Bush Knew the Patriot Act Would be a Political Trap for All Future Politicians
June 17, 2013 By Allen Clifton
...Imagine for a moment if most Democrats in Congress voted against, or President Obama vetoed, the Patriot Act this past January - then the Boston Marathon bombings occurred a couple of months later...
So what’s a politician to do - especially a president? Sure, someone on a small scale like Rand Paul can stand against the bill because he only requires that his specific state vote for him, not the entire country. But on a national scale, judged by everyone, that’s a different game altogether.
It also exposes some contradiction within the liberal community. Many claim to trust and support the president, then turn on him when it comes to issues like the Patriot Act.
The way I look at it is this. In 2008 he ran on the promise of more transparency in matters of national security. Then he took office. His views since have moved away from that and more towards secrecy. Perhaps once he became president, and learned more about what’s really gone on, he realized his naive view from the outside wasn’t practical and there were threats he never knew existed...
A lot more at link:
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/bush-knew-the-patriot-act-would-be-a-political-trap-for-all-future-politicians/
Remembering election night. The former POTUS always calls the next one to tell them what's up, or so it's said. The look on Obama's face was as if the entire weight of the world had been placed on his shoulders.
PLEASE NOTE:
This is the Barack Obama GROUP, a SAFE HAVEN for supporters of Barack Obama.
It is NOT a FORUM.
Really, it isn't.
If you plan to go farther, kindly read the SOP and:
Beeehaaave yourselves, beeehaaave yourselves, beeehaaave yourselves.
(Gratuitous mocking of a guy whose name will not be mentioned here. And no poll this time, sorry.)
= new reply since forum marked as read
Otherwise............................................................. 
From your link..
Where in his leaks was anything positive? You mean to tell me everything he saw was bad? I highly doubt that.
So what’s the answer? The way I look at it is this…
Terrorist attacks are going to happen with or without the Patriot Act. You’re gullible if you believe it can stop every single one but you’re just as gullible if you believe it hasn’t prevented any.
The world did fall on President Obama's shoulders that night. He has carried it for years now. He never bows under the pressure. He stays the course.
Thank you freshwest, that article was a great find.
PS... that picture you posted was of his returning to the Whitehouse after Sandy Hook.
[url=http://postimage.org/][img]
[/img][/url]
Why doesn't Rand Paul threaten to shut down the government over the Patriot Act, when he's threatening to do it over healthcare?
Why has he attached his personhood bills to deny women 4th amendment rights and support GOP rape of women with objects for theocrats?
Snowden supported the Patriot Act and the Iraq War and shooting all whistleblowers when it gave him a job. No, he didn't have an epiphany and doesn't care about people's rights. After all, he's called for taking the safety net from millions.
But I'm really tired of listening to the cult. Let's talk reality and change, and not get diverted. That is all that this has been, 'ripping the Democratic Party to shreds' until their hero Rand takes over.
Then we will never see this kind of liberal again:
There is only one term there some care about, 'civil liberties' for the 1% media gods. They didn't get worked up about the rest of us losing our right to privacy of our own bodies while their heroes supported taking them away from women, and don't get excited about the right to vote or any of that piddly stuff.
If they cared, they'd be celebrating what this president has done to stop their heroes denying half the population rights NOW.
However, you are right. The cries and tears and hair on fire rants over NSA are overdone. The issue is being blasted loudly and angrily here and by the Pauls of the world. Where were they when VAWA was the topic, where were they? They were AWOL!
You are correct, half the population is female. Did they stand for us, did they fight for us. No they were silent. As for the GOP they have tried everything to suppress us, deny us and take our civil liberties away. The outrage was silence.
Beautiful quote by JFK, thank you~
“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.”
John F. Kennedy, Profiles in Courage
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/90682-if-by-a-liberal-they-mean-someone-who-looks-ahead
Now that is a Profile in Courage!
freshwest.
Last edited Sun Aug 25, 2013, 09:02 PM - Edit history (2)
...The treaty sharing info goes back to WW2.The entire Anglosphere has been sharing a lot of information offically on the same basis it did during that war. Below is a post by Devon Rex, but most of us knew this for years, just not this well laid out:
I'll spell it out: UKUSA. It's the SIGINT Intelligence Agreement. BRUSA.
Might as well be signed in blood.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement
United Kingdom – United States of America Agreement (UKUSA, /juːkuːˈsɑː/ ew-koo-sah) is a multilateral agreement for cooperation in signals intelligence between the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The alliance of intelligence operations is also known as Five Eyes (FVEY). It was first signed in March 1946 by the United Kingdom and the United States and later extended to encompass the three Commonwealth realms of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The UKUSA Agreement was a follow-up of the 1943 BRUSA Agreement, the World War II agreement on cooperation over intelligence matters. This was a secret treaty, allegedly so secret that it was kept secret from the Australian Prime Ministers until 1973.
The agreement established an alliance of five English-speaking countries for the purpose of sharing intelligence, especially signals intelligence. It formalized the intelligence sharing agreement in the Atlantic Charter, signed in 1941, before the entry of the U.S. into the conflict.
History
The agreement originated from a ten-page British–U.S. Communication Intelligence Agreement, also known as BRUSA, that connected the signal intercept networks of the U.K. Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) at the beginning of the Cold War. The document was signed on March 5, 1946 by Colonel Patrick Marr-Johnson for the U.K.'s London Signals Intelligence Board and Lieutenant General Hoyt Vandenberg for the U.S. State–Army–Navy Communication Intelligence Board. Although the original agreement states that the exchange would not be "prejudicial to national interests", the United States often blocked information sharing from Commonwealth countries. The full text of the agreement was released to the public on June 25, 2010.
Under the agreement, the GCHQ and the NSA shared intelligence on the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and several eastern European countries (known as Exotics). The network was expanded in the 1960s into the Echelon collection and analysis network.
In July 2013, as part of the 2013 Edward Snowden revelations, it emerged that the NSA is paying GCHQ for its services, with at least £100 million of payments made between 2010–13.
Collection mechanisms
The UKUSA alliance is often associated with the ECHELON system; however, processed intelligence is reliant on multiple sources of information and the intelligence shared is not restricted to signals intelligence.
The "Five Eyes" in question are –
USA – National Security Agency
United Kingdom – Government Communications Headquarters
Canada – Communications Security Establishment
Australia – Defence Signals Directorate
New Zealand – Government Communications Security Bureau
Global coverage
Each member of the UKUSA alliance is officially assigned lead responsibility for intelligence collection and analysis in different parts of the globe.
Australia
Australia hunts for communications originating in Indochina, Indonesia, and southern China.
Canada
Formerly the northern portions of the former Soviet Union and conducting sweeps of all communications traffic that could be picked up from embassies around the world. In the post-Cold War era, a greater emphasis has been placed on monitoring satellite, radio and cellphone traffic originating from Central and South America, primarily in an effort to track drugs and non-aligned paramilitary groups in the region.
New Zealand
The Waihopai Valley Facility—base of the New Zealand branch of the ECHELON Program.
New Zealand is responsible for the western Pacific. Listening posts in the South Island at Waihopai Valley just south-west of Blenheim, and on the North Island at Tangimoana. The Anti-Bases Campaign holds regular protests in order to have the listening posts closed down.
United Kingdom
Europe, Africa, and European Russia.
United States
Monitors most of Latin America, Asia, Asiatic Russia, and northern China.
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023492002#post7
Devon Rex writes, 'Might as well be signed in blood.' That is true. Millions of people died in that war and that's still taken seriously. True, it was before most of us were born but it formed the world we live in.
It's NOT a secret and was NOT forced, it was for mutual protection in a world being overrun by fascists, who were NOT kidding around one damned bit. And they still aren't, but are a lot slicker now. Thom Hartmann OP...
If a new generation wants to break the ties of the USA to the rest of the Anglosphere, just go for it. Personally, as I see things, the USA has no real cultural identity and is more like a crossroads. But that's for a longer discussion on another day.
The information discussed here is the legal property of all of those nations, and the agreement was literally written in the blood of millions of combatants and civilians. It was a period of total warfare before the Gevena accords as they stand now and the Nuremberg trials. And those nations didn't want to see it happen again, thus the firm support from treaty partners, both the government and many of the people who live within those nations.
That blood has long since dried for some and may be forgotten, but for others, it has meaning that guides how they lived their lives.
I don't see anyone offering a solution in real life terms, which is not more media madness. It would require legislation restricting these governments from taking private information as they have in Europe. We used to pass such legislation in the progressive era of the 1970's. That is the worry individually. What goes on between those governments is not the same.
There is no law saying it is proper to take information from any of the partners. Which is what Snowden did, at the bidding of his in the Paul camp, Greenwalk, or Poitras, we don't know which. It appears Assange is late to this particular media gala being presented.
The treaty partners all work together as a unit, as they are bound by law to do. I find the ignorance of history and civics to be bad for all of us. And I hear no calls to revoke the treaty which was signed to make it Britain's business many years ago.
We dream of a world without any enemies and many of us are in vigorous debate over who the enemy du jour is as we see things today. Frankly, I don't have any enemies abroad.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023501805#post108
^Edited DR's original.^
The Miranda detention was not persecution. As if you can persecute a person waving a gun in your face or shouting fire in a theater, which is exactly what Greenwald did, in the most public way he possibly could find.
He was orchestrating a play for the media stage. And he supplied the actor his role, wrote the script and then advertised it in the NYT, of all places. Just to be sure to get a big audience. Who does Greenwald love? The Koch brothers, as shown in the piece in the Exile who were former partners and the political views of all three of G.A.S.
Oath to who? A private contractor? Ron Paul? Who's kidding who?
This is the work of Koch and Christian Nation groups like the Oath Keepers, Tenthers and Second Amendment Solution groups who plot armed revolt.
Oh, yeah, nice company there. so oppressed he is, doing the work of the 1%. But the poor and oppressed of the world don't have the money to put out all those ads there. Think about it.
I almost wonder if the UK was in on the scam, and have decided to play the villain for him while they do some skullduggery as the internet burns with outrage over this staged event.
If he hadn't announced in advance what was going on to the world and the fabled Police State© had just grabbed him without prior notice, it would only prove a guy hanging with a guy who has repeatedly bragged and threatened to do harm by releasing information, was asked about it.
Big Brother© was not needed, as the event was promoted. If the UK had stood by to let him pass and allowed information to be passed than resulted in a bombing later in London, the same groups would scream False Flag© at the British.
And the party in power in the UK would be out of office immediately. That's where all of this stuff gets murky and can be abused easily. It was in one thread how the Bankster© meme was used to get public approval on the purported release of terrible information abou them. It didn't happen, but their stocks went down while some other people's stocks went up, and that was why the banks cut them off. I'm amazed at times that the media conspiracy gods can get away with theirlittle con jobs, gold, etc.
It's SOP for governments to snoop on others, since 'intelligence' is the practice of prophecy with a slightly better track record than reading sheep entrails. But it could be they are really doing a good job. Telling the future won't work too well, since the human mind is capable of an infinite variety of tricks.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023505302#post43