WSJ: NSA Surveillance is Legal and Necessary

[timpage]

Oh, what a tangled web we do weave. The NYT publishes an editorial on the NSA data-mining stating that Obama has "lost all credibility"....which they later edited in the on-line version to add "on this issue."

In the meantime, the Wall Street Journal applauds the NSA surveillance effort:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...994191586.html

Strange bedfellows.

[CJ7]

read where the report is published every 3 months and has been for seven years ..
imagine that ...

[Jackie S]

Well, the President is now getting in on the act, at least as far as the phones and e-mail stuff goes.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...id=msnhp&pos=1

In a few years, the political tide will change, and there will be a guy, (or gal), with a "R" behind their name gathering the same info, and making the same denials..

Just hope everybody remembers that.

[Uncle Han]

Originally Posted by timpage

Oh, what a tangled web we do weave. The NYT publishes an editorial on the NSA data-mining stating that Obama has "lost all credibility"....which they later edited in the on-line version to add "on this issue."

In the meantime, the Wall Street Journal applauds the NSA surveillance effort:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...994191586.html

Strange bedfellows.

.





But you were condemning Bush! LMFAO!






.

[timpage]

Originally Posted by Uncle Han

.





But you were condemning Bush! LMFAO!






.

You are just razor sharp, you know it? You must ponder these well-thought-out posts of yours for....gosh, seconds, before you let fly.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Well, the President is now getting in on the act, at least as far as the phones and e-mail stuff goes.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...id=msnhp&pos=1

In a few years, the political tide will change, and there will be a guy, (or gal), with a "R" behind their name gathering the same info, and making the same denials..

Just hope everybody remembers that.

in that case, as long as theres an R attached behind their name, it wont be a big deal

[timpage]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Well, the President is now getting in on the act, at least as far as the phones and e-mail stuff goes.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...id=msnhp&pos=1

In a few years, the political tide will change, and there will be a guy, (or gal), with a "R" behind their name gathering the same info, and making the same denials..

Just hope everybody remembers that.

I may not be up to speed but all this data-mining started on Bush's watch, right? Realistically...what is Obama supposed to do? Come in as the new POTUS and eliminate a program touted to be part of keeping the country safe from terrorists?I cringe when I think of the Whirlytard headline all cap posts that would fill the pages here if that happened and there were a terroristic strike on the country. It would all be Obama's fault because he undid the NSA surveillance program.

Really, there is no upside on any of this for Obama. The pick is easy: you err on the side of keeping Americans safe and alive. I suppose there is potential for real abuse here but I have yet to hear of any....can anybody give an example of how this data-mining has actually harmed anybody? And, I don't mean just hurt your feelings in regard to what you think your constitutional rights are.....

[CuteOldGuy]

Violating the Constitution is per se harmful. No proof is needed. And it is a scandal and a crime and a VERY BIG DEAL whether there is an "R", "D", "L" or any other letter behind it.

[CuteOldGuy]

[i'va biggen]

Missed the point again didn't you ...

[Guest021824]

It's what isn't reported that will have the most direct affect on everyone's life in the future.

starting with this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act

If you read the actual law, it will really surprise you. Compound that with all the executive orders passed since 2001, and the fact that Obama has passed more executive orders than Reagan, Bush, Clinton and GW.Bush combined........read those and that should have you worried. What you hear on CNN, MSNBC, and FOX...is just fodder for those that won't read................The false partionship between Dems and Reps is all an act. They are on the same team,,,,,they are just against US.

Check out the laws as they are passed and read about them in the federal register online. THen wonder why you don't hear about those same laws and regulations on CNN, MSNBC, Fox and talk radio...........It's not simply coincidence..........it's a concerted plan to dupe those that aren't paying attention into freely giving up their rights because of orchestrated fear.....................somet hing to think about!!!!!!!!!!!

[Yssup Rider]

Let's see Plywood Man -- When Nixon did wiretaps there were illegal. When Obama did them, they were not only legal, but part of the Bush National Security plan.

Of course, we all know what happened to Nixon AFTER he was impeached, don't we?

BTW -- you ever gonna admit you fucked up on that one Plywood Cocksucker? Or am I going to have to remind you of it every day... maybe 4,000 days in a row, one for each of the innocent children our President personally slaughtered.

[RedLeg505]

Originally Posted by CJ7

in that case, as long as theres an R attached behind their name, it wont be a big deal

Nope, but the same Liberal dweebs all saying "Nothing to see here, move along" about the collecting of the data, will be back to ranting and raving about how the Patriot Act and ancillary programs for data mining are the REPUBLICAN POLICE STATE in all its glory. You know, sorta like how using drones killed innocent women and children bystanders when a Republican President ordered it, but suddenly, no comment about those bystanders when a Democrat INCREASED the number of missiles shot by a few orders of magnitude.

Funny how that works.

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Let's see Plywood Man -- When Nixon did wiretaps there were illegal. When Obama did them, they were not only legal, but part of the Bush National Security plan.

Of course, we all know what happened to Nixon AFTER he was impeached, don't we?

BTW -- you ever gonna admit you fucked up on that one Plywood Cocksucker? Or am I going to have to remind you of it every day... maybe 4,000 days in a row, one for each of the innocent children our President personally slaughtered.

Nixon was never formally impeached. He resigned to avoid the embarrassment of impeachment. Something Obama might want to start thinking about. Wiretapping by the way is illegal unless it is an essential part of a criminal investigation.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by acp5762

Nixon was never formally impeached. He resigned to avoid the embarrassment of impeachment. Something Obama might want to start thinking about.

Are you saying that you hope Obama steps aside so President Biden can run in 2016 as the incumbent?