Unhinged BDS Sufferers and National Security
- Posted by Beth on December 18th, 2005 filed in General, Politics, Support the Troops, The War
Bah, humbug. Time for a serious bitch-fest again. I don’t give a rat’s ass if nobody wants to link to this due to my angry, expletive-laden rant, and I don’t give a rat’s ass if the barking moonbats all want to come and complain about MY OPINION, either. They can all go fark themselves, for all I care.
I’m sick and farking tired of the utter STUPIDITY and carelessness of these subversive morons that are all looking to make a buck for themselves and/or are just cynically showing complete disregard for our national security because they still haven’t gotten over the fact that THEY LOST the debate/election/whatever. Get over it, you MORONS.
This latest outrage with the farking New Qaeda York Times exposing classified information, and the paranoid idiots that love stories like this for their own selfish reasons–I’m furious. First, they complain that the pre-911 intelligence was faulty (which it WAS) or that the Bush administration (and curiously, only the Bush administration) ignored the “obvious” signs of a potential attack. The 9/11 Commission CRITICIZED the NSA for not conducting surveillance, for Chrissakes! Then, when something is done to plug the holes–The Patriot Act, the NSA’s watching people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations, etc., then these same ENEMIES OF THE STATE scream bloody murder.
Newsflash: This isn’t some benign issue, people. This is AMERICAN LIVES we’re talking about. You haven’t noticed that there’s not been another “successful” 9/11-style attack since then? Or do you actually think the terrorists haven’t tried? Are you that dishonest and stupid? Are you also a terrorist or sympathizer yourself? Are you some kind of innocent yet paranoid psychotic who thinks The Government Is Coming For You™? Don’t you think The Government™ has more important things to do? You’re an idiot! Or are you just the typical idiotarian who opposes ANYTHING the Bush administration does–or worse, anything any government does in the interest of national security?
You filthy RINOs–McCain, Hagel, Murkowski, Sununu, Specter–and all you other RINOs who jump ship at the moment you think you might be criticized by the leftard press–I’ve got your number. We all do.
YES to extending the Patriot Act.
YES to surveillance on those with known ties to terror.
NO to leaking classified information.
NO to the “Al-Qaeda Bill of Rights.”
NO to the weak-kneed Republicans in the Senate who “fear the media more than their local constituents. Or fear the national media might make them look foolish in front of their local constituents.”
I’m not sure I even have words to describe my utter frustration with the interferences thrown in to every single farking thing we have to fight this war on Islamofascism–whether it’s the media disguising opinion as “news,” the lies they and idiotarian BLOGGERS spread, the ridiculously overblown hysteria over interrogation methods, the insane paranoia over the USA Patriot Act, the exposure of REAL classified information, the spreading and feeding of terrorist propaganda, the batshi’ite farking crazy “anti-war” (NOT) lunatics (yes, I do mean “batshi’ite crazy lunatics;” you people ARE out of your minds and obviously immune to history and logic), and the disgusting disloyal political opposition led by the likes of Ted “Chappie” Kennedy* and John F’n Kerry and Al-Q Gore and other losers with an axe to grind–no matter the human cost.
I thank GOD for the few politicians left on Capitol Hill with their integrity fully intact–fortunately for me, that includes my own Senators (Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby) and Representative (Jo Bonner). I sure as shi’ite hope you others who agree with me get with the program and hold your own legislators’ feet to the fire, and if they don’t want to win the war on terror, vote the bastards out of office.
To those of you so irresponsibly and cynically toying with American lives for political and/or paranoid reasons, I have three words: GO TO HELL.
Text of the President’s briefing today follows, all emphasis mine, also with my comments in parentheses:
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning.
As President, I took an oath to defend the Constitution, and I have no greater responsibility than to protect our people, our freedom, and our way of life. On September the 11th, 2001, our freedom and way of life came under attack by brutal enemies who killed nearly 3,000 innocent Americans. We’re fighting these enemies across the world. Yet in this first war of the 21st century, one of the most critical battlefronts is the home front. And since September the 11th, we’ve been on the offensive against the terrorists plotting within our borders.
[Why do you think we haven't suffered another attack?!]
One of the first actions we took to protect America after our nation was attacked was to ask Congress to pass the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act tore down the legal and bureaucratic wall that kept law enforcement and intelligence authorities from sharing vital information about terrorist threats. And the Patriot Act allowed federal investigators to pursue terrorists with tools they already used against other criminals. Congress passed this law with a large, bipartisan majority, including a vote of 98-1 in the United States Senate.
[Only when 9/11 hadn't been so stupidly and cynically forgotten. Poor memory IS often a symptom of stupidity or mental illness, you know--and also of pathologically lying political whores.]
Since then, America’s law enforcement personnel have used this critical law to prosecute terrorist operatives and supporters, and to break up terrorist cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia, California, Texas and Ohio. The Patriot Act has accomplished exactly what it was designed to do: it has protected American liberty and saved American lives.
Yet key provisions of this law are set to expire in two weeks. The terrorist threat to our country will not expire in two weeks. The terrorists want to attack America again, and inflict even greater damage than they did on September the 11th. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that law enforcement and intelligence officials have the tools they need to protect the American people.
The House of Representatives passed reauthorization of the Patriot Act. Yet a minority of senators filibustered to block the renewal of the Patriot Act when it came up for a vote yesterday. That decision is irresponsible, and it endangers the lives of our citizens. The senators who are filibustering must stop their delaying tactics, and the Senate must vote to reauthorize the Patriot Act. In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment.
To fight the war on terror, I am using authority vested in me by Congress, including the Joint Authorization for Use of Military Force, which passed overwhelmingly in the first week after September the 11th. I’m also using constitutional authority vested in me as Commander-in-Chief.
In the weeks following the terrorist attacks on our nation, I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist networks.
[Read that again!]
This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country.
As the 9/11 Commission pointed out, it was clear that terrorists inside the United States were communicating with terrorists abroad before the September the 11th attacks, and the commission criticized our nation’s inability to uncover links between terrorists here at home and terrorists abroad. Two of the terrorist hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon, Nawaf al Hamzi and Khalid al Mihdhar, communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas. But we didn’t know they were here, until it was too late.
[HYPOCRITES! You can't have it both ways!]
The authorization I gave the National Security Agency after September the 11th helped address that problem in a way that is fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities. The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time. And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.
The activities I authorized are reviewed approximately every 45 days. Each review is based on a fresh intelligence assessment of terrorist threats to the continuity of our government and the threat of catastrophic damage to our homeland. During each assessment, previous activities under the authorization are reviewed. The review includes approval by our nation’s top legal officials, including the Attorney General and the Counsel to the President. I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups.
The NSA’s activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA’s top legal officials, including NSA’s general counsel and inspector general. Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it. Intelligence officials involved in this activity also receive extensive training to ensure they perform their duties consistent with the letter and intent of the authorization.
[Is this STILL not enough? Why are you so eager to believe ONLY the Bush-deranged critics?]
This authorization is a vital tool in our war against the terrorists. It is critical to saving American lives. The American people expect me to do everything in my power under our laws and Constitution to protect them and their civil liberties. And that is exactly what I will continue to do, so long as I’m the President of the United States.
Thank you.
[*Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.]
Jo says:
amen to that…great post. :grin:
Larry says:
You get them Beth. The stupid fucks just don’t get it, no, scratch that. It’s the left behind socialist/communist, reject former 60’s college students. What assholes. same with the torture rider. If I was the president I’d say sorry, I can’t sign the defense spending bill with that attached. In Iraq we would understand.
Peace Moonbat says:
Don’t hold back.
Conservative Thinking says:
Round the Reader: 2 March 2005
If you haven’t seen Round the Reader yet then allow me fill you in. Round the Reader is an initiative spearheaded by Scott Boone and contributed to by myself, Drumwaster, Rick, and Beth. Every week day one of us will…
MCPO Airdale says:
Beth - Wonderful post.
I’ve written my guys, including the contemptable Arlen Specter. I asked Specter why he thought investigating the administration was more important than finding out who broke the law in leaking this program to the NYT. Additionally, I asked where in the law it prohibited the President from initiating these wiretaps and, finally, asked if he (Specter) one of the people in congress that the administration informed of this program.
I have S-O had it with this friggin’ RINO. Why, oh why didn’t Pat Toomey beat this asshole?!??
Holly Aho says:
If anyone believes terrorism is not a threat domestically here in the US, they shoucl visit this website: http://www.tkb.org/Home.jsp
Click on the US to see a list 56 pages long of terrorist acts committed here.
It’s an eye opener for anyone that thinks safety is not an issue domestically.
Flopping Aces says:
Democrats, Too Busy Defending Terrorists From America
While Republicans are busy defending America from Terrorists, the Democrats are busy defending Terrorists from America. It makes me sick.
…
Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » Democrats, Too Busy Defending Terrorists From America says:
[...] Ok folks, now THIS is a rant. And a rant that needed saying: (via My Vast RightWing Conspiracy) This latest outrage with the farking New Qaeda York Times exposing classified information, and the paranoid idiots that love stories like this for their own selfish reasons–I’m furious. First, they complain that the pre-911 intelligence was faulty (which it WAS) or that the Bush administration (and curiously, only the Bush administration) ignored the “obvious” signs of a potential attack. The 9/11 Commission CRITICIZED the NSA for not conducting surveillance, for Chrissakes! Then, when something is done to plug the holes–The Patriot Act, the NSA’s watching people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations, etc., then these same ENEMIES OF THE STATE scream bloody murder. [...]
Lady Heather says:
Awesome rant, Beth!
Stop The ACLU says:
Sunday Funnies
image courtesy of faithmouse
Barking Moonbat meets Santa
Woody’s Blog has Fahrenheit 1861
Wuzzadem takes a look at the anti-war activists’ reactions to NSA phone taps.
Protein Wisdom takes a look at some of his progressive friend’…
Wild Thing says:
YOU are aweosme Beth!!!!!
Theodore's World says:
Senate says FARK YOU to ALL Americans!
I could also have titled this….. RHINOs and Democrats try hard to protect the terrorists!!!!!!
Ed says:
Now, you need to not hold back. Tell us how you really feel! Love your rants.
Keep them coming. I agree totally. I was army–a life time ago. Was with MI in Berlin and
we worked directly for the NSA. We had regs on stopping all recording/listening of anything
that could possibly be Americans–even when their freq’s were just overlapping a prior target!
I always thought that was rediculous and I’m glad they have been skirting by that reg.
I’ll keep listening from North Alabama, Thanks.
Redhead Infidel says:
Well, I sure like the way you said it, way better than my own blurb. All I really wanted to do was shriek the f’n f-word every other phrase. I guess I’m still in tone-it-down mode from the Weblog Awards thingy, and haven’t shifted gears yet.
Great rant - and true in every word!
Sissy Willis says:
Thank you. I feel better already. :)
Common Sense Junction » Blog Archive » Who Can You Trust? Not Rich Lowry says:
[...] Beth @ My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy unloads on the treacherous SOBs that lurk in our midst and sell out America at every turn. [...]
Don Surber says:
But how do you really feel about it?
Don Surber says:
Latest Lefty Lunacy
What happens when Bush really does abuse his power?
Outside the Beltway disagrees. It’s a free country.
Beth at My VRWC has an interesting, if slighthly X-rated take on all this.
Erin Bizon says:
I want to thank you so much for writing my words, sometimes I start to think I must be the only one saying the same shi’ite.
I know that the the RINO’s you speak of really are damaging to the Republican Party, these people should either call themselves
liberals or independants and the Republican Party needs to stop spending money on their campaign’s. I suspect this thankfully will
be Spector’s last time around. I suggested to my son today that when he finishes his 4 year enlistment in the Army he should run for
local office because the problem in Washington is they are old and will never get this new WAR. I am almost sure they have lackeys
take care of computer things and telecommunication things and are really fearful of this new way of life and in that they will never
be able to understand this WAR. Only those 40 and below should be able to run for office in this 21st Century. Again Thanks so much
making my night by reading the words I use. Merry Christmas!!!
Invigilator says:
Let’s see. You folks are in favor of torture, warrantless searches and seizures, defaming the loyal opposition as traitors, and what else? You make me ashamed to be an American. No doubt you will delete this post instantly, demonstrating your lack of tolerance for free speech as well.
Beth says:
Invalid:
Wrong. I’m happy to let you show your ass (”ashamed to be an American”). Guess what–I think you deserve every bit of the words I have for you (actually, the TRUTH–not “defamation”), but bottom-feeding vermin like you will never make me ashamed to be an American.
Frankly, I pity you. You not only have a ridiculously simplistic view of the world (as evidenced by your simplistic take on the issues addressed in the post) that makes me think you’re probably mentally retarded or just another lying lunatic, YOU also have no tolerance for an America that doesn’t consist ONLY of people like you. And you want to talk about a lack of tolerance for free speech? BWAHAHAHAAHAAAA! “HYPOCRITE” would be appropriate here, too.
It must be miserable to have to suffer living in a country (actually, a WORLD) that is full of people who don’t agree with you and have the freedom to believe whatever the hell we want–even if it’s diametrically opposed to YOUR beliefs. It must suck to be ashamed of your own identity because of others, as well. It must REALLY be hard to have the gift of being born American (I’m assuming you were), from the most free and envied nation on Earth, and still not be happy. I guess the only thing you’re going to find better is Heaven. Maybe you should check it out.
Loser.
B.C. says:
If tearing the shriveled scrotum off a head-sawing goat-molester saves American lives, you bet.
Hmmmmmmm… See above. Yep.
Also, you mind coming up with ACTUAL, DOCUMENTED CASES OF “WARRANTLESS SEIZURES”? (Well, except for all of those illegally obtained FBI files the Klintoons had in the WH. We already know about those.)
BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! “Loyal opposition“? What color is the farkin’ sky on your side of the Idiotarian Parallel Universal Divide™, you drooling moron? Calling traitors “traitors” isn’t “defaming“. It’s called “calling a spade a spade.”
:mrgreen:
Preston Taylor Holmes says:
This is classic Beth. Dead-on.
Vinnie says:
Looks like someone read my Chuck Hagel rant
:mrgreen:
Larry says:
What the fuck is “loyal opposition”? Opposition is just that, opposition. You don’t oppose the fighters during a war. Politics are one thing, but the war on terror is quite another.
On another subject, I guess I can’t run for congress since I’m 46. Well, maybe I shouldn’t do 30 years in the Corps since it made me too old, according to one poster, to run for office. :wink:
Beth says:
Larry, I’d vote for you for King! :wink:
Run, Larry, Run!
Blackiswhite says:
Ma’am
If I weren’t such a short way into my marriage (only 11 years and 2 kids), I might have to ask you to marry me!
I love it when W or Chaney step in front of the microphone long enough to reveal the libiturds and surrender monkeys for what they are.
Hennessy's View says:
God Bless Beth!
Believe it or not, I try to tone down my rhetoric on this blog. When I feel that I’ve toned down too much, I look for a blog that really says what I’m really thinking. No apologies, no excuses, just good old fashioned “how it is,&#…
Bill says:
Beth,
Great venting. Now go after Michael Crook.
pajamas mediocrity » Blog Archive » Monday’s Roundup of Mediocrity says:
[...] Beth has a little something to say. [...]
jeff says:
Apparently you’re misinformed. This is not about saving American lives, it’s about scoring cheap political points. Get with the program, sister!
dingo says:
OK Beth,
I have seen a lot of rants from people on the right and a lot of talking points from Bush surrogates. But no one has yet come up with a reason that they could not have gotten warrants?
Please. Someone, anyone. Just give me one reason the exact same thing could not have been done legally.
Yeah, it may just be a technicality to get a warrant from a court since the courts have supposedly only rejected 2 requests. But it is a CONSTITUTIONAL TECHNICALITY. What happened to your sides love and respect of the constitution.
When one person can give me a valid reason, I will stop bitching about it.
Mike's America says:
A Victory Strategy for Al Queda?
A veritable stew of disgust over the only plan the Defeaticrats have thus far put forward: “A Victory Strategy for Al Queda.”
Flopping Aces presents the comments from a reader at Protein Wisdom, matched with the clear outrage of My Vast Right Wing…
John from WuzzaDem says:
Please. Someone, anyone. Just give me one reason the exact same thing could not have been done legally.
When one person can give me a valid reason, I will stop bitching about it.
Dingo,
First of all, I could give a shi’ite what you bitch about, so I don’t feel the need to answer any of your questions. Bitch away, jackass.
Why don’t you answer a few questions:
Who is Iyman Faris? If you don’t know, I suggest you Google the name.
Have you ever seen this:
That’s from the The Foreign Intelligence Security Act, so you can stop bitching now. Unless you have some proof that this provision was violated.
How long have you had an expectation of privacy when you’re talking to someone overseas? Were you not aware of the existence of the NSA and their purpose? Do you think that Democratic presidents asked the NSA to stop listening to international communications while they were in office? Maybe Carter did, but he was so farking naive about security that he put that dipshi’ite Stansfield Turner in charge of the CIA.
dingo says:
John,
Please, pray tell, where did you get that little quote of faulty information? Oh, wait… let me guess. Someone’s blog who posted 1801(f)(3) but not 1801(f)(1), (2) or (4). Am I right, or am I right? I am guessing they missed out on 1801 (h) also, but that would be just darn presumptuous of me, wouldn’t it.
And if we are going to be asking each other questions, who is Alexander Hamilton? Google it. See what pops up.
No?… still need a clue? Just go to trinity church and listen for the grave with the body turning over in it.
Which still brings me back to my original question. Why could NSA not have done the exact same thing legally. Roaming wire taps? check… 72 hour post facto warrant application? got it…
Still, no one has given a reason as to why this could not have been done legally?
Vinnie says:
The reason noone can answer you question, dingo, is because it wasn’t done illegally. It was done legally.
My heartfelt apologies to my good friend Beth for the long comment.
MacStansbury says:
for those interested, the Democrat source of all knowledge
and howcome this talking points a load of hog-wash
Gull says:
I hope our troops are watching all of this. Possibly the troops will greet them with a few choice questions if they make their token visits to Iraq during the holidays …. i.e., Why did you not vote for the Patriot Act? Why are you criticizing our Commander in Chief? Why are you providing sympathy to the terrorists? Whose side are you on, Congressman???? And why are you here?
I’m disgusted with these demo-rats and their using any excuse to bash the President. Stand tall, GW. We need you now more than ever.
suds46 says:
Damn, Beth, I wish you would tell us what you really think. Keep it coming!
John from WuzzaDem says:
Please, pray tell, where did you get that little quote of faulty information? Oh, wait… let me guess. Someone’s blog who posted 1801(f)(3) but not 1801(f)(1), (2) or (4). Am I right, or am I right? I am guessing they missed out on 1801 (h) also, but that would be just darn presumptuous of me, wouldn’t it.
Actually, I’ve read much of the applicable parts of FISA, and between that act and the President’s constitutional right to issue executive orders, there is a hell of a lot of ambiguity about what international communications can or cannot be monitored and under what circumstances.
But you’re the one making an accusation, so instead of just suggesting that Hamilton is spinning in his grave and making vague allusions to constitutional technicalities, why don’t you tell us what law was broken.
Combat Boots says:
Finally
Everything that should ever be said about this bullsh*t taking place at the NYT.
MVRWC says it all
Jeremy H. Bol says:
Hiya Beth!
Glad to see you haven’t calmed down any!
Okay, for me this is a life experience matter. Have I read the FISA cover to cover? No. Why? I lived it for just about ten years. There were more important documents guiding my actions. Here we go:
1. It is not illegal in any way shape or form to listen in on a telephone conversation initiated from overseas to an American location including outlying provinces.
2. Outgoing calls can be monitored only if they are contacting entities that are currently being monitored.
3. a court order can be obtained “after the fact” in a target of opportunity in order to obtain all pertinent information from the call. (If I remember correctly, a judge was briefed on matters quarterly as to the goings on. Not once was a violation found.)
4. Ambiguity: There is no ambiguity. This document is only the tip of the iceburg when dealing with rules and regulations of spyin…er..covert observation. Unfortunately, most of these other documents are classified. I can’t really say much else.
Now the politics:
Why would someone sit on a news story like this for a YEAR if they weren’t waiting for a moment to stymie the momentum of Repupblicans? Is it just coincidence that a whole host of Democrats had “outrage” speeches ready to go even though they knew about this well in advance and did nothing? Lets see..the day after congressional voting in Iraq and the day of reaffermation of the Patriot Act. Beth, I believe you nailed this one.
dingo says:
Vinnie,
Thanks for the response. I have already seen the article, and it is right up to a point. But the author does not go far enough into the law. He completely skipped 1801(h). If a US citizen is being monitored, there must be an application for a warrant within 72 hours after the interception, or, the AG must deliver under seal, a certified file to the court that the suspect is being monitored without a warrant. Either way, the law is clear that the court must still be notified.
dingo says:
John,
The law that I am talking about is not vague. It is the constitution. As much as you might want them from time to time, the congress, nor the president can waive our bill of rights without judicial review. The founders did this for a reason. Now, think of the precedent that something like this sets. Do you really want a “liberal” president to decide by decree who is and who is not a danger to the state without judicial checks? Seriously, if you set this precedent now for the president to determine which of our constitutional rights are necessary, you can kiss the 2nd amendment goodbye. If the president can waive the 4th, he can waive the 2nd and the 1st also.
Even in this countries most trying times, President Lincoln was found to be acting unconstitutional in suspension of habius corpus. This country has weathered many storms, and we will weather this one as well. But, it has been the fact that this is a nation of laws based on the constitution that has not only helps us pull through, but also gives us the moral justification and wherewithal to do it. Knee jerk reactionism is as dangerous to our democracy as any terrorists plot. Many Americans have given, and continue to give life for liberty. Now, you want to give liberty for life. We can defeat the terrorist, and we can do it without losing the American ideal.
MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Democrats can’t think of anything to win says:
[...] Maybe it’s the BDS, maybe it’s denial, or maybe they just don’t realize that all that stuff they keep trying is rather pointless. It didn’t work in 2000, or 2002, or 2004, but, by golly, it’s gonna work in 2006! It’s the definition of insanity, Benjamin Franklin said: doing the same thing, over and over, hoping for a different result. [link] [TB URL] [...]