|
Banned
|
Did They Hand this MF Decider the Wrong Script, or Is this "Ground Hog Day"?
If you've wasted the last six years believing the official 9/11 attacks story, and if you've "bought" the "line" about the legitimacy of the "War on Terr-urr", hook, line, and sinker.....can you explain to me why the "decider" looks like an obvious liar about the key reasons for his breaking the FISA laws....and why he risks making the war on terror seem as big of a farce as his radio "address to the nation" was today?
From the movie.... Ground Hog Day:
Quote:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/quotes
.....Phil <h3>(Decider...)</h3>: Can I be serious with you with you for a minute?
Rita: <h3>(the American People)</h3> I don't know. Can you?
Phil: Well, it's Groundhog Day... again... and that must mean we're up here at Gobbler's Knob waiting for the forecast from the world's most-famous groundhog weatherman, Punxsutawney Phil, who's just about to tell us how much more winter we can expect.
Phil: Can I talk to you about a matter that is not work-related?
Rita: You never talk about work.
Phil: What would you do if you were stuck in one place and every day was exactly the same, and nothing that you did mattered?
Ralph: That about sums it up for me. ......
|
In the Ground Hog Day movie, Bill Murray's character, trapped in an existence in which he woke up to the same day, everyday, used his foreknowledge of unfolding events to fashion "pick up lines", directed at attractive women. Our president Bush does the same....he uses his tired, oft repeated "lines" to fuck us out of our constitutional protections intended to protect us, from him and his criminal administration and political party.
When I heard he said the following, <h2>Today.....</h2>, I knew I was living Bill Murray's Ground Hog Day character's, "Ned's", life:
Quote:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...626B8B4F9F8%7D
Text of President Bush's weekly radio address
By MarketWatch
Last Update: 11:55 AM ET <h2>Jul 28, 2007</h2>
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week I visited with troops at Charleston Air Force Base. These fine men and women are serving courageously to protect our country against dangerous enemies. The terrorist network that struck America on September the 11th wants to strike our country again. To stop them, our military, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals need the best possible information about who the terrorists are, where they are, and what they are planning.
One of the most important ways we can gather that information is by monitoring terrorist communications. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- <h3>also known as FISA -- provides a critical legal foundation that allows our intelligence community to collect this information while protecting the civil liberties of Americans. But this important law was written in 1978, and it addressed the technologies of that era. This law is badly out of date -- and Congress must act to modernize it.
Today we face sophisticated terrorists who use disposable cell phones and the Internet to communicate with each other, recruit operatives, and plan attacks on our country. Technologies like these were not available when FISA was passed nearly 30 years ago, and FISA has not kept up with new technological developments.</h3> As a result, our Nation is hampered in its ability to gain the vital intelligence we need to keep the American people safe. In his testimony to Congress in May, Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, put it this way: We are "significantly burdened in capturing overseas communications of foreign terrorists planning to conduct attacks inside the United States."
<h3>To fix this problem, my Administration has proposed a bill that would modernize the FISA statute. This legislation is the product of months of discussion with members of both parties in the House and the Senate -- and it includes four key reforms: First, it brings FISA up to date with the changes in communications technology that have taken place over the past three decades.</h3> Second, it seeks to restore FISA to its original focus on protecting the privacy interests of people inside the United States, so we don't have to obtain court orders to effectively collect foreign intelligence about foreign targets located in foreign locations. Third, it allows the government to work more efficiently with private-sector entities like communications providers, whose help is essential. And fourth, it will streamline administrative processes so our intelligence community can gather foreign intelligence more quickly and more effectively, while protecting civil liberties.
<h3>Every day that Congress puts off these reforms increases the danger to our Nation.</h3> Our intelligence community warns that under the current statute, we are missing a significant amount of foreign intelligence that we should be collecting to protect our country. Congress needs to act immediately to pass this bill, so that our national security professionals can close intelligence gaps and provide critical warning time for our country.
As the recent National Intelligence Estimate reported, America is in a heightened threat environment. Reforming FISA will help our intelligence professionals address those threats -- and they should not have to wait any longer. Congress will soon be leaving for its August recess.<h3> I ask Republicans and Democrats to work together to pass FISA modernization now, before they leave town. Our national security depends on it.</h3> Thank you for listening.
|
My panic today is related to this post that I did on May 24, 2007:
Quote:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...9&postcount=16 May 24
<h2>The Flip:</h2>
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0011026-5.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
<h2>October 26, 2001</h2>
Multi-front Operation, 2001 Video & Timeline President Signs Anti-Terrorism Bill
Remarks by the President at Signing of the Patriot Act, Anti-Terrorism Legislation
The East Room
... The changes, effective today, will help counter a threat like no other our nation has ever faced. We've seen the enemy, and the murder of thousands of innocent, unsuspecting people. They recognize no barrier of morality. They have no conscience. The terrorists cannot be reasoned with. Witness the recent anthrax attacks through our Postal Service.
Our country is grateful for the courage the Postal Service has shown during these difficult times. We mourn the loss of the lives of Thomas Morris and Joseph Curseen; postal workers who died in the line of duty. And our prayers go to their loved ones.
I want to assure postal workers that our government is testing more than 200 postal facilities along the entire Eastern corridor that may have been impacted. And we will move quickly to treat and protect workers where positive exposures are found.
But one thing is for certain: These terrorists must be pursued, they must be defeated, and they must be brought to justice. (Applause.) And that is the purpose of this legislation. Since the 11th of September, the men and women of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies have been relentless in their response to new and sudden challenges.
We have seen the horrors terrorists can inflict. We may never know what horrors our country was spared by the diligent and determined work of our police forces, the FBI, ATF agents, federal marshals, Custom officers, Secret Service, intelligence professionals and local law enforcement officials, under the most trying conditions. They are serving this country with excellence, and often with bravery.
They deserve our full support and every means of help that we can provide. We're dealing with terrorists who operate by highly sophisticated methods and technologies, some of which were not even available when our existing laws were written. The bill before me takes account of the new realities and dangers posed by modern terrorists. It will help law enforcement to identify, to dismantle, to disrupt, and to punish terrorists before they strike.
For example, this legislation gives law enforcement officials better tools to put an end to financial counterfeiting, smuggling and money-laundering. Secondly, it gives intelligence operations and criminal operations the chance to operate not on separate tracks, but to share vital information so necessary to disrupt a terrorist attack before it occurs.
As of today, we're changing the laws governing information-sharing. And as importantly, we're changing the culture of our various agencies that fight terrorism. Countering and investigating terrorist activity is the number one priority for both law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
Surveillance of communications is another essential tool to pursue and stop terrorists. <h3>The existing law was written in the era of rotary telephones. This new law that I sign today will allow surveillance of all communications used by terrorists, including e-mails, the Internet, and cell phones.
As of today, we'll be able to better meet the technological challenges posed by this proliferation of communications technology.</h3> Investigations are often slowed by limit on the reach of federal search warrants.
Law enforcement agencies have to get a new warrant for each new district they investigate, even when they're after the same suspect. Under this new law, warrants are valid across all districts and across all states. ......
....... It is now my honor to sign into law the USA Patriot Act of 2001. (Applause.)
(The bill is signed.) (Applause.)
END 10:57 A.M. EDT
|
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20011027.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
<h3>October 27, 2001</h3>
Radio Address of the President to the Nation
.....The bill I signed yesterday gives intelligence and law enforcement officials additional tools they need to hunt and capture and punish terrorists. Our enemies operate by highly sophisticated methods and technologies, using the latest means of communication and the new weapon of bioterrorism.
<h3>When earlier laws were written, some of these methods did not even exist. The new law recognizes the realities and dangers posed by the modern terrorist. </h3> It will help us to prosecute terrorist organizations -- and also to detect them before they strike....
..... Intelligence operations and criminal investigations have often had to operate on separate tracks. The new law will make it easier for all agencies to share vital information about terrorist activity.
Surveillance of communications is another essential method of law enforcement. <h3>But for a long time, we have been working under laws written in the era of rotary telephones. </h3> Under the new law, officials may conduct court-ordered surveillance of all modern forms of communication used by terrorists.
In recent years, some investigations have been hindered by limits on the reach of federal search warrants. Officials had to get a new warrant for each new district and investigation covered, even when involving the same suspect. As of now, warrants are valid across districts and across state lines.......
...... These measures were enacted with broad support in both parties. They reflect a firm resolve to uphold and respect the civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution, while dealing swiftly and severely with terrorists.
<h2>Now comes the duty of carrying them out.</h2> And I can assure all Americans that these important new statutes will be enforced to the full.
Thank you for listening.
END
|
...and what is this....40 months later....could it be????
<h2>The Flop:</h2>
Quote:
http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2006...t-he-says.html
....<h2>Now comes the duty of carrying them out.</h2>
And I can assure all Americans that
these important new statutes will be
enforced to the full. Thank you for
listening.
Within months after making this assurance to the American people, President Bush authorized the NSA to ignore the requirements of the law he had just signed and which he assured the American people would be "enforced to the full." <h3>Now that he's been caught, what is his stated reason for disregarding the law? He tells us the law was too "old" and "outdated" and not designed to deal with the realities and dangers posed by the modern terrorist.</h3>
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0051219-1.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
<h2>December 19, 2005</h2>
Press Briefing by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and General Michael Hayden, Principal Deputy Director for National Intelligence
James S. Brady Briefing Room
......Q General, can you tell us why you don't choose to go to the FISA court?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Well, we continue to go to the FISA court and obtain orders. It is a very important tool that we continue to utilize. Our position is that we are not legally required to do, in this particular case, because the law requires that we -- FISA requires that we get a court order, unless authorized by a statute, and we believe that authorization has occurred.
The operators out at NSA tell me that we don't have the speed and the agility that we need, in all circumstances, to deal with this new kind of enemy. <h3>You have to remember that FISA was passed by the Congress in 1978. There have been tremendous advances in technology -- ......</h3>
|
And for some reason which I cannot begin to fathom, <h2>the press simply ignores all of his previous statements to the contrary.</h2>
|
...and seven months later, still....no, not more
<h2> Flop ?????</h2>
Mr. President....I thought that you boasted that the surveillance technology "gap" had been fixed....you took credit for fixing it....<b>59 months before you said this:</b>
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0060907-2.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
September 7, 2006
President Bush Discusses Progress in the Global War on Terror
Cobb Galleria Centre
Atlanta, Georgia
......Last year, details of the Terrorist Surveillance Program were leaked to the news media, and the program was then challenged in court. That challenge was recently upheld by a federal district judge in Michigan. My administration strongly disagrees with the ruling. We are appealing it, and we believe our appeal will be successful. Yet a series of protracted legal challenges would put a heavy burden on this critical and vital program. The surest way to keep the program is to get explicit approval from the United States Congress. <b>So today I'm calling on the Congress to promptly pass legislation providing additional authority for the Terrorist Surveillance Program, along with broader reforms in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.</b> (Applause.)
When FISA was passed in 1978, there was no widely accessible Internet, and almost all calls were made on fixed landlines. <h3>Since then, the nature of communications has changed, quite dramatically. The terrorists who want to harm America can now buy disposable cell phones, and open anonymous e-mail addresses. Our laws need to change to take these changes into account.......</h3>
|
<h2>The Flip:</h2>
Here is Bush, just weeks after he is alleged to have (by James Comey) directed Card and Gonzales to Ashcroft's ICU unit bed to sign an authorization that Ashcroft was no longer legally authorized to sign...he had relinquished his duties due to illness:
Quote:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...ges/print.html
And beyond McConnell's plainly false Op-Ed, the lies told by the Bush administration on the issue of eavesdropping have no equal. In light of the revelations from James Comey, just re-visit the statements from Alberto Gonzales in December 2005 -- five days before the New York Times revealed the warrantless eavesdropping program -- in which he assured his audience: "All wiretaps must be authorized by a federal judge." <h3>That is the same Alberto Gonzales who barged into John Ashcroft's hospital room to coerce his consent to their ongoing warrantless eavesdropping activities.
Worse, the President himself -- literally one month after the dispute with Comey and Ashcroft over warrantless eavesdropping -- one month -- ran around the country as part of his re-election campaign insisting that the only eavesdropping done by the government was one done with warrants:</h3>
Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. <b>Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so.</h3>
The same President who ordered warrantless eavesdropping -- and who almost had the entire top level of the DOJ resign as a result -- told Americans weeks later that the Government only eavesdrops with warrants. To call that "lying" is to understate the case. It really is to our great discredit that we have acquiesced to this level of presidential deceit.
<h3>McConnell's Op-Ed demonstrates that this level of deceit with regard to eavesdropping continues unabated. The notion that the administration would demand, and that Congress would entertain, further expansions of FISA under these circumstances is just staggering.</h3>
|
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040420-2.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
April 20, 2004
President Bush: Information Sharing, Patriot Act Vital to Homeland Security
Remarks by the President in a Conversation on the USA Patriot Act
Kleinshans Music Hall
Buffalo, New York
.... Part of the problem we face was that there was laws and bureaucratic mind-sets that prevented the sharing of information. And so, besides setting up the Homeland Security Department and beefing up our air travel security, and making sure that we now fingerprint at the borders and take those fingerprints, by the way, and compare to a master log of fingerprints of terrorists and known criminals, to make sure people coming into our country are the right people coming into our country. I mean, we do a lot of things. But we change law, as well, to allow the FBI and -- to be able to share information within the FBI.
Incredibly enough, because of -- which Larry and others will discuss -- see, I'm not a lawyer, so it's kind of hard for me to kind of get bogged down in the law. (Applause.) I'm not going to play like one, either. (Laughter.) The way I viewed it, if I can just put it in simple terms, is that one part of the FBI couldn't tell the other part of the FBI vital information because of law. And the CIA and the FBI couldn't talk. Now, these are people charged with gathering information about threats to the country; yet they couldn't share the information. And right after September the 11th, the Congress wisely acted, said, this doesn't make any sense. If we can't get people talking, how can we act? We're charged with the security of the country, first responders are charged with the security of the country, and if we can't share information between vital agencies, we're not going to be able to do our job. And they acted.
So the first thing I want you to think about is, when you hear Patriot Act, is that we changed the law and the bureaucratic mind-set to allow for the sharing of information. It's vital. And others will describe what that means.
Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. <h3>Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so.</h3> It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
But a roving wiretap means -- it was primarily used for drug lords. A guy, a pretty intelligence drug lord would have a phone, and in old days they could just get a tap on that phone. So guess what he'd do? He'd get him another phone, particularly with the advent of the cell phones. And so he'd start changing cell phones, which made it hard for our DEA types to listen, to run down these guys polluting our streets. And that changed, the law changed on -- roving wiretaps were available for chasing down drug lords. They weren't available for chasing down terrorists, see? And that didn't make any sense in the post-9/11 era. If we couldn't use a tool that we're using against mobsters on terrorists, something needed to happen.
The Patriot Act changed that. So with court order, law enforcement officials can now use what's called roving wiretaps, which will prevent a terrorist from switching cell phones in order to get a message out to one of his buddies.
Thirdly, to give you an example of what we're talking about, there's something called delayed notification warrants. Those are very important. I see some people, first responders nodding their heads about what they mean. These are a common tool used to catch mobsters. In other words, it allows people to collect data before everybody is aware of what's going on. It requires a court order. It requires protection under the law. We couldn't use these against terrorists, but we could use against gangs.
We had real problems chasing paper -- following paper trails of people. The law was just such that we could run down a problem for a crooked businessman; we couldn't use the same tools necessary to chase down a terrorist. That doesn't make any sense. And sometimes the use of paper trails and paper will lead local first responders and local officials to a potential terrorist. We're going to have every tool, is what I'm telling you, available for our people who I expect to do their job, and you expect to do their jobs.
We had tough penalties for drug traffickers; we didn't have as tough a penalty for terrorists. That didn't make any sense. The true threat to the 21st century is the fact somebody is trying to come back into our country and hurt us. And we ought to be able to at least send a signal through law that says we're going to treat you equally as tough as we do mobsters and drug lords.
There's other things we need to do. We need administrative subpoenas in the law. This was not a part of the recent Patriot Act. By the way, the reason I bring up the Patriot Act, it's set to expire next year. I'm starting a campaign to make it clear to members of Congress it shouldn't expire. It shouldn't expire, for the security of our country. (Applause.)
Administrative subpoenas mean it is -- speeds up the process whereby people can gain information to go after terrorists. Administrative subpoenas I guess is kind of an ominous sounding word, but it is, to put everybody's mind at ease about administrative subpoenas -- we use them to catch crooked doctors today. It's a tool for people to chase down medical fraud. And it certainly makes sense to me that if we're using it as a tool to chase medical fraud cases, we certainly ought to use it as a tool to chase potential terrorists.
I'll tell you another interesting part of the law that needs to be changed. Judges need greater authority to deny bail to terrorists. Judges have that authority in many cases like -- again, I keep citing drug offenses, but the Congress got tough on drug offenders a while ago and gave judges leeway to deny bail. They don't have that same authority to deny bail to terrorists now. I've got to tell you, it doesn't make any sense to me that it is very conceivable that we haul in somebody who is dangerous to America and then they are able to spring bail and out they go.
It's hard to assure the American people that we've given tools to law enforcement that they need if somebody has gone through all the work to chase down a potential terrorist, and they haul them in front of a court and they pay bail, and it adios. It just doesn't make any sense.
The Patriot Act needs to be renewed and the Patriot Act needs to be enhanced. That's what we're talking about. And it's better for others to explain to you how this Patriot Act works. After all, they're charged with protecting our citizens. They're on the front line. You see, I try to pick the best I can at the federal government and say, here's our mission -- our mission is to protect our country. I say that to the Defense Department -- our mission is to protect the country. I say it to the Justice Department, and to the FBI. After 9/11, I said to the Justice Department and the FBI, your job, your primary focus now is to prevent attack. Listen, I still want you chasing down the criminals; that's what's expected of you. But there's a new mind-set, and that is, because of what happened on 9/11, we've got to change the way we think, and therefore, your job now is to prevent attack.....
.... THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Attorney. (Laughter.) It's good I didn't break any rules. (Laughter.)
The point is, is that -- what he's telling you is, is that we needed to share this information throughout our government, which we couldn't do before. And it just doesn't make any sense. We got people working hard overseas that are collecting information to better help us protect ourselves. And what 9/11 was, is that -- said -- is that a threat overseas now must be taken seriously here at home. It's one thing to protect our embassies, and we work hard to do so. But now a threat overseas could end up being a threat to the homeland. And in order to protect the homeland, these good people have got to be able to share information.
Those who criticize the Patriot Act must listen to those folks on the front line of defending America. <b>The Patriot Act defends our liberty, is what it does, under the Constitution of the United States. (Applause.)</b> ...
......THE PRESIDENT: .... It's an honor to have been here today. I hope, as a result of this discussion, our fellow citizens have a better understanding of the importance of the Patriot Act and why it needs to be renewed and expanded -- <b>the importance of the Patriot Act, when it comes to defending America, our liberties, and at the same time, that it still protects our liberties under the Constitution.</b> But more importantly, I hope our fellow citizens recognize that there are hundreds of their fellow citizens working on a daily basis to do their duty to make this country as secure as possible. And for your work I say thank you, and may God continue to bless you. Thank you for coming. (Applause.)
END 10:33 A.M. EDT
Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/...aught-on-tape/
Bush Caught on Tape: “A Wiretap Requires A Court Order. Nothing Has Changed.”
Bush, April 2004:
Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. <b>Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so.</b> It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
|
|
<h2>The Flop:</h2>
Quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20060101.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 1, 2006
President Visits Troops at Brooke Army Medical Center
Brooke Army Medical Center
San Antonio, Texas
...Q In 2004, when you were doing an event about the Patriot Act, in your remarks you had said that any wiretapping required a court order, and that nothing had changed. <b>Given that we now know you had prior approval for this NSA program, were you in any way misleading?
THE PRESIDENT: I was talking about roving wire taps, I believe, involved in the Patriot Act. This is different from the NSA program. The NSA program is a necessary program.</b> I was elected to protect the American people from harm. And on September the 11th, 2001, our nation was attacked. And after that day, I vowed to use all the resources at my disposal, within the law, to protect the American people, which is what I have been doing, and will continue to do. And the fact that somebody leaked this program causes great harm to the United States.
There's an enemy out there. They read newspapers, they listen to what you write, they listen to what you put on the air, and they react. And it seems logical to me that if we know there's a phone number associated with al Qaeda and/or an al Qaeda affiliate, and they're making phone calls, it makes sense to find out why. They attacked us before, they will attack us again if they can. And we're going to do everything we can to stop them.
Yes, Ed. ...
|
9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......
9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......9/11......
Quote:
http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/p....cfm?id=274166
Rockefeller and Bond Announce Committee Completes Section of Phase II Looking at Accuracy of Pre-War Intelligence on Post-War Iraq
--Report to be Sent for Declassification and Could be Released Within Weeks--
Contact: Wendy Morigi (Rockefeller) (202) 224-6101;
Shana Marchio (Bond) (202) 224-0309
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Washington, DC - The Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, and the Vice Chairman, Senator Kit Bond, announced today that the Committee has adopted its Phase II report on prewar intelligence assessments about postwar Iraq. The Committee will submit the report to the Director of National Intelligence for classification review. Following declassification, the Committee will release the report to the public.
The Senate Intelligence Committee released their first report dealing with Intelligence Community failures related to Iraq's weapons capabilities on July 9, 2004. The findings and recommendations of that report were an important impetus leading to landmark legislation reforming the United States Intelligence Community.
Last fall, the Committee released reports on two of the five sections of Phase II: 1) the postwar findings about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and weapons programs and links to terrorism and how they compare with prewar assessments; and 2) the use by the Intelligence Community of information provided by the Iraqi National Congress.
|
|
Since Mr. Bush is obviously lying about this matter....not once, and he is doing it blatantly.....how can you trust anything else that he says? |