cia officer fired over intel leaks to reporters

[turdfrgsn]

still looking for a conspiracy?
well, here's your fucking consipracy:

this cunt should be getting gang ***** in every bodily orifice by lyndie englund and a couple of german shepherds in abu ghraib and all they do is fire her......


April 22, 2006
C.I.A. Fires Senior Officer Over Leaks (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/22/washington/22leak.html?ei=5065&en=126c3f48aea48e3f&ex=1146283200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print)
By DAVID JOHNSTON and SCOTT SHANE

WASHINGTON, April 21 — The Central Intelligence Agency has dismissed a senior career officer for disclosing classified information to reporters, including material for Pulitzer Prize-winning articles in The Washington Post about the agency's secret overseas prisons for terror suspects, intelligence officials said Friday.

The C.I.A. would not identify the officer, but several government officials said it was Mary O. McCarthy, a veteran intelligence analyst who until 2001 was senior director for intelligence programs at the National Security Council, where she served under President Bill Clinton and into the Bush administration.

At the time of her dismissal, Ms. McCarthy was working in the agency's inspector general's office, after a stint at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an organization in Washington that examines global security issues.

The dismissal of Ms. McCarthy provided fresh evidence of the Bush administration's determined efforts to stanch leaks of classified information. The Justice Department has separately opened preliminary investigations into the disclosure of information to The Post, for its articles about secret prisons, as well as to The New York Times, for articles last fall that disclosed the existence of a program of domestic eavesdropping without warrants supervised by the National Security Agency. Those articles were also recognized this week with a Pulitzer Prize.

Several former veteran C.I.A. officials said the dismissal of an agency employee over a leak was rare and perhaps unprecedented. One official recalled the firing of a small number of agency contractors, including retirees, for leaking several years ago.

The dismissal was announced Thursday at the C.I.A. in an e-mail message sent by Porter J. Goss, the agency's director, who has made the effort to stop unauthorized disclosure of secrets a priority. News of the dismissal was first reported Friday by MSNBC.

Ms. McCarthy's departure followed an internal investigation by the C.I.A.'s Security Center, as part of an intensified effort that began in January to scrutinize employees who had access to particularly classified information. She was given a polygraph examination, confronted about answers given to the polygraph examiner and confessed, the government officials said. On Thursday, she was stripped of her security clearance and escorted out of C.I.A. headquarters. Ms. McCarthy did not reply Friday evening to messages left by e-mail and telephone.

"A C.I.A. officer has been fired for unauthorized contact with the media and for the unauthorized disclosure of classified information," said a C.I.A. spokesman, Paul Gimigliano. "This is a violation of the secrecy agreement that is the condition of employment with C.I.A. The officer has acknowledged the contact and the disclosures."

Mr. Gimigliano said the Privacy Act prohibited him from identifying the employee.

Intelligence officials speaking on the condition of anonymity said that the dismissal resulted from "a pattern of conduct" and not from a single leak, but that the case involved in part information about secret C.I.A. detention centers that was given to The Washington Post.

Ms. McCarthy's departure was another unsettling jolt for the C.I.A., battered in recent years over faulty prewar intelligence in Iraq, waves of senior echelon departures after the appointment of Mr. Goss as director and the diminished standing of the agency under the reorganization of the country's intelligence agencies.

The C.I.A.'s inquiry focused in part on identifying Ms. McCarthy's role in supplying information for a Nov. 2, 2005, article in The Post by Dana Priest, a national security reporter. The article reported that the intelligence agency was sending terror suspects to clandestine detention centers in several countries, including sites in Eastern Europe.

Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, said on its Web site that he could not comment on the firing because he did not know the details. "As a general principle," he said, "obviously I am opposed to criminalizing the dissemination of government information to the press."

Eric C. Grant, a spokesman for the newspaper, would not address whether any C.I.A. employee was a source for the secret prison articles, but said, "No Post reporter has been subpoenaed or talked to investigators in connection with this matter."

The disclosures about the prisons provoked an outcry among European allies and set off protests among Democrats in Congress. The leak prompted the C.I.A. to send a criminal referral to the Justice Department. Lawyers at the Justice Department were notified of Ms. McCarthy's dismissal, but no new referral was issued, law enforcement officials said. They said that they would review the case, but that her termination could mean she would be spared criminal prosecution.

In January, current and former government officials said, Mr. Goss ordered polygraphs for intelligence officers who knew about certain "compartmented" programs, including the secret detention centers for terrorist suspects. Polygraphs are routinely given to agency employees at least every five years, but special polygraphs can be ordered when a security breach is suspected.

The results of such exams are regarded as important indicators of deception among some intelligence officials. But they are not admissible as evidence in court — and the C.I.A.'s reliance on the polygraph in Ms. McCarthy's case could make it more difficult for the government to prosecute her.

"This was a very aggressive internal investigation," said one former C.I.A. officer with more than 20 years' experience. "Goss was determined to find the source of the secret-jails story."

With the encouragement of the White House and some Republicans in Congress, Mr. Goss has repeatedly spoken out against leaks, saying foreign intelligence officials had asked him whether his agency was incapable of keeping secrets.

In February, Mr. Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee that "the damage has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission." He said it was his hope "that we will witness a grand jury investigation with reporters present being asked to reveal who is leaking this information."

"I believe the safety of this nation and the people of this country deserves nothing less," he said.

Ms. McCarthy has been a well-known figure in intelligence circles. She began her career at the agency as an analyst and then was a manager in the intelligence directorate, working at the African and Latin America desks, according to a biography by the strategic studies center. With an advanced degree from the University of Minnesota, she has taught, written a book on the Gold Coast and was director of the social science data archive at Yale University.

Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee.

Republican lawmakers praised the C.I.A. effort. Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, "I am pleased that the Central Intelligence Agency has identified the source of certain unauthorized disclosures, and I hope that the agency, and the community as a whole, will continue to vigorously investigate other outstanding leak cases."

Several former intelligence officials — who were granted anonymity after requesting it for what they said were obvious reasons under the circumstances — were divided over the likely effect of the dismissal on morale. One veteran said the firing would not be well-received coming so soon after the disclosure of grand jury testimony by Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff that President Bush in 2003 approved the leak of portions of a secret national intelligence estimate on Iraqi weapons.

"It's a terrible situation when the president approves the leak of a highly classified N.I.E., and people at the agency see management as so disastrous that they feel compelled to talk to the press," said one former C.I.A. officer with extensive overseas experience.

But another official, whose experience was at headquarters, said most employees would approve Mr. Goss's action. "I think for the vast majority of people this will be good for morale," the official said. "People didn't like some of their colleagues deciding for themselves what secrets should be in The Washington Post or The New York Times."

Paul R. Pillar, who was the agency's senior analyst for the Middle East until he retired late last year, said: "Classified information is classified information. It's not to be leaked. It's not to be divulged." He has recently criticized the Bush administration's handling of prewar intelligence about Saddam Hussein's unconventional weapons programs.

Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting for this article.

[crescentwrench]

Jack found out that a guy with Alpha Black clearance was a mole for Prophet 5 when they broke in to CIA headquarters. But they found out they kidnapped Sydney to save her baby.

And the agent wasn't fired, he was shot in the head by Irena Derevko.

[Coffee Diva]

Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee.

I think she should be forced to spend about five years in one of the prisons she outed.

[turdfrgsn]

meet mary mccarthy (http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=mccarthy&txtState=MD&txtZip=20817&txtEmploy=&txtCand=&txt2006=Y&txt2004=Y&txt2002=Y&Order=N):

mary mccarthy of the 20817 zip code in bethesda md. not only gave $2,000 to the kerry campaign on 3/14/2004, she also gave $5,000 to the democratic party of ohio on 10/5/2004. there’s also a $500 contribution to the dnc on 10/29/2004, and a $200 contribution to steven peter andreasen, a democrat congressional candidate, on 11/1/2002.


you're going to be hearing alot about her in the next few days, mostly about how she's a hero, a patriot, and should be given the presidential freedom award.

the truth is she is a traitor and should be shot before a firing squad.

[YourAmishDaddy]

But the fact there are "secret" prisons or illegal wiretapping doesn't bother anyone.

"Papers.....papers please.... we want your papers...."

If you want a gulag/police state, why not just come out and say that's what you want. Cause ya know "they hate us for our freedom" so in order to eliminate the threat... eliminate the freedom.."

[MrBogey]

But the fact there are "secret" prisons or illegal wiretapping doesn't bother anyone.

"Papers.....papers please.... we want your papers...."

If you want a gulag/police state, why not just come out and say that's what you want. Cause ya know "they hate us for our freedom" so in order to eliminate the threat... eliminate the freedom.."

What part of the Constitution does it say non-citizens abroad are subject to the Bill of Rights?

I guess if we go to war now we need to charge every soldier who fires at an enemy with attempted murder.

[YourAmishDaddy]

What part of the Constitution does it say non-citizens abroad are subject to the Bill of Rights?

I care not a wit about non citizens. Illegal wiretapping American citizens though, concerns me.

Shall we review what happened the last time an American president went down this road?

[turdfrgsn]

I care not a wit about non citizens. Illegal wiretapping American citizens though, concerns me.

Shall we review what happened the last time an American president went down this road?

yes, by all means let's, you must surely be referring to the fbi files under the former administration, or perhaps the 'misplaced' classified files absconded during a congressional investigation on pre 9/11 intelligence, no? oh but that was an honest mistake, right? forgot he just happened to slip them into his briefcase.........

i could give a fuck less about the wiretapping, eavesdrop on me all you want, enjoy the fucking show, i got nothing to hide

like i said, it doesn't matter who's in office, our sovereignty is being sold out from under us
vote for whoever you want to, as many times as you want to, it's not going to make the slightest difference
the fat is already in the fire, it's just a matter of when at this point
my guess? not too much longer
enjoy it while it lasts

[YourAmishDaddy]

yes, by all means let's, you must surely be referring to the fbi files under the former administration, or perhaps the 'misplaced' classified files absconded during a congressional investigation on pre 9/11 intelligence, no? oh but that was an honest mistake, right? forgot he just happened to slip them into his briefcase.........

i could give a fuck less about the wiretapping, eavesdrop on me all you want, enjoy the fucking show, i got nothing to hide

This is characteristic of many of the arguments today. Yes, the Clinton Administration was corrupt, so that justifies this one being even more corrupt.

The Republican Party: Living Down to the Clinton Statndard.. It's because of this type of foolishness and idiocy I left the GOP..

And of course you don't care about being wiretapped. Cause it's "your boys" in office. Which is why I'll laugh my ass off if Bush's "brother" Bill and his wife Hillary end up back in the White House.

Many people use this sort of illogical argument "If I'm doing nothing wrong, invade my life, make me a suspect, I've done nothing wrong, I have nothing to fear..." Well, who determines what "right and wrong" are? Who watches the watchers?

I could bore everyone and post story after story of how many people who have done "nothing wrong" who have been shaken down, interrogated, arrested for doing "nothing wrong" from the Toy store manager who was shaken down by Homeland Insecurity for selling knock off Rubik's Cubes to that marine who just got back from Iraq who was on a "terrorist watch list"

In fact there are about 300,000 names on the terrorist watch list. I doubt globally 300,000 members of al Qaeda exist. But 300,000 people, American citizens, many duplicate names, there have been children, elderly people, handicapped people who have been hassled. It's as of now nearly impossible to get your name off of it either.

People will have to begin to realize that there's still a Constitution in this country. And everyone who wishes to circumvent it are the traitors. You don't have to destroy due process, habeus corpus, the bill of rights to win a "war" which is unconstitutional to begin with.

[MrBogey]

I care not a wit about non citizens. Illegal wiretapping American citizens though, concerns me.

Shall we review what happened the last time an American president went down this road?

Well then why do you care so much if the CIA snags foreigners and interrogates them?

[YourAmishDaddy]

Well then why do you care so much if the CIA snags foreigners and interrogates them?

I just posted wiretapping American citizens...

I just posted 300,000 people on a watch list. American citizens.

That's my concern.

From the original article..

"as well as to The New York Times, for articles last fall that disclosed the existence of a program of domestic eavesdropping without warrants supervised by the National Security Agency. Those articles were also recognized this week with a Pulitzer Prize."

May as well post this too, since people seem to refuse to recognize that we have these..


Amendment IV

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.



Anything anyone wishes to argue they argue contrary to the Constitution. If they can live that, have at it.

[turdfrgsn]

It's because of this type of foolishness and idiocy I left the GOP..

then we agree for the most part
i just went further, i left the party (gop et al)
and the game

i started the thread to point out the latest hypocrisy
however i do make one distinction: the indiscretions under clinton--fbi files on private citizens, all missing, berger et al--were done for purely political purposes, there simply is no other excuse

current wiretapping etc etc, is being done during a time of war, ostensibly to ferret out those who would murder americans, regardless of their party affiliation, which is why it's no skin off my ass, i got nothing to hide and besides, i don't buy into the whole 9/11 conspiracy shit, this admin clearly didn't have prior knowledge of or intend to fabricate this war, they ain't that clever
or are they?
was the whole secret prisons thing just a smokescreen to root out leakers in the intel community?
was the wash post complicit in it?

but that's just part of the fun spectator sport the whole thing has become--pin the conspiracy on the donkey
or the elephant, whatever the case may be

ultimately, it will make no difference

bottom line, and as you alluded to, constitutional principles have long since been abandoned
the question is, what has to happen to bring about a return to them?
do enough people even give a shit about returning to them?
and what's it gonna look like if we don't?

[Madness]

was the whole secret prisons thing just a smokescreen to root out leakers in the intel community?
was the wash post complicit in it?

That might be closer to the truth than you think. There was an article just yesterday saying that agents in Europe can't prove that the secret prisons actually existed. So maybe they threw some bullshit story out there and waited to see who took the bait.

Even if the prisons do exist it isn't this woman's place to decide what the public needs to know. She obviously did it for political reasons as she went straight to the press with it.

[YourAmishDaddy]

I understand where you're coming from, but don't forget the founders when they said essentially if tyranny were to come to American shores it will be in the guise of a foreign enemy. This is what we have now.

I seriously believe the republic is lost. The thing I hurt most about after those towers fell is not so much the lives lost. But the fact the potential of any remnants of Constitutional life to return in this country essentially died. That was the final defining moment. The republic as envisioned by our founding fathers is no more.

Which is why I'm fairly indifferent about what's going on now. This simply is not America anymore. So why should I continue to fool myself into believing in something that doesn't exist?

[YourAmishDaddy]

Even if the prisons do exist it isn't this woman's place to decide what the public needs to know. She obviously did it for political reasons as she went straight to the press with it.

That's the reason we have a free press and free speech..


What i want to know from some of you folks is what is more important to you?

The glorification of your political party, or your liberty and your country?

You can't say your liberty and country are more important, because this illogic says we have to destroy liberty to fight a "war" and we have to win this "war" because "if we lose we lose our freedom" when you toss your freedom away.

It's like saving the children at Waco by killing them all.

This is the kind of warped logic that kept people from admitting there were concentration camps in Germany I suppose, as the ashes from the dead fell like snow all around them.

[turdfrgsn]

I understand where you're coming from, but don't forget the founders when they said essentially if tyranny were to come to American shores it will be in the guise of a foreign enemy. This is what we have now.

in the "will america fall" thread on "off topic" somebody quoted john adams, i think, as saying democracies always ultimately commit suicide
sounds like something adams would say at any rate, but he's right
and history has proven that out

i suspect there's healthy chunk of that going on at present as well as the foreign threats facing us--the thing is they're both working in tandem at an accelerated pace, which means some point of critical mass will be reached sooner or later

i'm guessing it'll be sooner

[Madness]

There are avenues to being a whistleblower. Running to the press isn't one of them. From some of the wording of her firing it appears she was a serial leaker of information. Her close ties to Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke due little to give her a shred of credibility as far as a legit whisteblowing on something like this.

[turdfrgsn]

That's the reason we have a free press and free speech..

true, citizens do have those rights
unequivocably

cia agents, however, don't,
and neither does the military for that matter, nor the fbi, etc, etc--anything that requires any kind of security clearance
nor do local police

oaths are taken and contracts signed when you go into those professions and no one is under any illusions that signing on the dotted line doesn't mean sacrificing certain certain constitutional freedoms
such is the nature of those vocations and it's crystal clear to anyone going into them

violation of those contractual terms, those oaths, in such a way that gives aid and comfort to enemies either foreign or domestic, constitutes treason

in this there is no ambiguity

she knew what she was doing, hers were acts of betrayal
not to this administration
but to the people
and another piece of our sovereignty sold down the river for mere temporary political expediency

[YourAmishDaddy]

There are avenues to being a whistleblower. Running to the press isn't one of them. From some of the wording of her firing it appears she was a serial leaker of information. Her close ties to Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke due little to give her a shred of credibility as far as a legit whisteblowing on something like this.

I understand that but where are whistleblowers supposed to go? If you want the public to know something where are you supposed to go? I mean I'd not accept a Pulitzer, but if I could blow the lid off something in that position that's against the interests of Americans, damn right I'd do it.

I just don't take time to worry about the partisan game. Sandy Burglar or not. I want to know if my government is doing things against my interest and my rights. I don't care which party these people are from, they're all criminals. But if they have some info I can use, guess what, I want to know.

This is supposed to be a country of by and for the people, so I ask who are they to decide the PEOPLE shouldn't know?

[YourAmishDaddy]

true, citizens do have those rights
unequivocably

cia agents, however, don't..

oaths are taken and contracts signed when you go into those professions and no one is under any illusions that signing on the dotted line doesn't mean sacrificing certain certain constitutional freedoms
such is the nature of those vocations and it's crystal clear to anyone going into them

violation of those contractual terms, those oaths, in such a way that gives aid and comfort to enemies either foreign or domestic, constitutes treason

in this there is no ambiguity

she knew what she was doing, hers were acts of betrayal
not to this administration
but to the people
and another piece of our sovereignty sold down the river for mere temporary political expediency


My friend, an oath is taken by the elected officials as well. To swear before God and man to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Those rights enumerated by the Constitution, and given to us by our Creator..

Those rights then, thus given to us by our Creator are to be protected by these people in government, not destroyed. Our elected officials, our public servants, and even our military pledge to do that first. So to circumvent the law, and to interfere with those rights means they have violated their oath of office, and have violated the Constitution. And even worse whether anyone believes in God or not, this is important, they have violated His law. So this agent, or any other agent not only has the right, but a duty to expose anything that infringes on those rights.

[Madness]

I just don't take time to worry about the partisan game. Sandy Burglar or not. I want to know if my government is doing things against my interest and my rights. I don't care which party these people are from, they're all criminals. But if they have some info I can use, guess what, I want to know.


It directly ties into this as it potentially shows the type of attitude she has towards classified info. It's not partisan. I'm just saying if you're close to two guys that have stolen and lied about classified info that it hurts your credibility greatly.

[turdfrgsn]

My friend, an oath is taken by the elected officials as well. To swear before God and man to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Those rights enumerated by the Constitution, and given to us by our Creator..

Those rights then, thus given to us by our Creator are to be protected by these people in government, not destroyed. Our elected officials, our public servants, and even our military pledge to do that first. So to circumvent the law, and to interfere with those rights means they have violated their oath of office, and have violated the Constitution. And even worse whether anyone believes in God or not, this is important, they have violated His law. So this agent, or any other agent not only has the right, but a duty to expose anything that infringes on those rights.

god's law is god's law

the constitution is the constitution

let's not confuse the two, there's the city of man, and there's the city of god, and never the twain shall meet
and that's actually a good thing believe it or not

and the oaths taken by defense, intelligence, etc are different from those taken by congress
there's a huge difference
you don't leak intelligence
ever
you wanna blow the whistle?
you quit your post, and then decide for yourself if it's truly worth dying or going to jail over

if you're right, you'll be absolved
by the people
if you're wrong
well, you suffer the consequences of your actions

[YourAmishDaddy]

I'm not mixing the two. My point is our rights are not given to us by our government. They are rights as stated in the Constitution given to us by our Creator. This is important whether anyone believes in God or not, and I can assure you at this time in my life, my belief is pretty thin, because if they are not Creator given, by birth ours then they are "man given" and man can take them away.

There may be different variations of the oath, and this I know personally, but the Constitution is the Constitution, and neither variation of any oath says it is ok to destroy the Constitution. There's not one oath that allows them to place loyalty to an agency above the Constitution which gives them the power to do anything they do in the first place.

The primary role of government is to protect our rights, and preserve our liberty, when they start destroying it they are violating all of their oathes.

[turdfrgsn]

I'm not mixing the two. My point is our rights are not given to us by our government. They are rights as stated in the Constitution given to us by our Creator. This is important whether anyone believes in God or not, and I can assure you at this time in my life, my belief is pretty thin, because if they are not Creator given, by birth ours then they are "man given" and man can take them away.

There may be different variations of the oath, and this I know personally, but the Constitution is the Constitution, and neither variation of any oath says it is ok to destroy the Constitution. There's not one oath that allows them to place loyalty to an agency above the Constitution which gives them the power to do anything they do in the first place.

The primary role of government is to protect our rights, and preserve our liberty, when they start destroying it they are violating all of their oathes.

the constitution is not the word of god, it's merely an instrument, a contract actually, meant to facilitate the greatest good for the greatest number

man is inherently flawed
this is just basic political theory
why do we form governments to begin with?
read your lock, hobbes, and rousseau

yes, take a stand if you feel you are in the right
and you will be absolved if that's the case
but don't think it doesn't come with consequences
and don't think those oaths are administered for no reason
why classify anything 'top secret' if it's a joke and anybody who wails 'ollie ollie oxenfree' gets an automatic get out of jail free card?

mary mccarthy is no patriot
she's a political operative and she undermined national security
she'll get what's coming to her
or she won't

but i fail to see how our liberty or our constitution is being 'violated' by any current actions by this admin
what innocents have been persecuted?
who's been hauled off to the gulags?
no one

[YourAmishDaddy]

The administration has violated the FISA laws, warrantless searches and wiretapping. This is how tyrants work, if they want to do something illegal, "well, let's just rewrite the law" now they don;t have to have warrants to do these. When all FISA allows you to get a warrant retroactively. You have 72 hours to do all the surveilence you want, and while youre doing it you can get a warrant. What this administration wants is never to have to get a warrant at all. this violates the Fourth Amendment. By not getting a warrant there is no paper trail at all, the feds can monitor and invade into the privacy of anyone at will. How do we know if any of the communictions they've monitored led to dead ends? Is the information of people not involved in any "terrorist activity" destroyed? We've seen time after time people in agencis who violate the laws, from stalkers to child molestors who would love to be able to know when and where we're going and not need a paper trail.


I don;t really care about them having the ability to do it, but first the Constitution states there has to be a reason, there has to be a warrant, there has to be probable cause. To avoid this, and disregard the Fourth Amendment gives these people absolute power to do and tap and search and arrest and apprehend as they please, no due process, no judges, no checks and balances. There have been several cases like Brandon Mayfield's who were apprehended because of this nonsense. They go after people, they harrass them, arrest them, violate the law, no right to confront accusers, no right to counsel, no right for a speedy hearing and/or trial, no freedom of association.

If you want to go after people get a warrant. This administration is above the law. They have absolute power. That is corruption in it's highest form.

[turdfrgsn]

The administration has violated the FISA laws, warrantless searches and wiretapping. This is how tyrants work, if they want to do something illegal, "well, let's just rewrite the law" now they don;t have to have warrants to do these.

again, revisit your history

lincoln did far worse--he suspended haebus corpus, and he didn't even have nukes to worry about

roosevelt did worse as well, or don't you recall the japanese internment camps?

the courts have already ruled on the breadth and scope of article 2 war powers--in the aftermath of the civil war, ww2, and vietnam, the FISA act notwithstanding

an interesting note tho, the FISA act has never been challenged before scotus as to its constitutionality, maybe it should've been, as far as i'm concerned, and as far as its being interpreted contemporarily, it is unconstitutional
(after all, the document does consist of more than the bill of rights--matter of fact, that section was essentially an afterthought by the framers)
and not that that matters really, mccain/feingold is a blatant violation of the first amendment, the president signed it hoping the court would invalidate it, which they didn't, and i don't blame them, he should've vetoed it before punting it to the court in the hopes that they'd do his dirty work for him

well, lesson learned as to the ebb and flow of power between the three branches and what is and what isn't constitutional

so it's not a matter of rewriting the law, it's a matter of exercising enumerated powers--powers which have been stretched much further by previous executives and under less dire circumstances, and powers which have been validated already by the highest court in the land

but i still think this misses the underlying point of the whole game: how much bullshit will 'we the people' put up with?
i think we'll find out in the near future
but then again, maybe not

[YourAmishDaddy]

Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant, I still will not justify one tyrant by pointing to another. I refuse to justify destroying rights in the guise of saving them. If anyone wishes to eviscerate the Constitution, let them be bold enough to say so. But no one can honestly try and convince me that in order to protect liberty in America, we have to destroy liberty in America.. "Oh the terrorists are coming, and when they get here they're gonna kill us.. and the civilization will fall... Life Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness will be gone... so in order to save you, we need to take away Life Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness.." In order to save the kids at Waco we needed to kill them, ya know, because the kids were being molested, so we needed to kill them and voila, no more molesting...

It's an insult. In order to be pro this administration you have to contort and twist and parse words and argue contrary to the Constitution.

Which is ultimately why I really don't see anything getting better. The people want to be abused. The people want another ass reaming. Goering was right. Scare the people enough and demonize the people who stand up to it, and put an everlasting threat in front of them and they beg to be enslaved.

America, is not inhabited by Americans, this is not the breed of people born of rebels and non conformists. This was a nation built on bitching, and forged in individualism. It is now a land of cowering quivering little people scared of their own shadows, and all too willing to give up everything.

I only pray that one day everyone gets what they've asked for in this place cause I've long stopped worrying about everyone else. What I don't want is everyone elses fucking police state being hoisted on me.

Other than that I've stopped trying to reform hell, the only thing that can be done by such actions is fanning the flames. I merely want to be left alone.

[turdfrgsn]

Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant, I still will not justify one tyrant by pointing to another. I refuse to justify destroying rights in the guise of saving them. If anyone wishes to eviscerate the Constitution, let them be bold enough to say so. But no one can honestly try and convince me that in order to protect liberty in America, we have to destroy liberty in America.. "Oh the terrorists are coming, and when they get here they're gonna kill us.. and the civilization will fall... Life Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness will be gone... so in order to save you, we need to take away Life Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness.." In order to save the kids at Waco we needed to kill them, ya know, because the kids were being molested, so we needed to kill them and voila, no more molesting...

It's an insult. In order to be pro this administration you have to contort and twist and parse words and argue contrary to the Constitution.

Which is ultimately why I really don't see anything getting better. The people want to be abused. The people want another ass reaming. Goering was right. Scare the people enough and demonize the people who stand up to it, and put an everlasting threat in front of them and they beg to be enslaved.

America, is not inhabited by Americans, this is not the breed of people born of rebels and non conformists. This was a nation built on bitching, and forged in individualism. It is now a land of cowering quivering little people scared of their own shadows, and all too willing to give up everything.

I only pray that one day everyone gets what they've asked for in this place cause I've long stopped worrying about everyone else. What I don't want is everyone elses fucking police state being hoisted on me.

Other than that I've stopped trying to reform hell, the only thing that can be done by such actions is fanning the flames. I merely want to be left alone.


all very well understood and very well articulated
can't say that i disagree with much of what you've said

one question tho, how much is the police state encroaching on you currently?
i mean as far as anything that didn't already exist pre 9/11?

[YourAmishDaddy]

Like I've said, and really don't like posting my personal garbage on this board. Plenty. It wasn't long ago we won a lawsuit from some of it. Airline security, gotta love it when they grope you for security. I get shit all the time when I travel. This goes back a long way but seems to have gotten a lot worse since 9-11. I'm sick of having to step and fetch for these idiots that supposedly work for us.

All of this stuff is a lie. Can you please tell me, if you've ever had anything stolen from you, like if someone were to break in your house and rob you, would not the first thing you do would be to after you've assessed the situation reinforce your doors and windows? If you lived in a bad neighborhood would you leave your front door wide open for anyone to just come in, and hope they have good intentions?

This is what we've done. on 9-12 the borders were wide open, since 9-11 they've been open, thousands upon thousands have come into this country. Thousands of illegals march and protest, yet the average schmucks have to be pat down, wiretapped, searched, harrassed. As if some white, black and Chinese dudes flew the planes into the buildings. Yet the time when my fiance was harrassed that Christmas season at Midway airport three years after 9-11 all these olive skinned dudes get free run of the place.

It's incrementalism. You can't even go into a store now and buy cold medicine like Sudafed without signing some form and putting down your info. Because well "people use this stuff for meth, and the Patriot Act says we can track down people by monitoring their purchases, even with cash" I've yet to see one Iowan white kid with a mullet plow a Boeing into a building, but it's in the Patriot Act. And what it has to do with 9-11 I have not one clue.

This is why it pisses me off when people say "I'm not doing anything wrong, I don't have anything to hide" well buy two things of Sudafed in day and get back to me.

Incrementally we give up more and more control, it's like "liberalism" then one day we wake up and it's out of control. And once this stuff is done you don't get it back, not without a lot of blood being shed. Much like the Abraham Lincoln thing.

So yes, I've had this stuff personally affect me. I'm probably on every watch list around. Mainly because I tell these people to kiss my ass when they bother me.

[turdfrgsn]

Like I've said, and really don't like posting my personal garbage on this board. Plenty. It wasn't long ago we won a lawsuit from some of it. Airline security, gotta love it when they grope you for security. I get shit all the time when I travel. This goes back a long way but seems to have gotten a lot worse since 9-11. I'm sick of having to step and fetch for these idiots that supposedly work for us.

so, you don't dig the whole airport experience

well, neither do i
never have really, even before 9/11
fucking flying bus is all it is, i hate flying period

and i dunno, i've never had to fill out a form for sudafed
i've had to for the good shit tho, but that was more about insurance than nat'l security, and don't get me started on insurance.......

anyhoot, and i'm down w/the whole slippery slope argument thing, i just don't see the offhand chance of getting groped at the airport or having to sign for sudafed as eviscerating the constitution or something to take arms up over

so anyway, aside from getting groped at airports and signing for sudafed, in what other ways has the police state encroached upon you personally?

[YourAmishDaddy]

Haha, this is why I invested in my friends business. He runs a charter flight company. That's the way to go, but lo and behold I'm watching Fox this morning and now they want to put restrictions on private flying now.

A lot of my personal stuff mostly involves being "tagged" I can openly state that since I stopped donating to the GOP and started giving to independents and speaking out I've started being audited again. LOL I remember doing radio in Chicago in 96 and saying some unbecoming things about Clinton just before the convention. Well I was audited three straight years after. And now I'm getting that treatment again. Which I'm used to now. It's no big thing.

What personally affects me other than those kinds of things isn't exclusive to just me is my point. When that Real ID thing hits in another year or so it afffects me, and affects you. You may like that kind of idea. Me, I have a Socialist Insecurity Card. I don't really see the need for another tagging device. It's stuff like that that annoys me. All these illegals coming here, but we have to be tagged like cattle.

Which is my point. I don't want the government to protect me. When I go into the city, like last year with the pat downs and the trains, just one more hoop to hop through. I remember the GOP convention last year, I went for the hell of it. The streets looked like a Blade Runner movie. Checkpoints, and riot gear everywhere, people being arrested for protesting, you had to be off the streets at a certain time after the thing. It was ridiculous. Stuff like that irks me. And no I'm not oneof these guys who believes that the New World Order is taking over. Just powerful idiots with small dicks that enjoy aggrivating people, many of whom have badges.

I just want at least checks and balances. We've lost our minds in this country. bin Laden himself couldn't have asked for more than we're doing to ourselves. We've taken the most open and free society in modern times and thrown it away. All in the name of safety.

[turdfrgsn]

yeah i can dig that, we have gone overboard
and unnecessarily

a few well-placed low-grade tactical nukes at strategic points around the middle east immediately after 9/11 and there would have been no need for any iraq war at all (or afghanistan), much less airport security

but then that's why i'll never be president, and why, on balance, perhaps bush is a much more humane man in that respect than i am

[YourAmishDaddy]

I know. But looking back on it I have to agree with Ron Paul. 9-11 was a criminal act. Which terrorism usually is. We could have just as quickly mobilized special forces, and collaborated with these governments to get rid of these bastards. These assholes like the Taliban prey on on their own people as well. We could have done that. 9-11 was a criminal act, not an act of war, because who do you declare war against?

Our founders put that there for a wise reason. Congress declares war. Which they haven't done since WW2.

But simply I believe if we played that right, we could have been heroes. But see that actually solves the problem. Since government thrives on failure that's too much like right. Which is why I'm just not afraid anymore. I was. I was living in Atlanta when 9-11 happened. And I knew I'd have to come back home eventually, and I kept putting it off and it didn't really hit me til I had to drive into Manhattan once. I literally had to force myself across the bridge and pulled over once i got situated and let it out.

Yeah at the time I wanted us to nuke the entire place, but after a while I started getting wrapped up into the illegal alien debates, and started putting two and two together. That if we were so in danger why are the borders wide open?

From that point I started waking up.

[Irishcurse]

Well to get a little more on topic........ This cunt was outing info just to make the Bush administration look bad ( like they need help in that department). The dems will call her a hero. They always do this. When Valirie Plame (SP) was outed, they cried that it was treason( the Republicans outed her to show her bias and someone should pay for that). Now instead of pointing out that she broke the trust of National Security, they will say she was trying to point out how corrupt the administration is, avoiding the fact that she broke the law in ways where it is a Capitol offense. I think the secret prison story was planted to try to out these leaks( A EU commission has found NO proof of these prisons). The wire tapping issue also broke a huge law and the culprit will be found and prosocuted. Debate the wiretapping but these bastards are suppose to keep secrets but instead they run to reporters who use this info for political purposes.

[turdfrgsn]

oh yeah i'm totally there w/you on the open borders/war on terror hypocrisy

it sickens me

i was 2 miles away from the pentagon when it was attacked, and i personally knew people, there and in nyc

maybe it's just a game of semantics, but 9/11 was not a "criminal" act, i consider it an act of war, and while i like the idea of exporting democracy to guarantee our own security, i just don't have that much faith in "the people" of the world, or at least the middle east, to embrace it

it would've been much more expedient to do some targeted nuke strikes, and less costly on all fronts

[YourAmishDaddy]

In the end we'll see how it plays out. Forgive me for my lack of faith in any of it nowadays. And no I don't really agree with the measures this woman took, but these days it's gotten to the point where it may be needed. Hell, six generals retired and spoke out and the first thing people said is "why didn't you say this while you were still there?"

You can't win.