Comments on: MAKING THE WORLD SAFE FOR TERRORISTS http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/ Politics served up with a smile... And a stilletto. Sun, 19 Apr 2026 00:03:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: uYfFMP98xc http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-254774 uYfFMP98xc Fri, 07 Jul 2006 01:00:39 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-254774 OAKvcLvBMopWc DeCTf3h2JHYsYO bbIGt5YPrp OAKvcLvBMopWc DeCTf3h2JHYsYO bbIGt5YPrp

]]> By: Cousin Dave http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-245561 Cousin Dave Wed, 28 Jun 2006 21:26:12 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-245561 Rick, I'm beginning to see a problem here. I too support in principle the idea that the people we should be going after are the leakers. However: I think I see a pattern in these leaks, and the pattern is that, with one exception (the Verizon phone-call database business), all of the programs that have been exposed are things that required cooperation from Europe. So I'm thinking that the NYT's sources are European. That being the case, trying to prosecute the sources is pointless; European governments aren't going to prosecute them for violations of U.S. law, and they aren't going to agree to extradition. This leaves the Administration in a quandry. If reporters are not going to be prosecuted, then Washington appears to have only three choices, none of them good: (1) Ignore the problem; keep trying to devise new programs and hope that they can do some good before they are compromised. (2) Cease cooperation with Europe. Given that there are things that still have to be done in Europe, this probably means engaging in covert ops on European soil. (3) Declare WWII-style martial law and impose censorship on the press. Rick, I’m beginning to see a problem here. I too support in principle the idea that the people we should be going after are the leakers. However: I think I see a pattern in these leaks, and the pattern is that, with one exception (the Verizon phone-call database business), all of the programs that have been exposed are things that required cooperation from Europe. So I’m thinking that the NYT’s sources are European. That being the case, trying to prosecute the sources is pointless; European governments aren’t going to prosecute them for violations of U.S. law, and they aren’t going to agree to extradition.

This leaves the Administration in a quandry. If reporters are not going to be prosecuted, then Washington appears to have only three choices, none of them good: (1) Ignore the problem; keep trying to devise new programs and hope that they can do some good before they are compromised. (2) Cease cooperation with Europe. Given that there are things that still have to be done in Europe, this probably means engaging in covert ops on European soil. (3) Declare WWII-style martial law and impose censorship on the press.

]]> By: Neo http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-245226 Neo Wed, 28 Jun 2006 06:23:38 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-245226 Speaking of the Saudis Is this what <a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008563" rel="nofollow">Sandy Berger</a> was trying to hide in his sox ? Speaking of the Saudis

Is this what Sandy Berger was trying to hide in his sox ?

]]> By: Andy http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-245175 Andy Wed, 28 Jun 2006 05:09:50 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-245175 Neo, Just as a point of fact the code you cite only applies to SIGINT and more specifically COMINT activities. So the the NSA wiretap leak would fall under it, but not this latest leak. I heard a soft-ball interview with Keller on NPR today where he gave the same basic argument that "everyone already knows." That's a totally BS argument, and I know from personal experience. Neo,

Just as a point of fact the code you cite only applies to SIGINT and more specifically COMINT activities. So the the NSA wiretap leak would fall under it, but not this latest leak.

I heard a soft-ball interview with Keller on NPR today where he gave the same basic argument that “everyone already knows.” That’s a totally BS argument, and I know from personal experience.

]]> By: Scrapiron http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-245134 Scrapiron Wed, 28 Jun 2006 04:00:47 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-245134 Isn't it great. Four months before the election the dim-wits and their supporters prove they are liars, traitors and spies for the enemy. Do the Republicans need more to bury the idiot left wing? The have left no doubt that the security and lives of the American poople mean less to them than their quest for power. Go democrats, the public isn't as supid as you think, that is those not tied to your apron string for life by welfare. Isn’t it great. Four months before the election the dim-wits and their supporters prove they are liars, traitors and spies for the enemy. Do the Republicans need more to bury the idiot left wing? The have left no doubt that the security and lives of the American poople mean less to them than their quest for power. Go democrats, the public isn’t as supid as you think, that is those not tied to your apron string for life by welfare.

]]> By: Henry http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-245133 Henry Wed, 28 Jun 2006 03:58:09 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-245133 The only way to get the attention of any media source is to stop supporting it. The ultra-liberal Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) is hurting for subscribers. They are maning the telephones seeking subscribers. I receive a call at least once a week. There not enough liberals to make up the difference. It just takes time. The AJC is the main news paper in the state and there are few local papers that are worth anything. My local paper is growing in circulation. I have to start picking on the editor who is a pretty good guy. Where do I get my news. I cherry pick from a lot of papers and sites such as this one. Bless all of you. The only way to get the attention of any media source is to stop supporting it. The ultra-liberal Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) is hurting for subscribers. They are maning the telephones seeking subscribers. I receive a call at least once a week. There not enough liberals to make up the difference. It just takes time. The AJC is the main news paper in the state and there are few local papers that are worth anything. My local paper is growing in circulation. I have to start picking on the editor who is a pretty good guy. Where do I get my news. I cherry pick from a lot of papers and sites such as this one.

Bless all of you.

]]> By: Svenghouli http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-244992 Svenghouli Tue, 27 Jun 2006 21:50:35 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-244992 Rick, You are right. A couple years back a "soldier" who was ani-Iraqi war was reporting on a blog about his platoon. The army shut it down because they claimed that in the blog it depicted position and military strategy. They stated that it was a resource the insurgency could use against them. A lot of people were pissed off because soldier lost his "right to free speech". Of course we like most sane people realize that the army is seperate from rest of the United States. It doesn't have to adhere to all of the rules that we civilians have to adhere. In fact, they have stricter rules of their own. They question now is does National Security have its own rules seperate from the rest of the country. I have an interesting question. It may seem childish, but I want some answers for this. If the Constitution was written before Benedict Arnold commit treason, would he have been within his rights. I think it is safe to assume that most of us consider this not covered by the first amendment. The question why is this not considered protected and while the New York Times is considered protected. While, the Times did not act intentionally treasonously did they accidently? Or was it just an example of partisanship being declared more important than America herself? Rick,

You are right. A couple years back a “soldier” who was ani-Iraqi war was reporting on a blog about his platoon. The army shut it down because they claimed that in the blog it depicted position and military strategy. They stated that it was a resource the insurgency could use against them. A lot of people were pissed off because soldier lost his “right to free speech”. Of course we like most sane people realize that the army is seperate from rest of the United States. It doesn’t have to adhere to all of the rules that we civilians have to adhere. In fact, they have stricter rules of their own. They question now is does National Security have its own rules seperate from the rest of the country.

I have an interesting question. It may seem childish, but I want some answers for this.

If the Constitution was written before Benedict Arnold commit treason, would he have been within his rights. I think it is safe to assume that most of us consider this not covered by the first amendment. The question why is this not considered protected and while the New York Times is considered protected. While, the Times did not act intentionally treasonously did they accidently? Or was it just an example of partisanship being declared more important than America herself?

]]> By: pc http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-244967 pc Tue, 27 Jun 2006 21:05:29 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-244967 And, by the way, this program was mentioned by the POTUS, and the Treasury Secretary in 2001. No mention of that, I noticed. And, by the way, this program was mentioned by the POTUS, and the Treasury Secretary in 2001. No mention of that, I noticed.

]]> By: pc http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-244952 pc Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:39:51 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-244952 What about WAPO, the Wall Street Jounal, Scarborough Country, and the dozens of other novelists who reported at the same time? What about the people who put it in books, long before the Times ever did? Simple question... do you believe the Executive branch should determine what can be published by our free press? Bottom line, the Aministration should not be commenting on this in such a way as to confirm or deny it. They should stop crying, and start worrying about their own propaganda and press manipulation, instead of trying to use the law and abuse the 1st Amendment of CONUS. WAAAAAA. Bed wetters, all! What about WAPO, the Wall Street Jounal, Scarborough Country, and the dozens of other novelists who reported at the same time? What about the people who put it in books, long before the Times ever did? Simple question… do you believe the Executive branch should determine what can be published by our free press?
Bottom line, the Aministration should not be commenting on this in such a way as to confirm or deny it. They should stop crying, and start worrying about their own propaganda and press manipulation, instead of trying to use the law and abuse the 1st Amendment of CONUS. WAAAAAA. Bed wetters, all!

]]> By: crosspatch http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/comment-page-1/#comment-244930 crosspatch Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:46:12 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/06/27/making-the-world-safe-for-terrorists/#comment-244930 I am all for pulling their press credential. The criteria for a Pentagon press pass is to pass a background security check. I don't see how any employee of the NYT could pass a security check at this point. I am all for pulling their press credential. The criteria for a Pentagon press pass is to pass a background security check. I don’t see how any employee of the NYT could pass a security check at this point.

]]>