties aren't worth squat if you have no security.  You keep mentioning logical fallacy or false premise.  9/11 really did happen.  Busses are blown up in Irael regularly.  Trains have been blown up in England.  This is not make believe.  I consider it grown up to consider worse case scenarios and prevent them from happening to us.


Quote:

If it means denying liberty to the citizenry it's designed to protect, then yes, it's much worse.  Many people believe that there are worse things than death, and that liberty and freedom are worth dying for.




Killing of innocents worse than listening in on phone conversations?  I can't disagree more.

Quote:

The purpose of life is not to simply exist as long as possible regardless of how torturous that existence is.




If your life is tortured, it is certainly for reasons other than the denial of your civil liberties.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #137 on: January 10, 2006, 12:19:48 am »
Quote:


Fact
I look at facts. I can give a damn who the president is.





That's good to hear.  Not many people think this way.

Quote:


2. He is put more money into the military and intel agencies than Bush Senior and Clinton combined. But your coment is  a matter of opinion.





So what?  His intelligence is for shit.  Besides, spending money doesn't make him an effective leader.

Quote:


3. The majority of the muslim extremists committing the terror acts in Iraq are not from Iraq. They are from all the surrounding sewer holes and using the lack of law as a chance to do what they do. Most terrorist from the world come from Pakistan Saudi Arabia, Yemen etc. Sadam did not put up with this kind of extremism in Iraq. He was the king and would not have a rival nor share power with a terror org. However, under the no fly zones pre war some organizations operated freely which is what helped fuel the fear of terror and WMD in Iraq.





Ummm...OK.  Is there a relevant point in there somewhere?

Quote:


Instead people are sacrificing there lives to protect you in ways you wouldnt believe..





You are incorrect, sir.

Quote:


5. you might not be afraid of the buses exploding and planes falling but this is the kind of threat that gets thrown out there. You have to take it as credible, just ask Isreal.





I'm sure there are all kinds of threats thrown out there.  That a) doesn't make them credible, and b) doesn't mean that without George W. Bush as President that every single one of them would be automatically carried out to the extreme.


Quote:


6. I dont know what you are trying to say on that last one but, I have been to Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and any other shit hole you can think of and I can tell you without a doubt that this country is worth dying for.





That's exactly what I'm trying to say.  I take it you don't disagree with me.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #138 on: January 10, 2006, 12:31:15 am »
Quote:


Who should he listen to?  Just curious.





He should think for himself.

Quote:


  Bush is the elected president and like him or hate him you're forced to listen to him.  Especially active duty military.





I dont' mean "listen" as in the physical act of "hearing".  But I think you know that.


Quote:


Just for grins I'd be curious as to whom you might suggest as being a better fit.





Should I start from the bottom?  Hillary Clinton.

Quote:


Meanwhile between laugh breaks, enemies of the U.S. continue training new recruits.





Like they're doing now?

Quote:


Really? Where? Fox News? A.M. Radio?





Yep.  Even internet baseball fansites.


Quote:


Nope.  Again, never said that.  What I did say was that your civil liberties aren't worth squat if you have no security.  You keep mentioning logical fallacy or false premise.  9/11 really did happen.  Busses are blown up in Irael regularly.  Trains have been blown up in England.  This is not make believe.  





I never once mentioned a false premise.  I said a false dichotomy, an illogical "either/or".  I'm not denying that those things happen or did happen.  The logical fallacy is your insistance that we have to sacrifice our personal liberty in order to keep them from happening again.  


Quote:


I consider it grown up to consider worse case scenarios and prevent them from happening to us.





I don't.  I consider it living in a culture of fear and ignorance.


Quote:


Killing of innocents worse than listening in on phone conversations?  I can't disagree more.





Here you go again with the extreme dichotomy.  Do you believe in any middle ground whatsoever, or is it always either follow Bush or a horrible, gruesome death awaits you?

Quote:


If your life is tortured, it is certainly for reasons other than the denial of your civil liberties.





No it wouldn't be.  Being denied basic liberty would certainly be torturous in my opinion.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #139 on: January 10, 2006, 12:35:15 am »
Quote:

Quote:


Fact
I look at facts. I can give a damn who the president is.





That's good to hear.  Not many people think this way.

Quote:


2. He is put more money into the military and intel agencies than Bush Senior and Clinton combined. But your coment is  a matter of opinion.





So what?  His intelligence is for shit.  Besides, spending money doesn't make him an effective leader.

Quote:


3. The majority of the muslim extremists committing the terror acts in Iraq are not from Iraq. They are from all the surrounding sewer holes and using the lack of law as a chance to do what they do. Most terrorist from the world come from Pakistan Saudi Arabia, Yemen etc. Sadam did not put up with this kind of extremism in Iraq. He was the king and would not have a rival nor share power with a terror org. However, under the no fly zones pre war some organizations operated freely which is what helped fuel the fear of terror and WMD in Iraq.





Ummm...OK.  Is there a relevant point in there somewhere?

Quote:


Instead people are sacrificing there lives to protect you in ways you wouldnt believe..





You are incorrect, sir.

Quote:


5. you might not be afraid of the buses exploding and planes falling but this is the kind of threat that gets thrown out there. You have to take it as credible, just ask Isreal.





I'm sure there are all kinds of threats thrown out there.  That a) doesn't make them credible, and b) doesn't mean that without George W. Bush as President that every single one of them would be automatically carried out to the extreme.


Quote:


6. I dont know what you are trying to say on that last one but, I have been to Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and any other shit hole you can think of and I can tell you without a doubt that this country is worth dying for.





That's exactly what I'm trying to say.  I take it you don't disagree with me.





1.Thanks, I guess. That is my job.
2.That is your opinion, my mom thinks I do a good job. Anyways blame David Kay for the bad intel but I will stop there on that.
3. was in response to Muslim extremist from Iraq coming to the US to commit terror. Maybe I was splitting hairs in my respone.
4. That does not deserve a response. But I will say, I can give you names of people who have made the sacrifice if you like and I have a nice scar on my leg to remind me of the sacrifice that takes place every day.
5. Correct and correct but if you dont look into every one of them than when one of them happens, than people like yourself will say we knew about it and did nothing.
6. I guess so, so why do you make a comment like the one you made about those who make sacrifices. I dont get that.

But this is a good debate...
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #140 on: January 10, 2006, 12:36:32 am »
The mere existence of government is proof that there is some balance between security and liberty. And while I don't buy the argument that every sacrifice in liberty called for by the president is required in order to purchase some security, I also think it obvious that liberty cannot be entirely unfettered from the restraints necessitated by security.

Even the Fourth Amendment impinges liberty. It indicates that reasonable searches and seizures are permissible and that warrants may issue with probable cause. If the government searches my person, house, papers or effects, my liberty has been violated, and I am not going to feel much less violated just because the search is reasonable.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #141 on: January 10, 2006, 12:43:04 am »
Quote:


2.That is your opinion, my mom thinks I do a good job. Anyways blame David Kay for the bad intel but I will stop there on that.





I'll take your word for Kay being the source of bad intel.

Quote:


3. was in response to Muslim extremist from Iraq coming to the US to commit terror. Maybe I was splitting hairs in my respone.





I don't think you're splitting hairs, I think you missed my point.  It wasn't about Iraq, per se, it was about the illogic of "if not for the Patriot Act, planes would be falling out of the sky and school buses would be exploding".

Quote:


4. That does not deserve a response. But I will say, I can give you names of people who have made the sacrifice if you like and I have a nice scar on my leg to remind me of the sacrifice that takes place every day.





And you'd still be wrong about what I know.

Quote:


5. Correct and correct but if you dont look into every one of them than when one of them happens, than people like yourself will say we knew about it and did nothing.





Don't lump me in with the fear mongers.

Quote:


6. I guess so, so why do you make a comment like the one you made about those who make sacrifices. I dont get that.





Huh?  I don't understand what this means at all.  I've made it clear that I think liberty and what our country stands for is worth dying for.  That's my whole point in this debate.  That it's not about making sure my sorry butt simply lives longer.  I'm not sure how you could misconstrue that.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #142 on: January 10, 2006, 12:43:51 am »
Quote:


Even the Fourth Amendment impinges liberty. It indicates that reasonable searches and seizures are permissible and that warrants may issue with probable cause. If the government searches my person, house, papers or effects, my liberty has been violated, and I am not going to feel much less violated just because the search is reasonable.





This is why US troops had so much trouble from the start in Iraq. They acted like a swat team at every residence because this is how they are trained. We lost alot of good will and good intelligence because we hurt their (Iraqi)sense of dignity that comes with being the man of the house. We are still paying for it today.

Kind of off the subject but so has this whole thing.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #143 on: January 10, 2006, 12:47:20 am »
I was responding to the "You are incorrect ,Sir" to sacrifices point, and I have know idea what you know. But,I know I have been to one to many funerals, And that is a sacrifice.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #144 on: January 10, 2006, 12:50:03 am »
Quote:

I was responding to the "You are incorrect ,Sir" to sacrifices point, and I have know idea what you know.




Then why did you comment on what I know?  That was what I was responding to.  Your comment that I don't know what sacrifices people have made.  You are incorrect.  I do know.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #145 on: January 10, 2006, 12:55:58 am »
I got you now. I thought you were saying that I was incorrect in people making sacrifices for all of US. Sorry, I am an idiot.

Interesting debate, most poeple are calling each other racist commies by now. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on those points but atleast you backed up your opinion.

And, hell no on Hillary...
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #146 on: January 10, 2006, 01:10:06 am »
Quote:

I got you now. I thought you were saying that I was incorrect in people making sacrifices for all of US. Sorry, I am an idiot.





No problemo.  I guess I should have said more than "you are incorrect".  

Quote:


Interesting debate, most poeple are calling each other racist commies by now. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on those points but atleast you backed up your opinion.





I like debates like this.  You have to be careful because people do get frustrated and it can degenerate into "commie bastard" pretty easily, but I must say we all have done a damn fine job of keeping it from such.  

Quote:


And, hell no on Hillary...





Well, I did say I was starting from the bottom of the barrel...
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #147 on: January 10, 2006, 09:45:03 am »
Quote:

Is listening to the President any worse than listening to the liberally biased media? Who do you think pulls more shit out of their asses, the President or CNN?



If you think the mainstream media has a liberal bias, you haven't been listening.  Only Olbermann on MSNBC offers a blatantly liberal view on TV.  The rest claim balance but are stacked with conservative pundits who follow the GOP talking points like a script.

The NY Times is the liberal newspaper of record.  They had the story on the domestic wiretapping program before the 2004 election.  They were going to run it, but did not solely due to a plea from the President.  Judith Miller - a Times columnist - was one of the more vocal proponents of the WMD program in Iraq.  She wrote article after article laying out the detail of the program.  She also went to jail for 4 months to protect her source in the Valeria Plame case.  Her source was Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby.

The only reason people think that the media has a liberal bias is because the right says it over and over and over and over.  And if you don't think that's a deliberate tactic, here's Bush in May of last year touting his disasterous and stil-born Social Security "reform":

"...in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."

This was the truth about the son-to-be-bankrupt system.  This based on a mathematical model that had the average age at death of 150, retirement still at 67 and extrapolated to the infinate plane.  Thankfully, on that one at least, the blatant money grab was too blatant for most people to swallow.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #148 on: January 10, 2006, 09:52:13 am »
Quote:

Who should he listen to?  Just curious.  Bush is the elected president and like him or hate him you're forced to listen to him.



Listen to him for sure.  Generally, I find that whatever he says about other people is what he's doing.  Same with laws he enacts:  Clear Skies initiative - relaxation in pollution controls on industry;  Clean Water - ditto; No Child Left Behind - due to failure to fund the program, schools forced cut extra-curricular and recreational activities to prepare for tests; Patriot Act - erosion of freedoms; Energy bill - no funding for alternative energy / tax break for oil companies; etc. etc. etc.

Quote:

Especially active duty military.



When was the last time Bush made a live speech in front of a random audiance?  He uses the military a lot because they can be told to show up and shut up.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Andyzipp

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #149 on: January 10, 2006, 10:26:29 am »
Quote:

You have to be careful because people do get frustrated and it can degenerate into "commie bastard" pretty easily, but I must say we all have done a damn fine job of keeping it from such.




I think everyone knows that you're a commie bastard.

strosrays

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #150 on: January 10, 2006, 10:47:32 am »
Going back through an re-reading this topic this A.M., more than anything it has reminded me of Col. Flagg.  Which makes me happy, and I just want to thank everyone who has participated here.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #151 on: January 10, 2006, 11:40:12 am »
Quote:

I personally am a fan of the President in spite of him being wrong on domestic spending, immigration, and laughing at his own jokes.  I am convinced that he is the best man for the job in terms of security.  This country has not been attacked since 9/11 in spite of attempts to do so.



Couple of points:

Your ending statement pre-supposes that there were no attempts to attack the United States before 9/11.  This is simply not true.  Clinton did have a limp response to the African Embassy and "Cole" bombings, but he was a lame duck president at the time.  His administration did, however, foil a number of attacks intended for targets in the homeland and he also captured, tried and convicted the people who attacked the WTC on his watch.

Bush has a horrible record on security.  Bush, despite being primed by the outgoing administration that bin Laden was going to occupy most of his time, took not a single briefing on terrorism before 9/11.  He ignored the inflammatorily titled daily briefing "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the US" in August.

He famously sat on his arse after being told of the attack on 9/11, but that's not half the story.  He was told of the first plane's strike before going into the classroom.  He decided to go ahead with the photo-op.  He was sitting listening to kids read when he was told that a second plane hit the second tower and that "the country is under attack".  Only then did he pick up the children's book and start flipping the pages.  For seven minutes.

Now, we were told in the run up to the Iraq invasion that Saddam had nukes and chemical weapons and was developing ways that could deliver them to the US mainland.  Europe, we were told, was already only 45 minutes away from death.  Given all this, seven minutes is a long time to sit in a total information blackout having been told that we're under attack.  Wouldn't you have some questions?  Who?  How?  Conventional?  Nuclear?  Chemical?

After the event, Bush opposed the formation of an independent 9/11 commission to investigate the security failings that allowed that attack.  Then, when it was forced on him, he obstructed it.  And he has since failed to implement the majority of its recommendations - he received a failing grade on this from the reports authors a month ago - over four years after the attacks.  No explanations why.

Fours years after 9/11, the Federal governments response to a catastrophe on home soil was a catastrophe in itself.  Did you know that there are over 6,500 people still missing following Hurricane Katrina?  We lost 3,000 innocent souls on 9/11, yet more than twice that number are unaccounted for still in the Gulf coast region.

Back in 2004, immediately following the Democratic National Convention, the administration made an announcement of a major victory in the war on terror - the Pakastani intelligence services had captured an senior al Qaeda operative.  As important was that they nabbeb him with his laptop intact, and the computer was chock full of names, contacts, plans etc.  Great!

Curiously, though, that information was months old.  The Pakistani government was particularly pissed off because al Qaeda wasn't aware that this man had been compromised.  He was, in fact, being used as a double agent to gather information on al Qaeda cells and their intentions.  One cell in particular was a group of locally-born Pakistanis in England.  They were getting very close on this one, but it all came to an abrupt end when the Bush administration made it's proud announcement.

London was attacked in the summer of '05.  The perpetrators were English-born young men of Pakistani decent.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #152 on: January 10, 2006, 11:42:56 am »
Quote:

The mere existence of government is proof that there is some balance between security and liberty. And while I don't buy the argument that every sacrifice in liberty called for by the president is required in order to purchase some security, I also think it obvious that liberty cannot be entirely unfettered from the restraints necessitated by security.

Even the Fourth Amendment impinges liberty. It indicates that reasonable searches and seizures are permissible and that warrants may issue with probable cause. If the government searches my person, house, papers or effects, my liberty has been violated, and I am not going to feel much less violated just because the search is reasonable.




What if you were someone with a profile that screams terrorist?  Like that baby who was not allowed to board a plane because he had the same name as someone on the no-fly list?

Or an 81-year old, retired University history professor in Arizona?  The DoHS has been reading his mail.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #153 on: January 10, 2006, 11:50:55 am »
Quote:

This is why US troops had so much trouble from the start in Iraq. They acted like a swat team at every residence because this is how they are trained. We lost alot of good will and good intelligence because we hurt their (Iraqi)sense of dignity that comes with being the man of the house. We are still paying for it today.

Kind of off the subject but so has this whole thing.




Nearly three years after the invasion, and security in Iraq is getting worse, not better.  US soldiers are dying and getting maimed in larger numbers, not smaller.  Iraqi citizens are dying and getting maimed in larger numbers, not smaller.  The country's infrastructure remains worse now that it ever was before the invasion.  Oil production has dropped to below pre-war levels, and by that I mean pre-World War II levels!

The Iraq war has been a disaster on almost every level except perhaps militarily.  Once again the US armed services have shown that they are second to none in their ability to take the fight to anyone and win.  However, once major combat operations ended, the services were left sitting around to be sitting ducks while the administration sat clueless as to what to do next.  They've been left stuck like that for nearly three years, with no end in sight.

And the elections?  The big winner were the Islamic fundamentalists who will have a majority in the new government.  Congratulations, George, you just successfully cloned Iran.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #154 on: January 10, 2006, 12:17:31 pm »
Quote:

...Back in 2004, immediately following the Democratic National Convention, the administration made an announcement of a major victory in the war on terror - the Pakastani intelligence services had captured an senior al Qaeda operative.  As important was that they nabbeb him with his laptop intact, and the computer was chock full of names, contacts, plans etc.  Great!

Curiously, though, that information was months old.  The Pakistani government was particularly pissed off because al Qaeda wasn't aware that this man had been compromised.  He was, in fact, being used as a double agent to gather information on al Qaeda cells and their intentions.  One cell in particular was a group of locally-born Pakistanis in England.  They were getting very close on this one, but it all came to an abrupt end when the Bush administration made it's proud announcement.

London was attacked in the summer of '05.  The perpetrators were English-born young men of Pakistani decent.





This incident, to me, illustrates just whose security this band of lovelies is concerned with.  As for the "liberal media", after the London bombings I waited for the two incidents to be connected.  I'm still waiting for these two obvious dots to be connected by a major news source.

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #155 on: January 10, 2006, 12:28:18 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

This is why US troops had so much trouble from the start in Iraq. They acted like a swat team at every residence because this is how they are trained. We lost alot of good will and good intelligence because we hurt their (Iraqi)sense of dignity that comes with being the man of the house. We are still paying for it today.

Kind of off the subject but so has this whole thing.




Nearly three years after the invasion, and security in Iraq is getting worse, not better.  US soldiers are dying and getting maimed in larger numbers, not smaller.  Iraqi citizens are dying and getting maimed in larger numbers, not smaller.  The country's infrastructure remains worse now that it ever was before the invasion.  Oil production has dropped to below pre-war levels, and by that I mean pre-World War II levels!

The Iraq war has been a disaster on almost every level except perhaps militarily.  Once again the US armed services have shown that they are second to none in their ability to take the fight to anyone and win.  However, once major combat operations ended, the services were left sitting around to be sitting ducks while the administration sat clueless as to what to do next.  They've been left stuck like that for nearly three years, with no end in sight.

And the elections?  The big winner were the Islamic fundamentalists who will have a majority in the new government.  Congratulations, George, you just successfully cloned Iran.





Ok... you sucked me back into this...

1)The fact that there are elections in the first place make it a success.  There is something like 90% participation in spite of the dangers of voting.

2)Iraqis are taking over their personal security.  The progress is slow, but it's happening.  Many of the deaths are Iraqi police/military recruits.  Yet they still keep signing up.  That is true bravery and desire for a better life for family/country.  To quote the great philosopher Hudson Hawk: "Many people believe that there are worse things than death, and that liberty and freedom are worth dying for."

3)If the Iraqis ELECT an Iranian style government, then they can live with the consequences.  FWIW I believe that the democratization of Iraq is destablizing the regimes in both Iran and Syria.

Ronald Regan was villified his entire presidency, but history has treated him very kindly.  The jury is still out on Bush, so we'll have to wait and see....My guess is that Bush will also get much credit years from now, but of course that is opinion.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #156 on: January 10, 2006, 12:28:50 pm »
Quote:

What if you were someone with a profile that screams terrorist?  Like that baby who was not allowed to board a plane because he had the same name as someone on the no-fly list?

Or an 81-year old, retired University history professor in Arizona?  The DoHS has been reading his mail.





That wasn't what I'm getting at. I'm not saying whether it's OK or not.  I get agitated every time I have to take off my shoes at the airport, so I'm certainly not cheering on the government to read my e-mail or anyone else's.

But what I'm saying is that every government is a balance between liberty and security.  I agree with Matt in preferring a government that errs on the side of liberty.  The vast majority of governments err on the side of security.  Perhaps the most popular argument in history made by tyrants is that they'll offer security at the price of liberty, when they often grant neither.

But the debate in this country is not simply about prioritizing security, as the president might put it, or prioritizing liberty, as his critics might respond.  The debate is about where to draw the line.  I am fairly certain that every person who has posted in this thread would draw the line at a point that would still infringe some liberty.

Even if you argue that the government should have obtained a warrant for wiretapping, you are still conceding that the government can listen in if it follows the right procedures.  I've read no one here pound his chest about the right not to have your bags searched before boarding an airplane.  Or stopping the government from holding a murder suspect prior to having been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

Some favor more liberty than others, but I don't think anyone can claim not to concede that some limitations on liberty should exist for the sake of security.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #157 on: January 10, 2006, 12:31:00 pm »
Quote:


I think everyone knows that you're a commie bastard.





Socialist, Andy, there's a huge difference.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

BudGirl

  • Contributor
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 17776
  • Brad Ausmus' Slave
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #158 on: January 10, 2006, 12:33:50 pm »
Quote:



I get agitated every time I have to take off my shoes at the airport,  





And be sure to take your screwdriver out of your pocket before you walk through the metal detectors.
''I just did an interview with someone I like more than you. I used a lot of big words on him. I don't have anything left for you.'' --Brad Ausmus

Well behaved women rarely make history.

Ty in Tampa

  • Contributor
  • Pope
  • Posts: 9111
  • You just gotta keep livin' man, L-I-V-I-N
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #159 on: January 10, 2006, 12:36:21 pm »
"I have no home. I'm the wind."
"You want me broken. You want me dead.
I'm living rent-free in the back of your head."

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #160 on: January 10, 2006, 12:37:46 pm »
Quote:

Ronald Regan was villified his entire presidency, but history has treated him very kindly.  The jury is still out on Bush, so we'll have to wait and see....My guess is that Bush will also get much credit years from now, but of course that is opinion.




The difference between Reagan and Bush is that Bush is absolutely terrible about expressing the justification for his policies.  He also has an instinct toward not explaining himself and relying on everyone simply to trust him to do what's right because he's the president.

I used to think that his inarticulateness and incurious nature were only mild disabilities as president, but they have become much more serious as the situation he is in has worsened.  A major reason the administration shies away from speaking publicly and spontaneously about what's going on is because they are afraid to put Bush in front of the microphones too often.

That's a problem, because as commander-in-chief, he has a duty to the troops to rally public morale on their behalf.  He has not done so adequately.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #161 on: January 10, 2006, 12:37:51 pm »
Quote:

3)If the Iraqis ELECT an Iranian style government, then they can live with the consequences.  FWIW I believe that the democratization of Iraq is destablizing the regimes in both Iran and Syria.




41 didn't go to Baghdad because of this scenario.  Contrary to popular misconception, once he was neutralized militarily, the Kuwaitis and Saudis LOVED having Saddam in place.  Why?  Because he served as a buffer between them and the real threat - Iran.

We are all going to live with the consequences if Iran controls (directly or by proxy) Iraq.  Destabilizing the regimes?  There is nothing more destabilizing than the current leadership in Iran, which makes Saddam look lucid by comparison.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #162 on: January 10, 2006, 12:40:28 pm »
Quote:

Quote:



I get agitated every time I have to take off my shoes at the airport,  





And be sure to take your screwdriver out of your pocket before you walk through the metal detectors.





If the terrorists can take away our OJ and vodka, they win.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #163 on: January 10, 2006, 12:42:10 pm »
Quote:

Congratulations, George, you just successfully cloned Iran.




Really?  I didn't know you could see into the future.

Ty in Tampa

  • Contributor
  • Pope
  • Posts: 9111
  • You just gotta keep livin' man, L-I-V-I-N
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #164 on: January 10, 2006, 12:43:58 pm »
I want to know who makes pocket-sized cocktails.
"You want me broken. You want me dead.
I'm living rent-free in the back of your head."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #165 on: January 10, 2006, 12:50:11 pm »
Quote:

This incident, to me, illustrates just whose security this band of lovelies is concerned with.  As for the "liberal media", after the London bombings I waited for the two incidents to be connected.  I'm still waiting for these two obvious dots to be connected by a major news source.



It's been reported piecemeal by the mainstream press (ABC reports part of it here) but it's only really the bloggers who have drawn the dotted line.  The arrests mentioned in the ABC story were botched because they had to be rushed after Khan was outed by the Bush administration.  With more time, they may have got 'em all and foiled the attacks.

It's things like this that mean I get pissed off when Bush says he's made us safer.  Cronyism in FEMA contributed to the death toll after Katrina.  More people would've survived with a better response from that agency.  Now we are hearing that cronyism at the Mine Health and Safety Administration meant that the horrendous safety record of the Sago mine in West Virginia went unpunished for years...
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #166 on: January 10, 2006, 01:01:36 pm »
Quote:

Ok... you sucked me back into this...

1)The fact that there are elections in the first place make it a success.  There is something like 90% participation in spite of the dangers of voting.

2)Iraqis are taking over their personal security.  The progress is slow, but it's happening.  Many of the deaths are Iraqi police/military recruits.  Yet they still keep signing up.  That is true bravery and desire for a better life for family/country.  To quote the great philosopher Hudson Hawk: "Many people believe that there are worse things than death, and that liberty and freedom are worth dying for."

3)If the Iraqis ELECT an Iranian style government, then they can live with the consequences.  FWIW I believe that the democratization of Iraq is destablizing the regimes in both Iran and Syria.

Ronald Regan was villified his entire presidency, but history has treated him very kindly.  The jury is still out on Bush, so we'll have to wait and see....My guess is that Bush will also get much credit years from now, but of course that is opinion.




1)  Ends don't justify these means.  The war was never about Iraqi freedom; it was about preventing Saddam Hussein from attacking the United States with his weapons of mass destruction.  This is yet another example, perhaps the mother of all examples, where the Bush administration changed the debate from what is was about to what they want it to be about.  None of which involves the truth.

2)  Had the President made a heartfelt plea regarding the plight of the oppressed Iraqi people, instead of scaring the shit out of us with tall tales of dirty bombs, the general public would've said "And...?"

3)  How is creating a Iran-friendly government in Iraq where there was previously an Iran-hating regime, destabilising to Iran?  Plus, I believe that the unilateral invasion of Iraq has played into the hands of the extremist Middle Eastern governments who can all point at Iraq and say "See!!!?"

I believe that George W. Bush will go down as the worst President in history.  And as for Reagan, you and I clearly read differnt takes on his presidency.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #167 on: January 10, 2006, 01:09:48 pm »
Quote:

That wasn't what I'm getting at. I'm not saying whether it's OK or not.  I get agitated every time I have to take off my shoes at the airport, so I'm certainly not cheering on the government to read my e-mail or anyone else's.

But what I'm saying is that every government is a balance between liberty and security.  I agree with Matt in preferring a government that errs on the side of liberty.  The vast majority of governments err on the side of security.  Perhaps the most popular argument in history made by tyrants is that they'll offer security at the price of liberty, when they often grant neither.

But the debate in this country is not simply about prioritizing security, as the president might put it, or prioritizing liberty, as his critics might respond.  The debate is about where to draw the line.  I am fairly certain that every person who has posted in this thread would draw the line at a point that would still infringe some liberty.

Even if you argue that the government should have obtained a warrant for wiretapping, you are still conceding that the government can listen in if it follows the right procedures.  I've read no one here pound his chest about the right not to have your bags searched before boarding an airplane.  Or stopping the government from holding a murder suspect prior to having been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

Some favor more liberty than others, but I don't think anyone can claim not to concede that some limitations on liberty should exist for the sake of security.




I'm a fiscal conservative, social liberal and a libertarian (that means I'd legalise drugs and prostitution, but use the tax revenue generated to pay for national health insurance).  Hence, my line on security vs. liberty is going to further skewed towards liberty than many.  But I don't believe that's the issue here.

Right now, the law provides checks and balances on government as regards what they can do to citizens.  Instead of changing those checks and balances, this administration has simply ignored them.  If it's important to read my e-mails then the governemnt should get a court order or change the law so that they don't have to.  They did neither, they just said "fuck it" and started reading.

That's not government of the people, by the people, for the people.  That government of the people, by the government, for the government.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #168 on: January 10, 2006, 01:29:40 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Congratulations, George, you just successfully cloned Iran.




Really?  I didn't know you could see into the future.



It's not the future, it's now.  The vast majority of votes in the election went to Islamic fundamentalist candidates who ran on an openly Islamic fundamentalist ticket.

Why do you think that we get to hear lots about the fact that the elections happened, and nothing about who actually won.

Edit:  Here's some commentary on the latest Iraqi elections.
Link.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #169 on: January 10, 2006, 01:38:32 pm »
Quote:

I'm a fiscal conservative, social liberal and a libertarian (that means I'd legalise drugs and prostitution, but use the tax revenue generated to pay for national health insurance).  Hence, my line on security vs. liberty is going to further skewed towards liberty than many.  But I don't believe that's the issue here.




I wouldn't read this as so skewed toward liberty.  You're saying that an individual should have the freedom to buy sex and drugs but must submit to having the government confiscate his income or wealth and to tell him what doctor he must visit.  Is the freedom of a hooker and a john to contract privately that much more vital than the freedom of a doctor and patient to contract privately?  Or the freedom of an individual to contract privately for health insurance without being forced to procure it from the government?

Quote:

Right now, the law provides checks and balances on government as regards what they can do to citizens.  Instead of changing those checks and balances, this administration has simply ignored them.  If it's important to read my e-mails then the governemnt should get a court order or change the law so that they don't have to.  They did neither, they just said "fuck it" and started reading.




But the judiciary, which is part of that system of checks and balances, has held, whether we like it or not, that the executive's power extends to such searches.  Re-quoting from yesterday:

"The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information.  It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it.  We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

That case involved electronic surveillance, not physical searches.  And the only place the courts drew the line was when the purpose of the searches shifted from foreign intellgence to criminal prosection. Truong was decided before this president was even thinking about running for office, so what you are blaming him for is doing something that another branch of government, the branch charged with interpreting the law, had said, 21 years before this president took an oath of office, that he was constitutionally permitted to do.

Quote:

That's not government of the people, by the people, for the people.  That government of the people, by the government, for the government.




Disappointing though it may be, it was an elected president, acting consistent with precedent rendered by judges appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, over which elected legislators have discretion to exercise their oversight function to review.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #170 on: January 10, 2006, 01:40:45 pm »
Quote:

It's not the future, it's now.  The vast majority of votes in the election went to Islamic fundamentalist candidates who ran on an openly Islamic fundamentalist ticket.

Why do you think that we get to hear lots about the fact that the elections happened, and nothing about who actually won.





It takes more than the results of election to turn Iraq into Iran.  If it results in the equivalent of the Mullahs running the country, then you will be correct.  Until then, you're speculating, but disguising your speculation as accomplished fact.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #171 on: January 10, 2006, 01:45:55 pm »
Quote:

Disappointing though it may be, it was an elected president, acting consistent with precedent rendered by judges appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, over which elected legislators have discretion to exercise their oversight function to review.




Yes he was legally elected.  But an elected tyrant is no less a tyrant than one who gained power by force.  This is a simply a tyranny of the majority.  That's the reason we have these Constitutional rights in the first place, to protect against that.  When that elected leader circumvents those rights, he's simply become a dictator, plain and simple.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #172 on: January 10, 2006, 01:49:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I'm a fiscal conservative, social liberal and a libertarian (that means I'd legalise drugs and prostitution, but use the tax revenue generated to pay for national health insurance).  Hence, my line on security vs. liberty is going to further skewed towards liberty than many.  But I don't believe that's the issue here.




I wouldn't read this as so skewed toward liberty.  You're saying that an individual should have the freedom to buy sex and drugs but must submit to having the government confiscate his income or wealth and to tell him what doctor he must visit.  Is the freedom of a hooker and a john to contract privately that much more vital than the freedom of a doctor and patient to contract privately?  Or the freedom of an individual to contract privately for health insurance without being forced to procure it from the government?

Quote:

Right now, the law provides checks and balances on government as regards what they can do to citizens.  Instead of changing those checks and balances, this administration has simply ignored them.  If it's important to read my e-mails then the governemnt should get a court order or change the law so that they don't have to.  They did neither, they just said "fuck it" and started reading.




But the judiciary, which is part of that system of checks and balances, has held, whether we like it or not, that the executive's power extends to such searches.  Re-quoting from yesterday:

"The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information.  It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it.  We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

That case involved electronic surveillance, not physical searches.  And the only place the courts drew the line was when the purpose of the searches shifted from foreign intellgence to criminal prosection. Truong was decided before this president was even thinking about running for office, so what you are blaming him for is doing something that another branch of government, the branch charged with interpreting the law, had said, 21 years before this president took an oath of office, that he was constitutionally permitted to do.

Quote:

That's not government of the people, by the people, for the people.  That government of the people, by the government, for the government.




Disappointing though it may be, it was an elected president, acting consistent with precedent rendered by judges appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, over which elected legislators have discretion to exercise their oversight function to review.




Not an expert on this one, but I have seen it pointed out that the Troung decision was before the NISA was passed.  And that there is a provision for warrantless searches within that act, however a court order must be obtained within 15 days.  Moreover, neither the Troung decision nor NISA apply to domestic surveillance.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #173 on: January 10, 2006, 01:52:56 pm »
Quote:

Yes he was legally elected.  But an elected tyrant is no less a tyrant than one who gained power by force.  This is a simply a tyranny of the majority.  That's the reason we have these Constitutional rights in the first place, to protect against that.  When that elected leader circumvents those rights, he's simply become a dictator, plain and simple.




This was not a statement that he is right just because he was elected.  The president has to follow the law, no matter how many votes he gets.  But the FISA review court has held that the law is that he can conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence, and FISA did nothing to impede that inherent constitutional power.  He was acting consistent with what the judiciary has ruled, rightly or wrongly, and Congress has the discretion (but not the obligation) to exercise oversight.

So maybe they're all tyrants.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #174 on: January 10, 2006, 01:56:15 pm »
Quote:

I wouldn't read this as so skewed toward liberty.  You're saying that an individual should have the freedom to buy sex and drugs but must submit to having the government confiscate his income or wealth and to tell him what doctor he must visit.  Is the freedom of a hooker and a john to contract privately that much more vital than the freedom of a doctor and patient to contract privately?  Or the freedom of an individual to contract privately for health insurance without being forced to procure it from the government?



You are confusing national health insurance with a nationalised health service.  Two very different things.

Quote:

But the judiciary, which is part of that system of checks and balances, has held, whether we like it or not, that the executive's power extends to such searches.  Re-quoting from yesterday:

"The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information.  It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it.  We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

That case involved electronic surveillance, not physical searches.  And the only place the courts drew the line was when the purpose of the searches shifted from foreign intellgence to criminal prosection. Truong was decided before this president was even thinking about running for office, so what you are blaming him for is doing something that another branch of government, the branch charged with interpreting the law, had said, 21 years before this president took an oath of office, that he was constitutionally permitted to do.




Electronic surveillance is a broad brush.  Wiretapping is one, very specific part of such, and is treated differently to other searches or surveillance, electronic or otherwise.  There would be no debate on this if the case you cite applied - the administration would point to it and move on.  Instead, they say "trust me" and refuse to answer any further questions on the topic.

Quote:

Disappointing though it may be, it was an elected president, acting consistent with precedent rendered by judges appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, over which elected legislators have discretion to exercise their oversight function to review.



Well, I do not subscribe to the theory that George W. Bush has ever been elected President.  But that's a whole nother lifetime of debate.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Ty in Tampa

  • Contributor
  • Pope
  • Posts: 9111
  • You just gotta keep livin' man, L-I-V-I-N
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #175 on: January 10, 2006, 01:56:53 pm »
So maybe they're all tyrants.

You're stating fact, but disguising fact as speculation.
"You want me broken. You want me dead.
I'm living rent-free in the back of your head."

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #176 on: January 10, 2006, 02:00:32 pm »
Quote:

1)  Ends don't justify these means.  The war was never about Iraqi freedom; it was about preventing Saddam Hussein from attacking the United States with his weapons of mass destruction.  This is yet another example, perhaps the mother of all examples, where the Bush administration changed the debate from what is was about to what they want it to be about.  None of which involves the truth.




No, they don't.  However, it became about stabilizing Iraq after deposing Saddam Hussein's regime because to leave immediately following would have led to even greater chaos.  I'm not sure if I'm imagining this but I'm fairly certain Bush has stated repeatedly that it is his opinion/belief that a representative gov't is a stable gov't.  

Quote:

2)  Had the President made a heartfelt plea regarding the plight of the oppressed Iraqi people, instead of scaring the shit out of us with tall tales of dirty bombs, the general public would've said "And...?"



Well, that sounds like a good leader, who realizes what motivates his people and will spur action.  What do you refer to as tall tails?  I believe every major nation was in agreement that Iraq had WMD and was pursuing even more dangerous levels of WMD.  What was learned after the fact should not be treated as common knowledge prior to the ensuing events.  

Quote:

3)  How is creating a Iran-friendly government in Iraq where there was previously an Iran-hating regime, destabilising to Iran?  Plus, I believe that the unilateral invasion of Iraq has played into the hands of the extremist Middle Eastern governments who can all point at Iraq and say "See!!!?"




Whether that proves to be true or not is more than unclear, it's not necesssarily probable.  There is still a great deal of animosity between Iraqi's and Iranian's over the Iranian's failure to assist Iraqi shi'ites.  The ties to Iran have been established as a connection to the insurgents, not the dominant Shi'ite groups in Iraq.  In all fairness, Iran has as much to fear from Iraq's democracy as we do from Iran's influence in Iraq.  How long before Iranians demand all candidates with substantial support receive fair treatment in the polls?  There are, to my understanding, far more moderate to secular interests in Iraq and Iran than is reported in the media (I too have friends in Iraq).  And just as extremists can point to the U.S. activity in Iraq and say "See, they just want our oil and to occupy our lands."  We can turn around and say, "See, we finally stood by our claim to being the leader of the free world and champion of democracy.  We have given the Iraqi people a voice."  The fact that this voice may not fall in line with our own only further supports that we are not imposing our will on a foreign nation.  Otherwise, we'd just be playing politics with another nations sovereignty. What leaves me dumbfounded is individuals like Wesley Clark who assert we need greater forces in Iraq and in the same breath says we can't give the appearance that we are an occupying force.  Those two statements cannot co-exist without acknowledging the signficance of the conflict they create.  

Quote:

I believe that George W. Bush will go down as the worst President in history.  And as for Reagan, you and I clearly read differnt takes on his presidency.




We are all entitled to our own opinions.  Just don't dismiss those of us who disagree with you as uninformed, uneducated, or un-intelligent. As long as that step isn't taken, I think there's room for quite a bit of sharing of ideas.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #177 on: January 10, 2006, 02:00:58 pm »
Quote:

It takes more than the results of election to turn Iraq into Iran.  If it results in the equivalent of the Mullahs running the country, then you will be correct.  Until then, you're speculating, but disguising your speculation as accomplished fact.



Point taken.  I did edit my original post to include this link to an article that discusses the probable fallout from the results.  Experts more informed than me are saying things like "...rifts separating Iraqis along sectarian and ethnic faultlines seem wider than ever; the country seems to be inching ever closer to the precipice of disintegration."
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #178 on: January 10, 2006, 02:05:20 pm »
Quote:


This was not a statement that he is right just because he was elected.  





Well my comment wasn't directed at you, per se, more at those who think that it's OK for the President to circumvent individual rights because it makes a majority of Americans feel safer.  

Quote:


The president has to follow the law, no matter how many votes he gets.  But the FISA review court has held that the law is that he can conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence, and FISA did nothing to impede that inherent constitutional power.  He was acting consistent with what the judiciary has ruled, rightly or wrongly, and Congress has the discretion (but not the obligation) to exercise oversight.





And as I've said, the law should end when it conflicts with inherent rights of liberty.  I know that's a difficult line to draw, but laws are there to protect individual liberty, not to define it.  We have freedom of speech, not because it's granted to us by law, but because it's an inherent right of humanity.  When the law interferes with liberty, it's time for the law to go.  

Quote:


So maybe they're all tyrants.





I think when all three branches of the government are contolled by the same group of ideologists, then the temptation to be tyrannical is overwhelming.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #179 on: January 10, 2006, 02:06:23 pm »
Quote:

Not an expert on this one, but I have seen it pointed out that the Troung decision was before the NISA was passed.  And that there is a provision for warrantless searches within that act, however a court order must be obtained within 15 days.  Moreover, neither the Troung decision nor NISA apply to domestic surveillance.




You are correct about the timing of Truong and FISA.  But the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review's 2002 decision, In re Sealed Case, rendered well after FISA and citing Truong, stated that FISA could not have limited an inherent power of the president to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence searches.

I was under the impression that these cases dealt with domestic intercepts intended to yield foreign intelligence.  It has been well established by the Supreme Court that gathering intelligence regarding domestic subversion does require a warrant, not that such formalities concerned J. Edgar Hoover or Bobby Kenendy.

The courts will almost certainly have much more to say about this in the next two years.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #180 on: January 10, 2006, 02:07:29 pm »
Quote:

So maybe they're all tyrants.

You're stating fact, but disguising fact as speculation.





Touche.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #181 on: January 10, 2006, 02:07:46 pm »
Quote:


Well, I do not subscribe to the theory that George W. Bush has ever been elected President.  But that's a whole nother lifetime of debate.





As much as I dislike Bush, I don't see how you can reasonably argue that he was not elected.  At least not without some blackhelicopterish cospiracy theories.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #182 on: January 10, 2006, 02:10:58 pm »
Quote:

...  I believe every major nation was in agreement that Iraq had WMD and was pursuing even more dangerous levels of WMD.  What was learned after the fact should not be treated as common knowledge prior to the ensuing events....




I don't believe this was true.  Certainly the UN weapons inspector didnt think they had WMD, every public statement of evidence that the administration put forth has shown to be incorrect and that the administration knew the statements (Niger yellow cake, tubes, etc,) to be false when they made them. Further Wolfowitz has said that the WMD justification was an expedient, a "bureaucratic compromise" in order to more simply make the case for the invasion to Congress and the public.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #183 on: January 10, 2006, 02:17:03 pm »
Quote:

You are confusing national health insurance with a nationalised health service.  Two very different things.




Basically a backstop for those who don't otherwise have it?  I might be able to live with that.  I think the system of everyone getting health insurance from his employer screws it all up, since it means you lose your insurance with your job and makes it more expensive for individuals to procure, since the market is mainly directed toward companies.  We should be buying it individually, like car or home insurance, with vouchers making up the difference for those who can't afford it.

Quote:

Electronic surveillance is a broad brush.  Wiretapping is one, very specific part of such, and is treated differently to other searches or surveillance, electronic or otherwise.  There would be no debate on this if the case you cite applied - the administration would point to it and move on.  Instead, they say "trust me" and refuse to answer any further questions on the topic.




I grasp that wiretaps have been treated differently, but I think the reason this area of law is murky and this cite doesn't resolve the issue is precisely because there is debate over whether the foreign-intelligence-gathering exception also applies to searches traditionally requiring a warrant, such as wiretaps.  You have two judicial precepts at odds here.

The judiciary grants significant deference to the executive in foreign affairs, which is why the Border Patrol can stop your car 10 miles from the border for the "national security" purpose of checking for illegals, but local police cannot operate highway checkpoints for the "law enforcement" purpose of checking for drugs.  The courts will end up deciding this.

Quote:

Well, I do not subscribe to the theory that George W. Bush has ever been elected President.  But that's a whole nother lifetime of debate.




Are you any relation to George Galloway?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #184 on: January 10, 2006, 02:28:34 pm »
Quote:

Well my comment wasn't directed at you, per se, more at those who think that it's OK for the President to circumvent individual rights because it makes a majority of Americans feel safer.




I agree with you.  If you need more latitude to prevent future attacks, legislate it, but don't do it ultra vires.

I have long thought that a comprehensive statute dealing with the treatment of various classes of detainees and procedures (POWs vs. unlawful combatants, citizens vs. non-citizens, captured on U.S. soil vs. foreign soil, etc.), plus detailed treatment of intelligence gathering, etc., would have cleared up many of these issues, would have probably gotten congressional approval with large majorities, and would have been upheld by the courts.

Various people would have found various aspects objectionable, but at least it would all be written down and vetted publicly for everyone to debate and decide.  This piecemeal, make-it-up-as-you-go-approach is doing nobody any good and has been perhaps most harmful to the administration itself.

Quote:

And as I've said, the law should end when it conflicts with inherent rights of liberty.  I know that's a difficult line to draw, but laws are there to protect individual liberty, not to define it.  We have freedom of speech, not because it's granted to us by law, but because it's an inherent right of humanity.  When the law interferes with liberty, it's time for the law to go.




Again, I agree with this (natural law) approach.  You possess your rights before the government ever comes along.  You limit them a bit to form a government, but the government can only do the things you've specifically assigned it to do, and anything else, especially when it conflicts with your inherent freedoms, is verbotten.

Quote:

I think when all three branches of the government are contolled by the same group of ideologists, then the temptation to be tyrannical is overwhelming.




I'm not one of the liberatarian stripe that believes both major parties are more or less the same, but I think members of the political class on both sides of the aisle have the same tendency to jump at what they think government can do without first considering whether such powers are enumerated and whether they are inconsistent with our freedoms.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #185 on: January 10, 2006, 02:33:12 pm »
Quote:

I don't believe this was true.  Certainly the UN weapons inspector didnt think they had WMD, every public statement of evidence that the administration put forth has shown to be incorrect and that the administration knew the statements (Niger yellow cake, tubes, etc,) to be false when they made them. Further Wolfowitz has said that the WMD justification was an expedient, a "bureaucratic compromise" in order to more simply make the case for the invasion to Congress and the public.




If Hans Blix didn't believe Iraq had WMD, then what did he think he was looking for?  And what happened to the documented weapons stores from 1998, before Saddam threw out the inspectors at that time?  Also, British intelligence has stood behind its finding that Iraq tried, unsuccessfully, to acquire uranium from Niger.

Most important, what good is the Security Council if it is going to pass resolutions that it is unwilling to enforce?  Why not disband the thing if that is how it is going to operate?

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #186 on: January 10, 2006, 02:34:15 pm »
Quote:

Basically a backstop for those who don't otherwise have it?  I might be able to live with that.  I think the system of everyone getting health insurance from his employer screws it all up, since it means you lose your insurance with your job and makes it more expensive for individuals to procure, since the market is mainly directed toward companies.  We should be buying it individually, like car or home insurance, with vouchers making up the difference for those who can't afford it.




While I personally agree with your suggestion, I know numerous folks who would not.  The primary reason being, whatever the cause, they have serious medical problems which require frequent and expensive treatments.  This established medical record would equate to someone with numerous cited moving violations and accidents attempting to obtain auto insurance.  

What potentially happens is, this person receives a premium quote, determines they cannot personally afford insurance , and opts not to purchase it.  However, in not having insurance, the backstop would then provide for them.  The gov't, like Insurance companies, is not about to absorb this cost without compensating by increasing revenue.  So, in turn, this added cost is transferred to the rest of us, anyway, via higher taxes or higher premiums, depending on who provides the backstop!  

The irony of it is, that if you are healthy and live a healthy lifestyle, there is little benefit as some other unfortunate soul, or someone with just really poor decision making skills (diet, hygiene, etc..), will need your help to cover their expense, one way or another.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
The Truong Case
« Reply #187 on: January 10, 2006, 02:43:24 pm »
Quote:

This was not a statement that he is right just because he was elected.  The president has to follow the law, no matter how many votes he gets.  But the FISA review court has held that the law is that he can conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence, and FISA did nothing to impede that inherent constitutional power.  He was acting consistent with what the judiciary has ruled, rightly or wrongly, and Congress has the discretion (but not the obligation) to exercise oversight.

So maybe they're all tyrants.




The argument that Truong allows wiretapping of US citizens is supported by a partial statement from a FISA appeals court decision, carefully selected and edited to completely reverse its implications with regard to domestic surveillance.

The quote used to make the claim is this:
"All the...courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence...We take for granted that the president does have that authority."

It's actually snippets of two sentences.  What they said in full (with omitted words emboldened) is as follows:

"The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it.  We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President?s constitutional power. The question before us is the reverse, does FISA amplify the President?s power by providing a mechanism that at least approaches a classic warrant and which therefore supports the government?s contention that FISA searches are constitutionally reasonable."

The case wasn't about whether searches or surveillance outside of FISA are allowed, but whether a specific FISA order was legally given.  It's a complete red herring.

You can read the entire decision here.  but you might find it easier to simply read the two sentences that immediately preceed the one above:

"We reiterate that Truong dealt with a pre-FISA surveillance based on the President?s constitutional responsibility to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States. 629 F.2d at 914. Although Truong suggested the line it drew was a constitutional minimum that would apply to a FISA surveillance, see id. at 914 n.4, it had no occasion to consider the application of the statute carefully."
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #188 on: January 10, 2006, 02:58:04 pm »
Quote:

As much as I dislike Bush, I don't see how you can reasonably argue that he was not elected.  At least not without some blackhelicopterish cospiracy theories.



2000 is simple.  Florida's Secretary of State at the time (also the co-chairman of Bush's 2000 election campaign committee), Katherine Harris, pronouned Bush the winner before the initial counting was complete and when it was still too close to call.  Gore was then fighting an uphill battle in the courts to reverse a Bush win that never was; a battle that was ended when the Supreme Court voted along partisan lines to end the counting.  Multiple recount scenarios in Florida showed that Gore won in 2000 in the vast majority of counting methodologies.

In 2005, the people of the Ukraine rose up and overthrew the government claiming election victory because of a 5% discrepancy between the exit polls and the election results.  Turns out the exit polls - typically an accurate measure here in the US too - were correct.  In the 2004 US Presidential election, the discrepancy between the exit polls and the election results was wider than 5% nationally, and significantly wider in swing states.  Circumstantial evidence to be sure, but when coupled with the enormous body of irregularities and illegal activities documented around the country in the run up to and on election day, it's certainly cause for concern.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: The Truong Case
« Reply #189 on: January 10, 2006, 03:02:08 pm »
Quote:

The case wasn't about whether searches or surveillance outside of FISA are allowed, but whether a specific FISA order was legally given.  It's a complete red herring.




How is it a red herring?  It may be dicta, but what it is stating is true: the Truong court did find inherent constitutional authority for the president to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence searches, and as a statutory-constitutional matter, FISA could not restrict the president's inherent constitutional authority, since a statute cannot rewrite the Constitution.  As you stated before, were these cases precisely on point, there would be no debate.  But it does not make them meaningless just because they are not precisely on point.  It will make them more easily distingsuishable, once a judge so predisposed gets the case in front of him.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #190 on: January 10, 2006, 03:03:10 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I don't believe this was true.  Certainly the UN weapons inspector didnt think they had WMD, every public statement of evidence that the administration put forth has shown to be incorrect and that the administration knew the statements (Niger yellow cake, tubes, etc,) to be false when they made them. Further Wolfowitz has said that the WMD justification was an expedient, a "bureaucratic compromise" in order to more simply make the case for the invasion to Congress and the public.




If Hans Blix didn't believe Iraq had WMD, then what did he think he was looking for?  And what happened to the documented weapons stores from 1998, before Saddam threw out the inspectors at that time?  Also, British intelligence has stood behind its finding that Iraq tried, unsuccessfully, to acquire uranium from Niger.

Most important, what good is the Security Council if it is going to pass resolutions that it is unwilling to enforce?  Why not disband the thing if that is how it is going to operate?





Oh you'd like that wouldn't you?... There was never a UN resolution authorizing force.  Blix was in Iraq because the UN (ie the US) tasked him to conduct the investigation.  He's said that he didnt find a scrap of evidence of a current program.  Also the IAEA and the CIA knew the Niger story was false, Tenet admitted that the "16 words" were known to be untrue before they were included in the SotU speech. Not to mention the Italians knew the Niger documents were forgeries in about 2 seconds.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #191 on: January 10, 2006, 03:55:52 pm »
Quote:

While I personally agree with your suggestion, I know numerous folks who would not.  The primary reason being, whatever the cause, they have serious medical problems which require frequent and expensive treatments.  This established medical record would equate to someone with numerous cited moving violations and accidents attempting to obtain auto insurance.  

What potentially happens is, this person receives a premium quote, determines they cannot personally afford insurance , and opts not to purchase it.  However, in not having insurance, the backstop would then provide for them.  The gov't, like Insurance companies, is not about to absorb this cost without compensating by increasing revenue.  So, in turn, this added cost is transferred to the rest of us, anyway, via higher taxes or higher premiums, depending on who provides the backstop!  

The irony of it is, that if you are healthy and live a healthy lifestyle, there is little benefit as some other unfortunate soul, or someone with just really poor decision making skills (diet, hygiene, etc..), will need your help to cover their expense, one way or another.




When an uninsured person gets really sick and goes to hospital for treatment, who do think picks up the bill?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #192 on: January 10, 2006, 04:03:07 pm »
Quote:

Multiple recount scenarios in Florida showed that Gore won in 2000 in the vast majority of counting methodologies.




That's not exactly true:

 The Link

I just find it laughable that, in the year 2000, in the most technologically advanced country on the planet, we could still be able to say "well if you count it this way..."
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: The Truong Case
« Reply #193 on: January 10, 2006, 04:04:25 pm »
Quote:

How is it a red herring?  It may be dicta, but what it is stating is true: the Truong court did find inherent constitutional authority for the president to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence searches, and as a statutory-constitutional matter, FISA could not restrict the president's inherent constitutional authority, since a statute cannot rewrite the Constitution.  As you stated before, were these cases precisely on point, there would be no debate.  But it does not make them meaningless just because they are not precisely on point.  It will make them more easily distingsuishable, once a judge so predisposed gets the case in front of him.



Your premise is wrong.  The decision cited is the appeal of a case in which a FISA court order was issued.  The appeal was regarding conditions applied by the FISA court on a specific court order and whether they were appropriate, The appeals court ruled that the conditions added to the warrant issued were not appropriate.

Thus Truong, when cited as justification for warrantless domestic wiretapping, is a complete red herring.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #194 on: January 10, 2006, 04:10:50 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Multiple recount scenarios in Florida showed that Gore won in 2000 in the vast majority of counting methodologies.




That's not exactly true:

 The Link

I just find it laughable that, in the year 2000, in the most technologically advanced country on the planet, we could still be able to say "well if you count it this way..."




Thanks for the correction.

The UK, with a population of over 60 million, counts all its votes, by hand, in one evening.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #195 on: January 10, 2006, 04:16:57 pm »
Quote:

I don't believe this was true.  Certainly the UN weapons inspector didnt think they had WMD, every public statement of evidence that the administration put forth has shown to be incorrect and that the administration knew the statements (Niger yellow cake, tubes, etc,) to be false when they made them. Further Wolfowitz has said that the WMD justification was an expedient, a "bureaucratic compromise" in order to more simply make the case for the invasion to Congress and the public




Quote:

Oh you'd like that wouldn't you?... There was never a UN resolution authorizing force.  Blix was in Iraq because the UN (ie the US) tasked him to conduct the investigation.  He's said that he didnt find a scrap of evidence of a current program.  Also the IAEA and the CIA knew the Niger story was false, Tenet admitted that the "16 words" were known to be untrue before they were included in the SotU speech. Not to mention the Italians knew the Niger documents were forgeries in about 2 seconds.




The UN seems to disagree with you.

Resolution 1441 (2002)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 4644th meeting, on
8 November 2002

Recognizing the threat Iraq?s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August
1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all
other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,
Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly obstructed immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), failed to cooperate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and IAEA weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), and ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA in 1998,

edit: emphasis mine.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #196 on: January 10, 2006, 04:24:34 pm »
Quote:

The UK, with a population of over 60 million, counts all its votes, by hand, in one evening.




Hell, Carlos Beltran built the entire Parlimentary system of rule in one evening.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #197 on: January 10, 2006, 04:29:00 pm »
Quote:

The UN seems to disagree with you.

Resolution 1441 (2002)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 4644th meeting, on
8 November 2002

Recognizing the threat Iraq?s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August
1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all
other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,
Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly obstructed immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), failed to cooperate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and IAEA weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), and ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA in 1998,

edit: emphasis mine.




Don't forget that the UN was being told by the US that they had evidence, hard concrete evidence, of Iraq's WMD stockpiles.  Not programs.  Not program related activities.  Stockpiles.  They passed these resolutions on the basis that the US had proof that Saddam was lying about his WMDs.  This culminated in Colin Powell's now cringeworthy presentation in Feb 2003.

Turns out that the UN inspection and sanction programs had worked.  Saddam had been disarmed - he was still being a complete prick - but he had no WMDs nor any programs towards reconstituting his arsenal.

What the UN had done over the previous 10 years had worked.  They just didn't believe it in the face of the Bush administration's incorrect claims.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #198 on: January 10, 2006, 04:58:05 pm »
Quote:

Oh you'd like that wouldn't you?... There was never a UN resolution authorizing force.  Blix was in Iraq because the UN (ie the US) tasked him to conduct the investigation.  He's said that he didnt find a scrap of evidence of a current program.  Also the IAEA and the CIA knew the Niger story was false, Tenet admitted that the "16 words" were known to be untrue before they were included in the SotU speech. Not to mention the Italians knew the Niger documents were forgeries in about 2 seconds.




It's not a matter of like or not like, and one doesn't have to reach the threshold of a use-of-force resolution to understand that the Security Council was directing Saddam to do things that weren't being done.  The Security Council couldn't even get compliance with the inspections resolutions.  A final use-of-force resolution never passed, because numerous members of the Security Council wouldn't vote to take action for Saddam's flouting of all the existing resolutions.  The United States determined to act without a final use-of-force resolution, relying instead on earlier resolutions.

As for Blix, Saddam never fully complied with the investigation, which would lead anybody reasonable to infer that Saddam had something to hide.  There is proof positive evidence that Saddam had WMD in the past -- he gassed Iranian troops and the Kurds.  At the time he booted out inspectors in 1998 -- itself a move reasonably suggestive that he had something to hide -- there was a catalog of weapons violations by Saddam.  Then Saddam refused to cooperate completely with the revived inspections after 9/11.

It is complete revision of history to recall all of this, and to remember the debates in 2002 and 2003, and conclude that it was not a popular opinion that Saddam was hiding or intent on developing WMD.  Did the administration hang its hat too heavily on the WMD argument?  Sure.  Did it prefer to cite alleged evidence supportive as opposed to deterimental to its argument?  Yes.  But none of this undermines the fact that Saddam was largely presumed to be an WMD threat.  This is nothing new.  The Clinton administration took the same position, as did the Congress.

The forged Niger documents weren't the basis for the British government's suspicion that Saddam was attempting to purchase yellowcake, and both the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Butler Inquiry found the State of the Union claim not to be unsupported.  Even Joe Wilson reported that Niger's former prime minister recalled being contacted by Iraq to establish commercial relations.  Unless Iraq was interested in livestock or subsistence crops, what else was Saddam looking for?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #199 on: January 10, 2006, 05:19:20 pm »
Quote:

There is proof positive evidence that Saddam had WMD in the past -- he gassed Iranian troops and the Kurds.



Two decades ago.  Using poison gas bought from the US government.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: The Truong Case
« Reply #200 on: January 10, 2006, 05:22:20 pm »
Quote:

Your premise is wrong.  The decision cited is the appeal of a case in which a FISA court order was issued.  The appeal was regarding conditions applied by the FISA court on a specific court order and whether they were appropriate, The appeals court ruled that the conditions added to the warrant issued were not appropriate.

Thus Truong, when cited as justification for warrantless domestic wiretapping, is a complete red herring.





No, the premise is not wrong.  I am not arguing that the FISA appellate case had the same facts.  I am pointing out that the FISA appellate court appropriately characterized the law, as set forth in Truong.

In Truong, the Fourth Circuit upheld the FBI's warrantless wiretapping of the domestic phone calls of Truong, a U.S. resident, on the basis that Truong was receiving calls from a federal government employee about documents that Truong was then sending via courier to the Vietnamese government.  The court upheld a warrantless wiretap in this case on the basis that the executive does not require a warrant for foreign intelligence searches, even when the target of the surveillance is a U.S. resident on U.S. soil.  The Fourth Circuit did exclude all evidence gathered via the wiretap after the date on which the court considered the investigation to have shifted from foreign intelligence to law enforcement and criminal prosecution of Truong.

The court noted that in the interim, Congress had passed FISA, but since the warrantless wiretap predated FISA, FISA did not apply.  What I am saying is that Truong stands directly for the premise that warrantless searches, including wiretaps, even of U.S. residents on U.S. soil, have been held constitutional for foreign-intelligence purposes, and that the question then becomes whether FISA could undermine the inherent constitutional authority of the president to order such warrantless searches.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #201 on: January 10, 2006, 05:23:45 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

There is proof positive evidence that Saddam had WMD in the past -- he gassed Iranian troops and the Kurds.



Two decades ago.  Using poison gas bought from the US government.





Oh, so that means he used it all up and never thought to get some more?  Talk about red herrings.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #202 on: January 10, 2006, 05:31:52 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

There is proof positive evidence that Saddam had WMD in the past -- he gassed Iranian troops and the Kurds.



Two decades ago.  Using poison gas bought from the US government.




Oh, so that means he used it all up and never thought to get some more?  Talk about red herrings.



I have a problem with information that old being used to justify pre-emptive war now.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #203 on: January 10, 2006, 05:38:13 pm »
Quote:

I have a problem with information that old being used to justify pre-emptive war now.




I'm not using it as evidence that he still had some old Dow Chemical pesticide cans lying about the palace.  I'm saying that his propensity for acquiring and using WMDs was supported by a prolific track record.  If the only argument had been that the CIA had taught him how to use mustard gas in 1985, I might find that insufficient.  But it was one among many, many elements of the case.  The debate in 2002 and 2003 was over whether to let the inspections regime work to take care of Saddam's WMDs, despite his intrasigence, or whether to go to war.  It was never about Saddam having credibly foresworn any desire or efforts to acquire or develop WMDs.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #204 on: January 10, 2006, 05:52:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I don't believe this was true.  Certainly the UN weapons inspector didnt think they had WMD, every public statement of evidence that the administration put forth has shown to be incorrect and that the administration knew the statements (Niger yellow cake, tubes, etc,) to be false when they made them. Further Wolfowitz has said that the WMD justification was an expedient, a "bureaucratic compromise" in order to more simply make the case for the invasion to Congress and the public




Quote:

Oh you'd like that wouldn't you?... There was never a UN resolution authorizing force.  Blix was in Iraq because the UN (ie the US) tasked him to conduct the investigation.  He's said that he didnt find a scrap of evidence of a current program.  Also the IAEA and the CIA knew the Niger story was false, Tenet admitted that the "16 words" were known to be untrue before they were included in the SotU speech. Not to mention the Italians knew the Niger documents were forgeries in about 2 seconds.




The UN seems to disagree with you.

Resolution 1441 (2002)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 4644th meeting, on
8 November 2002

Recognizing the threat Iraq?s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August
1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all
other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,
Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly obstructed immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), failed to cooperate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and IAEA weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), and ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA in 1998,

edit: emphasis mine.




There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #205 on: January 10, 2006, 05:55:27 pm »
Quote:

There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.




Has anyone argued that everyone thought Iraq should be invaded?  The majority of countries thought Iraq should not be invaded.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #206 on: January 10, 2006, 05:59:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Oh you'd like that wouldn't you?... There was never a UN resolution authorizing force.  Blix was in Iraq because the UN (ie the US) tasked him to conduct the investigation.  He's said that he didnt find a scrap of evidence of a current program.  Also the IAEA and the CIA knew the Niger story was false, Tenet admitted that the "16 words" were known to be untrue before they were included in the SotU speech. Not to mention the Italians knew the Niger documents were forgeries in about 2 seconds.




It's not a matter of like or not like, and one doesn't have to reach the threshold of a use-of-force resolution to understand that the Security Council was directing Saddam to do things that weren't being done.  The Security Council couldn't even get compliance with the inspections resolutions.  A final use-of-force resolution never passed, because numerous members of the Security Council wouldn't vote to take action for Saddam's flouting of all the existing resolutions.  The United States determined to act without a final use-of-force resolution, relying instead on earlier resolutions.

As for Blix, Saddam never fully complied with the investigation, which would lead anybody reasonable to infer that Saddam had something to hide.  There is proof positive evidence that Saddam had WMD in the past -- he gassed Iranian troops and the Kurds.  At the time he booted out inspectors in 1998 -- itself a move reasonably suggestive that he had something to hide -- there was a catalog of weapons violations by Saddam.  Then Saddam refused to cooperate completely with the revived inspections after 9/11.

It is complete revision of history to recall all of this, and to remember the debates in 2002 and 2003, and conclude that it was not a popular opinion that Saddam was hiding or intent on developing WMD.  Did the administration hang its hat too heavily on the WMD argument?  Sure.  Did it prefer to cite alleged evidence supportive as opposed to deterimental to its argument?  Yes.  But none of this undermines the fact that Saddam was largely presumed to be an WMD threat.  This is nothing new.  The Clinton administration took the same position, as did the Congress.

The forged Niger documents weren't the basis for the British government's suspicion that Saddam was attempting to purchase yellowcake, and both the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Butler Inquiry found the State of the Union claim not to be unsupported.  Even Joe Wilson reported that Niger's former prime minister recalled being contacted by Iraq to establish commercial relations.  Unless Iraq was interested in livestock or subsistence crops, what else was Saddam looking for?





This goes back to the US frustration with the other countries not voting on a resolution to invade.  Germany, France, Italy, Russia all had their reasons for not wanting war.   Bottom line is the US passed on the final vote.  The Bush administration was frustrated with the positions of the other countries at the time.  That was clear, it is difficult to understand how the position can be put forth now that the other countries agreed with their reasoning.
If Clinton presumed Iraq had WMDs why didnt he invade?

The arguments put forth by the administration concerning WMD were known by them to be false at the time they made them.  The simple proof is the proliferation of justifications after the fact and also Wolfowitz's bland assertion of expediency.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #207 on: January 10, 2006, 06:07:24 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.




Has anyone argued that everyone thought Iraq should be invaded?  The majority of countries thought Iraq should not be invaded.





Arguing that everyone thought Iraq had WMD makes it appear that the US plan for invasion was a mere logical extension of the this belief.  In fact, the majority of countries did not think the threat of Iraq's weapons program warranted invasion.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #208 on: January 10, 2006, 06:11:31 pm »
Quote:


There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.





It's ok, you can name France, as it was they who were going to block ANY resolution brought to the Security Council regardless of what the vote might be.  They quite publicaly stated as such, because that was their only option for stopping a new resolution from passing, the votes neccessary were already had.

How's that for diplomacy?

And it's not just any other justification,

Quote:

non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means




Seems to reference WMD's quite explicitly.  As opposed to some other phantom justification that you seem to be referring to.

And no the US didnt "pass" on the final vote, France had already stated they would veto ANYTHING passed by the Security Council thereby rendering any vote "mute".  If you want blame for no vote or resolution, go talk to Chirac, et al.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #209 on: January 10, 2006, 06:19:52 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.





It's ok, you can name France, as it was they who were going to block ANY resolution brought to the Security Council regardless of what the vote might be.  They quite publicaly stated as such, because that was their only option for stopping a new resolution from passing, the votes neccessary were already had.

How's that for diplomacy?

And it's not just any other justification,

Quote:

non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means




Seems to reference WMD's quite explicitly.  As opposed to some other phantom justification that you seem to be referring to.

And no the US didnt "pass" on the final vote, France had already stated they would veto ANYTHING passed by the Security Council thereby rendering any vote "mute".  If you want blame for no vote or resolution, go talk to Chirac, et al.




France, for whatever reason, had a different position on Iraq. Germany, Russia, just to name 2 more of many, werent going to vote for war.  There was no final resolution and most countries outside of the US and the UK think another resolution was necessary.  Not getting their way was the only reason the US didnt go forward with another resolution.  Obviously there weren't many other countries, including the US until 9/11, that thought the Iraq weapons program a threat.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #210 on: January 10, 2006, 06:22:27 pm »
Quote:

Has anyone argued that everyone thought Iraq should be invaded?  The majority of countries thought Iraq should not be invaded.



Don't forget Poland.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #211 on: January 10, 2006, 06:22:34 pm »
Quote:


If Clinton presumed Iraq had WMDs why didnt he invade?

The arguments put forth by the administration concerning WMD were known by them to be false at the time they made them.  The simple proof is the proliferation of justifications after the fact and also Wolfowitz's bland assertion of expediency.





These things are logically inconsistent.  Just because Clinton didnt make a decision to DO something, doesn't mean that the justifications or beliefs about Iraq didn't exist.  

Also, after the fact justifications have no bearing on whether or not they KNEW something was false, or simply made an error of judgement.  

Also it was a long running belief carried by much of the world during the period of the 90's that Saddamm had never fully complied with the demands it agreed upon with the UN.

And as for conflicts of intrest go, it is interesting to note that the countries most adamantly opposed to the war were the countries that had significant interest tied up in Iraq's oil, both legally and illegally through the Oil for Food scandal.

But I'm sure they just had the intrest of World Peace at heart.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #212 on: January 10, 2006, 06:24:33 pm »
Quote:

France, for whatever reason, had a different position on Iraq. Germany, Russia, just to name 2 more of many, werent going to vote for war.  There was no final resolution and most countries outside of the US and the UK think another resolution was necessary.




Not voting for the war, and exercising their arbitrary veto power as a permanent member of the security council are vastly different items.  France had declared their intention of exercising their veto power, the others did not.

Rendering the vote, once again, moot.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #213 on: January 10, 2006, 06:29:03 pm »
Quote:


And as for conflicts of intrest go, it is interesting to note that the countries most adamantly opposed to the war were the countries that had significant interest tied up in Iraq's oil, both legally and illegally through the Oil for Food scandal.





Along those same lines, it's also interesting to note that the leadership in the US clammoring for war the most also had significant interest in and stood significant financial gain by a war in Iraq.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #214 on: January 10, 2006, 06:29:57 pm »
1) I don't disagree that the United States refrained from obtaining another resolution because that resolution was bound to fail.  Relying on existing resolutions was a fallback.  The administration would have loved to have gotten another resolution.

2) This does not necessarily imply, however, that other nations did not believe Saddam had or was intent on developing WMDs.  It simply means other countries did not think it worth going to war to stop him.  France and Russia had particularly strong interests in not wanting to topple Saddam, no matter what the circumstances.

3) I also concur that the administration used WMDs as the primary but not sole argument for the invasion because it was expedient.  Wolfowitz's candor confirms this.  This was a public diplomacy error for which the administration is now paying a heavy price.

4) I think it indisputable that the administration used intelligence preferentially to make its best case for going to war.  Dodgy though this may have been, it was not inconsistent with the way any government pursues any policy it strongly favors.  Right or wrong, it was by no means atypical.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #215 on: January 10, 2006, 06:30:37 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

France, for whatever reason, had a different position on Iraq. Germany, Russia, just to name 2 more of many, werent going to vote for war.  There was no final resolution and most countries outside of the US and the UK think another resolution was necessary.




Not voting for the war, and exercising their arbitrary veto power as a permanent member of the security council are vastly different items.  France had declared their intention of exercising their veto power, the others did not.

Rendering the vote, once again, moot.





If the only purpose of the vote was to agree with the US position, then yes.  The US position was then to ignore the UN. Once that happened, I don't think there is any way, even arguing that other countries thought Iraq had a WMD program, (capability... intent...suggestion)to after the fact make it appear that these other countries agreed with the invasion.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #216 on: January 10, 2006, 06:32:31 pm »
Quote:

Along those same lines, it's also interesting to note that the leadership in the US clammoring for war the most also had significant interest in and stood significant financial gain by a war in Iraq.




There are many U.S. servicemen and women risking their lives in Iraq who believe in what they are doing there, and they are not gaining financially but rather thaking the chance that they will return maimed or in a bodybag.

Michael Moore has made a load of money off books and movies thanks to the war.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #217 on: January 10, 2006, 06:34:20 pm »
Quote:

1
3) I also concur that the administration used WMDs as the primary but not sole argument for the invasion because it was expedient.  Wolfowitz's candor confirms this.  This was a public diplomacy error for which the administration is now paying a heavy price.





I think you couldn't be more wrong here.  Bush sold this war to the UN, to the world, to Congress, and to the American people with one simple line of rhetoric:  Saddam was currently in possession of WMDs with the means and intent of using them against the US.  Anything else is post-disaster spin.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #218 on: January 10, 2006, 06:35:14 pm »
Quote:

I don't think there is any way, even arguing that other countries thought Iraq had a WMD program, (capability... intent...suggestion)to after the fact make it appear that these other countries agreed with the invasion.




I am in 100% agreement with this statement.  Even if they knew he had them or intended or wished to have them, they did not support the invasion.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #219 on: January 10, 2006, 06:36:08 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Along those same lines, it's also interesting to note that the leadership in the US clammoring for war the most also had significant interest in and stood significant financial gain by a war in Iraq.




There are many U.S. servicemen and women risking their lives in Iraq who believe in what they are doing there, and they are not gaining financially but rather thaking the chance that they will return maimed or in a bodybag.

Michael Moore has made a load of money off books and movies thanks to the war.





You're not going to set up an equivalency here are you?

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #220 on: January 10, 2006, 06:39:43 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

France, for whatever reason, had a different position on Iraq. Germany, Russia, just to name 2 more of many, werent going to vote for war.  There was no final resolution and most countries outside of the US and the UK think another resolution was necessary.




Not voting for the war, and exercising their arbitrary veto power as a permanent member of the security council are vastly different items.  France had declared their intention of exercising their veto power, the others did not.

Rendering the vote, once again, moot.





How is France asserting their opinion any more arbitrary than the US asserting theirs?  The decision to war was made in spite of world opinion.  There is no use trying to drag them into the rational by suggesting everyone thought that Iraq had WMD.  The difference between Bush II and Clinton is that Clinton did not believe the danger of the possibility of a weapons program to be worth invasion.  For what it's worth Bush I thought the same.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #221 on: January 10, 2006, 06:43:06 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Along those same lines, it's also interesting to note that the leadership in the US clammoring for war the most also had significant interest in and stood significant financial gain by a war in Iraq.




There are many U.S. servicemen and women risking their lives in Iraq who believe in what they are doing there, and they are not gaining financially but rather thaking the chance that they will return maimed or in a bodybag.

Michael Moore has made a load of money off books and movies thanks to the war.




You're not going to set up an equivalency here are you?




Nope.  I think Michael Moore would be much happier had the war never occurred.  But I also believe the Bush administration would be relieved had what they perceived to be the need for war never occurred, either.

Let me put it this way:  I think any financial gain to be derived by the administration or its friends had a lot less to do with their decision to go to war than did France and Russia's financial ties to Iraq have with their decision to oppose the war.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #222 on: January 10, 2006, 06:43:22 pm »
Quote:


There are many U.S. servicemen and women risking their lives in Iraq who believe in what they are doing there, and they are not gaining financially but rather thaking the chance that they will return maimed or in a bodybag.





And?  How is that relevant to the fact that much of the US leadership has gained financially by the war?

Quote:


Michael Moore has made a load of money off books and movies thanks to the war.





Yes he has.  Just as Dick Cheney and George W. Bush have made a ton of money thanks to the war.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #223 on: January 10, 2006, 06:44:22 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.





It's ok, you can name France, as it was they who were going to block ANY resolution brought to the Security Council regardless of what the vote might be.  They quite publicaly stated as such, because that was their only option for stopping a new resolution from passing, the votes neccessary were already had.

How's that for diplomacy?

And it's not just any other justification,

Quote:

non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means




Seems to reference WMD's quite explicitly.  As opposed to some other phantom justification that you seem to be referring to.

And no the US didnt "pass" on the final vote, France had already stated they would veto ANYTHING passed by the Security Council thereby rendering any vote "mute".  If you want blame for no vote or resolution, go talk to Chirac, et al.




France, for whatever reason, had a different position on Iraq. Germany, Russia, just to name 2 more of many, werent going to vote for war.  There was no final resolution and most countries outside of the US and the UK think another resolution was necessary.  Not getting their way was the only reason the US didnt go forward with another resolution.  Obviously there weren't many other countries, including the US until 9/11, that thought the Iraq weapons program a threat.


Considering the US has long been propping up what's left of the UN's relevance, it was merely a courteous gesture of international cooperation by the administration to go through all those bureaucratic and, in many cases, corrupt channels.  Once it was clear the other members had too much at stake to risk the dethroning of one of their favorite tyrants, the Bush administration rightly stopped the charade and formed a coalition of willing partners.

But that mindless ordeal only reasserted in the minds of tens of millions of Americans that the whole resolution process resembled a mother asking her children for permission to decide what's best.

It's time to put the UN out of business, so the Kofi Annans and sons of Kofi Annans can go out and get real jobs.

As much as that so-called radicalism is the thinking shared by so many reasonable and like-minded people in this country, it's a sad state of affairs that it shocks so many in this forum.
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #224 on: January 10, 2006, 06:44:24 pm »
Quote:

I'm not using it as evidence that he still had some old Dow Chemical pesticide cans lying about the palace.  I'm saying that his propensity for acquiring and using WMDs was supported by a prolific track record.  If the only argument had been that the CIA had taught him how to use mustard gas in 1985, I might find that insufficient.  But it was one among many, many elements of the case.  The debate in 2002 and 2003 was over whether to let the inspections regime work to take care of Saddam's WMDs, despite his intrasigence, or whether to go to war.  It was never about Saddam having credibly foresworn any desire or efforts to acquire or develop WMDs.



One of the issues for me is that this debate in the international arena was not allowed to run its course.  The promise Bush made was to exhaust all possible means, using the UN, to disarm Iraq; with force being the last resort.

But instead of using the UN, the administration railroaded it, misled it and finally ignored it in a rush to war.  For this reason, I think the administration and people arguing on its behalf cannot tout UN ineffectiveness as a justification.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #225 on: January 10, 2006, 06:46:07 pm »
Quote:

How is France asserting their opinion any more arbitrary than the US asserting theirs?  The decision to war was made in spite of world opinion.  There is no use trying to drag them into the rational by suggesting everyone thought that Iraq had WMD.  The difference between Bush II and Clinton is that Clinton did not believe the danger of the possibility of a weapons program to be worth invasion.  For what it's worth Bush I thought the same.




Whether most countries thought Saddam had WMDs and whether most countries supported the invasion are two separate issues.  It is perfectly possible (and indeed factually likely) that many countries thought Saddam had WMD but nonetheless opposed the invasion.

The point is that the failure to find stores of WMDs has been cast as proof that the Bush administration knew there were no WMDs but lied about their existence to trick the world into going to war.  But there were lots of countries opposed to the war who believed precisely what the Bush administration believed -- that Saddam had WMDs.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #226 on: January 10, 2006, 06:48:04 pm »
Quote:

And?  How is that relevant to the fact that much of the US leadership has gained financially by the war?




Point being that many people find the war worthy of support even if they have nothing to gain, or even everything to lose, because of it.

cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #227 on: January 10, 2006, 06:49:16 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I'm not using it as evidence that he still had some old Dow Chemical pesticide cans lying about the palace.  I'm saying that his propensity for acquiring and using WMDs was supported by a prolific track record.  If the only argument had been that the CIA had taught him how to use mustard gas in 1985, I might find that insufficient.  But it was one among many, many elements of the case.  The debate in 2002 and 2003 was over whether to let the inspections regime work to take care of Saddam's WMDs, despite his intrasigence, or whether to go to war.  It was never about Saddam having credibly foresworn any desire or efforts to acquire or develop WMDs.



One of the issues for me is that this debate in the international arena was not allowed to run its course.  The promise Bush made was to exhaust all possible means, using the UN, to disarm Iraq; with force being the last resort.

But instead of using the UN, the administration railroaded it, misled it and finally ignored it in a rush to war.  For this reason, I think the administration and people arguing on its behalf cannot tout UN ineffectiveness as a justification.



How exhaustive did you think would have been appropriate?  Hans Blix would still be there "inspecting" if the UN had had its way.  Let's see, Saddam had how many *years* to cooperate?
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #228 on: January 10, 2006, 06:49:34 pm »
Quote:


Point being that many people find the war worthy of support even if they have nothing to gain, or even everything to lose, because of it.





I don't dispute that.  But that doesn't change the fact that some people DID have something to gain from it.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #229 on: January 10, 2006, 06:50:34 pm »
Quote:

Not voting for the war, and exercising their arbitrary veto power as a permanent member of the security council are vastly different items.  France had declared their intention of exercising their veto power, the others did not.

Rendering the vote, once again, moot.




The UN is a democratic body of sorts.  France was acting within its authority to veto the resolution for use of force.    I believe that this was exactly what Bush wanted, as it gave him the excuse he needed to go it (almost) alone into Iraq.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #230 on: January 10, 2006, 06:53:12 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


There were several countries, including some in the Security Council, as well as Kofi Annan, that were adamant that another resolution was required to invade.  Put forth any other justification for the war you like, the one that everyone else thought they had WMD and should be invaded is false.





It's ok, you can name France, as it was they who were going to block ANY resolution brought to the Security Council regardless of what the vote might be.  They quite publicaly stated as such, because that was their only option for stopping a new resolution from passing, the votes neccessary were already had.

How's that for diplomacy?

And it's not just any other justification,

Quote:

non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security, Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means




Seems to reference WMD's quite explicitly.  As opposed to some other phantom justification that you seem to be referring to.

And no the US didnt "pass" on the final vote, France had already stated they would veto ANYTHING passed by the Security Council thereby rendering any vote "mute".  If you want blame for no vote or resolution, go talk to Chirac, et al.




France, for whatever reason, had a different position on Iraq. Germany, Russia, just to name 2 more of many, werent going to vote for war.  There was no final resolution and most countries outside of the US and the UK think another resolution was necessary.  Not getting their way was the only reason the US didnt go forward with another resolution.  Obviously there weren't many other countries, including the US until 9/11, that thought the Iraq weapons program a threat.


Considering the US has long been propping up what's left of the UN's relevance, it was merely a courteous gesture of international cooperation by the administration to go through all those bureaucratic and, in many cases, corrupt channels.  Once it was clear the other members had too much at stake to risk the dethroning of one of their favorite tyrants, the Bush administration rightly stopped the charade and formed a coalition of willing partners.

But that mindless ordeal only reasserted in the minds of tens of millions of Americans that the whole resolution process resembled a mother asking her children for permission to decide what's best.

It's time to put the UN out of business, so the Kofi Annans and sons of Kofi Annans can go out and get real jobs.

As much as that so-called radicalism is the thinking shared by so many reasonable and like-minded people in this country, it's a sad state of affairs that it shocks so many in this forum.




We were going so well too.  The idea that countries should seek to cooperate and that wars are best avoided has a long history.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #231 on: January 10, 2006, 06:53:32 pm »
Quote:

One of the issues for me is that this debate in the international arena was not allowed to run its course.  The promise Bush made was to exhaust all possible means, using the UN, to disarm Iraq; with force being the last resort.

But instead of using the UN, the administration railroaded it, misled it and finally ignored it in a rush to war.  For this reason, I think the administration and people arguing on its behalf cannot tout UN ineffectiveness as a justification.





Of course people arguing on the administration's behalf can make this argument.  Your opinion that the United Nations should have been giving more time to dither on this matter does not deprive me or anybody else from arguing the opinion that the United Nations as a whole and the Security Council in specific had failed miserably in their responsibilities to ensure international security, and that the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and other countries were wholeheartedly justified and not limited by United Nations intrasigence, bumbling and special interests to remove Saddam from power.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #232 on: January 10, 2006, 06:54:36 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I'm not using it as evidence that he still had some old Dow Chemical pesticide cans lying about the palace.  I'm saying that his propensity for acquiring and using WMDs was supported by a prolific track record.  If the only argument had been that the CIA had taught him how to use mustard gas in 1985, I might find that insufficient.  But it was one among many, many elements of the case.  The debate in 2002 and 2003 was over whether to let the inspections regime work to take care of Saddam's WMDs, despite his intrasigence, or whether to go to war.  It was never about Saddam having credibly foresworn any desire or efforts to acquire or develop WMDs.



One of the issues for me is that this debate in the international arena was not allowed to run its course.  The promise Bush made was to exhaust all possible means, using the UN, to disarm Iraq; with force being the last resort.

But instead of using the UN, the administration railroaded it, misled it and finally ignored it in a rush to war.  For this reason, I think the administration and people arguing on its behalf cannot tout UN ineffectiveness as a justification.


How exhaustive did you think would have been appropriate?  Hans Blix would still be there "inspecting" if the UN had had its way.  Let's see, Saddam had how many *years* to cooperate?




And bombed how many countries other than his own?

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #233 on: January 10, 2006, 06:54:56 pm »
Quote:


The point is that the failure to find stores of WMDs has been cast as proof that the Bush administration knew there were no WMDs but lied about their existence to trick the world into going to war.  But there were lots of countries opposed to the war who believed precisely what the Bush administration believed -- that Saddam had WMDs.






This is a circular argument.  You're essentially saying that other countries believing what Bush believed is proof that Bush didn't lie because if he had lied, then other countries wouldn't have believed what they did.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #234 on: January 10, 2006, 06:57:38 pm »
Quote:

I don't dispute that.  But that doesn't change the fact that some people DID have something to gain from it.




Certainly.  That doesn't necessitate that they went to war because they did have something to gain, but it doesn't deny it, either.

For many people (and I'm not casting this at you in particular), the debate about this war is a debate about how they feel about Bush.  I could do with or without Bush either way at this point.  This is about the principles involved, not about the actors.  I would far rather have Iraq turn into a successful nation and Bush heaped with scorn than for Bush to have a hagiographic record and Iraq end up mired in disaster.  Of course, we could get both or neither.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #235 on: January 10, 2006, 06:57:38 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

One of the issues for me is that this debate in the international arena was not allowed to run its course.  The promise Bush made was to exhaust all possible means, using the UN, to disarm Iraq; with force being the last resort.

But instead of using the UN, the administration railroaded it, misled it and finally ignored it in a rush to war.  For this reason, I think the administration and people arguing on its behalf cannot tout UN ineffectiveness as a justification.





Of course people arguing on the administration's behalf can make this argument.  Your opinion that the United Nations should have been giving more time to dither on this matter does not deprive me or anybody else from arguing the opinion that the United Nations as a whole and the Security Council in specific had failed miserably in their responsibilities to ensure international security, and that the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and other countries were wholeheartedly justified and not limited by United Nations intrasigence, bumbling and special interests to remove Saddam from power.





Precisely, but once done, there is no going back.  Furthermore, taking the step of invasion without provocation requires certainty.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #236 on: January 10, 2006, 06:58:59 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


Point being that many people find the war worthy of support even if they have nothing to gain, or even everything to lose, because of it.





I don't dispute that.  But that doesn't change the fact that some people DID have something to gain from it.





Perhaps I haven't achieved the appropriate level of cynycism, but to start a war for a profit motive requires a level of sociopathy that I cannot bring myself to believe is possessed by our elected leaders.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #237 on: January 10, 2006, 07:01:04 pm »
Quote:


For many people (and I'm not casting this at you in particular), the debate about this war is a debate about how they feel about Bush.  





That's probably true.  But for me, my feelings on the war contribute to my feelings on Bush, not the other way around.  After all, I'm a liberal, I couldn't do it any other way.  But I dont' deny that there are people on both sides of the debate who figure out which people they like then seek to defend that party's policies.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #238 on: January 10, 2006, 07:01:10 pm »
Quote:

Nope.  I think Michael Moore would be much happier had the war never occurred.  But I also believe the Bush administration would be relieved had what they perceived to be the need for war never occurred, either.



Mickey Herskowitz was commissioned to ghost-write W's autobiography.  In one of many interviews he had with Bush in 1999, he got this direct quote:

"My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.  If I have a chance to invade, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency."

He's talking about pressing a military action in order to further his domestic and foreign agenda overall.  This is exactly what he's done.  I'm not sure why people still wonder about his motives.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #239 on: January 10, 2006, 07:02:08 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I don't dispute that.  But that doesn't change the fact that some people DID have something to gain from it.




Certainly.  That doesn't necessitate that they went to war because they did have something to gain, but it doesn't deny it, either.

For many people (and I'm not casting this at you in particular), the debate about this war is a debate about how they feel about Bush.  I could do with or without Bush either way at this point.  This is about the principles involved, not about the actors.  I would far rather have Iraq turn into a successful nation and Bush heaped with scorn than for Bush to have a hagiographic record and Iraq end up mired in disaster.  Of course, we could get both or neither.





If the reason for war was stated in that way, do you think the invasion would have occured?  The principle of invading a soverign country just because they're genocidal maniacs is going to take some fleshing out.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #240 on: January 10, 2006, 07:03:42 pm »
Quote:


Perhaps I haven't achieved the appropriate level of cynycism, but to start a war for a profit motive requires a level of sociopathy that I cannot bring myself to believe is possessed by our elected leaders.





I don't think it requires cynicsm in the least.  Only an open mind.  And I don't think Bush started the war in Iraq for profit, that's just a nice little side benefit.  He started the war because he could.  He found the excuse to settle an old family score.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #241 on: January 10, 2006, 07:04:03 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Nope.  I think Michael Moore would be much happier had the war never occurred.  But I also believe the Bush administration would be relieved had what they perceived to be the need for war never occurred, either.



Mickey Herskowitz was commissioned to ghost-write W's autobiography.  In one of many interviews he had with Bush in 1999, he got this direct quote:

"My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.  If I have a chance to invade, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency."

He's talking about pressing a military action in order to further his domestic and foreign agenda overall.  This is exactly what he's done.  I'm not sure why people still wonder about his motives.





If this goes much further Leo Strauss is about to be assigned reading.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #242 on: January 10, 2006, 07:08:07 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

How is France asserting their opinion any more arbitrary than the US asserting theirs?  The decision to war was made in spite of world opinion.  There is no use trying to drag them into the rational by suggesting everyone thought that Iraq had WMD.  The difference between Bush II and Clinton is that Clinton did not believe the danger of the possibility of a weapons program to be worth invasion.  For what it's worth Bush I thought the same.




Whether most countries thought Saddam had WMDs and whether most countries supported the invasion are two separate issues.  It is perfectly possible (and indeed factually likely) that many countries thought Saddam had WMD but nonetheless opposed the invasion.

The point is that the failure to find stores of WMDs has been cast as proof that the Bush administration knew there were no WMDs but lied about their existence to trick the world into going to war.  But there were lots of countries opposed to the war who believed precisely what the Bush administration believed -- that Saddam had WMDs.





This obscures the fact that the proofs the administrations put forth for the WMD program were wrong, and the administration knew they were wrong when they said them.  That or they couldn't read.  And, very few other countries thought it necessary to invade Iraq.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #243 on: January 10, 2006, 07:08:17 pm »
Quote:

This is a circular argument.  You're essentially saying that other countries believing what Bush believed is proof that Bush didn't lie because if he had lied, then other countries wouldn't have believed what they did.





I don't find it circular.

A and B agree on a theory.

A acts to prove the theory.  B abstains.

The theory proves false.

B calls A a liar about the theory.

It is not circular for A to point out that B agreed with the theory before the theory proved false.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #244 on: January 10, 2006, 07:12:00 pm »
Quote:

This obscures the fact that the proofs the administrations put forth for the WMD program were wrong, and the administration knew they were wrong when they said them.  That or they couldn't read.  And, very few other countries thought it necessary to invade Iraq.




So they were either stupid or dishonest?  Was everybody else who thought Saddam had WMD stupid or dishonest too?

Which proofs did the administration know were wrong when they said them?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #245 on: January 10, 2006, 07:13:33 pm »
Quote:

How exhaustive did you think would have been appropriate?  Hans Blix would still be there "inspecting" if the UN had had its way.  Let's see, Saddam had how many *years* to cooperate?



Let's make this clear.  Saddam had no weapons nor weapons programs.  Hans Blix could've opened every door of every room of every building in the whole of Iraq SIMULTANEOUSLY, and he would have found jack shit.

Now, as to how long should Hans BLix have been given?  How about as long as he thought he needed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that what Saddam was saying was true - that he had no WMDs.  Which he didn't.

Also, Iraq was a diversion from the war on terror, which was being bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and run out of Afghanistan.  Resources were pulled from Afghanistan in order to invade Iraq.

Osama bin Laden remains free.  Remember him?  Here's what Bush said about him on March 13, 2002 (note the year -that's not a typo):

"...he's a person who's now been marginalized.  His network, his host government has been destroyed.  He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match.  He is  --  as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide  --  if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is.  You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you."

The link

So in six short months - from 9/1101 to 3/13/02 - he doesn't even think about the man who murdered 3,000 of his citizens any more.  How does that sit with his vow to hunt down and kill those responsible?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #246 on: January 10, 2006, 07:15:28 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

This is a circular argument.  You're essentially saying that other countries believing what Bush believed is proof that Bush didn't lie because if he had lied, then other countries wouldn't have believed what they did.





I don't find it circular.

A and B agree on a theory.

A acts to prove the theory.  B abstains.

The theory proves false.

B calls A a liar about the theory.

It is not circular for A to point out that B agreed with the theory before the theory proved false.





You're essentially saying

If A (other countries believing Bush) then B (Bush telling the truth) must hold true because without B there can't be A.

Your proposition is conditional upon the corresponding conditional, not independent of it.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #247 on: January 10, 2006, 07:17:11 pm »
Quote:


How is France asserting their opinion any more arbitrary than the US asserting theirs?  





It's not.  But all permanent members of the Security Council can veto any resolution for any reason whatsoever.  They do not need to justify their veto, they can just do it, hence it is arbitrary.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #248 on: January 10, 2006, 07:19:39 pm »
Quote:

Of course people arguing on the administration's behalf can make this argument.  Your opinion that the United Nations should have been giving more time to dither on this matter does not deprive me or anybody else from arguing the opinion that the United Nations as a whole and the Security Council in specific had failed miserably in their responsibilities to ensure international security, and that the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and other countries were wholeheartedly justified and not limited by United Nations intrasigence, bumbling and special interests to remove Saddam from power.



I reiterate that this argument is a fallacy, because Saddam HAD been disarmed.  We didn't know it yet, but Hans Blix was on his way to finding out.  And if you've committed to the public that you will let the process of a notoriously vacillating body run its course, you can't cry foul when it vacillates.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #249 on: January 10, 2006, 07:19:56 pm »
Quote:

Mickey Herskowitz was commissioned to ghost-write W's autobiography.  In one of many interviews he had with Bush in 1999, he got this direct quote:

"My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.  If I have a chance to invade, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency."

He's talking about pressing a military action in order to further his domestic and foreign agenda overall.  This is exactly what he's done.  I'm not sure why people still wonder about his motives.





Exactly.  It's just like reading Mein Kampf!  He laid the whole think out for Mickey.  I'm shocked he didn't let Mickey in on his plans to fly airplanes into the buildings in order to create the pretext for this premeditated war!  Maybe he was too busy to let Mickey in on everything since he was simultaneously plotting to steal Florida in the 2000 elections, or maybe his attention was diverted to the weather machine he was building to spawn the hurricane last fall that washed out all those Democratic voters in New Orleans.  And Darth Cheney was preoccupied with the task of consolidating power at Halliburton to ensure maximum gain from all of this!

For a moron, Bush sure is a genius!  Let's rename him Palpatine.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #250 on: January 10, 2006, 07:23:32 pm »
Quote:

Yes he has.  Just as Dick Cheney and George W. Bush have made a ton of money thanks to the war.




Dick Cheney sold off all his interest in Haliburton before taking the Vice Presidency, therefore any profit Haliburton has made has had no effect on Dick Cheney.  

Unless you are saying you have evidence of kickbacks from Haliburton to Cheney of which there isn't even speculation much less actual suspicion by any authorities.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #251 on: January 10, 2006, 07:26:58 pm »
Quote:


Dick Cheney sold off all his interest in Haliburton before taking the Vice Presidency, therefore any profit Haliburton has made has had no effect on Dick Cheney.  





Oh come on.  You cannot possibly be saying that Cheney, his friends, and his family are not making a single dime from Halliburton.

I've been through the US Governemtn procurement process up against Halliburton.  What they get away is shocking.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #252 on: January 10, 2006, 07:27:22 pm »
Quote:

If this goes much further Leo Strauss is about to be assigned reading.



How about someone that people will have heard of:

"Why, of course, the people don't want war.  Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war.  That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.  Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

---Hermann Goering
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #253 on: January 10, 2006, 07:29:08 pm »
Quote:

You're essentially saying

If A (other countries believing Bush) then B (Bush telling the truth) must hold true because without B there can't be A.

Your proposition is conditional upon the corresponding conditional, not independent of it.





There's a problem with this.

I'm not saying other countries believed Saddam had WMD solely or even primarily because the United States said so.  I'm saying that those countries believed independent of what the United States was arguing that Saddam had WMD.

If I accepted your interpretation of what I'm saying -- that other countries believed Saddam had WMD because the United States said so -- then it would of course still be possible that Bush was lying, and in fact lying very successfully.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #254 on: January 10, 2006, 07:29:40 pm »
Quote:


Exactly.  It's just like reading Mein Kampf!  He laid the whole think out for Mickey.  I'm shocked he didn't let Mickey in on his plans to fly airplanes into the buildings in order to create the pretext for this premeditated war!  Maybe he was too busy to let Mickey in on everything since he was simultaneously plotting to steal Florida in the 2000 elections, or maybe his attention was diverted to the weather machine he was building to spawn the hurricane last fall that washed out all those Democratic voters in New Orleans.  And Darth Cheney was preoccupied with the task of consolidating power at Halliburton to ensure maximum gain from all of this!





What I'm wondering is, did Bush tell Herskowitz about the time he, Bum Phillips and Dan Pastorini got shitfaced and went skinny dipping in the Persian Gulf.  I can't imagine Mickey being interested in any story that didn't involve drunk old Houston Oilers.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #255 on: January 10, 2006, 07:30:48 pm »
Quote:

It's not.  But all permanent members of the Security Council can veto any resolution for any reason whatsoever.  They do not need to justify their veto, they can just do it, hence it is arbitrary.



It can be arbitrary.  Doesn't mean it is.

Nit...picked.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #256 on: January 10, 2006, 07:31:30 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

This obscures the fact that the proofs the administrations put forth for the WMD program were wrong, and the administration knew they were wrong when they said them.  That or they couldn't read.  And, very few other countries thought it necessary to invade Iraq.




So they were either stupid or dishonest?  Was everybody else who thought Saddam had WMD stupid or dishonest too?

Which proofs did the administration know were wrong when they said them?





Some were stupid, the ones who thought the troops would be greeted as liberators, and some were dishonest, Wolfowitz. As for which proofs, see The Link

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #257 on: January 10, 2006, 07:33:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Not voting for the war, and exercising their arbitrary veto power as a permanent member of the security council are vastly different items.  France had declared their intention of exercising their veto power, the others did not.

Rendering the vote, once again, moot.




The UN is a democratic body of sorts.  France was acting within its authority to veto the resolution for use of force.    I believe that this was exactly what Bush wanted, as it gave him the excuse he needed to go it (almost) alone into Iraq.





Oh I dont disagree that they werent acting within their rights to do so.  What I am saying is that they are the reason a vote wasn't even taken to begin with because they were going to exercise that right.

And if that indeed was Bush's plan, it would ascribe to him a level of cleverness not normaly attributed to those with the supposed intelligence of a rock.

It amuses me the alternatingly descriptions of Bush, ranging from diabolical genius to so inept that he cannot feed himself.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #258 on: January 10, 2006, 07:34:13 pm »
Quote:

I reiterate that this argument is a fallacy, because Saddam HAD been disarmed.  We didn't know it yet, but Hans Blix was on his way to finding out.  And if you've committed to the public that you will let the process of a notoriously vacillating body run its course, you can't cry foul when it vacillates.




He threw out the inspectors in 1998, and he would not fully cooperate with the inspectors in 2002 and 2003.  He sure acted guilty even if he was not.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #259 on: January 10, 2006, 07:36:11 pm »
Quote:

Exactly.  It's just like reading Mein Kampf!  He laid the whole think out for Mickey.  I'm shocked he didn't let Mickey in on his plans to fly airplanes into the buildings in order to create the pretext for this premeditated war!  Maybe he was too busy to let Mickey in on everything since he was simultaneously plotting to steal Florida in the 2000 elections, or maybe his attention was diverted to the weather machine he was building to spawn the hurricane last fall that washed out all those Democratic voters in New Orleans.  And Darth Cheney was preoccupied with the task of consolidating power at Halliburton to ensure maximum gain from all of this!

For a moron, Bush sure is a genius!  Let's rename him Palpatine.




I still think Bush is a moron.  He's simply the front man for a bunch of idealogues who are in the throes of a very successful power-grab.  Everything they are doing is a well documented blueprint to achieve exactly that.  Leo Strauss - the father of the neo-con movement - wrote the manual 80 years ago.

There, I said it.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #260 on: January 10, 2006, 07:36:49 pm »
Quote:

Some were stupid, the ones who thought the troops would be greeted as liberators, and some were dishonest, Wolfowitz. As for which proofs, see The Link




In response to the report by that noted centrist Mr. Waxman, should I cite back to you the Senate Intelligence Committee's volimnous report finding intelligence failures but not lies?

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #261 on: January 10, 2006, 07:37:27 pm »
Quote:


It amuses me the alternatingly descriptions of Bush, ranging from diabolical genius to so inept that he cannot feed himself.





Well he has his good days and bad days.  Of course the true conspiracists would argue that Bush isn't really behind any of the diabolical genius moves, only a puppet for the others behind the scenes who are the real policy makers.  That Bush sticks to just trying to tie his shoelaces correctly each morning and not totally fucking up his television speeches.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #262 on: January 10, 2006, 07:39:31 pm »
Quote:

I still think Bush is a moron.  He's simply the front man for a bunch of idealogues who are in the throes of a very successful power-grab.  Everything they are doing is a well documented blueprint to achieve exactly that.  Leo Strauss - the father of the neo-con movement - wrote the manual 80 years ago.

There, I said it.





I still say Supreme Chancellor Palpatine is behind it all.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #263 on: January 10, 2006, 07:40:27 pm »
Quote:


I still say Supreme Chancellor Palpatine is behind it all.





Isn't he the one pravata says wears a shiny hat?
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #264 on: January 10, 2006, 07:41:07 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


For many people (and I'm not casting this at you in particular), the debate about this war is a debate about how they feel about Bush.  





That's probably true.  But for me, my feelings on the war contribute to my feelings on Bush, not the other way around.  After all, I'm a liberal, I couldn't do it any other way.  But I dont' deny that there are people on both sides of the debate who figure out which people they like then seek to defend that party's policies.





Not that it's of any particular matter, although I do believe the arguments that I've presented to be factually correct, they do not in particular way represent the entirety of my opinions on the this and any other subject.

And actually have quite enjoyed this discussion.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #265 on: January 10, 2006, 07:46:54 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


Dick Cheney sold off all his interest in Haliburton before taking the Vice Presidency, therefore any profit Haliburton has made has had no effect on Dick Cheney.  





Oh come on.  You cannot possibly be saying that Cheney, his friends, and his family are not making a single dime from Halliburton.

I've been through the US Governemtn procurement process up against Halliburton.  What they get away is shocking.





What I am saying is that any financial gain Cheney would be getting would be entirely illegal since he has no stake in the company whatsoever.  And any belief without proof is simply speculative, and there has been nothing brought forward to show anything that would prove such a claim.

While Haliburton's procedures maybe questionable, that doesnt have any bearing on whether or not Cheney is getting a kickback, which is your direct implication.

If you have proof of such, it would be welcomed for you to share it.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #266 on: January 10, 2006, 07:48:32 pm »
Quote:

Isn't he the one pravata says wears a shiny hat?




I thought Pravata wore the shiny hat but no pants.

I too have enjoyed this discussion, chiefly because everyone kept it civil.

P.S. I humbly apologize to Limey for likening him to George Galloway.  Limey does not resemble Galloway -- Galloway is too right wing!

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #267 on: January 10, 2006, 07:49:59 pm »
Quote:

He threw out the inspectors in 1998, and he would not fully cooperate with the inspectors in 2002 and 2003.  He sure acted guilty even if he was not.



He was being a prick, which was his preferred methodology.

However, this is what Hans Blix said in his report to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2003:

"Inspections in Iraq resumed on 27 November 2002.  In matters relating to process, notably prompt access to sites, we have faced relatively few difficulties and certainly much less than those that were faced by UNSCOM in the period 1991 to 1998.  This may well be due to the strong outside pressure...This is not to say that the operation of inspections is free from frictions, but at this juncture we are able to perform professional no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance."

The link

Saddam was cooperating.  Why not let the inspections continue?  Blix's boys left of their own accord the day before the invasion.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #268 on: January 10, 2006, 07:53:07 pm »
Quote:


What I am saying is that any financial gain Cheney would be getting would be entirely illegal since he has no stake in the company whatsoever.  





Not just Dick himself, but his chronies and family.  

Quote:


While Haliburton's procedures maybe questionable, that doesnt have any bearing on whether or not Cheney is getting a kickback, which is your direct implication.





It's not Halliburton's procedures that are questionable, it's the US Government's in dealing with them.  

Quote:


If you have proof of such, it would be welcomed for you to share it.





Well, I have proof that they get special benefits afforded no other company and such that would be deemed unethical under any other business circumstance.  But I'm not really going to share it, so take it for what it's worth to you.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #269 on: January 10, 2006, 07:58:49 pm »
Quote:

P.S. I humbly apologize to Limey for likening him to George Galloway.  Limey does not resemble Galloway -- Galloway is too right wing!



Would you be shocked to know that I voted for Margaret Thatcher.  Three times*.

This administration is not conservative.  It's borrowed more money from foreign governements than the previous 42 administrations combined.  Government is bigger than it's ever been.  It's policies are fiscally suicidal.  This is not your father's Republican party.

* The third was a mistake - Maggie demonstrated admirably the need for term limits.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #270 on: January 10, 2006, 10:51:59 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Some were stupid, the ones who thought the troops would be greeted as liberators, and some were dishonest, Wolfowitz. As for which proofs, see The Link




In response to the report by that noted centrist Mr. Waxman, should I cite back to you the Senate Intelligence Committee's volimnous report finding intelligence failures but not lies?





You know me, I'll read anything.  You also know that the Senate report didnt cover whether the admin influenced the focus of the intelligence.  Also, it didnt cover, point by point, the statements in this paper commissioned but hardly written by Waxman.  Are you disputing that these things were said?

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #271 on: January 10, 2006, 10:56:16 pm »
Quote:

Quote:


I still say Supreme Chancellor Palpatine is behind it all.





Isn't he the one pravata says wears a shiny hat?





Dunno, I only watch good science fiction.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #272 on: January 10, 2006, 11:29:34 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


Dick Cheney sold off all his interest in Haliburton before taking the Vice Presidency, therefore any profit Haliburton has made has had no effect on Dick Cheney.  





Oh come on.  You cannot possibly be saying that Cheney, his friends, and his family are not making a single dime from Halliburton.

I've been through the US Governemtn procurement process up against Halliburton.  What they get away is shocking.




What I am saying is that any financial gain Cheney would be getting would be entirely illegal since he has no stake in the company whatsoever.  And any belief without proof is simply speculative, and there has been nothing brought forward to show anything that would prove such a claim.

While Haliburton's procedures maybe questionable, that doesnt have any bearing on whether or not Cheney is getting a kickback, which is your direct implication.

If you have proof of such, it would be welcomed for you to share it.




Cheney owns over 433,000 shares in stock options in Halliburton.  He has signed a legally binding document to turn over any profits from the proceeds of these shares to charity.  Further, he has pledged not to take any tax advantage from this donation.  Halliburton has 504,455,647 shares in various hands as of the most recent 10K filing.  The roots of this company are deep in Texas.  The company was founded in the 1920's and has merged with companies that have ties to various prominent families in, and associated with, Texas.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #273 on: January 10, 2006, 11:53:38 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

He threw out the inspectors in 1998, and he would not fully cooperate with the inspectors in 2002 and 2003.  He sure acted guilty even if he was not.



He was being a prick, which was his preferred methodology.

However, this is what Hans Blix said in his report to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2003:

"Inspections in Iraq resumed on 27 November 2002.  In matters relating to process, notably prompt access to sites, we have faced relatively few difficulties and certainly much less than those that were faced by UNSCOM in the period 1991 to 1998.  This may well be due to the strong outside pressure...This is not to say that the operation of inspections is free from frictions, but at this juncture we are able to perform professional no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance."

The link

Saddam was cooperating.  Why not let the inspections continue?  Blix's boys left of their own accord the day before the invasion.




Limey is getting close to the breakdown in intel and the truth.  The magic year is 1997. You have to look at when the inspections ended and when they began again. As far as 2003, Sadam tried the biggest bluff in history against a determined enemy and lost. I was part of the ISG and unfortunately I have to leave it at that.

Here is a good cnn report on the final ISG report. The Link
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

strosrays

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #274 on: January 11, 2006, 01:46:11 am »
Quote:

"I have no home. I'm the wind."





'This won't look good on your record.'

'But Colonel, it's just Reader's Digest.'

"Not if you eliminate the third, fifth, and sixth letters.  Then its Red's Digest, Comrade.'

Col. Sphinx Drummond

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16760
  • art is a bulwark against the irrationality of man
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #275 on: January 11, 2006, 09:05:00 am »
Woah, I just read this thread, and I feel so much wiser. I'm envigorated and refreshed. The times they are a changin' and the answer is still blowin' in the wind. Call me Polyanna, but, I just wish that Hussein fucker would have made it a little more difficult by giving the inspectors carte blanche... "look anywhere you want assholes, I got nothing to hide..." Then the evil vast right wing neo-con conspiracy would have to create another reason to throw Iraq's righteous leader out, hopefully one the wonderful altruistic all-knowing and wise democrats could rally behind. Go Astros! Whoo hoo!
Everyone's talking, few of them know
The rest are pretending, they put on a show
And if there's a message I guess this is it
Truth isn't easy, the easy part's shit

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #276 on: January 11, 2006, 10:58:56 am »
Quote:

Limey is getting close to the breakdown in intel and the truth.  The magic year is 1997. You have to look at when the inspections ended and when they began again. As far as 2003, Sadam tried the biggest bluff in history against a determined enemy and lost. I was part of the ISG and unfortunately I have to leave it at that.

Here is a good cnn report on the final ISG report. The Link




WTF has 1997 got to do with the 2003 invasion?  We were led to war on the premise that Hussein sponsored al Qaeda and had WMDs that he could drop in your soup at a moments notice.  At the time the WMD statements were being made, Hans Blix was making his inspections, reporting unprecedented cooperation, and finding little but evidence pointing to there not being WMDs.

Or maybe we should just go and invade Germany for what they did in the 1940's.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #277 on: January 11, 2006, 12:07:15 pm »
Quote:


Or maybe we should just go and invade Germany for what they did in the 1940's.





I can just hear Tony Blair rallying the troops....

"Gentlemen...today, we shall take back Massachusetts!"
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #278 on: January 11, 2006, 12:21:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

He threw out the inspectors in 1998, and he would not fully cooperate with the inspectors in 2002 and 2003.  He sure acted guilty even if he was not.



He was being a prick, which was his preferred methodology.

However, this is what Hans Blix said in his report to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2003:

"Inspections in Iraq resumed on 27 November 2002.  In matters relating to process, notably prompt access to sites, we have faced relatively few difficulties and certainly much less than those that were faced by UNSCOM in the period 1991 to 1998.  This may well be due to the strong outside pressure...This is not to say that the operation of inspections is free from frictions, but at this juncture we are able to perform professional no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance."

The link

Saddam was cooperating.  Why not let the inspections continue?  Blix's boys left of their own accord the day before the invasion.




Limey is getting close to the breakdown in intel and the truth.  The magic year is 1997. You have to look at when the inspections ended and when they began again. As far as 2003, Sadam tried the biggest bluff in history against a determined enemy and lost. I was part of the ISG and unfortunately I have to leave it at that.

Here is a good cnn report on the final ISG report. The Link




I haven't kept up with this as well as I suppose I should have, but correct me if I misread the cnn report.  It reads as if the ISG final report is saying the WMD concerns with Saddam were eliminated due to the Gulf War rather than the UN sanctions and inspections subsequent to the war.  And that after 1991 Saddam was being Saddam and nobody wanted to do weapons business with him.
Goin' for a bus ride.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #279 on: January 11, 2006, 12:45:26 pm »
Quote:

I haven't kept up with this as well as I suppose I should have, but correct me if I misread the cnn report.  It reads as if the ISG final report is saying the WMD concerns with Saddam were eliminated due to the Gulf War rather than the UN sanctions and inspections subsequent to the war.  And that after 1991 Saddam was being Saddam and nobody wanted to do weapons business with him.



On February 24, 2001, Secretary of State Powell said this in response to a question about the US-led sanctions against Iraq:

"He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."

Nine months later, the Bush administration did a complete one-eighty on this.  The catalyst for this u-turn being a terrorist attack perpetrated by Saudis, backed by Saudi money and run out of Afghanistan.

People can nit-pick about whether the administration knew that this piece of intelligence was wrong or that piece was wrong; but prior to 9/11 it was saying nothing about Saddam other than that they believed him to be contained and no threat.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #280 on: January 11, 2006, 01:32:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I haven't kept up with this as well as I suppose I should have, but correct me if I misread the cnn report.  It reads as if the ISG final report is saying the WMD concerns with Saddam were eliminated due to the Gulf War rather than the UN sanctions and inspections subsequent to the war.  And that after 1991 Saddam was being Saddam and nobody wanted to do weapons business with him.



On February 24, 2001, Secretary of State Powell said this in response to a question about the US-led sanctions against Iraq:

"He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."

Nine months later, the Bush administration did a complete one-eighty on this.  The catalyst for this u-turn being a terrorist attack perpetrated by Saudis, backed by Saudi money and run out of Afghanistan.

People can nit-pick about whether the administration knew that this piece of intelligence was wrong or that piece was wrong; but prior to 9/11 it was saying nothing about Saddam other than that they believed him to be contained and no threat.




I get that you're quite hostile toward the current administrations handling of this entire thing as are many, but as I'm trying to get up to speed here what does your response have to do with my question?  Keep in mind, I'm asking only about my intrepretation of the report.  I don't have enough info to develop a reasonable opinion, yet.
Goin' for a bus ride.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #281 on: January 11, 2006, 03:01:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Limey is getting close to the breakdown in intel and the truth.  The magic year is 1997. You have to look at when the inspections ended and when they began again. As far as 2003, Sadam tried the biggest bluff in history against a determined enemy and lost. I was part of the ISG and unfortunately I have to leave it at that.

Here is a good cnn report on the final ISG report. The Link




WTF has 1997 got to do with the 2003 invasion?  We were led to war on the premise that Hussein sponsored al Qaeda and had WMDs that he could drop in your soup at a moments notice.  At the time the WMD statements were being made, Hans Blix was making his inspections, reporting unprecedented cooperation, and finding little but evidence pointing to there not being WMDs.

Or maybe we should just go and invade Germany for what they did in the 1940's.




Limey come on, I thought you had this. 1997 is when the major high level defections from Iraq occured. A wealth of information came from those defections. As soon as the defections occured the inspectors were kicked out. After 9/11 the belief of an AQ and Iraq alliance through various means led to the drum up for war. We know their was an alliance with terrorist organizations as have been reported through the media. Dont forget that Sadam use to pay the families of suicide bombers in Isreal.

As for Blix, Iraq had 6 years to do whatever with his weapons. Limey, we found Mig's buried in the desert. No one ever said Iraq didnt have WMD... If you look at the reports that come out even to this day, the cause for war is over STOCKPILES/CACHES, and it had to be made POST 1991. We are still finding mass graves with people who were killed by WMD and it was while inspections were going on....So he did have it... So where the hell is it. By the way, do you really think nobody is still keeping an eye out for WMD in Iraq

One more thing and then I am done with this arguement. If you are a cop or in your case a Bobby. You are looking for a suspect with a gun, you find the suspect but only find parts of a gun. Is it a gun? Or is it just pieces of medal?

And if Germany was still launching V2 rockets into London as the Iraqis did with long range Scuds to Kuwait, with by the way, were weapons Iraq was not allowed to have. Than yes we should attack Germany. If the Germans were still slaughtering Jews as the Iraqis were still doing to the Kurd up until 2003. Than yes we should attack Germany.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #282 on: January 11, 2006, 05:06:49 pm »
Quote:

I get that you're quite hostile toward the current administrations handling of this entire thing as are many, but as I'm trying to get up to speed here what does your response have to do with my question?  Keep in mind, I'm asking only about my intrepretation of the report.  I don't have enough info to develop a reasonable opinion, yet.



Yeah, I guess it's abundantly clear that I'm actively hateful of the current administration.  FWIW, this isn't partisanship, it's because the current lot are crooks and liars.

What I was trying to do with my response was confirm my agreement with your assumption, and reinforce that point by showing that there was no concern over Iraq right up to 9/11.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #283 on: January 11, 2006, 05:18:28 pm »
Quote:

Limey come on, I thought you had this. 1997 is when the major high level defections from Iraq occured. A wealth of information came from those defections. As soon as the defections occured the inspectors were kicked out. After 9/11 the belief of an AQ and Iraq alliance through various means led to the drum up for war. We know their was an alliance with terrorist organizations as have been reported through the media. Dont forget that Sadam use to pay the families of suicide bombers in Isreal.



There never was any link between al Qaeda, an Islamic fundamentalist group, and the secular Hussein regime.  Saddam was shit scared of al Qaeda because the last thing he wanted was zealots creating unrest against his rule.  It is well documented that there was no link between Iraq and al Qaeda and both Bush and Cheney have admitted this.  (Edit:  see extra comment below)

Quote:

As for Blix, Iraq had 6 years to do whatever with his weapons. Limey, we found Mig's buried in the desert. No one ever said Iraq didnt have WMD... If you look at the reports that come out even to this day, the cause for war is over STOCKPILES/CACHES, and it had to be made POST 1991. We are still finding mass graves with people who were killed by WMD and it was while inspections were going on....So he did have it... So where the hell is it. By the way, do you really think nobody is still keeping an eye out for WMD in Iraq.



You still say this despite the fact that there have been no traces of WMDs, let alone stockpiles, found since the invasion nearly three years ago.  Plus, the Colin Powell quote I gave you from pre-9/11 when he said that Iraq's WMD capability had been neutralised.

Read my lips:  No link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.  No WMDs in Iraq.

Quote:

One more thing and then I am done with this arguement. If you are a cop or in your case a Bobby. You are looking for a suspect with a gun, you find the suspect but only find parts of a gun. Is it a gun? Or is it just pieces of medal?



If by gun, you mean WMDs, or by parts of a gun, you mean WMD capability; neither has been found in Iraq.

Quote:

And if Germany was still launching V2 rockets into London as the Iraqis did with long range Scuds to Kuwait, with by the way, were weapons Iraq was not allowed to have. Than yes we should attack Germany. If the Germans were still slaughtering Jews as the Iraqis were still doing to the Kurd up until 2003. Than yes we should attack Germany.



How many scuds did Iraq fire during the invasion?  None.  Alsao, how many that were fired during the Gulf War were equipped with chemical, biological or nuclear warheads?  None, again.

The analogy to punishing someone for prior offenses remains intact.  As for Saddam's horrendous treatment of the Kurds, the world stood by and watched that happen at the time.  The time for outrage and action was in 1988, not 2003.

Edit:  On January 31, 2003, in response to the question "Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?" the President responded "I can't make that claim."
Clear enough?
The link
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #284 on: January 11, 2006, 05:36:00 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I get that you're quite hostile toward the current administrations handling of this entire thing as are many, but as I'm trying to get up to speed here what does your response have to do with my question?  Keep in mind, I'm asking only about my intrepretation of the report.  I don't have enough info to develop a reasonable opinion, yet.



Yeah, I guess it's abundantly clear that I'm actively hateful of the current administration.  FWIW, this isn't partisanship, it's because the current lot are crooks and liars.

What I was trying to do with my response was confirm my agreement with your assumption, and reinforce that point by showing that there was no concern over Iraq right up to 9/11.





Ok, I got it.  But, in all this, I fear what I don't know.  Much seems to be coming out through the press.  But, it reads to me as if Browneye, who has conveyed an image of insider on this matter, is saying that there is a great deal on this subject that has not been disclosed, not just in volume of info but of importance of info.  Also, it reads as if there is information about Saddam's WMD's that hasn't been hashed out thoroughly in the press.  I think Arky, maybe, mentioned something about unaccounted for weapons.

Unrelated to this topic but related to upcoming elections and 2008, my very liberal, Bush-hating, Political Science professor acquaintance advised me that the American public actually seems most content when the White House and Congress are held by opposing parties.  I suppose the idea is that each will watch the other as closely as possible, and there is the reduced likelihood that a whole lot of crap legislation will be passed.
Goin' for a bus ride.

Mike S

  • Roster Filler
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #285 on: January 11, 2006, 05:42:56 pm »
Beyond the al Shifa chemical plant in Sudan, which was subsequently destroyed by Clinton in 1998 via Tomahawk missile strikes and whose alleged ties between Iraq and bin Laden were tenuous at best, where is this so-called "alliance"?
"Romanes eunt domus"

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #286 on: January 11, 2006, 06:13:05 pm »
Quote:

Ok, I got it.  But, in all this, I fear what I don't know.  Much seems to be coming out through the press.  But, it reads to me as if Browneye, who has conveyed an image of insider on this matter, is saying that there is a great deal on this subject that has not been disclosed, not just in volume of info but of importance of info.  Also, it reads as if there is information about Saddam's WMD's that hasn't been hashed out thoroughly in the press.  I think Arky, maybe, mentioned something about unaccounted for weapons.



Given that the administration has been forced into, reluctantly, admitting that there are/were no WMDs, don't you think that even the scantest of evidence pointing to WMDs would've been screamed from the rooftops?

Quote:

Unrelated to this topic but related to upcoming elections and 2008, my very liberal, Bush-hating, Political Science professor acquaintance advised me that the American public actually seems most content when the White House and Congress are held by opposing parties.  I suppose the idea is that each will watch the other as closely as possible, and there is the reduced likelihood that a whole lot of crap legislation will be passed.



This is the core of my issue with the current administration.  Without the check of a viable opposition, they have embarked on an unprecedented power grab which can only lead to more unchecked power and greater and more outrageous power grabbing.  Unless this is arrested quickly, power will be consolidated in the Executive branch while the House is neutered.

Example:  Bush agreed to accept the anti-torture rider to a recent bill which he signed last week.  This was contentious, because he and Cheney had fought tooth-and-nail to keep the torture option available to them.  Quietly, however, Bush wrote a "signing statement" in which he declared that he reserved the right to ignore the torture ban when such interfered with his executive powers as a war-time president.  Essentially, he pissed on the torture ban.

Turns out that Bush had made something like 500 signing statements since becoming president.  In doing so, he is claiming that his interpretation of a bill designed, written, debated and passed by the Legislative branch is more important than the interpretation of either the Legislative or Judicial branches of government.  This is a slippery slope to dictatorship, and we've long since started down from the top.

Want to know who believes that signing statements are fine and dandy?  Supreme Court Justice nominee Samual Alito.  Want to know who gets to decide whether a president is allowed to interpret law?  The Supreme Court.

If you're not worried yet, you should be.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #287 on: January 11, 2006, 06:37:58 pm »
Quote:

Without the check of a viable opposition, they have embarked on an unprecedented power grab which can only lead to more unchecked power and greater and more outrageous power grabbing.  Unless this is arrested quickly, power will be consolidated in the Executive branch while the House is neutered.




This notion and blatant corruption becoming public knowledge led to the stunning 1994 ouster of the Democratic Party from power in the House.  History seems set to repeat itself.

Quote:

Example:  Bush agreed to accept the anti-torture rider to a recent bill which he signed last week.  This was contentious, because he and Cheney had fought tooth-and-nail to keep the torture option available to them.  Quietly, however, Bush wrote a "signing statement" in which he declared that he reserved the right to ignore the torture ban when such interfered with his executive powers as a war-time president.  Essentially, he pissed on the torture ban.

Turns out that Bush had made something like 500 signing statements since becoming president.  In doing so, he is claiming that his interpretation of a bill designed, written, debated and passed by the Legislative branch is more important than the interpretation of either the Legislative or Judicial branches of government.  This is a slippery slope to dictatorship, and we've long since started down from the top.

Want to know who believes that signing statements are fine and dandy?  Supreme Court Justice nominee Samual Alito.  Want to know who gets to decide whether a president is allowed to interpret law?  The Supreme Court.

If you're not worried yet, you should be.





I'm not big on conspiracy theories.  Intelligent, well-minded folks have interpreted presidential moves since Washington as power graps and usurption of Congressional authority.  (People think the media is bad now, you should look at what they wrote about Andrew Jackson, no relation, when he was running for president.)  Heck in 94 conservatives were screaming that the Clintons were leading the US to socialism while Hilary was holding closed door meetings on a nationalized health care system.  None of that came to fruition, the checks and balances remain, and politicians continue to tend toward corruption.
Goin' for a bus ride.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #288 on: January 11, 2006, 06:48:39 pm »
Quote:

and politicians continue to tend toward corruption.




On this note... it continues to amuse me that while everyone complains (rightfully) about Republicans taking Abramoff's bribes (again, with the 1994 equivalency), no one seems to pick up on the fact that you don't tend to get bribed when your vote will inevitably fall into the minority.

IOW, power tends to corrupt...
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #289 on: January 11, 2006, 06:56:56 pm »
Quote:

This notion and blatant corruption becoming public knowledge led to the stunning 1994 ouster of the Democratic Party from power in the House.  History seems set to repeat itself.



Right.  And the Republicans promised to clean up Washington.  What goes around...

Quote:

I'm not big on conspiracy theories.  Intelligent, well-minded folks have interpreted presidential moves since Washington as power graps and usurption of Congressional authority.  (People think the media is bad now, you should look at what they wrote about Andrew Jackson, no relation, when he was running for president.)  Heck in 94 conservatives were screaming that the Clintons were leading the US to socialism while Hilary was holding closed door meetings on a nationalized health care system.  None of that came to fruition, the checks and balances remain, and politicians continue to tend toward corruption.



The difference now is that one group - I won't call them Republicans, because that's unfair on genuine Republicans - has control of two of the three branches of government and is hell bent on adding the third.  If Alito is appointed to the Supreme Court, the third branch will be in their hands.  Any attempt to challenge the power of these idealogues thereafter will be decided by the Supreme Court.

Alito's opposition to abortion rights is a smoke screen.  The real and present threat posed by his nomination is his documented pre-dispostion to support government over individuals and executive power over all else.  If the Supreme Court becomes a rubber-stamp for the presidency, democracy is lost.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #290 on: January 11, 2006, 07:02:10 pm »
Quote:

On this note... it continues to amuse me that while everyone complains (rightfully) about Republicans taking Abramoff's bribes (again, with the 1994 equivalency), no one seems to pick up on the fact that you don't tend to get bribed when your vote will inevitably fall into the minority.

IOW, power tends to corrupt...




Right.  Byron Dorgan is implicated as he took Indian Tribe money.  Apologists point out that it wasn't "Abramoff" Indian money because it was from before the tribes became Abramoff clients.  My reaction?  "So fucking what?"  He took money from tribes whilst in a position to influence legislation in their favour.  He's as dirty as those who took money via Abramoff.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #291 on: January 11, 2006, 07:15:19 pm »
Quote:

Example:  Bush agreed to accept the anti-torture rider to a recent bill which he signed last week.  This was contentious, because he and Cheney had fought tooth-and-nail to keep the torture option available to them.  Quietly, however, Bush wrote a "signing statement" in which he declared that he reserved the right to ignore the torture ban when such interfered with his executive powers as a war-time president.  Essentially, he pissed on the torture ban.

Turns out that Bush had made something like 500 signing statements since becoming president.  In doing so, he is claiming that his interpretation of a bill designed, written, debated and passed by the Legislative branch is more important than the interpretation of either the Legislative or Judicial branches of government.  This is a slippery slope to dictatorship, and we've long since started down from the top.

Want to know who believes that signing statements are fine and dandy?  Supreme Court Justice nominee Samual Alito.  Want to know who gets to decide whether a president is allowed to interpret law?  The Supreme Court.

If you're not worried yet, you should be.





I was trying to let this thread run its course without any further comment, but this is such a ludicrous distortion, it begs refutation.

The purpose of presidential signing statements is to address the tendency of courts to read beyond the four corners of a statute in interpreting legislation.  In recent decades the courts have become increasingly likely to infer legislative intent by reading comments made by individual or groups of legislators about what the statute means, even if those comments are not included in the legislation or are even contrary to the legislation.

If the courts want to go beyond what the actual text of the statute says, they study what representative or senator so-and-so read into the Congressional Record regarding the legislation and incorporate that reading into interpretation of the statute.  The members of Congress know the courts do this, so they read things into the committee reports and Congressional Record on purpose to try to load up the legislative history of the statute.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia's House delegate, who also taught a legislation clinic at a local law school, even admitted to students that members will read things into the legislative history that were specifically rejected as part of the statute, in the hopes that courts will rely on the readings anyway when reviewing the committee reports and Congressional Record.

The signing statements are intended to do precisely the same thing from the president's perspective.  In addition to his executive powers, the president is granted by the Constitution a role in the law-making process, as to either signing or vetoing a bill.  In his signing statement, the president sets forth his understanding of the legislation he is signing, the same as congressmen do in the legislative history on the statute they are voting on.

The president inserted the signing statement to make clear to the courts that he understands the McCain legislation not to override any inherenet constitutional authority he has in this area.  The courts are free to consider or disregard this as they please.  Since legislative history is not used in every case, and signing statements are relied upon even less frequently, there is a significant likelihood that his comments will mean nothing.

They do not preserve any authority to abuse the law or anything like that.  In this case, the signing statement serves to let a court, that might otherwise conclude, "the president signed this, so he must have intended to concede any inherent constitutional power to the contrary," know that the president has made no such concession.

Of course, the consideration of both legislative history and signing statements is an undemocratic exercise by the courts, since the practice essentially constitutes the courts breathing the authority of law into statements of individuals, as opposed to the text of the statute that is passed by Congress and signed by the president.  The real problem here is the judges who are willing to rely on such extraneous matter, rather than reading the law for what it actually says and eschewing anything any member of Congress or the president said about it.

But to convert this into some kind power play by the president to break the law is a gross distortion, displaying either a fundamental misunderstanding of the judicial interpretation process in this country, or a desire to launch baseless attacks on the president.  It is a crackpot position, frankly.

Craig

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3289
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #292 on: January 11, 2006, 07:21:18 pm »
Quote:

Alito's opposition to abortion rights is a smoke screen.  The real and present threat posed by his nomination is his documented pre-dispostion to support government over individuals and executive power over all else.  If the Supreme Court becomes a rubber-stamp for the presidency, democracy is lost.




Exactly. I was worried about Alito's stance on abortion and the CAP bullshit, until I heard the term "unitary executive" and started learning about it. It's unbelieveable what these people are trying to get away with. And since there doesn't seem to be a single ball in the Democratic Party, much less a pair, I think they WILL get away with it.

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #293 on: January 11, 2006, 07:28:50 pm »
Quote:


Cheney owns over 433,000 shares in stock options in Halliburton.  He has signed a legally binding document to turn over any profits from the proceeds of these shares to charity.  Further, he has pledged not to take any tax advantage from this donation.  Halliburton has 504,455,647 shares in various hands as of the most recent 10K filing.  The roots of this company are deep in Texas.  The company was founded in the 1920's and has merged with companies that have ties to various prominent families in, and associated with, Texas.





I stand corrected then on the shares on the company, but it still stands any money he pockets in relation to Haliburton would be entirely illegal.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #294 on: January 11, 2006, 07:33:34 pm »
Quote:

Exactly. I was worried about Alito's stance on abortion and the CAP bullshit, until I heard the term "unitary executive" and started learning about it. It's unbelieveable what these people are trying to get away with. And since there doesn't seem to be a single ball in the Democratic Party, much less a pair, I think they WILL get away with it.




The Democrats, who've shown no small inclination to filibuster judicial nominees, don't appear to believe the popular support exists to do so with Alito.  So, apparently, the anti-Alito forces, having all the free speech guaranteed them by the Constitution and the same rights to vote for President and Senators as Alito's admirers, may very well have lost the democratic debate over his nomination and confirmation.

But let's just blame that on the slouch toward dictatorship.

I don't think much of Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a justice, and I think many of her opinions wholly inconsistent with a proper interpretation of the Constitution, but I don't throw a fit that there was some kind of subversion of democracy in motion when Clinton appointed her and the Senate confirmed her.  My side lost.  I got over it.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #295 on: January 11, 2006, 08:05:24 pm »
Quote:

But to convert this into some kind power play by the president to break the law is a gross distortion, displaying either a fundamental misunderstanding of the judicial interpretation process in this country, or a desire to launch baseless attacks on the president.  It is a crackpot position, frankly.



Take a look at the news reports surrounding this issue.  Many, many mainstream media outlets are reporting this as a clear attempt to bypass or undercut the torture ban.

And, for fuck's sake, why on Earth is the President adding caveats to legislation banning torture?

As to signing statements in general, Bush has been far more aggressive in his use of such statements than any other president in history.  Regardless, it is the role of the legislative branch to legislate, the executive branch to execute and the judicial branch to judge the meaning of law.  It's Bush's job to execute, not interpret law.

At the end of the day, the use of signing statements would not be a problem if one could trust the Supreme Court to independently rule on interpretation.  Judge Alito is on record as believing that the President's opinion should have greater weight than that of Congress, thereby stripping power from one branch and adding it to another.  If he is the new swing vote on the court, then the president will have the power to legislate from the oval office, simply by assigning a bill the meaning he prefers - trusting his supreme court justices to back him up.

This is how the power grab works:  two branches ganging up on the third.  Congress has already abdicated it's oversight role; if it approves Alito - who has openly stated his belief in the transfer of power from the House to the White House - then they are very close to abdicating their legislative role.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #296 on: January 11, 2006, 08:09:14 pm »
Quote:

You know me, I'll read anything.  You also know that the Senate report didnt cover whether the admin influenced the focus of the intelligence.  Also, it didnt cover, point by point, the statements in this paper commissioned but hardly written by Waxman.  Are you disputing that these things were said?




I won't dispute that any of them were said, as far as that goes.  Whether that constitutes purposefully and knowingly misleading statements, i.e., lying, is another thing entirely.  Let's take the executive summary of Bush's statements for example:

Quote:

Some of the misleading statements by President Bush include his statement in the January 28, 2003, State of the Union address that "the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa"; his statement on October 2, 2002, that "the Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency"; and his statement on May 1, 2003, that "the liberation of Iraq
. . . removed an ally of al Qaeda."





We've already been over the Niger issue.  The British government stands behind the finding, independent of the forged documents, that intelligence suggested that Saddam sought to purchase uranimum from Niger.  The Butler Inquiry supports it.  Moreover, the Senate Intelligence Report concludes that the president did not make a knowingly false statement in the 2003 State of the Union address.  That report concludes that there was a failure by American intelligence agencies to confirm what British intelligence still believes.  Of course, Joe Wilson also reported that the former prime minister of Niger stated that Iraq approached him about "commercial relations."

The "threat of unique urgency" is an opinion based on existing intelligence assessments.

As to the Iraq-al Qaeda link, the Senate Intelligence Report concludes that there were contact between between Saddam and al Quaeda, and that al Qaeda enjoyed safehavens in parts of Iraq, even if there was no official affiliation.  If Iraq was offering safe harbor to al Qaeda, then it wasn't unreasonable to state that toppling Saddam was removing an ally of al Qaeda.

What Waxman's report proves is that the Bush administration made a lot of statements on behalf of its policy of going to war -- there's a big surprise.  From the parts I've skimmed, I don't see it proving the "Bush lied, people died" line of reasoning.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #297 on: January 11, 2006, 08:13:29 pm »
Quote:

The Democrats, who've shown no small inclination to filibuster judicial nominees, don't appear to believe the popular support exists to do so with Alito.  So, apparently, the anti-Alito forces, having all the free speech guaranteed them by the Constitution and the same rights to vote for President and Senators as Alito's admirers, may very well have lost the democratic debate over his nomination and confirmation.



Filibustering of judicial nominees is not a recent development, as Frist et al would have us believe, and not unprecedented.  The first example of filibustering a judicial nominee was when Republicans did it to Lyndon Johnson in 1968, and there have been many further examples of this by Republicans since then.  A cloture vote was required to end filibusters of two of Clinton's nominees in 2000, and Frist himself voted against cloture in that case.

It's not a Republican exclusive, but then the Democrats aren't claiming that it is.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #298 on: January 11, 2006, 08:23:55 pm »
Quote:

Take a look at the news reports surrounding this issue.  Many, many mainstream media outlets are reporting this as a clear attempt to bypass or undercut the torture ban.




Who cares what the mainstream media's spin on it is?  Does that make it fact?

Quote:

And, for fuck's sake, why on Earth is the President adding caveats to legislation banning torture?




You are wrong here.  It is not a caveat.  It is stating what he understands the legislation to mean.  If he understands the legislation does not override his constitutionally inherent powers, he is saying so.  He is preserving his opinion, if it ever goes to court.  It does not somehow enpower him to defy the law, if the courts rule that his understanding and execution are incorrect.

Quote:

As to signing statements in general, Bush has been far more aggressive in his use of such statements than any other president in history.  Regardless, it is the role of the legislative branch to legislate, the executive branch to execute and the judicial branch to judge the meaning of law.  It's Bush's job to execute, not interpret law.




You are wrong here again.  The president has a law-making function.  He signs or vetoes bills.  In his law-making function, he is stating what he understands the law to mean, just as members of Congress do.  The judges will interpret the law.  They may consider his signing statement, just as they may consider the legislative history stated by legislators.  Or they may ignore it.  Either way, the judge's interpretation holds, no matter what the president or any congressman reads into the statement.

You appear not to understand how the legislative process and judicial interpretation system work in the country.  Either that, or you are pretending that they are something other than what they are in order to fit your conspiracy theories.

Quote:

At the end of the day, the use of signing statements would not be a problem if one could trust the Supreme Court to independently rule on interpretation.  Judge Alito is on record as believing that the President's opinion should have greater weight than that of Congress, thereby stripping power from one branch and adding it to another.  If he is the new swing vote on the court, then the president will have the power to legislate from the oval office, simply by assigning a bill the meaning he prefers - trusting his supreme court justices to back him up.




Nope, he states what his understanding of the bill is.  The courts can pay attention to it or ignore it.  Indeed, they are more likely to ignore it, and in fact, a textualist and originalist like Alito is more likely than most judges to ignore it, since he takes the four-corners approach to reading a statute, reading its actual text, not what the lawmakers -- the president or congressmen -- said about it.

Quote:

This is how the power grab works:  two branches ganging up on the third.  Congress has already abdicated it's oversight role; if it approves Alito - who has openly stated his belief in the transfer of power from the House to the White House - then they are very close to abdicating their legislative role.




It's also how a democracy works.  People elect the president.  They elect the Congress.  The president nomintes judges.  The Senate confirms them.  Or not.  You are casting about with the notion that the president, Alito, Congress, etc. are some extremist cabal hell-bent on taking over the country, when it is your views that are in fact so far out of the mainstream that they have lost at the electoral level and in the court of public opinion.

It's a political version of WFW.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #299 on: January 11, 2006, 08:28:33 pm »
Quote:

I won't dispute that any of them were said, as far as that goes.  Whether that constitutes purposefully and knowingly misleading statements, i.e., lying, is another thing entirely.  Let's take the executive summary of Bush's statements for example:

Quote:

Some of the misleading statements by President Bush include his statement in the January 28, 2003, State of the Union address that "the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa"; his statement on October 2, 2002, that "the Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency"; and his statement on May 1, 2003, that "the liberation of Iraq
. . . removed an ally of al Qaeda."





We've already been over the Niger issue.  The British government stands behind the finding, independent of the forged documents, that intelligence suggested that Saddam sought to purchase uranimum from Niger.  The Butler Inquiry supports it.  Moreover, the Senate Intelligence Report concludes that the president did not make a knowingly false statement in the 2003 State of the Union address.  That report concludes that there was a failure by American intelligence agencies to confirm what British intelligence still believes.  Of course, Joe Wilson also reported that the former prime minister of Niger stated that Iraq approached him about "commercial relations."

The "threat of unique urgency" is an opinion based on existing intelligence assessments.

As to the Iraq-al Qaeda link, the Senate Intelligence Report concludes that there were contact between between Saddam and al Quaeda, and that al Qaeda enjoyed safehavens in parts of Iraq, even if there was no official affiliation.  If Iraq was offering safe harbor to al Qaeda, then it wasn't unreasonable to state that toppling Saddam was removing an ally of al Qaeda.

What Waxman's report proves is that the Bush administration made a lot of statements on behalf of its policy of going to war -- there's a big surprise.  From the parts I've skimmed, I don't see it proving the "Bush lied, people died" line of reasoning.




Here's where language parsing - like debating the meaning of the word "it" - becomes relevant.  In October, Bush gave a speech in Cincinatti.  The original draft of the speech included a reference to the yellowcake accusation, but it was taken out at the insistence of CIA Director George Tenet.  Later that month, a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's WMD capability cited the yellowcake story as "highly dubious".

The British yellowcake story was the same one as the CIA had.  Bush already knew it was, in the opinion of the CIA, crap.  Yet it was in his speech - just re-attributed to the Brits.  It wasn't without profile either; it was the coup de grace of his argument for war.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #300 on: January 11, 2006, 08:39:42 pm »
Quote:

It's also how a democracy works.  People elect the president.  They elect the Congress.  The president nomintes judges.  The Senate confirms them.  Or not.  You are casting about with the notion that the president, Alito, Congress, etc. are some extremist cabal hell-bent on taking over the country, when it is your views that are in fact so far out of the mainstream that they have lost at the electoral level and in the court of public opinion.

It's a political version of WFW.





This administration has redefined torture to an amazingly narrow description, fought tooth and nail to avoid legislation that would prevent them from torturing, then caveated the torture ban to say that it doesn't override the presiden't powers.  Why do you think the ban was introduced in the first place, if not to stop the administration from torturing people?  The whole point was to make it blatantly clear that the US doesn't mistreat prisoners, and Bush felt it necessary to clarify how it applies to him.

I work in insurance; weasel words are my game; and the signing statement are some of the weaseliest words I've ever seen.

You are parsing the debate, attacking individual minutae and then poo-pooing the bigger picture as the product of an overly suspcious mind.  I am looking at intent, and the application of any caveat to a rule against torture has nothing but evil intent, IMHO.

Alito has said that he gives more weight to presidential signing statements than the House's stated intentions behind the laws they draft and pass.  This flies in the face of the intent of the constitution to have three seperate but equal branches.  Bush is trying to put him on the court that will decide whether Bush is within his rights to do what he's doing.  It's a very cosy relationship that makes me extremely uncomfortable.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #301 on: January 11, 2006, 08:50:59 pm »
Quote:

Filibustering of judicial nominees is not a recent development, as Frist et al would have us believe, and not unprecedented.  The first example of filibustering a judicial nominee was when Republicans did it to Lyndon Johnson in 1968, and there have been many further examples of this by Republicans since then.  A cloture vote was required to end filibusters of two of Clinton's nominees in 2000, and Frist himself voted against cloture in that case.

It's not a Republican exclusive, but then the Democrats aren't claiming that it is.





I never said it was a Republican exclusive.  And the Republicans have a majority.  If they wish to change the rules, they can.  I got tired of hearing them whine about it, when they had the votes to change it.

In any event, the Fortas nomination failed to receive a cloture vote after just a few days of debate.  Moreover, there is supportable speculation that Fortas did not have the votes to win confirmation -- probably the chief factor behind his request to President Johnson to be withdrawn from consideration after just a few days of floor debate.

Contrast this to nominees who were virtually guaranteed to win confirmation, but who spent months or even years waiting for a floor vote that never came.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #302 on: January 11, 2006, 09:03:39 pm »
Quote:

The British yellowcake story was the same one as the CIA had.  Bush already knew it was, in the opinion of the CIA, crap.  Yet it was in his speech - just re-attributed to the Brits.  It wasn't without profile either; it was the coup de grace of his argument for war.




To quote from the Senate intelligence report, "Both the WINPAC Director and NSC Special Assistant told Committee staff that the WINPAC Director's concerns about using the uranimum information [in the State of the Union speech] pertained only to revealing sources and methods and not to any concern about the credibility of the uranium reporting."

Moreover, I've never heard anyone saying it was yellowcake that put them over the top in supporting the war.  Saying it was the "coup de grace" is a stretch.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #303 on: January 11, 2006, 09:24:27 pm »
Quote:

This administration has redefined torture to an amazingly narrow description, fought tooth and nail to avoid legislation that would prevent them from torturing, then caveated the torture ban to say that it doesn't override the presiden't powers.  Why do you think the ban was introduced in the first place, if not to stop the administration from torturing people?  The whole point was to make it blatantly clear that the US doesn't mistreat prisoners, and Bush felt it necessary to clarify how it applies to him.

I work in insurance; weasel words are my game; and the signing statement are some of the weaseliest words I've ever seen.

You are parsing the debate, attacking individual minutae and then poo-pooing the bigger picture as the product of an overly suspcious mind.  I am looking at intent, and the application of any caveat to a rule against torture has nothing but evil intent, IMHO.

Alito has said that he gives more weight to presidential signing statements than the House's stated intentions behind the laws they draft and pass.  This flies in the face of the intent of the constitution to have three seperate but equal branches.  Bush is trying to put him on the court that will decide whether Bush is within his rights to do what he's doing.  It's a very cosy relationship that makes me extremely uncomfortable.





I'm not parsing the debate.  I'm correcting your erroneous assertion that a signing statement is anything other than putting into the record the president's asserted understanding of the legislation for the purpose, when courts later interpret the legislation, of consideration of that understanding.  The courts will be free to consider that understanding or ignore it as entirely irrelevant, just as they review legislative intent read by congressmen into the legislative history.  You may note that John McCain and John Warner have entered a response to the president's signing statement into legislative history.

If the administration acts in ways that are contrary to the law, the administration will be taken to court, and the courts will exercise their judgment as to whether they think the president's signing statement has any bearing.  They'll read the law, they'll read the Constitution, and they'll interpret the law and the Constitution.  Let me put it this way: I can count on one hand the number of cases I've ever read where the courts have interpreted a statute using a signing statement.  I can remember reading lots of cases where the courts purported to rely on legislative history, at least in part, to render a decision.

As for Alito, I'd like you to direct me to a credible source where he states that legislative history and signing statements play a role in his mode of statutory interpretation.  Alito has written along these lines:

"Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress," Alito wrote. He later added that "by forcing some rethinking by courts, scholars, and litigants, it may help to curb some of the prevalent abuses of legislative history."

But, again, if Alito really is "Scalito," as he has been accused, then it's doubtful he's going to care about presidential or congressional intent.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #304 on: January 11, 2006, 10:14:06 pm »
Quote:

Contrast this to nominees who were virtually guaranteed to win confirmation, but who spent months or even years waiting for a floor vote that never came.



A filibuster can be broken with enough votes.  Take it away, and the minority party may as well take a long vacation.  A bit like what they've done up until recently.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #305 on: January 11, 2006, 10:18:28 pm »
Quote:

To quote from the Senate intelligence report, "Both the WINPAC Director and NSC Special Assistant told Committee staff that the WINPAC Director's concerns about using the uranimum information [in the State of the Union speech] pertained only to revealing sources and methods and not to any concern about the credibility of the uranium reporting."

Moreover, I've never heard anyone saying it was yellowcake that put them over the top in supporting the war.  Saying it was the "coup de grace" is a stretch.





You've missed my point about the source-thing.  Bush was dodging the issue of the uranium story being "highly dubious" by attributing it to the Brits.  A reasonable person, knowing it to be almost certainly bunk would've left it out.

There was no reason to put it in other than for it's very heavy impact.  "Saddam is trying to get nukes" is what I heard, and it scared the shit out of me and had me clamouring for his removal.  It was the last straw for me, and I suspect many, many other people too.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #306 on: January 11, 2006, 10:28:10 pm »
Quote:

You are parsing the debate, attacking individual minutae and then poo-pooing the bigger picture as the product of an overly suspcious mind.  I am looking at intent, and the application of any caveat to a rule against torture has nothing but evil intent, IMHO.

Alito has said that he gives more weight to presidential signing statements than the House's stated intentions behind the laws they draft and pass.  This flies in the face of the intent of the constitution to have three seperate but equal branches.  Bush is trying to put him on the court that will decide whether Bush is within his rights to do what he's doing.  It's a very cosy relationship that makes me extremely uncomfortable.





I'm not parsing the debate.  I'm correcting your erroneous assertion that a signing statement is anything other than putting into the record the president's asserted understanding of the legislation for the purpose, when courts later interpret the legislation, of consideration of that understanding.  The courts will be free to consider that understanding or ignore it as entirely irrelevant, just as they review legislative intent read by congressmen into the legislative history.  You may note that John McCain and John Warner have entered a response to the president's signing statement into legislative history.

If the administration acts in ways that are contrary to the law, the administration will be taken to court, and the courts will exercise their judgment as to whether they think the president's signing statement has any bearing.  They'll read the law, they'll read the Constitution, and they'll interpret the law and the Constitution.  Let me put it this way: I can count on one hand the number of cases I've ever read where the courts have interpreted a statute using a signing statement.  I can remember reading lots of cases where the courts purported to rely on legislative history, at least in part, to render a decision.

As for Alito, I'd like you to direct me to a credible source where he states that legislative history and signing statements play a role in his mode of statutory interpretation.  Alito has written along these lines:

"Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress," Alito wrote. He later added that "by forcing some rethinking by courts, scholars, and litigants, it may help to curb some of the prevalent abuses of legislative history."

But, again, if Alito really is "Scalito," as he has been accused, then it's doubtful he's going to care about presidential or congressional intent.



I guess you're going to gloss over the whole torture thing...

Here's Alito describing his thoughts on the power of the executive branch:

Quote:

The Constitution "makes the president the head of the executive branch, but it does more than that," Judge Alito said in a speech to the Federalist Society at Washington's Mayflower Hotel. "The president has not just some executive powers, but the executive power -- the whole thing."



This is from an article in the screaming liberal rag, the Wall Street Journal

Also, in 1984, while working for the Reagan administration, Alito defended the right of government officials to order domestic wiretaps without a warrant.  This article from the San Francisco Chronicle takes us neatly back to where we kicked off this joyous sojourn through politics - warrantless wiretapping of US citizens by the government, which, despite the length of this thread, is still illegal and still happening.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #307 on: January 12, 2006, 12:15:32 am »
Quote:

Here's Alito describing his thoughts on the power of the executive branch:

Quote:

The Constitution "makes the president the head of the executive branch, but it does more than that," Judge Alito said in a speech to the Federalist Society at Washington's Mayflower Hotel. "The president has not just some executive powers, but the executive power -- the whole thing."



This is from an article in the screaming liberal rag, the Wall Street Journal




What is the issue here?  Of course the president has the whole executive power.  The Constitution says so.  Read the first line of Article II: "The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."  It does not say, "The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America and [insert other parties here]."

Who else are you asserting should have some of the executive power?  The cabinet secretaries and other appointed officials serve at the pleasure of the president.  They serve at his direction.  If they did not, they would be insubordinate, and besides, they are unelected.

This is an example of the silliness of seizing on a statement and trying to make a kerfuffle about it by pretending that it says something sinister rather than something self-evident.  The president has all the executive power.  No kidding.  What else is there to this?

Quote:

Also, in 1984, while working for the Reagan administration, Alito defended the right of government officials to order domestic wiretaps without a warrant.  This article from the San Francisco Chronicle takes us neatly back to where we kicked off this joyous sojourn through politics - warrantless wiretapping of US citizens by the government, which, despite the length of this thread, is still illegal and still happening.




What this article says is that Alito advised the Reagan administration that its best legal strategy for seeking immunity for officials ordering warrantless domestic wiretaps was to wait for a stronger case than the Nixon administration case.

Are you asserting that this was not sound legal advice to be given to the president by his lawyers?  That was Alito's job: to advise the president of the best legal strategies available to him.  As the article states, the administration disregarded Alito's legal advice and lost.

He was doing what he had an ethical obligation to do: provide his client with the best possible advice for defending his client's interests.  Just because Alito's client was the executive branch does not make his ethical obligations any less applicable.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #308 on: January 12, 2006, 12:27:07 am »
Quote:

I guess you're going to gloss over the whole torture thing.




Nope.  I'm just not going to led you gloss over the fact that signing statements are not some kind of Nuremburg Laws-type usurpation of power by the president.

There are existing laws and treaties on the books regarding torture.  If the administration violated them, bring a lawsuit and put a stop to it.  I'm not sure the McCain rider added anything to that other than possibly outlawing some actions that do not rise to the level of torture, thus making it more difficult for interrogators do their jobs.

I do not subscribe to the theory that the terrorists deserve whatever they get (although I bet you would find a fair number of people in this country who would subscribe to it).  But we cannot even have an honest debate on where the line should be drawn, because of the hysterial screaming of "torture! torture!" from those who would castigate the administration for a lot of things that are permissible under existing laws or treaties.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #309 on: January 12, 2006, 12:37:21 am »
Quote:

You've missed my point about the source-thing.  Bush was dodging the issue of the uranium story being "highly dubious" by attributing it to the Brits.  A reasonable person, knowing it to be almost certainly bunk would've left it out.

There was no reason to put it in other than for it's very heavy impact.  "Saddam is trying to get nukes" is what I heard, and it scared the shit out of me and had me clamouring for his removal.  It was the last straw for me, and I suspect many, many other people too.





No, he didn't.  The Senate Intelligence report states that the issue with the Niger statement in the State of the Union address was not its accuracy but that U.S. intelligence did not want to reveal its sources or confidential information.  

Let me state this for the last time: Joe Wilson's report confirms that the Iraqis approached Niger about establishing "commercial relations."  What else were the Iraqis seeking there if not uranium?

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #310 on: January 12, 2006, 01:04:53 am »
Quote:

Quote:

Limey come on, I thought you had this. 1997 is when the major high level defections from Iraq occured. A wealth of information came from those defections. As soon as the defections occured the inspectors were kicked out. After 9/11 the belief of an AQ and Iraq alliance through various means led to the drum up for war. We know their was an alliance with terrorist organizations as have been reported through the media. Dont forget that Sadam use to pay the families of suicide bombers in Isreal.



There never was any link between al Qaeda, an Islamic fundamentalist group, and the secular Hussein regime.  Saddam was shit scared of al Qaeda because the last thing he wanted was zealots creating unrest against his rule.  It is well documented that there was no link between Iraq and al Qaeda and both Bush and Cheney have admitted this.  (Edit:  see extra comment below)

Quote:

As for Blix, Iraq had 6 years to do whatever with his weapons. Limey, we found Mig's buried in the desert. No one ever said Iraq didnt have WMD... If you look at the reports that come out even to this day, the cause for war is over STOCKPILES/CACHES, and it had to be made POST 1991. We are still finding mass graves with people who were killed by WMD and it was while inspections were going on....So he did have it... So where the hell is it. By the way, do you really think nobody is still keeping an eye out for WMD in Iraq.



You still say this despite the fact that there have been no traces of WMDs, let alone stockpiles, found since the invasion nearly three years ago.  Plus, the Colin Powell quote I gave you from pre-9/11 when he said that Iraq's WMD capability had been neutralised.

Read my lips:  No link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.  No WMDs in Iraq.

Quote:

One more thing and then I am done with this arguement. If you are a cop or in your case a Bobby. You are looking for a suspect with a gun, you find the suspect but only find parts of a gun. Is it a gun? Or is it just pieces of medal?



If by gun, you mean WMDs, or by parts of a gun, you mean WMD capability; neither has been found in Iraq.

Quote:

And if Germany was still launching V2 rockets into London as the Iraqis did with long range Scuds to Kuwait, with by the way, were weapons Iraq was not allowed to have. Than yes we should attack Germany. If the Germans were still slaughtering Jews as the Iraqis were still doing to the Kurd up until 2003. Than yes we should attack Germany.



How many scuds did Iraq fire during the invasion?  None.  Alsao, how many that were fired during the Gulf War were equipped with chemical, biological or nuclear warheads?  None, again.

The analogy to punishing someone for prior offenses remains intact.  As for Saddam's horrendous treatment of the Kurds, the world stood by and watched that happen at the time.  The time for outrage and action was in 1988, not 2003.

Edit:  On January 31, 2003, in response to the question "Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?" the President responded "I can't make that claim."
Clear enough?
The link  




1. you are correct in your first point but AQ is not the only Terrorist org. You are also correct in the fact that Sadam did not want the terror orgs in his country. But that doesnt stop him from supporting terror. Also I made this point in a previous post with HH.

2. Once again you are WRONG on WMD found in Iraq. Sarin and Mustard gas was reported back in 2004. The Link,2933,120137,00.html

3.Once again see 2. The key words are Stockpiles and Post 1991 WMD. We did not find Stockpiles, but we did find WMD...Look it up. You love the media so much, Go to Google and type in "Sarin in Iraq" and you will find Fox, BBC, CBS etc reported the find in 2004 along with Mustard. Do some research, dont just pull shit out of your arse.

4. it is unknown if any of the numerous long range missles fired into Kuwait before the invasion in 2003 were SCUD but they were clearly banned weapons. Hell Limey, I will give you a British newspaper this time.  The Link,3604,918756,00.html

5. Clear enough???? And I did not have sex with that woman Miss Lewinsky. That was clear too. Dude, presidents dont give classified information to the media. Once again Stop watching CNN. You were not in Iraq and you you were not one of the brits with the ISG. Clear enough? If watching CNN for intel was all we needed, than people like you could be Intelligence analysts. You get your information from the media I get mine from putting my balls on the line to find the truth.

I was on the runway in Kuwait city when one of those banned weapons believed to be Scuds went over our heads. Dont tell me there were no WMD found in Iraq. I was at Camp Slayer when the Mustard Gas IED exploded. Where were you Mr clear enough. I spent half the friggin day in MOPP gear. I was with the Iraq Survey Group at Camp Slayer in Baghdad, I was there, I was there when we wrote the Comprehensive Report for Congress, I was there when we were looking for WMD. So you can read my lips, You Are Wrong. You have no idea what you are talking about. Read the Comprehensive Report.

I cant seem to get the links to work so I guess I will have to cut and paste for you. This also reported by the BBC, CBS and others

 BAGHDAD, Iraq ? A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent (search) recently exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday.

Bush administration officials told Fox News that mustard gas (search) was also recently discovered.

Two people were treated for "minor exposure" after the sarin incident but no serious injuries were reported. Soldiers transporting the shell for inspection suffered symptoms consistent with low-level chemical exposure, which is what led to the discovery, a U.S. official told Fox News.

The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search), the chief military spokesman in Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad. "The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy.


The Guardian:
Kuwait says attacks from Iraq used banned missiles claimed to have been destroyed

Rory McCarthy in Camp As Sayliyah, Qatar, and Ewen MacAskill
Friday March 21, 2003
The Guardian


Four Iraqi missiles were fired into Kuwait yesterday near points where US and British troops were massing for invasion.
Two were widely reported to be Scuds. But the British government was cautious last night, saying it was awaiting confirmation.

There were no casualties and no suggestion that chemical or biological warheads were loaded on to the missiles.

British Harrier jets were scrambled to bomb the mobile Iraqi missile launchers based around Basra in southern Iraq.

A Kuwaiti defence ministry spokesman said that two Scuds had been fired. If only one turned out to be a Scud, it would be proof that Saddam Hussein had been lying not only over the last few months but the last 12 years.
Iraq claimed that had it destroyed all its Scud missiles after the last Gulf war but the US and Britain have maintained that 15 to 20 had been hidden.

A British government official said: "If it really was a Scud, it is prohibited by 687 [the 1991 United Nations ceasefire resolution], and Iraq has repeatedly denied possession of them, and we were right all along."

The Iraqi information minister, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, denied Iraq had fired any Scuds or had any.

One of the alleged Scuds was reported to have been brought down by a US Patriot missile. Scud missiles are much bigger than others in Iraq's arsenal and should have been easily identifiable. But if it has been hit by a Patriot, it may prove difficult to find any recognisable parts.

Two of the missiles were Chinese-built Seersucker anti-ship missiles, which are much smaller than Scuds and fly low to the ground. It is thought the Seersuckers were positioned south of Basra and originally intended to attack US and British warships.

At Camp New Jersey - one of at least two encampments in the Kuwaiti desert where soldiers jumped into protective gear - military sources said the missile might have been a Samoud 2.

Iraq is allowed missiles with a range of up to 150km (93 miles) but Scuds have a range well beyond that, which is why they were banned.

Iraqi forces had been close to the border on Wednesday night, hours before the US deadline for war ran out. But a British defence source in Qatar said the artillery appeared to have retreated to the city of Basra yesterday.

By early evening, about a dozen missile attacks were reported, including eight missiles that buzzed above a CNN reporter accompanying US-led troops in Kuwait.

One missile landed near the US army's A Company, 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, whose soldiers were eating lunch. "That is not supposed to be happening," said Captain Chris Carter, the company commander.

Within minutes a message came across the radio: a tactical ballistic missile had hit the desert.

Minutes later, all troops were ordered to put on gas masks and biochemical protective suits.




"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #311 on: January 12, 2006, 01:51:45 am »
I hope that just because I am trying to explain the truth that I am not lumped together with the war mongers. I will admit that I was against the war in the beginning because I didnt want to die trying to save a quarter in a gallon of gasoline. But regardless of why we went, I know what I saw with my own eyes. As an analyst you have to find the truth and make an informed decision when there isnt always enough information. It was no fun watching the Nick Berg film trying to find clues. Or spending hours looking For Specialist Maupin or Capt Speicher, which was also a task of the ISG. I still have nightmares of the things I saw, I saw what happens to a mans skull when it is hit by the bullet of a marine sniper rifle, and as a father I still think about the graves of children all thrown together in pits. I believe 100 percent that we did the right thing by going to Iraq, because I have met the people who were tortured at Abu G, I saw the torture devices Sadam used on people. I dont expect you to change your mind because of me but the first time a man grabs you by the hand with tears running down his face and he says the only words he knows in English " Thank You". You too would want to fight to give him his freedom. We can debate if it is Iraqis or insurgents doing the fighting. We can debate why we went to war or if you like the president. But I Sleep at night knowing that we are doing the right thing. Our biggest mistake is that we didnt hand over the country as soon as we conquered it, and we let the looting go on way to long. That is why it is so hard to find the evidence we need. But who cares, the SOB is gone.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

strosrays

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #312 on: January 12, 2006, 01:53:24 am »
Quote:

"I have no home. I'm the wind."






"Nobody can get the truth out of me because even I don't know what it is. I keep myself in a constant state of utter confusion."

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #313 on: January 12, 2006, 02:35:55 am »
Quote:

. It was no fun watching the Nick Berg film trying to find clues.  




I watched one of those beheading videos on some "Faces of Death" type website a year or so ago.... dumb idea.  That messed with my head (no pun intended) for weeks.  Pretty much cured me of viewing that type of material.

BTW Browneye, thanks for your service to the country.  It has been interesting to read your perpective and experiences.  It has also been interesting and informative to read the viewpoints of Limey, Arky, HH, and others.  Unfortunately in this type of debate there is no happy endpoint.  But it has remained civil, which is good.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #314 on: January 12, 2006, 02:39:52 am »
Quote:


"Nobody can get the truth out of me because even I don't know what it is. I keep myself in a constant state of utter confusion."





That quote would make for a great signature.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #315 on: January 12, 2006, 02:50:47 am »
Quote:

Quote:

. It was no fun watching the Nick Berg film trying to find clues.  




I watched one of those beheading videos on some "Faces of Death" type website a year or so ago.... dumb idea.  That messed with my head (no pun intended) for weeks.  Pretty much cured me of viewing that type of material.

BTW Browneye, thanks for your service to the country.  It has been interesting to read your perpective and experiences.  It has also been interesting and informative to read the viewpoints of Limey, Arky, HH, and others.  Unfortunately in this type of debate there is no happy endpoint.  But it has remained civil, which is good.




Thanks...
I had to watch that damn thing along with some of the other videos out there. I cried the first time I saw it. The dude was an idiot for being there but he didnt deserve that. I wish I could say that he was the only one. The other bad one was the chow hall in Mosul that exploded, I worked all night looking for clues on that one. What a shit hole that country is.

I was there during the invasion and I went back in March 04 to April 05. I hope someday the real truth will come out. The thing that bothers me about the president, is that when he was re elected our mission stopped and the ISG went away. I guess it didnt matter anymore.

We didnt find the Stockpiles
We didnt find Speicher
We didnt find Maupin
That is the real shame of our mission in Iraq.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #316 on: January 12, 2006, 11:40:08 am »
Quote:

Quote:

This administration has redefined torture to an amazingly narrow description, fought tooth and nail to avoid legislation that would prevent them from torturing, then caveated the torture ban to say that it doesn't override the presiden't powers.  Why do you think the ban was introduced in the first place, if not to stop the administration from torturing people?  The whole point was to make it blatantly clear that the US doesn't mistreat prisoners, and Bush felt it necessary to clarify how it applies to him.

I work in insurance; weasel words are my game; and the signing statement are some of the weaseliest words I've ever seen.

You are parsing the debate, attacking individual minutae and then poo-pooing the bigger picture as the product of an overly suspcious mind.  I am looking at intent, and the application of any caveat to a rule against torture has nothing but evil intent, IMHO.

Alito has said that he gives more weight to presidential signing statements than the House's stated intentions behind the laws they draft and pass.  This flies in the face of the intent of the constitution to have three seperate but equal branches.  Bush is trying to put him on the court that will decide whether Bush is within his rights to do what he's doing.  It's a very cosy relationship that makes me extremely uncomfortable.





I'm not parsing the debate.  I'm correcting your erroneous assertion that a signing statement is anything other than putting into the record the president's asserted understanding of the legislation for the purpose, when courts later interpret the legislation, of consideration of that understanding.  The courts will be free to consider that understanding or ignore it as entirely irrelevant, just as they review legislative intent read by congressmen into the legislative history.  You may note that John McCain and John Warner have entered a response to the president's signing statement into legislative history.

If the administration acts in ways that are contrary to the law, the administration will be taken to court, and the courts will exercise their judgment as to whether they think the president's signing statement has any bearing.  They'll read the law, they'll read the Constitution, and they'll interpret the law and the Constitution.  Let me put it this way: I can count on one hand the number of cases I've ever read where the courts have interpreted a statute using a signing statement.  I can remember reading lots of cases where the courts purported to rely on legislative history, at least in part, to render a decision.

As for Alito, I'd like you to direct me to a credible source where he states that legislative history and signing statements play a role in his mode of statutory interpretation.  Alito has written along these lines:

"Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress," Alito wrote. He later added that "by forcing some rethinking by courts, scholars, and litigants, it may help to curb some of the prevalent abuses of legislative history."

But, again, if Alito really is "Scalito," as he has been accused, then it's doubtful he's going to care about presidential or congressional intent.




Legislative histories are common in legal briefs.  The signing statement hasn't been used much because there havent been that many of them, I heard 7 from Reagan to Clinton.  Typically the President either signs or vetos the legislation.  It is Congresses' job to write legislation, the judiciary's job is to apply or interpret the laws. With justices such as Alito in the SC, who lean towards deference to the Executive, these signing statements will become more important.  Bush has over 100 signing statements.  Are they just doodles?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #317 on: January 12, 2006, 11:46:45 am »
Quote:

This is an example of the silliness of seizing on a statement and trying to make a kerfuffle about it by pretending that it says something sinister rather than something self-evident.  The president has all the executive power.  No kidding.  What else is there to this?



When working for Reagan, Alito laid out the case for using the signing statement to shift the balance of interpretation towards the Executive branch and away from the legislative.  It never really caught on, perhaps because there were no judges on the Supreme Court like Alito.

Alito said at the time that this approach is unlikely to get a warm welcome.  Quote "The novelty of the procedure and the potential increase of presidential power are two factors that may account for this anticipated reaction.  In addition, and perhaps most important, Congress is likely to resent the fact that the president will get in the last word on questions of interpretation."

Ironically, in reference to the Bush administrations use of the signing statement, Phillip Cooper of Portland State University wrote, in a recent Presidential Studies Quarterly, that the administration "has very effectively expanded the scope and character of the signing statement not only to address specific provisions of legislation that the White House wishes to nullify, but also in an effort to significantly reposition and strengthen the powers of the presidency relative to the Congress. This tour d' force has been carried out in such a systematic and careful fashion that few in Congress, the media, or the scholarly community are aware that anything has happened at all."

Alito devised the scheme, expected it to be unpopular because it shifted power away from Congress, and now may get to ratify his own plan as a Supreme Court Justice.  Many people are concerned (now) about the use of signing statements and the creation of a Supreme Court that may well be friendly to such.

All the above is from this article in the Washington Post.

Quote:

He was doing what he had an ethical obligation to do: provide his client with the best possible advice for defending his client's interests.  Just because Alito's client was the executive branch does not make his ethical obligations any less applicable.



It's not a question on whether that case had merit, it's the fact that Alito's stated position is to support the authority of the governemnt to wiretap on Americans without a warrant.  This is a hot issue currently, and one that will almost certainly come in front of the Supreme Court during Alito's time there if he's approved.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #318 on: January 12, 2006, 11:47:31 am »
Quote:

Quote:

You've missed my point about the source-thing.  Bush was dodging the issue of the uranium story being "highly dubious" by attributing it to the Brits.  A reasonable person, knowing it to be almost certainly bunk would've left it out.

There was no reason to put it in other than for it's very heavy impact.  "Saddam is trying to get nukes" is what I heard, and it scared the shit out of me and had me clamouring for his removal.  It was the last straw for me, and I suspect many, many other people too.





No, he didn't.  The Senate Intelligence report states that the issue with the Niger statement in the State of the Union address was not its accuracy but that U.S. intelligence did not want to reveal its sources or confidential information.  

Let me state this for the last time: Joe Wilson's report confirms that the Iraqis approached Niger about establishing "commercial relations."  What else were the Iraqis seeking there if not uranium?





If you're bringing up Joe Wilson, his opinion was that they weren't.

"Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq. Niger's uranium business consists of two mines, Somair and Cominak, which are run by French, Spanish, Japanese, German and Nigerian interests. If the government wanted to remove uranium from a mine, it would have to notify the consortium, which in turn is strictly monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, because the two mines are closely regulated, quasi-governmental entities, selling uranium would require the approval of the minister of mines, the prime minister and probably the president. In short, there's simply too much oversight over too small an industry for a sale to have transpired."
 The Link

Ty in Tampa

  • Contributor
  • Pope
  • Posts: 9111
  • You just gotta keep livin' man, L-I-V-I-N
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #319 on: January 12, 2006, 11:53:25 am »
Quote:

Quote:

"I have no home. I'm the wind."



"Nobody can get the truth out of me because even I don't know what it is. I keep myself in a constant state of utter confusion."





"...it's the duty of every real American to be on the lookout for goldbricks, pinko's and fellow travelers. 'Course without the likes of Americans like you the jobs of Americans like me would be a lot more difficult. But don't get me wrong, Americans like me like difficult jobs. So don't get the idea you're doing the CIA any favors. We don't really need Americans like you, we don't need anybody."
"You want me broken. You want me dead.
I'm living rent-free in the back of your head."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #320 on: January 12, 2006, 11:59:33 am »
Quote:

Nope.  I'm just not going to led you gloss over the fact that signing statements are not some kind of Nuremburg Laws-type usurpation of power by the president.

There are existing laws and treaties on the books regarding torture.  If the administration violated them, bring a lawsuit and put a stop to it.  I'm not sure the McCain rider added anything to that other than possibly outlawing some actions that do not rise to the level of torture, thus making it more difficult for interrogators do their jobs.

I do not subscribe to the theory that the terrorists deserve whatever they get (although I bet you would find a fair number of people in this country who would subscribe to it).  But we cannot even have an honest debate on where the line should be drawn, because of the hysterial screaming of "torture! torture!" from those who would castigate the administration for a lot of things that are permissible under existing laws or treaties.




Alberto Gonzales redefined what this administration interprets as torture.  It is "pain equivalent to that of organ failure or death."  So when Bush et al says "we don't turture", this is the defininition he's using.  "Waterboarding" is one practice to which the administration has owned up;  Google it, it sounds like a hoot.

The McCain rider wasn't actually banning torture.  It was actually a ban of "cruel treatment" of prisoners.  I would certainly call waterboarding cruel.  It was this ban that Bush/Cheney fought so hard to avoid.

We can go back and forth on the semantics of this particular signing statement, but if it walks like a duck (equipped with testicle-zapping electrodes) and quacks like a duck (equipped with testicle-zapping electrodes) then someone's bollocks are in for a shock.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #321 on: January 12, 2006, 12:02:47 pm »
Quote:

No, he didn't.  The Senate Intelligence report states that the issue with the Niger statement in the State of the Union address was not its accuracy but that U.S. intelligence did not want to reveal its sources or confidential information.  

Let me state this for the last time: Joe Wilson's report confirms that the Iraqis approached Niger about establishing "commercial relations."  What else were the Iraqis seeking there if not uranium?




The document that supported the accusation of the attempt to buy uranium has been shown to be the most amateurish of forgeries.

George Tenet (he who had this claim taken out from a speech just 3 months prior to the SOTU address) took the blame for the misleading reappearing.  Presumably this is part of his resume of fuck ups involving Iraq's WMDs that earned him the Medal of Freedom.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #322 on: January 12, 2006, 12:02:55 pm »
Quote:

If you're bringing up Joe Wilson, his opinion was that they weren't.

"Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq. Niger's uranium business consists of two mines, Somair and Cominak, which are run by French, Spanish, Japanese, German and Nigerian interests. If the government wanted to remove uranium from a mine, it would have to notify the consortium, which in turn is strictly monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, because the two mines are closely regulated, quasi-governmental entities, selling uranium would require the approval of the minister of mines, the prime minister and probably the president. In short, there's simply too much oversight over too small an industry for a sale to have transpired."
 The Link





This statement goes to whether a sale in fact ever took place.  It has nothing to do with whether Iraq sought to make a purchase, even if Niger refused.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #323 on: January 12, 2006, 12:07:57 pm »
Quote:

When working for Reagan, Alito laid out the case for using the signing statement to shift the balance of interpretation towards the Executive branch and away from the legislative.  It never really caught on, perhaps because there were no judges on the Supreme Court like Alito.





Emphasis mine: my understanding is that most lawyers take positions to adavance their clients' interests, positions that they would not necessarily agree with as a judge.

However, I do have to ask why the Senate won't ask real questions like this, instead of flabbling about whether or not Alito believed in keeping women and minorities out of Princeton, a charge that neither his comments nor his judicial history support.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #324 on: January 12, 2006, 12:21:48 pm »
Quote:

When working for Reagan, Alito laid out the case for using the signing statement to shift the balance of interpretation towards the Executive branch and away from the legislative.  It never really caught on, perhaps because there were no judges on the Supreme Court like Alito.

Alito said at the time that this approach is unlikely to get a warm welcome.  Quote "The novelty of the procedure and the potential increase of presidential power are two factors that may account for this anticipated reaction.  In addition, and perhaps most important, Congress is likely to resent the fact that the president will get in the last word on questions of interpretation."

Ironically, in reference to the Bush administrations use of the signing statement, Phillip Cooper of Portland State University wrote, in a recent Presidential Studies Quarterly, that the administration "has very effectively expanded the scope and character of the signing statement not only to address specific provisions of legislation that the White House wishes to nullify, but also in an effort to significantly reposition and strengthen the powers of the presidency relative to the Congress. This tour d' force has been carried out in such a systematic and careful fashion that few in Congress, the media, or the scholarly community are aware that anything has happened at all."

Alito devised the scheme, expected it to be unpopular because it shifted power away from Congress, and now may get to ratify his own plan as a Supreme Court Justice.  Many people are concerned (now) about the use of signing statements and the creation of a Supreme Court that may well be friendly to such.

All the above is from this article in the Washington Post.





Read your own cited article and you'll figure out this is a tempest in a teapot:

"In the 1980s, the Reagan administration, like other White Houses before and after, chafed at the reality that Congress's reach on the meaning of laws extends beyond the words of statutes passed on Capitol Hill. Judges may turn to the trail of statements lawmakers left behind in the Congressional Record when trying to glean the intent behind a law. The White House left no comparable record.

"Such 'interpretive signing statements' would be a significant departure from run-of-the-mill bill signing pronouncements, which are 'often little more than a press release,' Alito wrote. The idea was to flag constitutional concerns and get courts to pay as much attention to the president's take on a law as to 'legislative intent.'

"'Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress,' Alito wrote. He later added that 'by forcing some rethinking by courts, scholars, and litigants, it may help to curb some of the prevalent abuses of legislative history.'

"The Reagan administration popularized the use of such statements and subsequent administrations continued the practice. (The courts have yet to give them much weight, though.)"

As I already wrote, if Alito is a textualist and an originalist in the mold of Scalia and Thomas (egads!), then he will not rely heavily on them, since he should stick with the four corners of the statute and not allow extraneous matter to affect his judgment.  Even if he does rely on them, he'll be one out of nine.

Simply put: Congress gets its say, the president gets his say, the courts decide.

Quote:

It's not a question on whether that case had merit, it's the fact that Alito's stated position is to support the authority of the governemnt to wiretap on Americans without a warrant.  This is a hot issue currently, and one that will almost certainly come in front of the Supreme Court during Alito's time there if he's approved.




So basically you're saying you don't want him on the court because you disagree with him?  Your point being?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #325 on: January 12, 2006, 12:25:58 pm »
Quote:

The document that supported the accusation of the attempt to buy uranium has been shown to be the most amateurish of forgeries.




The United States and Britain have found that there were intelligence sources other than the forged documents to suggest that Iraq approached Niger to make the purchase attempt.

Of course, we've been through this 584 times, so there's not any point in discussing it any further.

Quote:

George Tenet (he who had this claim taken out from a speech just 3 months prior to the SOTU address) took the blame for the misleading reappearing.  Presumably this is part of his resume of fuck ups involving Iraq's WMDs that earned him the Medal of Freedom.




The Senate Intelligence report comes down hard on Tenet.  If you want to have a debate about whether he deserves a medal, I'm not going to oppose it.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #326 on: January 12, 2006, 12:28:01 pm »
Quote:

Alberto Gonzales redefined what this administration interprets as torture.  It is "pain equivalent to that of organ failure or death."  So when Bush et al says "we don't turture", this is the defininition he's using.  "Waterboarding" is one practice to which the administration has owned up;  Google it, it sounds like a hoot.

The McCain rider wasn't actually banning torture.  It was actually a ban of "cruel treatment" of prisoners.  I would certainly call waterboarding cruel.  It was this ban that Bush/Cheney fought so hard to avoid.

We can go back and forth on the semantics of this particular signing statement, but if it walks like a duck (equipped with testicle-zapping electrodes) and quacks like a duck (equipped with testicle-zapping electrodes) then someone's bollocks are in for a shock.





And I suspect Gonzales's interpretation isn't likely to hold up in court.  Sue him, and we'll find out.  Or let's have a democratic debate on where to draw the line.

Of course, if your position doesn't prevail, you can just say it's a dictatorship of the majority.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #327 on: January 12, 2006, 12:31:41 pm »
Quote:

Legislative histories are common in legal briefs.  The signing statement hasn't been used much because there havent been that many of them, I heard 7 from Reagan to Clinton.  Typically the President either signs or vetos the legislation.  It is Congresses' job to write legislation, the judiciary's job is to apply or interpret the laws. With justices such as Alito in the SC, who lean towards deference to the Executive, these signing statements will become more important.  Bush has over 100 signing statements.  Are they just doodles?




71 by Reagan. 105 by Clinton.  Mostly, like Bush, in the area of foreign policy, where the executive and legislative are most likely to clash over authority.

I have no idea how many times Alito relied on them on the Third Circuit.  I haven't seen that reported anywhere.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #328 on: January 12, 2006, 12:39:02 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

If you're bringing up Joe Wilson, his opinion was that they weren't.

"Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq. Niger's uranium business consists of two mines, Somair and Cominak, which are run by French, Spanish, Japanese, German and Nigerian interests. If the government wanted to remove uranium from a mine, it would have to notify the consortium, which in turn is strictly monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, because the two mines are closely regulated, quasi-governmental entities, selling uranium would require the approval of the minister of mines, the prime minister and probably the president. In short, there's simply too much oversight over too small an industry for a sale to have transpired."
 The Link





This statement goes to whether a sale in fact ever took place.  It has nothing to do with whether Iraq sought to make a purchase, even if Niger refused.





The problem with that argument is that the administration used this incident as one proof that Iraq ... "is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon."  Combined with the talk of "mushroom clouds" they sought to use this discredited story as one more piece of evidence.  And look at the reaction when the story was publicly doubted by Wilson.  Why would the raising of doubt in the midst of this continuing case for invasion, mainly put forth at the time on the fear of WMD, cause the reaction it did if they didnt want people to believe this piece of their story?  Was the case for war a dialogue or a lecture?  Which evidence was allowed to be heard?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #329 on: January 12, 2006, 12:42:39 pm »
Quote:

The problem with that argument is that the administration used this incident as one proof that Iraq ... "is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon."  Combined with the talk of "mushroom clouds" they sought to use this discredited story as one more piece of evidence.  And look at the reaction when the story was publicly doubted by Wilson.  Why would the raising of doubt in the midst of this continuing case for invasion, mainly put forth at the time on the fear of WMD, cause the reaction it did if they didnt want people to believe this piece of their story?  Was the case for war a dialogue or a lecture?  Which evidence was allowed to be heard?




Wilson provoked such a reaction because he was lying.  He lied about who sent him, he lied about what he found.  It is ironic that the same crowd that believes like the Gospel that Bush lied, people died, has never atoned for making a saint and a martyr or Joe Wilson.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #330 on: January 12, 2006, 12:42:46 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Legislative histories are common in legal briefs.  The signing statement hasn't been used much because there havent been that many of them, I heard 7 from Reagan to Clinton.  Typically the President either signs or vetos the legislation.  It is Congresses' job to write legislation, the judiciary's job is to apply or interpret the laws. With justices such as Alito in the SC, who lean towards deference to the Executive, these signing statements will become more important.  Bush has over 100 signing statements.  Are they just doodles?




71 by Reagan. 105 by Clinton.  Mostly, like Bush, in the area of foreign policy, where the executive and legislative are most likely to clash over authority.

I have no idea how many times Alito relied on them on the Third Circuit.  I haven't seen that reported anywhere.




I got bad information on the count. (edit) if anyone is interested see The Link

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #331 on: January 12, 2006, 12:46:44 pm »
Quote:

1. you are correct in your first point but AQ is not the only Terrorist org. You are also correct in the fact that Sadam did not want the terror orgs in his country. But that doesnt stop him from supporting terror. Also I made this point in a previous post with HH.



So explain to me again why, with Saddam contained, toothless and nothing to do with al Qaeda or 9/11, did we invade?

Quote:

2. Once again you are WRONG on WMD found in Iraq. Sarin and Mustard gas was reported back in 2004. The Link,2933,120137,00.html



One bomb and one shell?  That's it?  Maybe someone brought it with them - chemical stashes have been uncovered that are brand, spankin' new.

Quote:

3.Once again see 2. The key words are Stockpiles and Post 1991 WMD. We did not find Stockpiles, but we did find WMD...Look it up. You love the media so much, Go to Google and type in "Sarin in Iraq" and you will find Fox, BBC, CBS etc reported the find in 2004 along with Mustard. Do some research, dont just pull shit out of your arse.



Or I could read here that the one shell does not mean that the shell in question was this year's model.  Also, sarin isn't the instantly deadly nerve gas that is widely feared.  The CDC reports that, because sarin evaporates so quickly, it presents "an immediate but short-lived threat".  Mild or moderate exposure will result in unpleasant symptoms from which the victim will recovery completely.  Only "severe" exposure is likely to result in death.  Still deadly, but there is an argument that sarin and mustard gases are not actually WMDs.  Sure if you had enough - but Saddam clearly didn't (one shell of indeterminate age) - and "enough" of anything can be deadly.  Even beer.

Quote:

4. it is unknown if any of the numerous long range missles fired into Kuwait before the invasion in 2003 were SCUD but they were clearly banned weapons. Hell Limey, I will give you a British newspaper this time.  The Link,3604,918756,00.html



I stand corrected.  One, maybe two, conventionally armed scuds fired during the invasion.

Quote:

5. Clear enough???? And I did not have sex with that woman Miss Lewinsky. That was clear too. Dude, presidents dont give classified information to the media. Once again Stop watching CNN. You were not in Iraq and you you were not one of the brits with the ISG. Clear enough? If watching CNN for intel was all we needed, than people like you could be Intelligence analysts. You get your information from the media I get mine from putting my balls on the line to find the truth.



Well I could go off on the Valerie Plame case, in which the Bush administration gave CNN's Robert Novak (among others) classified information, but I won't.

I have expressed my unequivocal appreciation for your service previously in this forum - which I trust you saw.  Of course I wasn't there, so I have no first hand experience.  However, we are being asked to support a campaign that has been totally mis-managed (by those above the military) from day #1 and was predicated on fucked up intelligence that has since proven to be almost entirely wrong.  Why, when numerous press agencies, who had and have reporters on the ground, tell me that the Bush administration is not being honest with me, should I trust the administration?  

Quote:

I was on the runway in Kuwait city when one of those banned weapons believed to be Scuds went over our heads. Dont tell me there were no WMD found in Iraq. I was at Camp Slayer when the Mustard Gas IED exploded. Where were you Mr clear enough. I spent half the friggin day in MOPP gear. I was with the Iraq Survey Group at Camp Slayer in Baghdad, I was there, I was there when we wrote the Comprehensive Report for Congress, I was there when we were looking for WMD. So you can read my lips, You Are Wrong. You have no idea what you are talking about. Read the Comprehensive Report.


   
I hate that you had to be there and be subject to such attacks.  This administration put you in harm's way for a mistake.  That in no way shape or form diminishes what you or your brothers/sisters in arms have sacrificed.  Objection to the war does not mean no support for the troops - the two are very separate.  In some ways they complimentary, positions: I don't think you needed to be there.

As to mustard and sarin gas bombs - they are disgusting weapons.  But deployed in relatively tiny amounts against front line troops is not the same as the "we're all going to die" pitch used to sell the war.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #332 on: January 12, 2006, 12:47:59 pm »
Quote:

I got bad information on the count. (edit) if anyone is interested see The Link




That's where I got the number from.  I've seen lots of links to that one.  Haven't read it all the way, though.

If you see a source about Alito's reliance on them as a judge, I'd be curious.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #333 on: January 12, 2006, 12:50:27 pm »
Quote:

Sure if you had enough - but Saddam clearly didn't (one shell of indeterminate age) - and "enough" of anything can be deadly.  Even beer.




Limey, now I have to draw the line.  A true Englishman/Texan would never insult beer by comparing it to sarin nerve gas.  Nor would he ever concede that there is such a thing as too much beer.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #334 on: January 12, 2006, 12:51:00 pm »
Quote:

So basically you're saying you don't want him on the court because you disagree with him?  Your point being?



Nope.  He judicial record is what makes me dislike him as a nominee.  He has been turned over more times than Jenna Jameson, mostly for over-reaching.

Maybe we should've stuck with Harriet Myers.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #335 on: January 12, 2006, 12:53:29 pm »
Quote:

Maybe we should've stuck with Harriet Myers.




Opinion poll: worst make-up ever?

A. Kathleen Harris.
B. Tammy Faye Baker.
C. Harriet Myers.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #336 on: January 12, 2006, 12:55:26 pm »
Quote:

I hope that just because I am trying to explain the truth that I am not lumped together with the war mongers. I will admit that I was against the war in the beginning because I didnt want to die trying to save a quarter in a gallon of gasoline. But regardless of why we went, I know what I saw with my own eyes. As an analyst you have to find the truth and make an informed decision when there isnt always enough information. It was no fun watching the Nick Berg film trying to find clues. Or spending hours looking For Specialist Maupin or Capt Speicher, which was also a task of the ISG. I still have nightmares of the things I saw, I saw what happens to a mans skull when it is hit by the bullet of a marine sniper rifle, and as a father I still think about the graves of children all thrown together in pits. I believe 100 percent that we did the right thing by going to Iraq, because I have met the people who were tortured at Abu G, I saw the torture devices Sadam used on people. I dont expect you to change your mind because of me but the first time a man grabs you by the hand with tears running down his face and he says the only words he knows in English " Thank You". You too would want to fight to give him his freedom. We can debate if it is Iraqis or insurgents doing the fighting. We can debate why we went to war or if you like the president. But I Sleep at night knowing that we are doing the right thing. Our biggest mistake is that we didnt hand over the country as soon as we conquered it, and we let the looting go on way to long. That is why it is so hard to find the evidence we need. But who cares, the SOB is gone.



Again, I shall be at pains to state that my anti-war stance does not in any way inpugn the men and women who served.  You all will carry a burden long after the rest of us have forgotten the sacrifice - which is to our shame.

Saddam was an evil, evil man.  The world is full of them.  If you believe it is the place of the United States to be the world's bug exterminator, then that's entirely your right.  I do not believe this to be the case.  Also, international law says it is not the case.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #337 on: January 12, 2006, 12:57:34 pm »
Quote:

If you believe it is the place of the United States to be the world's bug exterminator ...




Let's not get started on Tom Delay.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #338 on: January 12, 2006, 01:00:55 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I got bad information on the count. (edit) if anyone is interested see The Link




That's where I got the number from.  I've seen lots of links to that one.  Haven't read it all the way, though.

If you see a source about Alito's reliance on them as a judge, I'd be curious.





In his 3rd Circuit opinions, "signing statement" appears -zero- times.  But... would he have had jurisdiction in the matters where the signing statements were mostly used?  Further, since he seems to be a (the?) lead instigator in the increased use of signing statements to assert executive power, wouldnt it be logical to believe that if (when) he is on the SC he will give them more weight?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #339 on: January 12, 2006, 01:01:56 pm »
Quote:

And I suspect Gonzales's interpretation isn't likely to hold up in court.  Sue him, and we'll find out.  Or let's have a democratic debate on where to draw the line.



I can't, because I'm not being tortured (other than having to listen to Bush mangle the English language nightly on TV).  Those who are being tortured are being denied access to the courts.




Quote:

Of course, if your position doesn't prevail, you can just say it's a dictatorship of the majority.



I would love to be proved wrong.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #340 on: January 12, 2006, 01:03:11 pm »
Quote:

Limey, now I have to draw the line.  A true Englishman/Texan would never insult beer by comparing it to sarin nerve gas.  Nor would he ever concede that there is such a thing as too much beer.



You've clearly never tasted "Ace"; preferred beverage of bag men and women up and down the UK.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #341 on: January 12, 2006, 01:07:55 pm »
Quote:

In his 3rd Circuit opinions, "signing statement" appears -zero- times.  But... would he have had jurisdiction in the matters where the signing statements were mostly used?  Further, since he seems to be a (the?) lead instigator in the increased use of signing statements to assert executive power, wouldnt it be logical to believe that if (when) he is on the SC he will give them more weight?




I would assume he would be required by the rules of judicial conduct to recuse himself if any matters regarding signing statements he had prepared/reviewed/approved came before him.  On the Court of Appeals, this isn't a big deal, since there are plenty of judges to hear the case.  On the Supreme Court, I believe, he makes his own determination whether to recuse himself.  So obviously he could sit and hear such a case if he wanted to.

All that being said, if he really is in the mold of Scalia, I can't see him relying on such statements anyway.  My read of Alito's arguments while in the Reagan administration is that signing statements are a form of defense against legislative history: if the courts are going to look at extraneous legislative materials, then they should look at extraneous executive materials too.

Scalia believes statutes should be interpreted based on the text, more specifically the original understanding of the text, and based on the traditional canons of interpretation.  The only circumstance I can think of him using legislative history or signing statements is to counter contravening legislative history raised in reponse to another justice's opinion.

Maybe Alito will be more predisposed to use them, but if he does, then he isn't being faithful to the judicial philosophy that he supposedly espouses.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #342 on: January 12, 2006, 01:09:31 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Limey, now I have to draw the line.  A true Englishman/Texan would never insult beer by comparing it to sarin nerve gas.  Nor would he ever concede that there is such a thing as too much beer.



You've clearly never tasted "Ace"; preferred beverage of bag men and women up and down the UK.





So one sip of Ace is too much, and you'd rather have a steaming pint of sarin?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #343 on: January 12, 2006, 01:13:26 pm »
Quote:

Wilson provoked such a reaction because he was lying.  He lied about who sent him, he lied about what he found.  It is ironic that the same crowd that believes like the Gospel that Bush lied, people died, has never atoned for making a saint and a martyr or Joe Wilson.



Wilson never lied about who sent him.  He never claimed that Cheney sent him nor did he ever claim that Cheney knew he was going.

Here's what he said in his Times op-ed piece:

"In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake ? a form of lightly processed ore ? by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's. The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office."

Edit:  I have never seen the substance of what Wilson reported challenged.  Only the (incorrect) assertion that he claimed to have been sent by Cheney.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #344 on: January 12, 2006, 01:13:45 pm »
Quote:

Let's not get started on Tom Delay.




Sic semper tyranis.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #345 on: January 12, 2006, 01:18:30 pm »
Quote:

I would assume he would be required by the rules of judicial conduct to recuse himself if any matters regarding signing statements he had prepared/reviewed/approved came before him.  On the Court of Appeals, this isn't a big deal, since there are plenty of judges to hear the case.  On the Supreme Court, I believe, he makes his own determination whether to recuse himself.  So obviously he could sit and hear such a case if he wanted to.



Alito has a history of failing to recuse himself even when he has promised to do so.  He ruled in favour of a company in which he owned shares, despite have given a written undertaking to recuse himself from any cases involving that company.  And this was as a circuit judge where there are "plenty of judges to hear the case".

The link.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #346 on: January 12, 2006, 01:19:20 pm »
Quote:

So one sip of Ace is too much, and you'd rather have a steaming pint of sarin?



Give me a moment to think...
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #347 on: January 12, 2006, 01:30:41 pm »
Quote:

In his 3rd Circuit opinions, "signing statement" appears -zero- times.  But... would he have had jurisdiction in the matters where the signing statements were mostly used?  Further, since he seems to be a (the?) lead instigator in the increased use of signing statements to assert executive power, wouldnt it be logical to believe that if (when) he is on the SC he will give them more weight?



Google of the day: "unitary executive".
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #348 on: January 12, 2006, 01:36:08 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

In his 3rd Circuit opinions, "signing statement" appears -zero- times.  But... would he have had jurisdiction in the matters where the signing statements were mostly used?  Further, since he seems to be a (the?) lead instigator in the increased use of signing statements to assert executive power, wouldnt it be logical to believe that if (when) he is on the SC he will give them more weight?




I would assume he would be required by the rules of judicial conduct to recuse himself if any matters regarding signing statements he had prepared/reviewed/approved came before him.  On the Court of Appeals, this isn't a big deal, since there are plenty of judges to hear the case.  On the Supreme Court, I believe, he makes his own determination whether to recuse himself.  So obviously he could sit and hear such a case if he wanted to.

All that being said, if he really is in the mold of Scalia, I can't see him relying on such statements anyway.  My read of Alito's arguments while in the Reagan administration is that signing statements are a form of defense against legislative history: if the courts are going to look at extraneous legislative materials, then they should look at extraneous executive materials too.

Scalia believes statutes should be interpreted based on the text, more specifically the original understanding of the text, and based on the traditional canons of interpretation.  The only circumstance I can think of him using legislative history or signing statements is to counter contravening legislative history raised in reponse to another justice's opinion.

Maybe Alito will be more predisposed to use them, but if he does, then he isn't being faithful to the judicial philosophy that he supposedly espouses.





What you're saying suggests that he will use them as a counter to any suggestions of intent that could be gleaned from Congress' natterings.  I'll see your nattering and raise you a quibble.  It's a blunt instrument in any case.  The easiest way for the executive to ignore or change legislation is to delay writing the regs or write them in such a way to achieve the prefered outcome.  Easy peasy.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #349 on: January 12, 2006, 01:44:33 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

The problem with that argument is that the administration used this incident as one proof that Iraq ... "is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon."  Combined with the talk of "mushroom clouds" they sought to use this discredited story as one more piece of evidence.  And look at the reaction when the story was publicly doubted by Wilson.  Why would the raising of doubt in the midst of this continuing case for invasion, mainly put forth at the time on the fear of WMD, cause the reaction it did if they didnt want people to believe this piece of their story?  Was the case for war a dialogue or a lecture?  Which evidence was allowed to be heard?




Wilson provoked such a reaction because he was lying.  He lied about who sent him, he lied about what he found.  It is ironic that the same crowd that believes like the Gospel that Bush lied, people died, has never atoned for making a saint and a martyr or Joe Wilson.





The problem is that they made the story about Joe Wilson's wife and not so much whether the assessment of the Niger situation was accurate.  And, the 16 words were recanted only after it became common knowledge that the Italians spotted the amateurish forgeries.  Why were the words recanted if there was further corroborating evidence?  Nope the whole thing, when viewed in the context of the other evidence that was being put forth at the time and the subsequent avalanche of the "real reasons" for invading, stinks.  If the purpose was to destroy the WMD the proof of the possession of them should have been ironclad.  It was not, not just in hindsight neither.  If the purpose was something else, that should have been debated.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #350 on: January 12, 2006, 01:58:23 pm »
This is slightly off topic but I'd like to compliment all the contributors of this thread who have provided documented information, personal experience, and even some interpretations of legal, or otherwise complicated, documents.  The breadth of knowledge and information here is impressive, IMO, and I have personally benefitted from following this riduculously long thread.  While I have the inclination to read these documents, I don't think even google could offer this much information and insight, let alone in a single location.  Thanks to all, even Limey despite him being a limey, and while I won't say my position has changed, the basis for my opinion is far stronger.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #351 on: January 12, 2006, 02:01:26 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

When working for Reagan, Alito laid out the case for using the signing statement to shift the balance of interpretation towards the Executive branch and away from the legislative.  It never really caught on, perhaps because there were no judges on the Supreme Court like Alito.





Emphasis mine: my understanding is that most lawyers take positions to adavance their clients' interests, positions that they would not necessarily agree with as a judge.

However, I do have to ask why the Senate won't ask real questions like this, instead of flabbling about whether or not Alito believed in keeping women and minorities out of Princeton, a charge that neither his comments nor his judicial history support.




It's the same answer for everything, we, the American people are IDIOTS.  How long would the typical yutz read a story about checks and balances before they flipped over to the one about bigots?  My favorite HL Mencken quote sums up the situation,

"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

Not just the White House neither.  The other side of this is that the press has, by design or merely being staffed by the same "plain folk", lost all credibility as a source of information.  "Truthiness" the American Dialect Society word of the year sums it up; truthiness refers to the quality of stating concepts or facts one wishes or believes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true. As Stephen Colbert put it, "I don?t trust books. They're all fact, no heart."'

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #352 on: January 12, 2006, 02:13:24 pm »
Quote:

The other side of this is that the press has, by design or merely being staffed by the same "plain folk", lost all credibility as a source of information.




I don't believe the press has much credibility as a whole.  Certain individuals do.  Certain individuals do not.  It takes quite some time to figure the 2 out in many cases.  I cannot understand why some people think that the American press has become partisan only recently.  There have been partisan articles in the newspapers since the beginning.
Goin' for a bus ride.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #353 on: January 12, 2006, 02:18:05 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

The other side of this is that the press has, by design or merely being staffed by the same "plain folk", lost all credibility as a source of information.




I don't believe the press has much credibility as a whole.  Certain individuals do.  Certain individuals do not.  It takes quite some time to figure the 2 out in many cases.  I cannot understand why some people think that the American press has become partisan only recently.  There have been partisan articles in the newspapers since the beginning.





Good point.  Too many people don't have the skills or time to figure out the sources of accurate information.

phil

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #354 on: January 12, 2006, 03:04:27 pm »
Quote:

I have never seen the substance of what Wilson reported challenged.  




Then you have not read the SSCI report.
My heart bleeds for your fantasy team.

Browneye

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 316
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #355 on: January 12, 2006, 03:07:58 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

1. you are correct in your first point but AQ is not the only Terrorist org. You are also correct in the fact that Sadam did not want the terror orgs in his country. But that doesnt stop him from supporting terror. Also I made this point in a previous post with HH.



So explain to me again why, with Saddam contained, toothless and nothing to do with al Qaeda or 9/11, did we invade?

Quote:

2. Once again you are WRONG on WMD found in Iraq. Sarin and Mustard gas was reported back in 2004. The Link,2933,120137,00.html



One bomb and one shell?  That's it?  Maybe someone brought it with them - chemical stashes have been uncovered that are brand, spankin' new.

Quote:

3.Once again see 2. The key words are Stockpiles and Post 1991 WMD. We did not find Stockpiles, but we did find WMD...Look it up. You love the media so much, Go to Google and type in "Sarin in Iraq" and you will find Fox, BBC, CBS etc reported the find in 2004 along with Mustard. Do some research, dont just pull shit out of your arse.



Or I could read here that the one shell does not mean that the shell in question was this year's model.  Also, sarin isn't the instantly deadly nerve gas that is widely feared.  The CDC reports that, because sarin evaporates so quickly, it presents "an immediate but short-lived threat".  Mild or moderate exposure will result in unpleasant symptoms from which the victim will recovery completely.  Only "severe" exposure is likely to result in death.  Still deadly, but there is an argument that sarin and mustard gases are not actually WMDs.  Sure if you had enough - but Saddam clearly didn't (one shell of indeterminate age) - and "enough" of anything can be deadly.  Even beer.
.





1.It wasnt just AQ. We knew he supported terror orgs, that was never a question. The beleif was that AQ was one of them. Remember, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Once again you are correct in the intel mistake on its belief.

2. This is why I said post 1991, and no, nobody brought it with them from wherever. Sadam was not allowed to posses WMD developed post 1991 which for some reason is not explained much on the TV. Also, in order for the Mustard and Sarin to work properly, it has to be weaponized and distributed/detonated correctly to work properly. That along with the fact that they were extremely old weapons (pre91)is the reason those soldiers survived with nothing more than a tummy ache. This is where the looting comes in. While Rumsfield was making light of the looting as Iraqis letting off steam or som BS. They were looting storage facilities not properly inspected or secured. This is the reason why you can buy a mortar in down town baghdadfor less than a bottle rocket. Shit gets mixed together and eventually mustard detonates. Luckily they dont know what they are doing so it isnt very deadly, but who knows how many things are out there. Limey you have to ask yourself thoough...If this information has been released to the public, just imagine what hasnt. There is alot more to this and I hope someday the real truth comes out. As far as the gun analogy, you really need to skim through the Comprehensive Report. There is alot of good information in there that they dont talk about in the media.
"Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again."

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #356 on: January 12, 2006, 03:28:54 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I have never seen the substance of what Wilson reported challenged.  




Then you have not read the SSCI report.




You mean this part?

An e-mail from the INR Iraq nuclear analyst to a DOE analyst on December 23, 2002 indicated that the analyst was surprised that INR's well known alternative views on both the aluminum tubes and the uranium information were not included in the points before they were transmitted to the NSC. The DOE analyst commented in an e-mail response to INR that, "it is most disturbing that WINPAC is essentially directing foreign policy in this matter. There are some very strong points to be made in respect to Iraq's arrogant non-compliance with UN sanctions. However, when individuals attempt to convert those "strong statements" into the "knock out" punch, the Administration will ultimately look foolish - i.e. the tubes and Niger!"
The Link

Anyone want to talk about what WINPAC is? (edit) Also, I dont believe the SSCI covered the Office of Special Plans.

phil

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #357 on: January 12, 2006, 03:53:20 pm »
No, I mean the part where Wilson admits under questioning that he hadn't seen the Italian documents (it would have been tricky to see documents in February/March '02 -- the timeframe of Wilson's visit -- that only came into US possession in October '02, and that were not actually translated until early '03), that Mayaki told him that Iraq had attempted to enter into "increased economic trade" and that since their only other major exports are chickpeas and sheep (if I recall correctly), that indeed, he (Mayaki) believed them to be attempting to purchase yellowcake.  It starts on about page 39.

You know, the part that would actually be relevant to Limey's statement that he'd never seen the substance of Wilson's statements challenged.
My heart bleeds for your fantasy team.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #358 on: January 12, 2006, 04:14:03 pm »
Quote:

Also, I dont believe the SSCI covered the Office of Special Plans.



We're going to have to put together an "alternative" reading list, or simply a list of things to Google.

Office of Special Plans
New Pearl Habor
Leo Strauss
Unitary Executive
Project for a New American Century

What else...?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #359 on: January 12, 2006, 04:18:11 pm »
Quote:

No, I mean the part where Wilson admits under questioning that he hadn't seen the Italian documents (it would have been tricky to see documents in February/March '02 -- the timeframe of Wilson's visit -- that only came into US possession in October '02, and that were not actually translated until early '03), that Mayaki told him that Iraq had attempted to enter into "increased economic trade" and that since their only other major exports are chickpeas and sheep (if I recall correctly), that indeed, he (Mayaki) believed them to be attempting to purchase yellowcake.  It starts on about page 39.

You know, the part that would actually be relevant to Limey's statement that he'd never seen the substance of Wilson's statements challenged.




You mean the part of his op-ed piece where he wrote:

"As for the actual memorandum, I never saw it. But news accounts have pointed out that the documents had glaring errors ? they were signed, for example, by officials who were no longer in government ? and were probably forged."
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #360 on: January 12, 2006, 04:35:23 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

No, I mean the part where Wilson admits under questioning that he hadn't seen the Italian documents (it would have been tricky to see documents in February/March '02 -- the timeframe of Wilson's visit -- that only came into US possession in October '02, and that were not actually translated until early '03), that Mayaki told him that Iraq had attempted to enter into "increased economic trade" and that since their only other major exports are chickpeas and sheep (if I recall correctly), that indeed, he (Mayaki) believed them to be attempting to purchase yellowcake.  It starts on about page 39.

You know, the part that would actually be relevant to Limey's statement that he'd never seen the substance of Wilson's statements challenged.




You mean the part of his op-ed piece where he wrote:

"As for the actual memorandum, I never saw it. But news accounts have pointed out that the documents had glaring errors ? they were signed, for example, by officials who were no longer in government ? and were probably forged."





From the SSCI

Immediately after receiving the documents, the INR Iraq nuclear analyst e-mailed IC colleagues offering to provide the documents at a previously planned meeting of the Nuclear Interdiction Action Group (NIAG) the following day. The analyst, apparently already suspicious of the validity of the documents noted in his e-mail, "you'll note that it bears a funky Emb. of Niger stamp (to make it look official, I guess)."
(U) The INR Iraq nuclear analyst told Committee staff that the thing that stood out immediately about the documents was that a companion document - a document included with the Niger documents that did not relate to uranium - mentioned some type of military campaign against major world powers. The members of the alleged military campaign included both Iraq and Iran, and was, according to the documents, being orchestrated through the Nigerien Embassy in Rome, which all struck the analyst as "completely implausible." Because the stamp on this document matched the stamp on the uranium document, the analyst thought that all of the documents were likely suspect.
The Link

How is waving a document at him that is "immediately" recognized as "completely implausible" "questioning"?

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #361 on: January 12, 2006, 04:40:33 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Also, I dont believe the SSCI covered the Office of Special Plans.



We're going to have to put together an "alternative" reading list, or simply a list of things to Google.

Office of Special Plans
New Pearl Habor
Leo Strauss
Unitary Executive
Project for a New American Century

What else...?





Oh please... if we're going to put "New Pearl Harbor" on there, then please allow other works of fiction as well.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

phil

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #362 on: January 12, 2006, 04:54:36 pm »
It could not have referred to the Italian documents (the obviously forged ones that he references here) because the US didn't have them at that time.  February being before October, and all.  They could not have been part of the impetus to send him to Niger.  Unless those PNAC bastards have a time machine, that is.

However, far more important is Wilson's sworn testimony that he was indeed aware of an attempt -- albeit a rebuffed one -- to purchase yellowcake.  Wilson quite simply misstates the facts when he says that the conclusion that Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium ore "was not borne out by the facts as I understood them".  He knew very well that an attempt had been made.  Was there an actual transaction?  No.  Was Saddam making "attempts" to purchase uranium ore?  Yes.
My heart bleeds for your fantasy team.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #363 on: January 12, 2006, 04:57:03 pm »
Quote:

From the SSCI

Immediately after receiving the documents, the INR Iraq nuclear analyst e-mailed IC colleagues offering to provide the documents at a previously planned meeting of the Nuclear Interdiction Action Group (NIAG) the following day. The analyst, apparently already suspicious of the validity of the documents noted in his e-mail, "you'll note that it bears a funky Emb. of Niger stamp (to make it look official, I guess)."
(U) The INR Iraq nuclear analyst told Committee staff that the thing that stood out immediately about the documents was that a companion document - a document included with the Niger documents that did not relate to uranium - mentioned some type of military campaign against major world powers. The members of the alleged military campaign included both Iraq and Iran, and was, according to the documents, being orchestrated through the Nigerien Embassy in Rome, which all struck the analyst as "completely implausible." Because the stamp on this document matched the stamp on the uranium document, the analyst thought that all of the documents were likely suspect.
The Link

How is waving a document at him that is "immediately" recognized as "completely implausible" "questioning"?




I am confused.  You said that Wilson is a liar because he claimed to have seen the memo then had to recant.  I quoted his op-ed (full text here if you're interested) where he states that he'd never seen the memo.  This extract from SCCI supports the news reports that Wilson referenced.

So how, again, is Wilson a liar?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #364 on: January 12, 2006, 05:29:07 pm »
Quote:

It could not have referred to the Italian documents (the obviously forged ones that he references here) because the US didn't have them at that time.  February being before October, and all.  They could not have been part of the impetus to send him to Niger.  Unless those PNAC bastards have a time machine, that is.

However, far more important is Wilson's sworn testimony that he was indeed aware of an attempt -- albeit a rebuffed one -- to purchase yellowcake.  Wilson quite simply misstates the facts when he says that the conclusion that Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium ore "was not borne out by the facts as I understood them".  He knew very well that an attempt had been made.  Was there an actual transaction?  No.  Was Saddam making "attempts" to purchase uranium ore?  Yes.





Not a credible attempt that anyone should be concerned with. And, to do what with?  He had no centrifuges.  Setting aside Mr Wilson, what do you make of the DOE analyst concluding that "the Administration will ultimately look foolish - i.e. the tubes and Niger!"  And in fact, they do.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #365 on: January 12, 2006, 05:36:24 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Also, I dont believe the SSCI covered the Office of Special Plans.



We're going to have to put together an "alternative" reading list, or simply a list of things to Google.

Office of Special Plans
New Pearl Habor
Leo Strauss
Unitary Executive
Project for a New American Century

What else...?




Oh please... if we're going to put "New Pearl Harbor" on there, then please allow other works of fiction as well.



Not the book (have never read it, have no intention to) but the phrase.

"New Pearl Harbor" is relevant because it is what the PNAC believed it needed to impliment its Straussian political philosophy.  Straussian philosophy states that honesty is expendable when it interferes with ones goals.  It also promotes perpetual war, religious fundamentalism and aggressive nationalism.

In 1998, PNAC wrote a letter to Clinton, urging a pre-emptive attack on Iraq in order to topple Saddam.  Of the 18 people who signed that letter, 11 have or are currently served the Bush administration:

Elliott Abrams - took plea-bargain during Iran-Contra affair, pardoned by Bush Sr., currently Bush Jr's Deputy National Security Advisor

Richard L. Armitage - now retired, was Deputy Secretary of State in 2001

John Bolton - recess-appointed Ambassador to UN.  Has had multiple positions in Bush administration

Paula Dobriansky - has been the Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs since 2001

Zalmay Khalilzad - highest ranking muslim in Bush administration.  Currently Ambassador to Iraq

Richard Perle - appointed by Bush in 2001 to be chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee

Peter W. Rodman - Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

Donald Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense

William Schneider, Jr. - currently the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Science Board and a member the State Department's Defense Trade Advisory Group

Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Secretary of Defense, 2001-2005.  Currently President of the World Bank

Robert B. Zoellick - Deputy Secretary of State
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #366 on: January 12, 2006, 06:13:39 pm »
If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.

phil

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #367 on: January 12, 2006, 06:19:00 pm »
Okay, this is my last attempt to make this clear.

Wilson claimed in that editorial that the impetus for sending him to Niger in the first quarter of 2002 was a memo that referenced the Italian documents.  This is not possible.  The documents were provided to the US embassy in Rome on 10/02/2002.  Ergo, Wilson's first false statement.

Wilson stated that his "understanding of the facts" was that Iraq did not make an attempt to purchase uranium from Niger, which understanding was based on his conversations with current and former Nigerien officials. This is false.  He spoke to the former PM, Mayaki, who stated that Iraq attempted to expand trade.  He (Mayaki) knew that could only mean one thing -- uranium -- as they have no other exports that Iraq could possibly want.  Mayaki told Wilson that this was his belief.  Wilson knew that at least one attempt to purchase uranium from Iraq was made.  Ergo, Wilson's second false statement.

Does that make Wilson a liar?  I dunno.  Unlike some, I can't read minds and intentions behind false statements.  But I wish I hadn't gotten into this discussion.  I saw you state that you had never seen Wilson's statements disputed; I recalled that they had been disputed in the full report of the SSCI; I commented to that effect.  I'm sorry to have raise your ire, though I'll simply note that you have not actually said "fuck off, I have so".  Which surprises me, as that was what I actually expected.  I'm even more sorry to have broken my resolution to quit arguing with people on the internet about politics, as it tends to be a waste of time, bandwidth, and goodwill.

Y'all knock yourselves out.
My heart bleeds for your fantasy team.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #368 on: January 12, 2006, 06:24:17 pm »
Quote:

If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.




I dont know what reaches the level of a "conspiracy" but these are like minded people with a common agenda.  The goal was stated and it came to pass.  We're just noting outcomes here.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #369 on: January 12, 2006, 06:44:22 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.




I dont know what reaches the level of a "conspiracy" but these are like minded people with a common agenda.  The goal was stated and it came to pass.  We're just noting outcomes here.





We all shudder at the machinations of zionistic freemasonry.

OldBlevins

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 633
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #370 on: January 12, 2006, 06:52:41 pm »
Quote:

If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.




Hey, where'd Limey go?
blah, blah, blah . . .

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #371 on: January 12, 2006, 06:58:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.




Hey, where'd Limey go?





Hush, or you'll get it too.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #372 on: January 12, 2006, 07:07:43 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.




I dont know what reaches the level of a "conspiracy" but these are like minded people with a common agenda.  The goal was stated and it came to pass.  We're just noting outcomes here.




We all shudder at the machinations of zionistic freemasonry.




Straussian, and they dont even try to hide it.

Craig

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3289
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #373 on: January 12, 2006, 08:35:43 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Also, I dont believe the SSCI covered the Office of Special Plans.



We're going to have to put together an "alternative" reading list, or simply a list of things to Google.

Office of Special Plans
New Pearl Habor
Leo Strauss
Unitary Executive
Project for a New American Century

What else...?




Oh please... if we're going to put "New Pearl Harbor" on there, then please allow other works of fiction as well.



Not the book (have never read it, have no intention to) but the phrase.

"New Pearl Harbor" is relevant because it is what the PNAC believed it needed to impliment its Straussian political philosophy.  Straussian philosophy states that honesty is expendable when it interferes with ones goals.  It also promotes perpetual war, religious fundamentalism and aggressive nationalism.

In 1998, PNAC wrote a letter to Clinton, urging a pre-emptive attack on Iraq in order to topple Saddam.  Of the 18 people who signed that letter, 11 have or are currently served the Bush administration:

Elliott Abrams - took plea-bargain during Iran-Contra affair, pardoned by Bush Sr., currently Bush Jr's Deputy National Security Advisor

Richard L. Armitage - now retired, was Deputy Secretary of State in 2001

John Bolton - recess-appointed Ambassador to UN.  Has had multiple positions in Bush administration

Paula Dobriansky - has been the Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs since 2001

Zalmay Khalilzad - highest ranking muslim in Bush administration.  Currently Ambassador to Iraq

Richard Perle - appointed by Bush in 2001 to be chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee

Peter W. Rodman - Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

Donald Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense

William Schneider, Jr. - currently the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Science Board and a member the State Department's Defense Trade Advisory Group

Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Secretary of Defense, 2001-2005.  Currently President of the World Bank

Robert B. Zoellick - Deputy Secretary of State




The document mentioning a "New Pearl Harbor" is still on PNAC's website. It was written in September 2000, and the relevant quote is on page 63.

The Link (link goes to .pdf)

The quote is: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event ? like a new Pearl Harbor."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #374 on: January 12, 2006, 10:42:45 pm »
Quote:

The document mentioning a "New Pearl Harbor" is still on PNAC's website. It was written in September 2000, and the relevant quote is on page 63.

The Link (link goes to .pdf)

The quote is: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event ? like a new Pearl Harbor."




On September 11, 2001, Bush noted in his diary:

"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st Century took place today."
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

strosrays

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #375 on: January 13, 2006, 12:17:02 am »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

"I have no home. I'm the wind."



"Nobody can get the truth out of me because even I don't know what it is. I keep myself in a constant state of utter confusion."




"...it's the duty of every real American to be on the lookout for goldbricks, pinko's and fellow travelers. 'Course without the likes of Americans like you the jobs of Americans like me would be a lot more difficult. But don't get me wrong, Americans like me like difficult jobs. So don't get the idea you're doing the CIA any favors. We don't really need Americans like you, we don't need anybody."





"I've trained myself not to laugh or smile."

"Really?"
 
"Watched a hundred hours of The Three Stooges. Every time I felt like smiling, I jabbed myself in the stomach with a cattle prod."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #376 on: January 13, 2006, 09:32:28 am »
Quote:

If you really believed the conspiracy theories you're peddling, then you'd be afraid to post them, since you'd be in danger of being rounded up.



Bush, while never having been associated with Straussian theory by name, made a very Straussian comment (which I posted up the thread) when he told Mickey Herskowitz about his thoughts on political capital achieved through war.  When he became President, he packed his government with PNAC - most of whom do openly subscribe to Strauss' philosphies.  Dick Cheney & Scooter Libby (as well as Jeb Bush) signed off on the PNAC's Statement of Principles.

If you put people in charge who have a strongly ascribed political agenda, then they follow that agenda virtually to the letter, it's hardly a conspiracy theory to accuse them of such.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #377 on: January 13, 2006, 12:07:43 pm »
From today's Wall Street Journal (subscription required):

The Link

An excerpt:

"It is almost an article of religious faith among opponents of the Iraq War that Iraq became a terrorist destination only after the U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein. But what if that's false, and documents from Saddam's own regime show that his government trained thousands of Islamic terrorists at camps inside Iraq before the war?

"Sounds like news to us, and that's exactly what is reported this week by Stephen Hayes in the Weekly Standard magazine. Yet the rest of the press has ignored the story, and for that matter the Bush Administration has also been dumb. The explanation for the latter may be that Mr. Hayes also scores the Administration for failing to do more to translate and analyze the trove of documents it's collected from the Saddam era.

"Mr. Hayes reports that, from 1999 through 2002, 'elite Iraqi military units' trained roughly 8,000 terrorists at three different camps?in Samarra and Ramadi in the Sunni Triangle, as well as at Salman Pak, where American forces in 2003 found the fuselage of an aircraft that might have been used for training. Many of the trainees were drawn from North African terror groups with close ties to al Qaeda, including Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Mr. Hayes writes that he had no fewer than 11 corroborating sources, and yesterday he told us he'd added several more since publication."

....

"The 9/11 Commission has confirmed extensive communication between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda over the years, including sanctuary for the current insurgent leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. We have also learned that in the years leading up to his ouster Saddam had implemented a 'faith campaign' to use fundamentalist Islam as a tool of internal control."

And from that neo-con, Straussian, PNAC rag, the Weekly Standard:

The Link

"The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing."

....

"The discovery of the information on jihadist training camps in Iraq would seem to have two major consequences: It exposes the flawed assumptions of the experts and U.S. intelligence officials who told us for years that a secularist like Saddam Hussein would never work with Islamic radicals, any more than such jihadists would work with an infidel like the Iraqi dictator. It also reminds us that valuable information remains buried in the mountain of documents recovered in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past four years."

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #378 on: January 13, 2006, 12:28:33 pm »
Quote:

Bush, while never having been associated with Straussian theory by name, made a very Straussian comment (which I posted up the thread) when he told Mickey Herskowitz about his thoughts on political capital achieved through war.  When he became President, he packed his government with PNAC - most of whom do openly subscribe to Strauss' philosphies.  Dick Cheney & Scooter Libby (as well as Jeb Bush) signed off on the PNAC's Statement of Principles.

If you put people in charge who have a strongly ascribed political agenda, then they follow that agenda virtually to the letter, it's hardly a conspiracy theory to accuse them of such.





Reading Bush's quote to Herskowitz and, despite Bush's notorious inarticulateness, concluding that it means Bush, if elected, had definitive plans to launch a war in order to acquire political capital, is paranoia.  A more plausible reading is that if he ever did have the political capital his father had from going to war, he would use it.

Of course, we know that Bush did not use it, as he frittered it away on campaign-finance reform that tramples free speech, signed an education bill that failed to contain significant school choice innovations, stymied free trade with steel tariffs, supported massive farm and highway bills chocked full of anti-market subsidies, expanded Medicare without obtaining reforms, watched his abortive social security privatization founder in Congress and never had his tax cuts made permanent.  Then he nominated Harriet Myers.

So we are to believe that he started a war for the purpose of gaining political capital that he never even used.

As for the people he surrounded himself with, what a scandal that a Republican president selected prominent conservatives who shared many of his ideas to serve him in the executive branch!  And how strange that they all seem to have similar ideas of how to deal with foreign policy!  I mean, I would expect people of the same political stripe to have radically different ideas on political matters, wouldn't you?

This is another example of your seizing on obvious facts as if they are sensational -- like Bush picking conservatives, and those conservatives having similar ideas to one another and belonging to the same conservative organizations -- and construing them into some Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Freemasonry, Straussian cabal that even in 1997 or 1998 was chomping at the bit to get into office just so they could lie their way into taking America to war!

The unitary executive!  Omigosh!  The president has all the executive power, just like the Constitution says!  Where's Thomas Paine when you need a pamphlet?  Oh, well.  Michael Moore will have to do!

Spoooooooookkkkkkyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #379 on: January 13, 2006, 12:41:05 pm »
Quote:

From today's Wall Street Journal (subscription required):

The Link

An excerpt:

"It is almost an article of religious faith among opponents of the Iraq War that Iraq became a terrorist destination only after the U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein. But what if that's false, and documents from Saddam's own regime show that his government trained thousands of Islamic terrorists at camps inside Iraq before the war?

"Sounds like news to us, and that's exactly what is reported this week by Stephen Hayes in the Weekly Standard magazine. Yet the rest of the press has ignored the story, and for that matter the Bush Administration has also been dumb. The explanation for the latter may be that Mr. Hayes also scores the Administration for failing to do more to translate and analyze the trove of documents it's collected from the Saddam era.

"Mr. Hayes reports that, from 1999 through 2002, 'elite Iraqi military units' trained roughly 8,000 terrorists at three different camps?in Samarra and Ramadi in the Sunni Triangle, as well as at Salman Pak, where American forces in 2003 found the fuselage of an aircraft that might have been used for training. Many of the trainees were drawn from North African terror groups with close ties to al Qaeda, including Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Mr. Hayes writes that he had no fewer than 11 corroborating sources, and yesterday he told us he'd added several more since publication."

....

"The 9/11 Commission has confirmed extensive communication between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda over the years, including sanctuary for the current insurgent leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. We have also learned that in the years leading up to his ouster Saddam had implemented a 'faith campaign' to use fundamentalist Islam as a tool of internal control."

And from that neo-con, Straussian, PNAC rag, the Weekly Standard:

The Link

"The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing."

....

"The discovery of the information on jihadist training camps in Iraq would seem to have two major consequences: It exposes the flawed assumptions of the experts and U.S. intelligence officials who told us for years that a secularist like Saddam Hussein would never work with Islamic radicals, any more than such jihadists would work with an infidel like the Iraqi dictator. It also reminds us that valuable information remains buried in the mountain of documents recovered in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past four years."





"...what if that's false"?  Are we still back filing reasons for the invasion?  "Valuable information" may be buried, but it wasn't used in the Bush administrations pretext for invasion.  Your skepticism that the group in the Bush administration known as "neo-cons" had a preset agenda and a shared mode of operation is irrelevant.  It exists and has been documented, in large part by themselves, see The Link and especially The Link

Further, there has existed a skepticism among traditional Republicans, which is increasing, that the present administration represents the values of the Republican party.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #380 on: January 13, 2006, 12:47:52 pm »
Quote:

"...what if that's false"?  Are we still back filing reasons for the invasion?  "Valuable information" may be buried, but it wasn't used in the Bush administrations pretext for invasion.  Your skepticism that the group in the Bush administration known as "neo-cons" had a preset agenda and a shared mode of operation is irrelevant.  It exists and has been documented, in large part by themselves, see The Link and especially The Link

Further, there has existed a skepticism among traditional Republicans, which is increasing, that the present administration represents the values of the Republican party.





This post-hoc evidence tends to confirm the pre-war argument that Iraq was a sponsor of terrorism.

Saying the New American Century crowd supported a policy of regime change in Iraq -- the official policy of the United States, as I recall -- is different than saying they lied their way into war at all costs, which is what these allegations to Straussianism are supposed to mean.

Do you think Iraq would have been invaded absent 9/11?

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #381 on: January 13, 2006, 12:52:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

"...what if that's false"?  Are we still back filing reasons for the invasion?  "Valuable information" may be buried, but it wasn't used in the Bush administrations pretext for invasion.  Your skepticism that the group in the Bush administration known as "neo-cons" had a preset agenda and a shared mode of operation is irrelevant.  It exists and has been documented, in large part by themselves, see The Link and especially The Link

Further, there has existed a skepticism among traditional Republicans, which is increasing, that the present administration represents the values of the Republican party.





This post-hoc evidence tends to confirm the pre-war argument that Iraq was a sponsor of terrorism.

Saying the New American Century crowd supported a policy of regime change in Iraq -- the official policy of the United States, as I recall -- is different than saying they lied their way into war at all costs, which is what these allegations to Straussianism are supposed to mean.

Do you think Iraq would have been invaded absent 9/11?




Yes. [edit] as for the argument that Iraq was a sponsor of terrorist organization, the rational for the invasion was that they were involved in the 9/11 attack (actually it was Saudi Arabia).  At the time of the invasion a majority of Americans believed Iraq was involved.  The standard line of administration officials is that they don't know where they got that idea.  VP Cheney is on record as being on both sides of that issue, famously revealed by Jon Stewart (in loco parentis for the feeble media) in his "liar liar pants on fire" expose.  It seems like any terrorist act would have sufficed as an excuse for invasion.  How long would it have taken the neo-cons to find an outlet for their stated goal for the 21st Century "Secure and expand zones of democratic peace; ... exploit transformation of war."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #382 on: January 13, 2006, 12:55:15 pm »
Quote:

Reading Bush's quote to Herskowitz and, despite Bush's notorious inarticulateness, concluding that it means Bush, if elected, had definitive plans to launch a war in order to acquire political capital, is paranoia.  A more plausible reading is that if he ever did have the political capital his father had from going to war, he would use it.



I never drew that conclusion; I simply noted that the statement was particularly Straussian.  I also never said that they definitive plans to go to war, but when 9/11 happened they took the Straussian route and used it to get done what they'd wanted to do for years.

Quote:

Of course, we know that Bush did not use it, as he frittered it away on campaign-finance reform that tramples free speech, signed an education bill that failed to contain significant school choice innovations, stymied free trade with steel tariffs, supported massive farm and highway bills chocked full of anti-market subsidies, expanded Medicare without obtaining reforms, watched his abortive social security privatization founder in Congress and never had his tax cuts made permanent.  Then he nominated Harriet Myers.

So we are to believe that he started a war for the purpose of gaining political capital that he never even used.




Bush rolled on virtually unopposed for years.  Flaws or gaffs in his policymaking was not due to Democratic tinkering.  The Patriot Act was not even available to be read when it was voted on.  The recently enacted bankruptcy bill was drafted by a lobbyist working for credit card companies, and passed without change.


Edit:  I can't remember whether this was the one passed by voice vote, when the chairman ignore the overwhelming "no" vote and called it for the non-existent yesses (and you have to hear this to believe it - it's no conspiracy theory, you can almost hear crickets chirping when he calls for the "yes" vote), or if it's the one where the chairman refused to allow the debate, refused to allow the point of order on the refusal to allow the debate, stormed off the podium and then, when the Democrats continued to speak on this issue, had the mics turned off.


His administration still refuses to answer questions about anything it chooses not to talk about.  The power to initiate investigation lays entirely with the Republicans, who will have the majority on every such panel just as they do on any panel they do not agree to make bi-partisan.

It is only in recent times, perhaps less than a year, that public concern for this administration's performance has resonated enough in Washington for the opposition to grow some balls.  He has spent the political capital he had, which is why he is now incurring real oposition because it is happening as a result of Republicans looking away from Bush and towards the mid-terms this year.

Oh, and Harriet Myers was taken down by the extreme religious right, who were concerned that she wasn't a cast-iron vote against baby-killing and boys kissing.  If they could've been convinced that she was solid on those things, she'd already be wearing the gown.

Quote:

As for the people he surrounded himself with, what a scandal that a Republican president selected prominent conservatives who shared many of his ideas to serve him in the executive branch!  And how strange that they all seem to have similar ideas of how to deal with foreign policy!  I mean, I would expect people of the same political stripe to have radically different ideas on political matters, wouldn't you?

This is another example of your seizing on obvious facts as if they are sensational -- like Bush picking conservatives, and those conservatives having similar ideas to one another and belonging to the same conservative organizations -- and construing them into some Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Freemasonry, Straussian cabal that even in 1997 or 1998 was chomping at the bit to get into office just so they could lie their way into taking America to war!




I'm not saying that I'm shocked that Bush picked conservatives for his government.  I'm saying that you cannot poo-poo, as a conspiracy theory, the suggestion that a large group of them who subscribe to Straussian philosophy  haven't followed such philosophy when almost everything they have done follows the blueprint Strauss designed.

Quote:

The unitary executive!  Omigosh!  The president has all the executive power, just like the Constitution says!  Where's Thomas Paine when you need a pamphlet?  Oh, well.  Michael Moore will have to do!

Spoooooooookkkkkkyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Ahhh, the Michael Moore defense.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #383 on: January 13, 2006, 01:08:53 pm »
Quote:

And from that neo-con, Straussian, PNAC rag, the Weekly Standard



You got that right.  Bill Kristol, Editor of the Weekly Standard is Chairman of PNAC.  The WSJ reporting on the WS report is not really corroboration.  In the world of axe-grinding, Kristol has the biggest axe and the biggest grinder.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #384 on: January 13, 2006, 01:36:32 pm »
Quote:


Oh, and Harriet Myers was taken down by the extreme religious right, who were concerned that she wasn't a cast-iron vote against baby-killing and boys kissing.  If they could've been convinced that she was solid on those things, she'd already be wearing the gown.





As an admitted Bush supporter, I have to disagree somewhat on this statement.  Harriet Myers was opposed because the nomination reeked of cronyism.  Cronyism is more understandable for the appointment of cabinet positions, but totally unacceptable for SCOTUS.  Arkys previous post gave an accurate laundry list of reasons  conservatives  have been annoyed with Bush.  The nomination of Myers angered  conservatives like no other move Bush has made.  He was stupid to stubbornly defend the move, but wisened up when he finally withdrew her.  Harriet Myers was a complete wildcard, and nobody (Dems or Repubs) could have known how she would have ruled from the bench after receiving her lifetime appointment.

I give emphasis to the word conservative, because conservatism is a philosophy more than a party affiliation.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #385 on: January 13, 2006, 01:43:44 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

And from that neo-con, Straussian, PNAC rag, the Weekly Standard



You got that right.  Bill Kristol, Editor of the Weekly Standard is Chairman of PNAC.  The WSJ reporting on the WS report is not really corroboration.  In the world of axe-grinding, Kristol has the biggest axe and the biggest grinder.




I don't recall where anyone asserted that the WSJ's reference to the Weekly Standard story constituted corroboration.

Yes, and Bill Kristol has a much bigger axe to grind than Michael Moore, George Soros, Barbra Streisand, Ariana Huffington, Cindy Sheehan, Alec Baldwin, Ted Kennedy, Sean Penn, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Bellafonte, Johnny Depp, Howard Dean, MoveOn.org, George Galloway, Jimmy Carter, David Duke, Code Pink, and any of the other motley assorted elements of the "Bush Lied, People Died" crowd.

Maybe I can paint a conspiracy out of them.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #386 on: January 13, 2006, 01:44:24 pm »
Quote:

As an admitted Bush supporter, I have to disagree somewhat on this statement.  Harriet Myers was opposed because the nomination reeked of cronyism.  Cronyism is more understandable for the appointment of cabinet positions, but totally unacceptable for SCOTUS.  Arkys previous post gave an accurate laundry list of reasons  conservatives  have been annoyed with Bush.  The nomination of Myers angered  conservatives like no other move Bush has made.  He was stupid to stubbornly defend the move, but wisened up when he finally withdrew her.  Harriet Myers was a complete wildcard, and nobody (Dems or Repubs) could have known how she would have ruled from the bench after receiving her lifetime appointment.



I agree entirely with the above.  However, had the rampant cronyism* not been highlighted by Katrina, I think Myers could easily have been confirmed.

* All administrations engage in cronyism.  The difference now is that cronies are put into real positions of authority instead of being made Ambassador to Tahiti.

Quote:

I give emphasis to the word conservative, because conservatism is a philosophy more than a party affiliation.



Again, I agree.  As stated above, I do not believe that this administration has acted in concert with traditional conservative values / philosophies.  The $40bn Dept. of Homeland Security is the biggest govt. department ever. Government spending is bigger than ever.  Government borrowing is at unprecedented levels.  I am surprised that more conservatives are not thoroughly p.o'd at Bush et al.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: what were we talking about?
« Reply #387 on: January 13, 2006, 01:44:42 pm »
"The U.S. Treasury Department last month denied baseball's application for Cuba to play in the United States. A permit is necessary because of laws governing certain transactions with Cuba, which generally is not allowed to receive U.S. currency.

After Cuba promised to donate any money to victims of Hurricane Katrina, baseball reapplied for a permit. Baseball is awaiting a decision on its second application, Rich Levin, a spokesman for the commissioner's office said Thursday."

The Link

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #388 on: January 13, 2006, 01:46:22 pm »
Quote:

Yes, and Bill Kristol has a much bigger axe to grind than Michael Moore, George Soros, Barbra Streisand, Ariana Huffington, Cindy Sheehan, Alec Baldwin, Ted Kennedy, Sean Penn, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Bellafonte, Johnny Depp, Howard Dean, MoveOn.org, George Galloway, Jimmy Carter, David Duke, Code Pink, and any of the other motley assorted elements of the "Bush Lied, People Died" crowd.



You forgot MoveOn.

Quote:

Maybe I can paint a conspiracy out of them.



If you could get any of them to agree on at least two things, start painting!
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #389 on: January 13, 2006, 01:48:51 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

As an admitted Bush supporter, I have to disagree somewhat on this statement.  Harriet Myers was opposed because the nomination reeked of cronyism.  Cronyism is more understandable for the appointment of cabinet positions, but totally unacceptable for SCOTUS.  Arkys previous post gave an accurate laundry list of reasons  conservatives  have been annoyed with Bush.  The nomination of Myers angered  conservatives like no other move Bush has made.  He was stupid to stubbornly defend the move, but wisened up when he finally withdrew her.  Harriet Myers was a complete wildcard, and nobody (Dems or Repubs) could have known how she would have ruled from the bench after receiving her lifetime appointment.
Quote:


I agree entirely with the above.  However, had the rampant cronyism* not been highlighted by Katrina, I think Myers could easily have been confirmed.

* All administrations engage in cronyism.  The difference now is that cronies are put into real positionsof authority instead of being made Ambassador to Tahiti.

Quote:

I give emphasis to the word conservative, because conservatism is a philosophy more than a party affiliation.



Again, I agree.  As stated above, I do not believe that this administration has acted in concert with traditional conservative values / philosophies.  The $40bn Dept. of Homeland Security is the biggest govt. department ever. Government spending is bigger than ever.  Government borrowing is at unprecedented levels.  I am surprised that more conservatives are not thoroughly p.o'd at Bush et al.





As I see it, given the examples you provided, it's as much, if not more, the Republican Congress that has abandoned the conservative principles, esp those it outlined when taking control in 94-95.
Goin' for a bus ride.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #390 on: January 13, 2006, 01:49:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

And from that neo-con, Straussian, PNAC rag, the Weekly Standard



You got that right.  Bill Kristol, Editor of the Weekly Standard is Chairman of PNAC.  The WSJ reporting on the WS report is not really corroboration.  In the world of axe-grinding, Kristol has the biggest axe and the biggest grinder.




I don't recall where anyone asserted that the WSJ's reference to the Weekly Standard story constituted corroboration.

Yes, and Bill Kristol has a much bigger axe to grind than Michael Moore, George Soros, Barbra Streisand, Ariana Huffington, Cindy Sheehan, Alec Baldwin, Ted Kennedy, Sean Penn, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Bellafonte, Johnny Depp, Howard Dean, MoveOn.org, George Galloway, Jimmy Carter, David Duke, Code Pink, and any of the other motley assorted elements of the "Bush Lied, People Died" crowd.

Maybe I can paint a conspiracy out of them.




Did they all go to the same university, study under the same teaching philosophy, create an organization with plans and statements that eventually came true and take over key parts of the government responsible for intelligence that lead to war?  Give it a shot.  (Also, Harry Belafonte, motley?)

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #391 on: January 13, 2006, 01:51:58 pm »
Quote:

As an admitted Bush supporter, I have to disagree somewhat on this statement.  Harriet Myers was opposed because the nomination reeked of cronyism.  Cronyism is more understandable for the appointment of cabinet positions, but totally unacceptable for SCOTUS.  Arkys previous post gave an accurate laundry list of reasons  conservatives  have been annoyed with Bush.  The nomination of Myers angered  conservatives like no other move Bush has made.  He was stupid to stubbornly defend the move, but wisened up when he finally withdrew her.  Harriet Myers was a complete wildcard, and nobody (Dems or Repubs) could have known how she would have ruled from the bench after receiving her lifetime appointment.

I give emphasis to the word conservative, because conservatism is a philosophy more than a party affiliation.





The conservative legal community that fought Bush most vociferously on Harriet Myers are not all or even primarily concerned with the Religious Right.  Most of them do not wear their religion on their sleeves.  Others of them are Jewish.  Limey is entirely correct that the Religious Right would have been glad to have Myers if they knew for sure she was a guaranteed vote on certain issues.

For legal conservatives, the real problem with Myers is that for two decades, the legal conservatives have argued that credentials for the bench, not political ideology, should be the touchstone for Senate confirmation of Supreme Court nominees.  Myers represented the opposite -- she might actually have been a "safe" pick for conservatives on religious ideology, but her credentials were lacking.  She was precisely the opposite of the kind of nominee legal conservatives would support, despite how she might have voted on the issues.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #392 on: January 13, 2006, 01:55:28 pm »
Quote:

Did they all go to the same university, study under the same teaching philosophy, create an organization with plans and statements that eventually came true and take over key parts of the government responsible for intelligence that lead to war?  Give it a shot.




Oh, I see, it all started way back when they all went to college together!  Now, it's much more clear.

A group of people concerned in the late '90s that containment of Iraq wasn't working, and that regime change should be the policy of the United States -- what a sinister development!

Quote:

(Also, Harry Belafonte, motley?)




Motley as can be.

"American singer and human rights activist Harry Belafonte has called US President George W Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world" saying millions of Americans support the socialist revolution of Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez."

The Link

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #393 on: January 13, 2006, 01:57:44 pm »
Quote:

You forgot MoveOn.




Read again.  They're in there.

Quote:

If you could get any of them to agree on at least two things, start painting!




Bush sucks.  Cheney sucks.  That's two.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #394 on: January 13, 2006, 01:58:25 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Did they all go to the same university, study under the same teaching philosophy, create an organization with plans and statements that eventually came true and take over key parts of the government responsible for intelligence that lead to war?  Give it a shot.  (Also, Harry Belafonte, motley?)




Oh, I see, it all started way back when they all went to college together!  Now, it's much more clear.

A group of people concerned in the late '90s that containment of Iraq wasn't working, and that regime change should be the policy of the United States -- what a sinister development!




YES, you're getting it.  Turns out, the way they did it, it is. [edit] Guess where Chalabi went to college, go on, take a wild guess.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #395 on: January 13, 2006, 01:59:25 pm »
Quote:

The conservative legal community that fought Bush most vociferously on Harriet Myers are not all or even primarily concerned with the Religious Right.  Most of them do not wear their religion on their sleeves.  Others of them are Jewish.  Limey is entirely correct that the Religious Right would have been glad to have Myers if they knew for sure she was a guaranteed vote on certain issues.

For legal conservatives, the real problem with Myers is that for two decades, the legal conservatives have argued that credentials for the bench, not political ideology, should be the touchstone for Senate confirmation of Supreme Court nominees.  Myers represented the opposite -- she might actually have been a "safe" pick for conservatives on religious ideology, but her credentials were lacking.  She was precisely the opposite of the kind of nominee legal conservatives would support, despite how she might have voted on the issues.




I wonder if the confirmation of John Roberts would've been diffrent if they'd known  he is gay.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #396 on: January 13, 2006, 02:00:20 pm »
Quote:

I wonder if the confirmation of John Roberts would've been diffrent if they'd known  he is gay.




I thought that was the line on Souter.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #397 on: January 13, 2006, 02:01:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Did they all go to the same university, study under the same teaching philosophy, create an organization with plans and statements that eventually came true and take over key parts of the government responsible for intelligence that lead to war?  Give it a shot.




Oh, I see, it all started way back when they all went to college together!  Now, it's much more clear.

A group of people concerned in the late '90s that containment of Iraq wasn't working, and that regime change should be the policy of the United States -- what a sinister development!

Quote:

(Also, Harry Belafonte, motley?)




Motley as can be.

"American singer and human rights activist Harry Belafonte has called US President George W Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world" saying millions of Americans support the socialist revolution of Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez."

The Link




Motley usually describes appearance, Moore, Kennedy, Sheehan, motley, I'll give you.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #398 on: January 13, 2006, 02:04:50 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I wonder if the confirmation of John Roberts would've been diffrent if they'd known  he is gay.




I thought that was the line on Souter.




"Real men" don't pose for pictures.  Especially, with other men and food.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #399 on: January 13, 2006, 02:05:04 pm »
Quote:

YES, you're getting it.  Turns out, the way they did it, it is. [edit] Guess where Chalabi went to college, go on, take a wild guess.  




Oh, so now it's an international conspiracy.  And you forgot David Frum, he's from Canada.  And what about Tony Blair, in Britain?  And John Howard.  It's all coming together now.

You guys should be on 60 Minutes or something.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #400 on: January 13, 2006, 02:06:14 pm »
Quote:

Motley usually describes appearance, Moore, Kennedy, Sheehan, motley, I'll give you.




Pelosi's not bad for her age.

I can't believe I just wrote that.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #401 on: January 13, 2006, 02:06:53 pm »
Quote:

"Real men" don't pose for pictures.  Especially, with other men and food.




Maybe they were serving Ace at the party.

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #402 on: January 13, 2006, 02:07:30 pm »
Quote:

You guys should be on 60 Minutes or something.




Now you've done it.  I expect Spack here any time.  And this discussion was so civil until now.
Goin' for a bus ride.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #403 on: January 13, 2006, 02:10:04 pm »
Quote:

Now you've done it.  I expect Spack here any time.  And this discussion was so civil until now.




Should I have said 20/20?

Craig

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3289
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #404 on: January 13, 2006, 02:20:56 pm »
Quote:

Guess where Chalabi went to college, go on, take a wild guess.




Wow, I didn't know that. But yeah, a quick Google shows ...

The Link

"During his time at the U of C, Chalabi became acquainted with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He also formed a relationship with Richard Perle, an advisor to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld."

Jacksonian

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12893
  • Anonymous Source
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #405 on: January 13, 2006, 02:23:35 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Now you've done it.  I expect Spack here any time.  And this discussion was so civil until now.




Should I have said 20/20?





No.  And thank goodness you didn't say Dateline.  Aw, shit, I said it.  This thread is fucked.
Goin' for a bus ride.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #406 on: January 13, 2006, 02:28:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Guess where Chalabi went to college, go on, take a wild guess.




Wow, I didn't know that. But yeah, a quick Google shows ...

The Link

"During his time at the U of C, Chalabi became acquainted with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He also formed a relationship with Richard Perle, an advisor to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld."





And who introduced all the nutjob "informants" the OSP used?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #407 on: January 13, 2006, 02:46:20 pm »
Quote:

Wow, I didn't know that. But yeah, a quick Google shows ...

The Link

"During his time at the U of C, Chalabi became acquainted with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He also formed a relationship with Richard Perle, an advisor to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld."




And just to complete the consiracy circle, Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress received circa $40mm in funding from the US Govt. over many years.  The INC begat the informant "Curveball", "Curveball" begat a large part of the now discredited WMD intelligence, most notably the non-existant mobile chemical labs.

Edit:  For sake of completeness, Chalabi was the Deputy Prime Minister, got destroyed in the recent election, garnering less than 1% of the vote, so they made him Oil Minister.  Iraq's horrendous oil crisis (you read that right) continues to deepen, with gas prices being tripled recently.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #408 on: January 13, 2006, 02:53:32 pm »
Quote:

And who introduced all the nutjob "informants" the OSP used?



I'm a curveball because I cuuuuuuurve.

The link

Edit:  This article states that the informant who told of the terrorist training camps and aircraft fusilage practice ground was described by the CIA as a "bullshitter".
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #409 on: January 13, 2006, 03:20:06 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Wow, I didn't know that. But yeah, a quick Google shows ...

The Link

"During his time at the U of C, Chalabi became acquainted with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He also formed a relationship with Richard Perle, an advisor to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld."




And just to complete the consiracy circle, Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress received circa $40mm in funding from the US Govt. over many years.  The INC begat the informant "Curveball", "Curveball" begat a large part of the now discredited WMD intelligence, most notably the non-existant mobile chemical labs.

Edit:  For sake of completeness, Chalabi was the Deputy Prime Minister, got destroyed in the recent election, garnering less than 1% of the vote, so they made him Oil Minister.  Iraq's horrendous oil crisis (you read that right) continues to deepen, with gas prices being tripled recently.




Tripled because of a deal with the IMF.  (Who's the head of the IMF?) Caused the Oil Minister to go on vacation in protest, when he got back he had been replaced by...Ahmad Chalabi The Link

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #410 on: January 13, 2006, 03:28:21 pm »
Quote:

"During his time at the U of C, Chalabi became acquainted with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He also formed a relationship with Richard Perle, an advisor to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld."




Your forgot Mohammed Atta.  They had to have him on it too to make it look good.  Plus, I heard Ariel Sharon's cousin was in on it as well.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #411 on: January 13, 2006, 03:35:30 pm »
Quote:

Your forgot Mohammed Atta.  They had to have him on it too to make it look good.  Plus, I heard Ariel Sharon's cousin was in on it as well.



I don't think anyone here is arguing that the Bush administration is/was consorting with al Qaeda.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #412 on: January 13, 2006, 05:20:41 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Your forgot Mohammed Atta.  They had to have him on it too to make it look good.  Plus, I heard Ariel Sharon's cousin was in on it as well.



I don't think anyone here is arguing that the Bush administration is/was consorting with al Qaeda.





But if they were trying to set the stage for invasion, would they not need some foreign help?  Or was 9/11 just very fortuitous for them?

Mike S

  • Roster Filler
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #413 on: January 13, 2006, 05:34:13 pm »
Twisted?  Well, that's a rather jaded way of viewing it.  But, there's no question that September 11 provided the Bush Administration with the opportunity to remove Saddam Hussein from power.
"Romanes eunt domus"

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #414 on: January 13, 2006, 05:40:38 pm »
Quote:

But if they were trying to set the stage for invasion, would they not need some foreign help?  Or was 9/11 just very fortuitous for them?



IMHO, the latter.  Reports from inside the White House, from the likes of Richard Clark, point to Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the other chickenhawks falling over themselves to tie Iraq to 9/11.  That suggests to me that 9/11 was a gift horse to these guys.

Edit: with respect to foreign help.  Don't forget that on 9/12, the entire world was united with America in its outrage and in its support for the effort to bring the perpetrators to bear.  4 years later, Bush is set to lose his last remaining openly supportive foreign leader when Tony Blair steps down as Prime Minister.  His likely successor, Gordon Brown, has already made statements that talk to his intention to step away from support of Bush.

Basically, the world was on board with the hunt for bin Laden and terrorists the world over.  Support cooled rapidly when the administration took its detour into Iraq and has continued to chill the more they get told to fuck 'emselves.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #415 on: January 13, 2006, 05:43:23 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

But if they were trying to set the stage for invasion, would they not need some foreign help?  Or was 9/11 just very fortuitous for them?



IMHO, the latter.  Reports from inside the White House, from the likes of Richard Clark, point to Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the other chickenhawks falling over themselves to tie Iraq to 9/11.  That suggests to me that 9/11 was a gift horse to these guys.





Then how would they have gone about it otherwise?  And why weren't they doing anything between 1/20/01 and 9/11/01?  Wouldn't this have been a first priority for them?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #416 on: January 13, 2006, 05:58:44 pm »
Quote:

Then how would they have gone about it otherwise?  And why weren't they doing anything between 1/20/01 and 9/11/01?  Wouldn't this have been a first priority for them?



Don't forget that they had zero political capital prior to 9/11.  Bush's inauguration motorcade was pelted with eggs.  He had to eschew the traditional walk because he may not have made it.  His election was highly contentious, but what wasn't questioned was that he'd lost the popular vote.  His approval numbers were bad (not as bad as they are now, but pretty bad nonetheless).  He was in bad shape and looking very much like a one-term-and-out president.

9/11 changed all that.  He was given unequivocal support from virtually the entire planet.  He's taken it, and turned it to shit in four short years (see graphic).  What's his approval rating now, 38%?  Active disapproval rating is over 50%.  Around the world, Americans are pariahs. A far cry from 9/12/01 when Jean-Marie Colombani echoed JFK's Berlin address when writing in Le Monde - the liberal French newspaper - that "today we are all Americans".
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #417 on: January 13, 2006, 06:17:26 pm »
Quote:

 His election was highly contentious, but what wasn't questioned was that he'd lost the popular vote.




Is your point that he had a low base of support after winnning a fair, albeit tough fight, or that Bush was "unfairly" given his office once the fix was in on the Supreme Court?
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Bench

  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16476
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #418 on: January 13, 2006, 06:22:02 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

 His election was highly contentious, but what wasn't questioned was that he'd lost the popular vote.




Is your point that he had a low base of support after winnning a fair, albeit tough fight, or that Bush was "unfairly" given his office once the fix was in on the Supreme Court?





I think the point is that the Dems "really" won Florida, giving them a solid electoral victory to go along with the popular non-mandate.

I'm not a fan of Dubya then or now, but WFW.
"Holy shit, Mozart. Get me off this fucking thing."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #419 on: January 13, 2006, 06:22:03 pm »
Quote:

Is your point that he had a low base of support after winnning a fair, albeit tough fight, or that Bush was "unfairly" given his office once the fix was in on the Supreme Court?



For the purposes of this element of the discussion, the former.  The graphic I linked is very telling - the spread of his approval was around 50% after the 2000 election but trending down all year.  Then 9/11 takes it sky-high, from where it's been in steady decline ever since (save a couple of blips to do with the war).
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #420 on: January 13, 2006, 06:40:17 pm »
Quote:

I think the point is that the Dems "really" won Florida, giving them a solid electoral victory to go along with the popular non-mandate.

I'm not a fan of Dubya then or now, but WFW.




"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty".  The failure to investigate vote suppression as well as counting irregularities opened the door for it to happen again in 2004 in Ohio and many other states.  Until these things are investigated, instead of being dismissed with "get over it" rhetoric, the results will have an asterisk in my mind.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #421 on: January 13, 2006, 06:44:04 pm »
Quote:

Don't forget that they had zero political capital prior to 9/11.  Bush's inauguration motorcade was pelted with eggs.  He had to eschew the traditional walk because he may not have made it.  His election was highly contentious, but what wasn't questioned was that he'd lost the popular vote.  His approval numbers were bad (not as bad as they are now, but pretty bad nonetheless).  He was in bad shape and looking very much like a one-term-and-out president.

9/11 changed all that.  He was given unequivocal support from virtually the entire planet.  He's taken it, and turned it to shit in four short years (see graphic).  What's his approval rating now, 38%?  Active disapproval rating is over 50%.  Around the world, Americans are pariahs. A far cry from 9/12/01 when Jean-Marie Colombani echoed JFK's Berlin address when writing in Le Monde - the liberal French newspaper - that "today we are all Americans".





But wait.  I thought the point of starting the war was to earn political capital.  But now you're saying he needed political capital to start the war.  But if the point of starting the war was to earn political capital, and political capital was needed to start the war, then why not just use the political capital needed to start the war to do whatever he wanted to do with the political capital he was supposed to earn from starting the war?

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #422 on: January 13, 2006, 06:46:14 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Is your point that he had a low base of support after winnning a fair, albeit tough fight, or that Bush was "unfairly" given his office once the fix was in on the Supreme Court?



For the purposes of this element of the discussion, the former.  The graphic I linked is very telling - the spread of his approval was around 50% after the 2000 election but trending down all year.  Then 9/11 takes it sky-high, from where it's been in steady decline ever since (save a couple of blips to do with the war).





Without a doubt, Bush has gambled his legacy and perhaps the political capital of the republican party on Iraq.  That being said, the payoff of having a stable democracy in the Middle East (not like the Saudi/Kuwait bullshit) would be tremendous.  Nobody likes to hear of American/Brit soldiers getting killed, but the loss of life compared to other conflicts has been very low.  It is not surprising that with the constant drip, drip, drip of casualties being reported that Bush is taking a popularity hit.  I believe that Lincoln's popularity ratings were even worse, yet he is today considered on par with Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed.

During WWII the allies did casualty estimates prior to the D-Day invasions, and the numbers were mind bending (sorry, don't have the exact number).  Yet the attack proceeded.  My point is that do you believe that such an action could be taken in todays political/media enviroment if the risks were similar?  I don't.

Iraq may just end up another dictatorship in several years and Bush will be accurately judged a failure president.  Or not... lets wait and see how things pan out.  What is certain, is that if we cut and run, then failure is guaranteed.  It is sad that many would not mind seeing the failure, because of their hatred for Bush.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #423 on: January 13, 2006, 06:49:29 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I think the point is that the Dems "really" won Florida, giving them a solid electoral victory to go along with the popular non-mandate.

I'm not a fan of Dubya then or now, but WFW.




"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty".  The failure to investigate vote suppression as well as counting irregularities opened the door for it to happen again in 2004 in Ohio and many other states.  Until these things are investigated, instead of being dismissed with "get over it" rhetoric, the results will have an asterisk in my mind.





And I want Nixon's victory over Kennedy re-instated too. WFW.

Bench

  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16476
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #424 on: January 13, 2006, 06:55:37 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I think the point is that the Dems "really" won Florida, giving them a solid electoral victory to go along with the popular non-mandate.

I'm not a fan of Dubya then or now, but WFW.




"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty".  The failure to investigate vote suppression as well as counting irregularities opened the door for it to happen again in 2004 in Ohio and many other states.  Until these things are investigated, instead of being dismissed with "get over it" rhetoric, the results will have an asterisk in my mind.




And I want Nixon's victory over Kennedy re-instated too. WFW.




Exactly. It's hardly an abberation in the history of politics. Sometimes we win, sometimes they win (insert whichever party you like into the pronouns). By most accounts Chicago '60 was more diabolical than Florida '00.

Did the chicanery in Florida launch this country down an unfortunate path? Arguably. I certainly think so, but there's little to be done about it now other than vote the bastards out in two years. As for now, I'm more interested in the Republicans using One Tough Grandma to try and steal Kinky's independent petitioners. Whodathunk old Hair Helmet would be so frightened of the Kinkstah?
"Holy shit, Mozart. Get me off this fucking thing."

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #425 on: January 13, 2006, 06:57:57 pm »
Quote:

But wait.  I thought the point of starting the war was to earn political capital.  But now you're saying he needed political capital to start the war.  But if the point of starting the war was to earn political capital, and political capital was needed to start the war, then why not just use the political capital needed to start the war to do whatever he wanted to do with the political capital he was supposed to earn from starting the war?



He needed 9/11 to start the war.  The war prolongs the political capital and acts as a justification to eschew oversight.  Without the war I doubt that Bush would've been re-elected because the parts of his campaign that worked were the tweaking of the public's innate patriotism and scaring the shit out of us.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #426 on: January 13, 2006, 07:07:06 pm »
Quote:

He needed 9/11 to start the war.  The war prolongs the political capital and acts as a justification to eschew oversight.  Without the war I doubt that Bush would've been re-elected because the parts of his campaign that worked were the tweaking of the public's innate patriotism and scaring the shit out of us.




But Pravata told me earlier that he thinks the invasion would have occurred without 9/11:

The Link

Was he wrong?

And if Bush was threatened with losing re-election because he was unpopular, but he really wanted a war so he could earn political capital, wouldn't he then have thought up a pretext to go to war to save his skin?  I mean, what kind of conspirators are they if they finally get this guy in office, take over Congress and the courts, and then don't carry through on the scheme hatched in the hallowed halls of the University of Chicago so many decades ago?

Seems unlikely they'd let the chance go by.

Maybe if we send a group e-mail to the Daily Kos we'll get the official conspiracy theory answer to this one.

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #427 on: January 13, 2006, 07:07:27 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

But wait.  I thought the point of starting the war was to earn political capital.  But now you're saying he needed political capital to start the war.  But if the point of starting the war was to earn political capital, and political capital was needed to start the war, then why not just use the political capital needed to start the war to do whatever he wanted to do with the political capital he was supposed to earn from starting the war?



He needed 9/11 to start the war.  The war prolongs the political capital and acts as a justification to eschew oversight.  Without the war I doubt that Bush would've been re-elected because the parts of his campaign that worked were the tweaking of the public's innate patriotism and scaring the shit out of us.




Bush was re-elected in spite of the war.  9/11 is what defined Bush and cemented his re-election**.  Bush has been fair to lousy on domestic issues and minus 9/11 thats all he would have had to run on.

**  Not having any further domestic terror attacks is what truly pushed Bush over the top in the election.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #428 on: January 13, 2006, 07:19:13 pm »
Quote:

Without a doubt, Bush has gambled his legacy and perhaps the political capital of the republican party on Iraq.  That being said, the payoff of having a stable democracy in the Middle East (not like the Saudi/Kuwait bullshit) would be tremendous.  Nobody likes to hear of American/Brit soldiers getting killed, but the loss of life compared to other conflicts has been very low.  It is not surprising that with the constant drip, drip, drip of casualties being reported that Bush is taking a popularity hit.  I believe that Lincoln's popularity ratings were even worse, yet he is today considered on par with Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed.

During WWII the allies did casualty estimates prior to the D-Day invasions, and the numbers were mind bending (sorry, don't have the exact number).  Yet the attack proceeded.  My point is that do you believe that such an action could be taken in todays political/media enviroment if the risks were similar?  I don't.

Iraq may just end up another dictatorship in several years and Bush will be accurately judged a failure president.  Or not... lets wait and see how things pan out.  What is certain, is that if we cut and run, then failure is guaranteed.  It is sad that many would not mind seeing the failure, because of their hatred for Bush.




IMHO, the failure in Iraq has already occurred.  Civil war already exists by any definition of civil war.  Secular candidates in the election got ignored, Islamic candidates romped home.

Bush once said that we would leave if the Iwraqis asked us to.  Well they have, it's the only thing they agree on.  80% want us out.  45% think it's ok to kill our troops.  95% of the insurgents are Iraqis.

All the stated reasons to stay are moot - all we can do now is get more of our troops killed.

In 1965, eight years into the Vietnam war, the US death toll was just over 2,000.  By the time it was over in 1973 that number had risen to 58,000.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #429 on: January 13, 2006, 07:23:19 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

He needed 9/11 to start the war.  The war prolongs the political capital and acts as a justification to eschew oversight.  Without the war I doubt that Bush would've been re-elected because the parts of his campaign that worked were the tweaking of the public's innate patriotism and scaring the shit out of us.




But Pravata told me earlier that he thinks the invasion would have occurred without 9/11:

The Link

Was he wrong?

And if Bush was threatened with losing re-election because he was unpopular, but he really wanted a war so he could earn political capital, wouldn't he then have thought up a pretext to go to war to save his skin?  I mean, what kind of conspirators are they if they finally get this guy in office, take over Congress and the courts, and then don't carry through on the scheme hatched in the hallowed halls of the University of Chicago so many decades ago?

Seems unlikely they'd let the chance go by.

Maybe if we send a group e-mail to the Daily Kos we'll get the official conspiracy theory answer to this one.





And he was correct and I'll tell you why.  If the pretense, not to mention what was voted on in Congress, for the war was WMDs, would there have been any fewer WMDs if 9/11 hadn't occured?  No. ("Les see, nutin minus nutin, carry the one...still got nutin") The phantom WMDs excuse is independent of the 9/11 attack.  They could've trumped that one up at any time.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #430 on: January 13, 2006, 07:32:48 pm »
Quote:

IMHO, the failure in Iraq has already occurred.  Civil war already exists by any definition of civil war.  Secular candidates in the election got ignored, Islamic candidates romped home.

Bush once said that we would leave if the Iwraqis asked us to.  Well they have, it's the only thing they agree on.  80% want us out.  45% think it's ok to kill our troops.  95% of the insurgents are Iraqis.

All the stated reasons to stay are moot - all we can do now is get more of our troops killed.

In 1965, eight years into the Vietnam war, the US death toll was just over 2,000.  By the time it was over in 1973 that number had risen to 58,000.





And yet polls in Iraq, to the extent we are going to give them any credence, indicate that the majority of Iraqis believe their lives are better now than under Saddam and that they will continue to get better.  And they've held three consecutive successful elections despite dire warnings each time that balloting would result in violent catastrophe.

The United States was defeated in Vietnam once the anti-war movement and the media managed to scare the political leadership in Washington into believing that the war was lost.  The Vietnamese generals interviewed since the war have been very clear about the morale they gained from American defeatist attitudes while the United States was actually fighting a successful action on the ground.

The people comparing Iraq to Vietnam are trying to spin a self-fulfilling prophecy.  I cannot imagine having such loathing for a president that I would be willing to damn my country into losing a war by disfiguring the truth and repeating the very lies that are music to our enemies' ears.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #431 on: January 13, 2006, 07:33:44 pm »
Quote:

And he was correct and I'll tell you why.  If the pretense, not to mention what was voted on in Congress, for the war was WMDs, would there have been any fewer WMDs if 9/11 hadn't occured?  No. ("Les see, nutin minus nutin, carry the one...still got nutin") The phantom WMDs excuse is independent of the 9/11 attack.  They could've trumped that one up at any time.




Well, that's at least what I expected Limey to say, and I'm surprised he didn't.

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #432 on: January 13, 2006, 07:34:42 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Without a doubt, Bush has gambled his legacy and perhaps the political capital of the republican party on Iraq.  That being said, the payoff of having a stable democracy in the Middle East (not like the Saudi/Kuwait bullshit) would be tremendous.  Nobody likes to hear of American/Brit soldiers getting killed, but the loss of life compared to other conflicts has been very low.  It is not surprising that with the constant drip, drip, drip of casualties being reported that Bush is taking a popularity hit.  I believe that Lincoln's popularity ratings were even worse, yet he is today considered on par with Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed.

During WWII the allies did casualty estimates prior to the D-Day invasions, and the numbers were mind bending (sorry, don't have the exact number).  Yet the attack proceeded.  My point is that do you believe that such an action could be taken in todays political/media enviroment if the risks were similar?  I don't.

Iraq may just end up another dictatorship in several years and Bush will be accurately judged a failure president.  Or not... lets wait and see how things pan out.  What is certain, is that if we cut and run, then failure is guaranteed.  It is sad that many would not mind seeing the failure, because of their hatred for Bush.




IMHO, the failure in Iraq has already occurred.  Civil war already exists by any definition of civil war.  Secular candidates in the election got ignored, Islamic candidates romped home.

Bush once said that we would leave if the Iwraqis asked us to.  Well they have, it's the only thing they agree on.  80% want us out.  45% think it's ok to kill our troops.  95% of the insurgents are Iraqis.

All the stated reasons to stay are moot - all we can do now is get more of our troops killed.

In 1965, eight years into the Vietnam war, the US death toll was just over 2,000.  By the time it was over in 1973 that number had risen to 58,000.





Ahhhhhh.... It is becoming clear now.  It's a  civil war.  Oh by all means defeat is certain.  Cut and Run should be the name of the next operation.

I find your stats to be questionable.  80% of who?  Shites...Sunnis....liberated political prisoners??  Of course Iraqis want Americans to leave... I don't blame them.  Just because HFD saves my house from burning down, doesn't mean I want them to move in.  I can't imagine the average Iraqi wishing for a return to the days of Saddam.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #433 on: January 13, 2006, 07:55:27 pm »
Since I have to leave now for the weekend, I'll part with (what is in my view) a less fanciful recount of events.

After 9/11, the United States finally grasped that Islamic terrorism was not confined to the Middle East.  The United States acted first against those in Afghanistan directly responsible for the attacks.  The administration then widened its strategy and took the radical move of upsetting the decades-old nostrum that containment of weapons-proliferation and terror-sponsorship in the Middle East were tenable.

Regime-change in Iraq had been the official policy of the United States since the Clinton administration.  Saddam was suspected of having WMD and being in violation of numerous Security Council resolutions since ejecting the inspectors in 1998.  He was also known to consort with terrorists, provide them safe harbor and fund them.  The administration attempted to compel the United Nations to enforce its resolutions.  The Security Council, with vetoes by countries such as Russia and France who were actually in favor of lifting sanctions on Saddam, would permit no action.

So the United States and the United Kingdom acted without the United Nations.  The WMD were not found -- either Saddam had been disarmed and was bluffing or was lied to by his inferiors about his WMD capability, or the weapons were quickly disassembled, moved or hidden.  The United States embarked ham-fistedly on the process of turning Iraq into a Middle Eastern example of an Islamic country not in need of a strong man to operate.

The administration has made many mistakes in this regard.  It was unprepared to properly handle the transition.  It has not stopped the flow of foreign fighters from Syria and Iran, even as it tolerates nuclear proliferation in Iran and North Korea.  (One positive effect was Libya's willingness to surrender its WMD.)  The administration's public diplomacy in justification of its policies may be some of the worst in the modern age.

I'm not willing yet to write off Iraq, however, and the far-reaching consequences that a successful pluralistic state there could have on the rest of the Middle East and hence on world security.  Lots of people on the right and left in many countries are pissed off because actually addressing terror-sponsorship and weapons-proliferation at their source is unnerving for people who favor "stability" -- infamous, in fact, for fomenting instability -- over all other values in the international system.

And I would wager that one reason Bush's poll numbers have suffered and the war is unpopular is not because Americans oppose the concept of the war, but because they do not perceive the war is being fought vigorously enough.  Americans want a winner.  What they do not want is what appears to be a dithering effort.  We are not shy about committing troops.  We get angry about not letting them do their job thoroughly and completely.

The media likes to interpret the polls to mean that more and more Americans have come around to the Moore-Soros-Galloway-Streisand-Dean axis of loathing having gone to war in the first place.  No.  Americans want to win.  They want leadership to let the troops win.  They do not want to pull out unilaterally a la Jack Murtha and Nancy Pelosi.  They want to finish the job, and they perceive that the actions essential for that to happen are not necessarily being taken.

Fight hard to the finish or do not join the fight at all.  That was a lesson of Vietnam.

And, by the way, I could give a damn what the French think about it.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #434 on: January 14, 2006, 12:02:56 pm »
Quote:

And yet polls in Iraq, to the extent we are going to give them any credence, indicate that the majority of Iraqis believe their lives are better now than under Saddam and that they will continue to get better.  And they've held three consecutive successful elections despite dire warnings each time that balloting would result in violent catastrophe.

The United States was defeated in Vietnam once the anti-war movement and the media managed to scare the political leadership in Washington into believing that the war was lost.  The Vietnamese generals interviewed since the war have been very clear about the morale they gained from American defeatist attitudes while the United States was actually fighting a successful action on the ground.

The people comparing Iraq to Vietnam are trying to spin a self-fulfilling prophecy.  I cannot imagine having such loathing for a president that I would be willing to damn my country into losing a war by disfiguring the truth and repeating the very lies that are music to our enemies' ears.




The Vietnam comparison is relevant, because there is an escalation of violence against the occupying forces.  It's been increasing for over a year.  Only about 10% of the troop fatalities occurred prior to when Bush declared "major combat operations have ended".  The Vietnam War dragged on because the politicos were looking for a convenient high-point on which to finish.  It never came, and I don't see one any time soon in Iraq.  Casualty rates will only get worse.

As for the thing about Iraqis feeling better about their country; that's nice.  It's not why we were told we were going there, and there's no way we would've gone if that had been what we were told as to why we were going, but it's nice.  In the meantime, we're destroying the US' reputation in the world, running up huge deficits that will take decades to repay, borrowing money like crazy from China and the emerging nations and destroying the military and getting its members killed and maimed.

The Iraqis better be fucking ecstatic.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #435 on: January 14, 2006, 12:13:55 pm »
Quote:

Ahhhhhh.... It is becoming clear now.  It's a  civil war.  Oh by all means defeat is certain.  Cut and Run should be the name of the next operation.

I find your stats to be questionable.  80% of who?  Shites...Sunnis....liberated political prisoners??  Of course Iraqis want Americans to leave... I don't blame them.  Just because HFD saves my house from burning down, doesn't mean I want them to move in.  I can't imagine the average Iraqi wishing for a return to the days of Saddam.




I mention Civil War becuase one of the reasons for not leaving is that we would doom Iraq to decend into it.  Problem with that argument is civil war is already happening.

The 80% and 45% figures come from an opinion poll spanning all of the Iraqi religious factions taken late last year.  At the Arab Leaders' Conference in Egypt last year, the only thing that the Iraqi Sunni, Shi'ites and Kurds agreed on was a resolution demanding that the US set a timetable for withdrawal.  Why this is important is because Bush vowed to leave if ever they asked us to.

The 95% figure of the Iraqi content of the insurgency, comes from Congressman John Murtha.  We're not fighting al Qaeda in Iraq; we're fighting Iraqis in Iraq.

And I shall repeat once again in this thread.  This was never about liberating Iraqis from Saddam; it was about taking him out before he launched a full spread of WMDs at us.  This liberation stuff is the third justification for war after the first two turned out to not exist.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #436 on: January 14, 2006, 12:39:48 pm »
Quote:

Since I have to leave now for the weekend, I'll part with (what is in my view) a less fanciful recount of events.



Here's a quick a dirty summary from me:

I think that the response to 9/11, to go after al Qaeda and the Taliban was absolutely the correct thing to do.  I am disappointed that the job was never finished (resources having been pulled from that region to support the action against Iraq).

I think there was a deliberate effort to taint Iraq with 9/11 to enable the policy of forceable regime change.  The administration bullied the intelligence agencies to give them only what they wanted to hear, they ignored contrary voices/info and even set up their own intelligence clearinghouse - the Office of Special Plans - which received intelligence independently from the CIA, NSA and FBI.  This Office was fed a pack of lies by Chalabi and his stooges; all of whom had been investigated by thge existing services and discarded as full of shit.

This flawed intelligence product was sold to Congress and the people as bona fide, and we all rushed off to war.  I, too, was clamouring for Saddam's head - he was trying to get nukes ferchissake!

I believe that Bush's approval numbers are so bad because he has pretty much fucked up everything he's touched.  I am hard-pressed to think of one successful policy change or initiative enacted by this administration.  There may be some, but the bottom line is that most people are getting poorer by the day.  No amount of rhetoric about improvment in the economy is going to change what people know to be true in their wallets.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #437 on: January 15, 2006, 04:17:03 am »
excellent thread

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #438 on: January 17, 2006, 02:29:08 pm »
Quote:

excellent thread



Perhaps by way of a full stop on the end of this, I find Al Gore's speech yesterday on the wiretapping scandal to be quite compelling.

Here's the text.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #439 on: January 17, 2006, 03:04:00 pm »
Dear Al:

Please don't forget what Bill thought about warrantless searches for national security purposes.

Signed,
Outraged U.S. Citizen

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #440 on: January 17, 2006, 03:09:32 pm »
Quote:

Dear Al:

Please don't forget <a href="http://nationalreview.com/york/york200512200946.asp">what Bill thought about warrantless searches for national security purposes.[/url]

Signed,
Outraged U.S. Citizen




This only strengthens the argument against warrantless wiretapping.  Nixon did it, without engaging in debate in Congress, and was forced to resign in the face of an impending impeachment.  Clinton wanted to do it but backed off when the Republican controlled Congress told him no.  Now Bush has done it, without engaging in debate in Congress...
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #441 on: January 17, 2006, 03:11:51 pm »
Quote:

GORE: The FBI privately labeled King the -- and I quote -- "the most dangerous and effective negro leader in the country" and vowed to -- again, I quote -- "take him off his pedestal."

The government even attempted to destroy his marriage and tried to blackmail him into committing suicide. This campaign continued until Dr. King's murder.

The discovery that the FBI conducted this long-running and extensive campaign of secret electronic surveillance designed to infiltrate the inner workings of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and to learn the most intimate details of Dr. King's life was instrumental in helping to convince Congress to enact restrictions on wiretapping.

And one result was the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act, often called FISA, which was enacted expressly to ensure that foreign intelligence surveillance would be presented to an impartial judge to verify that there was indeed a sufficient cause for the surveillance.





I can't recall, who was president when this act of illegal wire-taps was initiated against King?

I admire how Gore manages to tie the current wire-tapping scenario to the attempted character assassination that took place in the 60's.  Those two scenarios are obviously analogous.  It's beyond me why no one else made the connection.  

Quote:

At present, we still have much to learn about the NSA's domestic surveillance. What we do know about this pervasive wiretapping virtually compels the conclusion that the president of the United States has been breaking the law, repeatedly and insistently.




Hmmm... virtually...  I prefer reality, personally, but that would require waiting on the courts to do their job and would pre-empt the ability to make provocative statements.

Quote:

And make no mistake: The rule of law makes us stronger by ensuring that decisions will be tested, studied, reviewed and examined through the normal processes of government that are designed to improve policy and avoid error.

GORE: And the knowledge that they will be reviewed prevents overreaching and checks the accretion to power.

A commitment to openness, truthfulness and accountability helps our country avoid many serious mistakes that we would otherwise make.

Recently, for example, we learned from just-declassified documents after almost 40 years that the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which authorized the tragic Vietnam War was actually based on false information.

And we now know that the decision by Congress to authorize the Iraq war 38 years later was also based on false information.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, the point is that America would have been better off knowing the truth and avoiding both of these colossal mistakes in our history. And that is the reason why following the rule of law makes us safer, not more vulnerable.





Now we get to the real point of this speech.  Iraq = Vietnam.  Vietnam was a quagmire.  Therefore, Iraq is a quagmire.  Well done!  I haven't seen this quality of persuasive argument since freshmen level speech class in college.  

Quote:

The president and I agree on one thing: The threat from terrorism is all too real.

There is simply no question that we continue to face new challenges in the wake of the attacks on September 11th and we must be ever vigilant in protecting our citizens from harm.

Where we disagree is on the proposition that we have to break the law or sacrifice our system of government in order to protect Americans from terrorism when, in fact, doing so would make us weaker and more vulnerable.





I'm pretty sure the Bush administration has a solid belief they were within the law.  It's a pretty large assumption to assume they believed they were violating the law and proceeded.  I didn't hear Gore voicing outrage when Clinton use every legal maneuver to avoid claims of sexual harrassment, including lying under oath.  I don't mean to re-hash past events, as I thought the republican controlled congress over-reached in that particular issue.  However, it does seem a bit of a double standard unless you feel breaking the law to hide adultery is less significant than breaking the law to prevent terrorist attacks (assuming that's what they were listening for and not some plot to discredit Al Sharpton or Jessie Jackson -sticking with the character attacks of minority leaders - not that Jackson hasn't done quite a bit to help in that regard).  

Gore goes on about quotes attributed to Gonzalez and asserts claims by Bush.  Some are known, some seem to be stretching the facts a bit, i.e. Bush claiming the right to kidnap people off the street.  Claim?  I haven't read that.  Has it happened, I belive the most recent event was in Italy, and Italy is charging some 20 people in a conspiracy to kidnap and transfer an identified terrorist outside Italian borders.  

Some valid points (or questions I should say) are raised.  All in all, I think Gore is playing politics with the issue.  Rather than allow the issue to be resolved in the courts, he's trying the case in the court of public opinion.  That wreaks of politics, regardless of which side you take on the issue.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #442 on: January 17, 2006, 03:15:07 pm »
Quote:

This only strengthens the argument against warrantless wiretapping.  Nixon did it, without engaging in debate in Congress, and was forced to resign in the face of an impending impeachment.  Clinton wanted to do it but backed off when the Republican controlled Congress told him no.  Now Bush has done it, without engaging in debate in Congress...




So it's not that he's upset with warrantless searches per se, he's upset with warrantless searches not authorized by Congress?

I suspect that the courts are going to hold that the president does not have inherent constitutional authority to engage in warrantless searches even for foreign intelligence purposes, and that will be the end of the debate.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #443 on: January 17, 2006, 03:26:10 pm »
Quote:

So it's not that he's upset with warrantless searches per se, he's upset with warrantless searches not authorized by Congress?

I suspect that the courts are going to hold that the president does not have inherent constitutional authority to engage in warrantless searches even for foreign intelligence purposes, and that will be the end of the debate.




You've taken my words, attached them to Gore and then argued something else.

Gore decryed the avoidance of judicial oversight in not obtaining warrants, and the avoidance of legislative oversight by failing to obtain the requisite law change to enable the warrantless wiretapping program.

If the courts hold that the the warrantless wiretaps are unconstitutional, it will not be the end.  It will signal the beginning of impeachment proceedings.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

otterj

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #444 on: January 17, 2006, 03:27:49 pm »
Looks like lawsuits are now being filed against Bush and the NSA for domestic spying.

 Link

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #445 on: January 17, 2006, 03:32:28 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Dear Al:

Please don't forget <a href="http://nationalreview.com/york/york200512200946.asp">what Bill thought about warrantless searches for national security purposes.[/url]

Signed,
Outraged U.S. Citizen




This only strengthens the argument against warrantless wiretapping.  Nixon did it, without engaging in debate in Congress, and was forced to resign in the face of an impending impeachment.  Clinton wanted to do it but backed off when the Republican controlled Congress told him no.  Now Bush has done it, without engaging in debate in Congress...




I don't understand the legal issues involved nearly well enough to tell you whether this will hold up in court.

I can, unequivocally, state that Al Gore is absolutely the wrong man to put forth this argument.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #446 on: January 17, 2006, 03:35:39 pm »
Quote:

You've taken my words, attached them to Gore and then argued something else.




I'm trying to figure out what has Gore hot under the collar, besides the fact that his Bush-hatred borders on near-lunacy.  Of course, he's not by any means alone in that respect.

Quote:

Gore decryed the avoidance of judicial oversight in not obtaining warrants, and the avoidance of legislative oversight by failing to obtain the requisite law change to enable the warrantless wiretapping program.




So, warrantless searches are (1) OK in the absence of legislation to the contrary and (2) OK if authorized by legislation.  What I am asking here (you or Gore can answer, but I doubt he's reading) is whether warrantless searches are an absolute evil or simply a legislative prerogative.

Quote:

If the courts hold that the the warrantless wiretaps are unconstitutional, it will not be the end.  It will signal the beginning of impeachment proceedings.




I know you wish this to be true, but that does not make it so.

It appears that the Supreme Court has not decided one way or the other whether warrantless searches of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes are constitutional.  I suspect which way the currently comrpised court will rule on this matter, but I do not know whether the president's having tested this principal will lead to articles of impeachment, much less impeachment itself or removal from office.

You might try thinking of this matter from the legal perspective rather than from the political perspective every once in awhile.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #447 on: January 17, 2006, 03:41:00 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

You've taken my words, attached them to Gore and then argued something else.




I'm trying to figure out what has Gore hot under the collar, besides the fact that his Bush-hatred borders on near-lunacy.  Of course, he's not by any means alone in that respect.

Quote:

Gore decryed the avoidance of judicial oversight in not obtaining warrants, and the avoidance of legislative oversight by failing to obtain the requisite law change to enable the warrantless wiretapping program.




So, warrantless searches are (1) OK in the absence of legislation to the contrary and (2) OK if authorized by legislation.  What I am asking here (you or Gore can answer, but I doubt he's reading) is whether warrantless searches are an absolute evil or simply a legislative prerogative.

Quote:

If the courts hold that the the warrantless wiretaps are unconstitutional, it will not be the end.  It will signal the beginning of impeachment proceedings.




I know you wish this to be true, but that does not make it so.

It appears that the Supreme Court has not decided one way or the other whether warrantless searches of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes are constitutional.  I suspect which way the currently comrpised court will rule on this matter, but I do not know whether the president's having tested this principal will lead to articles of impeachment, much less impeachment itself or removal from office.

You might try thinking of this matter from the legal perspective rather than from the political perspective every once in awhile.





You're suggesting there's a difference?  The phrase Limey used, "full stop" must be British English that translates to "open up a whole new can of worms" in American English.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #448 on: January 17, 2006, 03:47:02 pm »
Quote:

I'm trying to figure out what has Gore hot under the collar, besides the fact that his Bush-hatred borders on near-lunacy.  Of course, he's not by any means alone in that respect.



Gore obviously has an axe to grind.  However, his attack was broader than warrantless wiretapping; that is simply the latest example of the administration's indifference to the role of the other two branches of government.

Quote:

So, warrantless searches are (1) OK in the absence of legislation to the contrary and (2) OK if authorized by legislation.  What I am asking here (you or Gore can answer, but I doubt he's reading) is whether warrantless searches are an absolute evil or simply a legislative prerogative.



No.  Warrantless wiretaps are legal if Congress enacts legislation that makes it so.  They haven't.  I think Gore's argument is that the abandonment of constitutional checks and balances is what's evil.  When he and Clinton went after similar powers, they asked Congress.

Quote:

It appears that the Supreme Court has not decided one way or the other whether warrantless searches of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes are constitutional.  I suspect which way the currently comrpised court will rule on this matter, but I do not know whether the president's having tested this principal will lead to articles of impeachment, much less impeachment itself or removal from office.



Other searches are not subject to the same provisions of FISA as wiretaps.  I still have not seen an argument put forth that FISA does not apply.  If FISA applies, a warrant for a wiretap is required.

Quote:

You might try thinking of this matter from the legal perspective rather than from the political perspective every once in awhile.



I do and have.  Like when I debunked your Truong argument.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #449 on: January 17, 2006, 03:47:20 pm »
Quote:

You're suggesting there's a difference?  The phrase Limey used, "full stop" must be British English that translates to "open up a whole new can of worms" in American English.




A difference easily blurred.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #450 on: January 17, 2006, 03:48:42 pm »
Quote:

You're suggesting there's a difference?  The phrase Limey used, "full stop" must be British English that translates to "open up a whole new can of worms" in American English.



There's nothing new here. Same old, previously debunked, obfuscation.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #451 on: January 17, 2006, 03:57:21 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

You're suggesting there's a difference?  The phrase Limey used, "full stop" must be British English that translates to "open up a whole new can of worms" in American English.



There's nothing new here. Same old, previously debunked, obfuscation.





Should I be concerned that the majority of commentary against Gore has been of the ad hominen variety?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #452 on: January 17, 2006, 04:22:47 pm »
Quote:

No.  Warrantless wiretaps are legal if Congress enacts legislation that makes it so.  They haven't.  I think Gore's argument is that the abandonment of constitutional checks and balances is what's evil.  When he and Clinton went after similar powers, they asked Congress.




So what you are saying is that no warrantless search may be conducted unless Congress says so?  This does not appear to be compatible with the existing case law in this area.

Quote:

Other searches are not subject to the same provisions of FISA as wiretaps.  I still have not seen an argument put forth that FISA does not apply.  If FISA applies, a warrant for a wiretap is required.




But whether FISA applies, and thus restricts the inherent constitutional authority of the president, as found by the courts, is precisely the issue.  I agree with you wholeheartedly that if the courts find that FISA could have overriden the president's inherent constitutional authority, then the wiretaps should have been conducted in accordance with FISA.

Quote:

I do and have.  Like when I debunked your Truong argument.




Have you even read Truong?

In Truong, the Fourth Circuit held that the executive branch has inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance on a U.S. resident on U.S. soil for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence information but not for the purpose of gathering evidence for criminal prosecution.  As the Fourth Circuit noted, FISA was not in effect at the time the Truong searches occurred.

What the FISA review court said in 2002, was, "The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."  The FISA review court went on to say, "We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

The FISA court was not ruling on the same facts as the NSA warrantless wiretaps, but it nonetheless states unequivocally what Truong and subsequent cases found, and it goes further to assert that FISA could not limit the president's inherent constitutional power announced in Truong.

The cases filed today will eventually be heard in the Second Circuit and the Seventh Circuit, and it is probable that one or both of those Courts of Appeal will rule differently than the Fourth Circuit did in Truong as to the president's inherent constitutional power, or will at least take the position that FISA could limit the president's inherent constitutional authority by requiring the president to obtain a warrant.  Then the Supreme Court will likely agree to review this split among the circuits.

But Truong is not inapposite here.  It is the best precedent currently on point.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #453 on: January 17, 2006, 04:27:43 pm »
Quote:

Should I be concerned that the majority of commentary against Gore has been of the ad hominen variety?



Concerned?  Maybe.

Surprised? No.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #454 on: January 17, 2006, 04:31:51 pm »
To put it more simply, Truong said that the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches.

FISA came along and said the president does need a warrant to conduct such searches.

The FISA review court said that FISA could not impose a warrant requirement on the president where the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches.

Something is going to get overruled there.

(1) Either Truong will be overruled, and the Constitution does not inherently permit the president to conduct warrantless searches.

(2) Or FISA will be overruled, and FISA cannot impose a warrant requirement on the president where the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches.

(3) Or the principle announced by the FISA review court will be overruled, meaning that the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches in the absence of legislation, but once FISA passed, the president was bound to live by it.

Limey, if I've read correctly what you've been saying the last week, I'm guessing that you're arguing that No. 3 is the case.  Is that right?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #455 on: January 17, 2006, 04:36:29 pm »
Quote:

So what you are saying is that no warrantless search may be conducted unless Congress says so?  This does not appear to be compatible with the existing case law in this area.



WHY ER TAP!  Not "search".  A wiretap of an American citizen requires a warrant.  This premise, that is the only one I have espoused, is entirely consistent with law, case or otherwise, in this area.

Quote:

But whether FISA applies, and thus restricts the inherent constitutional authority of the president, as found by the courts, is precisely the issue.  I agree with you wholeheartedly that if the courts find that FISA could have overriden the president's inherent constitutional authority, then the wiretaps should have been conducted in accordance with FISA.



You are the only person arguing this.  Not even Bush is arguing this and Gore quotes Alberto Gonzales when Gonzales himself states that they cannot argue this.  Bush claims executive powers granted in the authorisation for the use of force against Iraq.

Quote:

Have you even read Truong?



Yes I have.  And we've been here before.  It doesn't apply.  I showed you why above.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #456 on: January 17, 2006, 04:39:05 pm »
Quote:

To put it more simply, Truong said that the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches.

FISA came along and said the president does need a warrant to conduct such searches.

The FISA review court said that FISA could not impose a warrant requirement on the president where the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches.

Something is going to get overruled there.

(1) Either Truong will be overruled, and the Constitution does not inherently permit the president to conduct warrantless searches.

(2) Or FISA will be overruled, and FISA cannot impose a warrant requirement on the president where the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches.

(3) Or the principle announced by the FISA review court will be overruled, meaning that the Constitution inherently permits the president to conduct warrantless searches in the absence of legislation, but once FISA passed, the president was bound to live by it.

Limey, if I've read what you're been saying correctly the last week, I'm guessing that you're arguing that No. 3 is the case.  Is that right?





Searches!  Searches!  Searches!

Samuel Alito VOLUNTEERED during his confirmation hearings that wiretaps are very different from searches.

We are talking about WIRETAPS.  Enough with the searches.  It's obfuscation of the highest order.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #457 on: January 17, 2006, 04:44:25 pm »
This is verbatim from Truong.  Note that it specifically refers to wiretaps.

Quote:

More importantly, the executive possesses unparalleled expertise to make the decision whether to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance, whereas the judiciary is largely inexperienced in making the delicate and complex decisions that lie behind foreign intelligence surveillance. See New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 727-30, 91 S. Ct. 2140, 2148-2150, 29 L. Ed. 2d 822 (1971) (Stewart, J., concurring); United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324, 330, 57 S. Ct. 758, 760, 81 L. Ed. 1134 (1937). The executive branch, containing the State Department, the intelligence agencies, and the military, is constantly aware of the nation's security needs and the magnitude of external threats posed by a panoply of foreign nations and organizations. On the other hand, while the courts possess expertise in making the probable cause determination involved in surveillance of suspected criminals, the courts are unschooled in diplomacy and military affairs, a mastery of which would be essential to passing upon an executive branch request that a foreign intelligence wiretap be authorized. Few, if any, district courts would be truly competent to judge the importance of particular information to the security of the United States or the "probable cause" to demonstrate that the government in fact needs to recover that information from one particular source.



Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #458 on: January 17, 2006, 04:47:07 pm »
Quote:

Searches!  Searches!  Searches!

Samuel Alito VOLUNTEERED during his confirmation hearings that wiretaps are very different from searches.

We are talking about WIRETAPS.  Enough with the searches.  It's obfuscation of the highest order.





A wiretap is a search and seizure for constitutional purposes.  Half of first-year criminal justice class in law school is spent discussing how wiretaps are dealt with under the Fourth Amendment, which concerns searches and seizures.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #459 on: January 17, 2006, 04:53:04 pm »
Quote:

A wiretap is a search and seizure for constitutional purposes.  Half of first-year criminal justice class in law school is spent discussing how wiretaps are dealt with under the Fourth Amendment, which concerns searches and seizures.



A wiretap is a search, but one that is handled differently under law from physical searches.  Do you claim that this is not the case?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #460 on: January 17, 2006, 05:02:22 pm »
Quote:

This is verbatim from Truong.  Note that it specifically refers to wiretaps.

Quote:

More importantly, the executive possesses unparalleled expertise to make the decision whether to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance, whereas the judiciary is largely inexperienced in making the delicate and complex decisions that lie behind foreign intelligence surveillance. See New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 727-30, 91 S. Ct. 2140, 2148-2150, 29 L. Ed. 2d 822 (1971) (Stewart, J., concurring); United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324, 330, 57 S. Ct. 758, 760, 81 L. Ed. 1134 (1937). The executive branch, containing the State Department, the intelligence agencies, and the military, is constantly aware of the nation's security needs and the magnitude of external threats posed by a panoply of foreign nations and organizations. On the other hand, while the courts possess expertise in making the probable cause determination involved in surveillance of suspected criminals, the courts are unschooled in diplomacy and military affairs, a mastery of which would be essential to passing upon an executive branch request that a foreign intelligence wiretap be authorized. Few, if any, district courts would be truly competent to judge the importance of particular information to the security of the United States or the "probable cause" to demonstrate that the government in fact needs to recover that information from one particular source.






This conveniently ignores the centre of the Truong Case.  As I stated a week ago in this very thread, it was an appeal of a case when the FISA court had issued a warrant but applied conditions to it.  The appeal was specifically on whether the court has the authority to add such conditions to a warrant.

There is nothing in the case that challenges the FISA law itself.  If there was, you'd quote it.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #461 on: January 17, 2006, 05:05:14 pm »
Quote:

A wiretap is a search, but one that is handled differently under law from physical searches.  Do you claim that this is not the case?




Wiretaps, search of vehicle, search of a home, search of a person incident to an arrest, are all handled with different rules and warrant requirements.  And searches and seizures are also handled differently depending on whether they are for criminal prosecution or foreign intelligence purposes.  FISA applied to electronic surveillance, including wiretaps, before it applied to physical searches.

Troung involved electronic surveillance, specifically wiretaps.  It did not make a special constitutional warrant requirement just because wiretaps were involved.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #462 on: January 17, 2006, 05:16:52 pm »
Quote:

This conveniently ignores the centre of the Truong Case.  As I stated a week ago in this very thread, it was an appeal of a case when the FISA court had issued a warrant but applied conditions to it.  The appeal was specifically on whether the court has the authority to add such conditions to a warrant.




What you are describing is not Truong.  What you are describing is In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, which was decided by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review in 2002, and which quotes Truong.

Truong was decided 22 years earlier, in 1980, and was an appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.  It held that the president has inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance of U.S. persons on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes.

Quote:

There is nothing in the case that challenges the FISA law itself.  If there was, you'd quote it.




In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 says, with respect to the holding in Troung:

The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information.  It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.

So there's the quote.  In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 says unequivocally that FISA could not encroach upon the president's constitutional power upheld 22 years earlier in Truong.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #463 on: January 17, 2006, 05:20:32 pm »
Quote:

This conveniently ignores the centre of the Truong Case.




This is the center of Truong, by the way:

Quote:

The defendants raise a substantial challenge to their convictions by urging that the surveillance conducted by the FBI violated the Fourth Amendment and that all the evidence uncovered through that surveillance must con-sequently be suppressed. As has been stated, the gov-ernment did not seek a warrant for the eavesdropping on Truong's phone conversations or the bugging of his apartment. Instead, it relied upon a "foreign intelligence" exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant require-ment. 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.




To repeat from above, the court held, in part, as follows:

Quote:

The executive possesses unparalleled expertise to make the decision whether to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance, whereas the judiciary is largely inexperienced in making the delicate and complex decisions that lie behind foreign intelligence surveillance. See New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 727-30, 91 S. Ct. 2140, 2148-2150, 29 L. Ed. 2d 822 (1971) (Stewart, J., concurring); United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324, 330, 57 S. Ct. 758, 760, 81 L. Ed. 1134 (1937). The executive branch, containing the State Department, the intelligence agencies, and the military, is constantly aware of the nation's security needs and the magnitude of external threats posed by a panoply of foreign nations and organizations. On the other hand, while the courts possess expertise in making the probable cause determination involved in surveillance of suspected criminals, the courts are unschooled in diplomacy and military affairs, a mastery of which would be essential to passing upon an executive branch request that a foreign intelligence wiretap be authorized. Few, if any, district courts would be truly competent to judge the importance of particular information to the security of the United States or the "probable cause" to demonstrate that the government in fact needs to recover that information from one particular source.



Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #464 on: January 17, 2006, 05:21:04 pm »
Quote:

Wiretaps, search of vehicle, search of a home, search of a person incident to an arrest, are all handled with different rules and warrant requirements.  And searches and seizures are also handled differently depending on whether they are for criminal prosecution or foreign intelligence purposes.  FISA applied to electronic surveillance, including wiretaps, before it applied to physical searches.



Great.  So no more obfuscation about "searches" when we're talking wiretaps.  They are not the same.  The Patriot Act, for example, allows "sneak and peek" searches of your home without a warrant and without the need to advise you of the search.  This is a warrantless search, but has absolutely nothing to do with wiretaps.

Quote:

Troung involved electronic surveillance, specifically wiretaps.  It did not make a special constitutional warrant requirement just because wiretaps were involved.



I explained the center of Truong above, but you understand this.  It does nothing...no thing...to set aside the legal requirement to have a warrant when wiretapping American citizens.

Do you see my argument?  I'm arguing specifically about what Bush has admitted doing.  You are throwing up allusions to "searches" and quoting nebulous passages from cases that are irrelevant to this specific situation.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #465 on: January 17, 2006, 05:27:05 pm »
Quote:

What you are describing is not Truong.  What you are describing is In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, which was decided by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review in 2002, and which quotes Truong.

Truong was decided 22 years earlier, in 1980, and was an appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.  It held that the president has inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance of U.S. persons on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes.




I am referring to the appeal of the Truong case to the FISA Court.

Quote:

In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 says, with respect to the holding in Troung:

The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information.  It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.

So there's the quote.  In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 says unequivocally that FISA could not encroach upon the president's constitutional power upheld 22 years earlier in Truong.




SEARCHES!  Not wiretaps. Don't you think AG Gonzales would've argued this precedent if it actually applied?
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #466 on: January 17, 2006, 05:28:32 pm »
Quote:

Great.  So no more obfuscation about "searches" when we're talking wiretaps.  They are not the same.  The Patriot Act, for example, allows "sneak and peek" searches of your home without a warrant and without the need to advise you of the search.  This is a warrantless search, but has absolutely nothing to do with wiretaps.




But I have never contended that the specific rules applicable to wiretaps for criminal prosecution purposes have been invoked here.  Warrantless wiretaps for foreign intelligence searches have been explicitly upheld as constitutional.  See Truong.

Quote:

I explained the center of Truong above, but you understand this.  It does nothing...no thing...to set aside the legal requirement to have a warrant when wiretapping American citizens.

Do you see my argument?  I'm arguing specifically about what Bush has admitted doing.  You are throwing up allusions to "searches" and quoting nebulous passages from cases that are irrelevant to this specific situation.





But the case you described above was not Truong.  The case you described was In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.  Truong specifically upholds the president's inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps on U.S. persons on U.S. soil.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #467 on: January 17, 2006, 05:32:11 pm »
Quote:

I am referring to the appeal of the Truong case to the FISA Court.




When was this case decided?  Do you have a link to it?  I don't think there was an appeal of Truong to the FISA court.  The Truong case was appealed from the U.S. District Court in Virginia to the Fourth Circuit, which issued a decision in 1980.

Quote:

SEARCHES!  Not wiretaps. Don't you think AG Gonzales would've argued this precedent if it actually applied?




But the searches in Truong were wiretaps, and the court said the president had inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps.  The court said that regardless of what defense Gonzales presents.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #468 on: January 17, 2006, 05:37:47 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

This conveniently ignores the centre of the Truong Case.




This is the center of Truong, by the way:

Quote:

The defendants raise a substantial challenge to their convictions by urging that the surveillance conducted by the FBI violated the Fourth Amendment and that all the evidence uncovered through that surveillance must con-sequently be suppressed. As has been stated, the gov-ernment did not seek a warrant for the eavesdropping on Truong's phone conversations or the bugging of his apartment. Instead, it relied upon a "foreign intelligence" exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant require-ment. 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.




To repeat from above, the court held, in part, as follows:

Quote:

The executive possesses unparalleled expertise to make the decision whether to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance, whereas the judiciary is largely inexperienced in making the delicate and complex decisions that lie behind foreign intelligence surveillance. See New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 727-30, 91 S. Ct. 2140, 2148-2150, 29 L. Ed. 2d 822 (1971) (Stewart, J., concurring); United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324, 330, 57 S. Ct. 758, 760, 81 L. Ed. 1134 (1937). The executive branch, containing the State Department, the intelligence agencies, and the military, is constantly aware of the nation's security needs and the magnitude of external threats posed by a panoply of foreign nations and organizations. On the other hand, while the courts possess expertise in making the probable cause determination involved in surveillance of suspected criminals, the courts are unschooled in diplomacy and military affairs, a mastery of which would be essential to passing upon an executive branch request that a foreign intelligence wiretap be authorized. Few, if any, district courts would be truly competent to judge the importance of particular information to the security of the United States or the "probable cause" to demonstrate that the government in fact needs to recover that information from one particular source.






The original Truong case was decided in 1978, before the FISA law was enacted (it passed in '78 and was enacted in '79).  Therefore, any decision that the FISA court - which was now responsible for the appeal - would be based on the law as it stood pre-FISA.

It's all entirely moot to the FISA law as it stands currently.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #469 on: January 17, 2006, 05:40:40 pm »
Quote:

When was this case decided?  Do you have a link to it?  I don't think there was an appeal of Truong to the FISA court.  The Truong case was appealed from the U.S. District Court in Virginia to the Fourth Circuit, which issued a decision in 1980.




Link

Quote:

But the searches in Truong were wiretaps, and the court said the president had inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps.  The court said that regardless of what defense Gonzales presents.



Truong pre-dated FISA.  'Nuff said.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #470 on: January 17, 2006, 05:56:56 pm »
Perhaps I was unclear earlier.

There is a case called In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.  It was decided by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review in 2002.  It is available here:

The Link

There is another case called United States v. Truong.  It was decided by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1980.  It was an appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  I have not been able to find it online other than by pulling it off Lexis.  I will e-mail it to you if you want to read it.

These are not the same case, and In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 is not an appeal of Truong.  In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 cites Truong regarding certain holdings of law.

In Truong,

Quote:

The defendants raise a substantial challenge to their convictions by urging that the surveillance conducted by the FBI violated the Fourth Amendment and that all the evidence uncovered through that surveillance must consequently be suppressed. As has been stated, the government did not seek a warrant for the eavesdropping on Truong's phone conversations or the bugging of his apartment. Instead, it relied upon a "foreign intelligence" exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. 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.




In Truong, the Fourth Circuit held that no warrant was required for wiretapping defendants to collect foreign intelligence information, but it did exclude evidence once the wiretapping became primarily for a criminal prosecution investigation.

The wiretaps in Truong took place before FISA went in effect.  In 2002, 22 years later, in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review decided an appeal from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court:

Quote:

The court's decision from which the government appeals imposed certain requirements and limitations accompanying an order authorizing electronic surveillance of an "agent of a foreign power" as defined in FISA. There is no disagreement between the government and the FISA court as to the propriety of the electronic surveillance; the court found that the government had shown probable cause to believe that the target is an agent of a foreign power and otherwise met the basic requirements of FISA. The government's application for a surveillance order contains detailed information to support its contention that the target, who is a United States person, is aiding, abetting, or conspiring with others in international terrorism.  The FISA court authorized the surveillance, but imposed certain restrictions, which the government contends are neither mandated nor authorized by FISA.




In In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review noted:

Quote:

The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.




The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review concluded,

Quote:

Even without taking into account the President's inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance, we think the procedures and government showings required under FISA, if they do not meet the minimum Fourth Amendment warrant standards, certainly come close. We, therefore, believe firmly, applying the balancing test drawn from Keith, that FISA as amended is constitutional because the surveillances it authorizes are reasonable.




In other words, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 found the FISA warrant constitutional, without even considering the president's inherent constitutional authority (to conduct warrantless wiretaps for foreign intelligence purposes) announced 22 years earlier in Truong.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #471 on: January 17, 2006, 06:00:20 pm »
Quote:

It's all entirely moot to the FISA law as it stands currently.




No, it's not.  There's still the constitutional question of whether a statute could restrict the president's inherent constitutional authority.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #472 on: January 17, 2006, 06:02:27 pm »
Quote:

Truong pre-dated FISA.  'Nuff said.




No, it's not 'nuff said.  A court may hold that FISA could extinguish the president's inherent constitutional authority to order warrantless wiretaps of U.S. persons on U.S. soil, as announced in Truong, but a court may also hold, as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review assumed, that FISA could not encroach on the president's inherent constitutional authority.

Do you now at least understand that the case you were citing wasn't Truong?  It was In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 that you were relying on.

Phil_in_CS

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1511
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #473 on: January 17, 2006, 06:18:45 pm »
this is the longest thread in a year that hasn't involved barzilla

OldBlevins

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 633
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #474 on: January 17, 2006, 06:48:39 pm »
Quote:

this is the longest thread in a year that hasn't involved barzilla




I'm sure he's involved in this somehow.
blah, blah, blah . . .

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #475 on: January 17, 2006, 06:53:10 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

this is the longest thread in a year that hasn't involved barzilla




I'm sure he's involved in this somehow.





He's sitting at home trying to figure out how to calculate Truong's RCAP.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #476 on: January 17, 2006, 07:09:11 pm »
Quote:

No, it's not 'nuff said.  A court may hold that FISA could extinguish the president's inherent constitutional authority to order warrantless wiretaps of U.S. persons on U.S. soil, as announced in Truong, but a court may also hold, as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review assumed, that FISA could not encroach on the president's inherent constitutional authority.

Do you now at least understand that the case you were citing wasn't Truong?  It was In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 that you were relying on.  




I may have my cases in a twist, but I am correct that Truong pre-dated FISA so any actual commentary in that case regarding wiretapping regulations does not apply to post-FISA cases.

As to your assertion that a court may hold that FISA doesn't encroach on the President's constitutional authority, this is, of course, possible, but highly unlikely.  FISA was enacted in the aftermath of Nixon's warrantless wiretapping - which, he argued (unsuccessfully), was necessary for national security in a time of war.  FISA's there to ensure that wiretapping of furriners, who are not protected by the constitution, does not encroach on the privacy of those who are.  Given this, it's unlikely that a court will set aside a law that was enacted to limit Presidential authority because it limits Presidential authority.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #477 on: January 17, 2006, 07:34:34 pm »
Quote:

As to your assertion that a court may hold that FISA doesn't encroach on the President's constitutional authority, this is, of course, possible, but highly unlikely.  FISA was enacted in the aftermath of Nixon's warrantless wiretapping - which, he argued (unsuccessfully), was necessary for national security in a time of war.  FISA's there to ensure that wiretapping of furriners, who are not protected by the constitution, does not encroach on the privacy of those who are.  Given this, it's unlikely that a court will set aside a law that was enacted to limit Presidential authority because it limits Presidential authority.



Here's a link to a page on the FindLaw website that deals with electronic surveillance.

In conclusion, it says "The question of the scope of the President's constitutional powers, if any, remains judicially unsettled", and it cites Truong amongst other cases in the footnote.  However, it also goes on to say:

"Congress has acted, however, providing for a special court to hear requests for warrants for electronic surveillance in foreign intelligence situations, and permitting the President to authorize warrantless surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information provided that the communications to be monitored are exclusively between or among foreign powers and there is no substantial likelihood any 'United States person' will be overheard."  It then cites the enactment of FISA.

Truong doesn't override FISA.  FISA allows warrantless wiretapping of furriners only.  If an American may be on the line, wherever they may be, a warrant is required.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #478 on: January 17, 2006, 07:54:24 pm »
Quote:

I may have my cases in a twist, but I am correct that Truong pre-dated FISA so any actual commentary in that case regarding wiretapping regulations does not apply to post-FISA cases.




If this were the case, then the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review would not have cited Truong in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.  But the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review did cite, and in fact approvingly cited, Truong in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.

Can you point to any statement in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 where the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review stated that Truong no longer matters because the searches in Truong took place pre-FISA?  Do you dispute that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review approvingly cited Truong in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, without any reference to Truong being inapposite?

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review appeared to say precisely the opposite: Truong appears to be good law, even in a post-FISA world.  I have no idea how you can dispute this, unless you simply ignore what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review  said.

I am not saying that a court would not re-examine the issue and find that the statutory precepts of FISA did circumscribe the inherent constitutional authority of the president announced in Truong, but your assumption that Truong would absolutely not apply post-FISA seems overly-aggressive given basic principles of legal interpretation.

Maybe you could cite-check Truong for us and find a case where it has been found not to apply due to FISA.

Quote:

As to your assertion that a court may hold that FISA doesn't encroach on the President's constitutional authority, this is, of course, possible, but highly unlikely.  FISA was enacted in the aftermath of Nixon's warrantless wiretapping - which, he argued (unsuccessfully), was necessary for national security in a time of war.  FISA's there to ensure that wiretapping of furriners, who are not protected by the constitution, does not encroach on the privacy of those who are.  Given this, it's unlikely that a court will set aside a law that was enacted to limit Presidential authority because it limits Presidential authority.




Again, a court may very well accept the premise you are advocating, but I do not think it is an open-and-shut case.

By the way, the notion that the Clinton administration abandoned its belief that the president had inherent authority to conduct warrantless foreign-intelligence physical searches once FISA was amended has been found to be questionable:

Quote:

The Center's position appears contradicted not only by [Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie] Gorelick's testimony but by a statement she made to Legal Times in November 1994, several months after her testimony, in which she said, "Our seeking legislation in no way should suggest that we do not believe we have inherent authority."




Or you can read what this former Clinton administration associate attorney general has to say about it.

Note that he refers to the case involving Nixon, which involved wiretapping to stop domestic threats.  That is different for domestic wiretapping regarding foreign threats and their agents.  This column also backs what I am saying above with respect to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review's decision in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #479 on: January 17, 2006, 08:06:27 pm »
Quote:

Here's a link to a page on the FindLaw website that deals with electronic surveillance.

In conclusion, it says "The question of the scope of the President's constitutional powers, if any, remains judicially unsettled", and it cites Truong amongst other cases in the footnote.  However, it also goes on to say:

"Congress has acted, however, providing for a special court to hear requests for warrants for electronic surveillance in foreign intelligence situations, and permitting the President to authorize warrantless surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information provided that the communications to be monitored are exclusively between or among foreign powers and there is no substantial likelihood any 'United States person' will be overheard."  It then cites the enactment of FISA.

Truong doesn't override FISA.  FISA allows warrantless wiretapping of furriners only.  If an American may be on the line, wherever they may be, a warrant is required.





The question is whether FISA, a statute, can override Truong or, more specifically, the president's inherent constitutional authority announced in Truong.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #480 on: January 17, 2006, 08:10:49 pm »
Prior to FISA, the courts held that the president has inherent constitutional authority to order warrantless wiretaps of U.S. persons on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence-gathering.  FISA sought to place a statutory warrant requirement on that inherent constitutional authority.

There's your separation-of-powers struggle right there, and I'm not sure it's the executive stepping on the legislative's toes.  It might be seen as the other way around.  Can Congress limit the president's inherent constitutional authority by statute?  How is this not like saying a statute can effectively amend the Constitution itself?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #481 on: January 17, 2006, 08:19:52 pm »
Quote:

If this were the case, then the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review would not have cited Truong in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.  But the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review did cite, and in fact approvingly cited, Truong in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.

Can you point to any statement in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 where the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review stated that Truong no longer matters because the searches in Truong took place pre-FISA?  Do you dispute that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review approvingly cited Truong in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, without any reference to Truong being inapposite?

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review appeared to say precisely the opposite: Truong appears to be good law, even in a post-FISA world.  I have no idea how you can dispute this, unless you simply ignore what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review  said.

I am not saying that a court would not re-examine the issue and find that the statutory precepts of FISA did circumscribe the inherent constitutional authority of the president announced in Truong, but your assumption that Truong would absolutely not apply post-FISA seems overly-aggressive given basic principles of legal interpretation.

Maybe you could cite-check Truong for us and find a case where it has been found not to apply due to FISA.




Truong was appealed because information gleaned from a legally undertaken warrantless wiretap allowed because it was for foreing intelligence gathering was used to further a domestic criminal prosecution.  The law upheld that the wiretap was lawful for foreign intelligence purposes but threw out the evidence in the criminal prosecution.

Truong pre-dated FISA.  FISA established the rules going forward for wiretapping and other searches.  As FISA is constructed law that post-dates Truong, it trumps Truong if there's any conflict.  The issue in Truong was the use of gathered information, not the gathering method.

Quote:

Again, a court may very well accept the premise you are advocating, but I do not think it is an open-and-shut case.

By the way, the notion that the Clinton administration abandoned its belief that the president had inherent authority to conduct warrantless foreign-intelligence physical searches once FISA was amended has been found to be <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200512211147.asp">questionable[/url]:

Quote:

The Center's position appears contradicted not only by [Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie] Gorelick's testimony but by a statement she made to Legal Times in November 1994, several months after her testimony, in which she said, "Our seeking legislation in no way should suggest that we do not believe we have inherent authority."




Or you can read what this former Clinton administration associate attorney general <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0512210142dec21,1,2062394.story?coll=chi-technology-hed">has to say about it[/url].

Note that he refers to the case involving Nixon, which involved wiretapping to stop domestic threats.  That is different for domestic wiretapping regarding foreign threats and their agents.  This column also backs what I am saying above with respect to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review's decision in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001.



Once again you have reverted to discussions of generic searches or surveillance.  The Clinton case was an argument for physical searches, not wiretaps.  Wiretaps are different, the law says so.  All this is mis-direction.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #482 on: January 17, 2006, 08:24:37 pm »
Quote:

Prior to FISA, the courts held that the president has inherent constitutional authority to order warrantless wiretaps of U.S. persons on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence-gathering.  FISA sought to place a statutory warrant requirement on that inherent constitutional authority.

There's your separation-of-powers struggle right there, and I'm not sure it's the executive stepping on the legislative's toes.  It might be seen as the other way around.  Can Congress limit the president's inherent constitutional authority by statute?  How is this not like saying a statute can effectively amend the Constitution itself?




How does this inherent constitutional authority, which has never previously stood up when the subject of the wiretap was an American, survive the 4th Amendment?

"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."
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #483 on: January 17, 2006, 08:28:35 pm »
Quote:

The question is whether FISA, a statute, can override Truong or, more specifically, the president's inherent constitutional authority announced in Truong.



Truong was an agent of a foreign power.  FISA deals with agents of foreign powers, but does not override the constitution (it can't as you rightly point out).

Non-foreigners are protected by the 4th Amendment.  It's hard to see the executive branch's inherent constitutional authority for searches and seizures without a warrant when you read that one, short paragragh.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

VirtualBob

  • Pope
  • Posts: 5630
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #484 on: January 17, 2006, 09:21:27 pm »
Maybe we should put the two of you in a small room with short knives and see who comes out?
Up in the Air

UpTooLate

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #485 on: January 17, 2006, 11:56:14 pm »
Quote:

Maybe we should put the two of you in a small room with short knives and see who comes out?




That would be a waste of talent.  These guys would be great on a "Crossfire" type TV show.  They wouldn't even need guests.
"Go with Christ" - Eric "The Dawg" Cartman

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #486 on: January 17, 2006, 11:57:36 pm »
Quote:

Truong was appealed because information gleaned from a legally undertaken warrantless wiretap allowed because it was for foreing intelligence gathering was used to further a domestic criminal prosecution.  The law upheld that the wiretap was lawful for foreign intelligence purposes but threw out the evidence in the criminal prosecution.




Not exactly. The Fourth Circuit in Truong upheld the district court's supression in the criminal proceeding of evidence obtained from the wiretap after the date on which the district court determined that the investigation shifted from foreign intelligence to law enforcement purposes.  The Fourth Circuit agreed with the district court that evidence obtained from the wiretap prior to that date was admissible in the criminal proceeding.

Quote:

Truong pre-dated FISA.  FISA established the rules going forward for wiretapping and other searches.  As FISA is constructed law that post-dates Truong, it trumps Truong if there's any conflict.  The issue in Truong was the use of gathered information, not the gathering method.




Not necessarily. If the Supreme Court holds, as the Fourth Circuit did, that the president's authority to order warrantless wiretaps is inherent in the Constitution, then it may determine that FISA could not have limited that inherent constitutional authority, since a statute does not trump the Constitution.

Quote:

Once again you have reverted to discussions of generic searches or surveillance.  The Clinton case was an argument for physical searches, not wiretaps.  Wiretaps are different, the law says so.  All this is mis-direction.




Clinton administration officials, even after FISA was extended to cover physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes, continued to insist that the president had inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless physical searches, regardless of what FISA said.  That is directly analogous here.  It is not misdirection.

Again, a Clinton-era associate attorney general thinks it is relevant. Why would he mention it if it were not?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #487 on: January 18, 2006, 12:11:34 am »
Quote:

How does this inherent constitutional authority, which has never previously stood up when the subject of the wiretap was an American, survive the 4th Amendment?

"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."





Ask the Fourth Circuit.  They're the ones who ruled in Truong that the president has inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps of U.S. persons on U.S. soil for foreign intelligence purposes.

By the way, the Fourth Amendment requires only that searches and seizures be reasonable and that warrants issue only with probable cause.  This has never been read to mean that all searches and seizures require warrants to be reasonable and, hence, constitutional.  The courts have developed case law over time to determine when warrants are required and when they are not.

Wiretaps for foreign intelligence purposes are one of the categories where a court, the Fourth Circuit, has determined that warrants are not required.  The Supreme Court has yet to directly address the issue.  I suspect it will soon address the issue, and it may very rule consistent with what you are saying.  But it has not ruled this way to date.

I quoted the Fourth Circuit's reasoning in Truong here.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #488 on: January 18, 2006, 12:19:38 am »
Quote:

Truong was an agent of a foreign power.  FISA deals with agents of foreign powers, but does not override the constitution (it can't as you rightly point out).

Non-foreigners are protected by the 4th Amendment.  It's hard to see the executive branch's inherent constitutional authority for searches and seizures without a warrant when you read that one, short paragragh.





OK, here's where I'll agree with you (somewhat).

I think the Supreme Court, as currently composed, is probably not going to find, like the Fourth Circuit did in Truong, an unfettered inherent right of the president to conduct warrantless wiretaps of U.S. persons (whether foreign agents or not) on U.S. soil, even for foreign intelligence purposes.

They're likely to point out what you said -- that FISA provides a mechanism to address this, and they're probably going to defer to the "delicate balance" that Congress and the president have worked out in FISA.

The Supreme Court has yet to hear the matter, only some courts of appeal have, and the Supreme Court is obviously not bound by the courts of appeal.  Even if the Supreme Court had already decided this differently, it could simply change its mind anyway.

And I'm not arguing that it would necessarily be a bad thing if the Supreme Court did make this decision.  But the president has a colorable argument under the existing decisions, and his critics have a colorable argument under FISA.  Two cases filed today now have this on the way to a place where it can actually be decided, as opposed to endlessly debated here.

chuck

  • Contributor
  • Double Super Secret Pope
  • Posts: 12495
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #489 on: January 18, 2006, 01:53:28 am »
So the executive branch has repeatedly claimed inherent constitutional authority to execute warrantless wiretaps on US citizens within the borders of the US for foreign intelligence purposes.

What burden if any is then placed on the executive branch to demonstrate that it has probable cause to target a specific US citizen due to suspicion of foreign agency or suspicion that the citizen's electronic communication activity may yield foreign intelligence?

What is to stop the executive branch from a warrantless wiretap on chuck, Mrs. Limey and Arky under the guise of "foreign intelligence purposes" when in reality they may not have any such specific motivation? If, during their efforts to gain "foreign intelligence" via warrantless wiretap they discover that chuck is running a brothel, Mrs. Limey is laundering money and Arky is misappropriating intellectual property from Major League Baseball, this evidence can legally be used in our criminal prosecution, correct?
Y todo lo que sube baja
pregĂșntale a Pedro Navaja

tophfar

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1049
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #490 on: January 18, 2006, 04:47:36 am »
Quote:

So the executive branch has repeatedly claimed inherent constitutional authority to execute warrantless wiretaps on US citizens within the borders of the US for foreign intelligence purposes.

What burden if any is then placed on the executive branch to demonstrate that it has probable cause to target a specific US citizen due to suspicion of foreign agency or suspicion that the citizen's electronic communication activity may yield foreign intelligence?

What is to stop the executive branch from a warrantless wiretap on chuck, Mrs. Limey and Arky under the guise of "foreign intelligence purposes" when in reality they may not have any such specific motivation? If, during their efforts to gain "foreign intelligence" via warrantless wiretap they discover that chuck is running a brothel, Mrs. Limey is laundering money and Arky is misappropriating intellectual property from Major League Baseball, this evidence can legally be used in our criminal prosecution, correct?





I'll take this one, if I understand things correctly so far.

From what I gathered from the cases provided is that no, that evidence could not be used in a criminal investigation.  The warrantless search/wiretap could only be used in regards to intelligence gathering and if an investigation began to turn into a criminal one, instead of intelligence gathering, a warrant would then be neccessary and any evidence gathered without said warrant would be unadmissable/unusable in said criminal case.

But then I could also be talking out my ass.
Here are just a few of the key ingredients: dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, choppers - can you see how incredible this is going to be?

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #491 on: January 18, 2006, 11:37:09 am »
Quote:

So the executive branch has repeatedly claimed inherent constitutional authority to execute warrantless wiretaps on US citizens within the borders of the US for foreign intelligence purposes.

What burden if any is then placed on the executive branch to demonstrate that it has probable cause to target a specific US citizen due to suspicion of foreign agency or suspicion that the citizen's electronic communication activity may yield foreign intelligence?

What is to stop the executive branch from a warrantless wiretap on chuck, Mrs. Limey and Arky under the guise of "foreign intelligence purposes" when in reality they may not have any such specific motivation? If, during their efforts to gain "foreign intelligence" via warrantless wiretap they discover that chuck is running a brothel, Mrs. Limey is laundering money and Arky is misappropriating intellectual property from Major League Baseball, this evidence can legally be used in our criminal prosecution, correct?





Criminal proceedings often begin with a suppression hearing (without jury present) for the trial court to determine whether to suppress or admit evidence that the defendant contends was gathered in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The prosecution cannot just introduce evidence at trial at will.  If the trial court finds a Fourth Amendment violation, the evidence is thrown out.  Moreover, any evidence gathered based on information that was gathered in violation of the Fourth Amendment is thrown out as "fruit of the poisonous tree."

The Fourth Circuit's reasoning in Truong is that the executive branch has the expertise to determine whether a wiretap is reasonable in a given situation given national security exigencies, whereas judges do not have such expertise.

One point that another court might now make in response to that is that FISA established a panel of judges precisely so those judges would gain such expertise and be able to decide such matters.  So, as I have readily conceded, another court might find that things have changed.

Remember that "probable cause" is the Fourth Amendment standard that must be met for issuance of a warrant.  For a warrantless search (wiretap), the Fourth Amendment standard is that the search (wiretap) be "reasonable."



Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #492 on: January 18, 2006, 11:40:37 am »
Quote:

I'll take this one, if I understand things correctly so far.

From what I gathered from the cases provided is that no, that evidence could not be used in a criminal investigation.  The warrantless search/wiretap could only be used in regards to intelligence gathering and if an investigation began to turn into a criminal one, instead of intelligence gathering, a warrant would then be neccessary and any evidence gathered without said warrant would be unadmissable/unusable in said criminal case.

But then I could also be talking out my ass.





Evidence might be admissible in a criminal proceeding provided that the primary purpose of gathering evidence was foreign intelligence.  Like you said, once the gathering switches to criminal investigation, it must be suppressed.

austro

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 19637
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #493 on: January 18, 2006, 12:00:03 pm »
Warning: ignorant question follows.

Quote:

Evidence might be admissible in a criminal proceeding provided that the primary purpose of gathering evidence was foreign intelligence. Like you said, once the gathering switches to criminal investigation, it must be suppressed.  




But having learned about the brothel, money-laundering, and IP misappropriation during legitimate foreign-intelligence gathering, couldn't the powers that be take that information as reasonable cause for a warrant that would then enable legitimate wire-tapping for criminal investigation purposes?  And, if so, is there really any practical distinction here?

Or is that original information unusable for a follow-on warrant?
I remember all the good times me 'n Miller enjoyed
Up and down the M1 in some luminous yo-yo toy
But the future has to change - and to change I've got to destroy
Oh look out Lennon here I come - land ahoy-hoy-hoy

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: World Baseball Classic to be cancelled?
« Reply #494 on: January 18, 2006, 12:18:13 pm »
Quote:

But having learned about the brothel, money-laundering, and IP misappropriation during legitimate foreign-intelligence gathering, couldn't the powers that be take that information as reasonable cause for a warrant that would then enable legitimate wire-tapping for criminal investigation purposes?  And, if so, is there really any practical distinction here?

Or is that original information unusable for a follow-on warrant?





The defense attorney would argue that the evidence should be suppressed because the information used to establish probable cause for the warrant was gathered without a warrant.  He would argue that the underlying investigation was really for criminal prosecutorial purposes, and that the foreign intelligence purposes claimed by the government are simply a subterfuge.

The prosecutor would argue that the evidence should be admitted because although the information used to establish probable cause for the warrant was gathered without a warrant, the underlying investigation was for foreign intelligence purposes, but such information is still incidentally usable for criminal prosecutorial purposes.

The trial court would have to decide.

Spack McGrimm

  • Administrator
  • Roster Filler
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
When I log on this site...
« Reply #495 on: January 18, 2006, 12:54:18 pm »
the "My Home" page comes up.  And in the section labled,"Number of Friends Online" it always says the same thing.

Zero.

500 posts?  Really? You've got until the end of the day and I'm locking this son of a bitch up.

Consider your self warned.  And I'm talking to the Stat geek and his fish and chips molesting friend.
I'll eat your fucking spleen!

JimR

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 29345
    • View Profile
    • McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore, LLP
PLEASE
« Reply #496 on: January 18, 2006, 02:44:21 pm »
do not wait. lock this up NOW and delete it from the board. please. what a fucking waste of everything, including time and bandwidth.
Often wrong, but never in doubt.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: When I log on this site...
« Reply #497 on: January 18, 2006, 02:58:56 pm »
Quote:

the "My Home" page comes up.  And in the section labled,"Number of Friends Online" it always says the same thing.

Zero.

500 posts?  Really? You've got until the end of the day and I'm locking this son of a bitch up.

Consider your self warned.  And I'm talking to the Stat geek and his fish and chips molesting friend.




I'm done as I'm swamped trying to get ready for a biz-trip.

Arky and I will settle this on our own:  handbags at 20 paces.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: When I log on this site...
« Reply #498 on: January 18, 2006, 03:20:40 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

the "My Home" page comes up.  And in the section labled,"Number of Friends Online" it always says the same thing.

Zero.

500 posts?  Really? You've got until the end of the day and I'm locking this son of a bitch up.

Consider your self warned.  And I'm talking to the Stat geek and his fish and chips molesting friend.




I'm done as I'm swamped trying to get ready for a biz-trip.

Arky and I will settle this on our own:  handbags at 20 paces.




I salute you with a pint of Ace, Limey.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: When I log on this site...
« Reply #499 on: January 18, 2006, 03:21:53 pm »
... 499 ...