wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:43:21 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Cheney has been responsible for the deaths of thousand upon
thousands of American, Iraqi, and Afgani lives.

That would not ring so hollow if Obama would stop the wars


How's he supposed to do that? Snap his fingers? It takes a while. We're
certainly drawing down in Iraq. A decision is pending in Afg.

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
news
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:48:11 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 01:20:49 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

I can see you, but you cannot see me. Clear as Scotch tape!



http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/decla...aspx?GT1=43002


I think the reason Obama is stopping the "wiretap" investigations is
that there are valid national security issues at stake.
We stand around and bitch that Bush should have stopped Atta and the
boys and then criticize the way he could have stopped them.
NSA has always "wiretapped" and they always will. That is their job.
If they are not busting you for your affair with the girl in the
office or that bag of grass you arranged to pick up at the Tastee
Freeze, why do you care?
The reality is they were only looking at international calls to
countries with terrorist ties anyway, if you can believe the official
line. I have seen the bug Clinton put in every telephone office (at
least while it was in the box) and I bet they hear more than that if
they want. It is capable of sniffing every packet that goes in or
out..


Actually, they were listening to far more conversations and many of them
were inside the US. It's pretty well documented. I think Obama made a
mistake by stopping the investigations.


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?


No idea. I never heard it, and I think there's a diff. between "operatives"
(fairly nebulous) and the gov't.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"H the K" wrote in message
...
On 11/3/09 4:19 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:48:11 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 01:20:49 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

I can see you, but you cannot see me. Clear as Scotch tape!



http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/decla...aspx?GT1=43002


I think the reason Obama is stopping the "wiretap" investigations is
that there are valid national security issues at stake.
We stand around and bitch that Bush should have stopped Atta and the
boys and then criticize the way he could have stopped them.
NSA has always "wiretapped" and they always will. That is their job.
If they are not busting you for your affair with the girl in the
office or that bag of grass you arranged to pick up at the Tastee
Freeze, why do you care?
The reality is they were only looking at international calls to
countries with terrorist ties anyway, if you can believe the official
line. I have seen the bug Clinton put in every telephone office (at
least while it was in the box) and I bet they hear more than that if
they want. It is capable of sniffing every packet that goes in or
out..


Actually, they were listening to far more conversations and many of them
were inside the US. It's pretty well documented. I think Obama made a
mistake by stopping the investigations.


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.


Yours are really dull. :)


Well, so are mine.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On 11/3/09 4:32 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:43:21 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Cheney has been responsible for the deaths of thousand upon
thousands of American, Iraqi, and Afgani lives.

That would not ring so hollow if Obama would stop the wars


How's he supposed to do that? Snap his fingers? It takes a while. We're
certainly drawing down in Iraq. A decision is pending in Afg.



Considering what just happened in Afghanistan in regard to the election
re-run, I'm hoping Obama resists the pressure to send in 40,000 more
troops, or any number resembling 40,000. Afghanistan is not a nation, it
is a collection of territories run by warlords, with a central
government run by a crook. Pakistan is also a failed nation. The
geography in that part of the world is pretty impossible.

It's too bad Dubya blew our wad in Iraq. Had our military concentrated
on Afghanistan and the Taliban and al Qaeda these past eight years, we
might be in a much better position now.

What we have is the mess an idiot like Bush leaves behind for others to
clean up.

On Nov 3, 4:19*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:48:11 -0800, "nom=de=plume"





wrote:
wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 01:20:49 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

I can see you, but you cannot see me. *Clear as Scotch tape!

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/decla...9/10/26/barack....

I think the reason Obama is stopping the "wiretap" investigations is
that there are valid national security issues at stake.
We stand around and bitch that Bush should have stopped Atta and the
boys and then criticize the way he could have stopped them.
NSA has always "wiretapped" and they always will. That is their job.
If they are not busting you for your affair with the girl in the
office or that bag of grass you arranged to pick up at the Tastee
Freeze, why do you care?
The reality is they were only looking at international calls to
countries with terrorist ties anyway, if you can believe the official
line. I have seen the bug Clinton put in every telephone office (at
least while it was in the box) and I bet they hear more than that if
they want. It is capable of sniffing every packet that goes in or
out..

Actually, they were listening to far more conversations and many of them
were inside the US. It's pretty well documented. I think Obama made a
mistake by stopping the investigations.

Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cite?

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:43:21 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Keith Nuttle" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:48:11 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 01:20:49 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

I can see you, but you cannot see me. Clear as Scotch tape!



http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/decla...aspx?GT1=43002

I think the reason Obama is stopping the "wiretap" investigations is
that there are valid national security issues at stake.
We stand around and bitch that Bush should have stopped Atta and the
boys and then criticize the way he could have stopped them.
NSA has always "wiretapped" and they always will. That is their job.
If they are not busting you for your affair with the girl in the
office or that bag of grass you arranged to pick up at the Tastee
Freeze, why do you care?
The reality is they were only looking at international calls to
countries with terrorist ties anyway, if you can believe the official
line. I have seen the bug Clinton put in every telephone office (at
least while it was in the box) and I bet they hear more than that if
they want. It is capable of sniffing every packet that goes in or
out..

Actually, they were listening to far more conversations and many of them
were inside the US. It's pretty well documented. I think Obama made a
mistake by stopping the investigations.

Probably a matter of priority. If they stopped all investigations in
favor of focusing on putting Cheney away, that'd work for me.
You have misplaced priorities.

Cheney will only irritate you, terrorist will kill you.


Not really. Cheney has been responsible for the deaths of thousand upon
thousands of American, Iraqi, and Afgani lives.

Sure, Harry, along with almost all the Democrats in Congress.

lol lol

"H the K" wrote in message
...
On 11/3/09 4:32 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:43:21 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Cheney has been responsible for the deaths of thousand upon
thousands of American, Iraqi, and Afgani lives.

That would not ring so hollow if Obama would stop the wars


How's he supposed to do that? Snap his fingers? It takes a while. We're
certainly drawing down in Iraq. A decision is pending in Afg.



Considering what just happened in Afghanistan in regard to the election
re-run, I'm hoping Obama resists the pressure to send in 40,000 more
troops, or any number resembling 40,000. Afghanistan is not a nation, it
is a collection of territories run by warlords, with a central government
run by a crook. Pakistan is also a failed nation. The geography in that
part of the world is pretty impossible.

It's too bad Dubya blew our wad in Iraq. Had our military concentrated on
Afghanistan and the Taliban and al Qaeda these past eight years, we might
be in a much better position now.

What we have is the mess an idiot like Bush leaves behind for others to
clean up.


I don't know what the best course is. I think we should concentrate more on
drones and special operations, but I'm not an expert. Obama is listening to
lots of folks and I'm willing to give him the benefit of my doubt about the
best decision... at least for now.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:50:43 -0800, Loogypicker wrote:


Anyone who thinks nobody ever listens to their phone conversations is
an idiot.
BTW where was the outrage when democratic operatives were bugging Newt
Gingrich's cell phone?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cite?


http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...or_giving.html

On Nov 3, 10:34*am, Loogypicker wrote:

No, no. He's doing it because he's a liberal, hates his country and
doesn't want anything good. Just wait and see. The conservatives here
will go there!-

you forgot that he's an arab muslim socialist.

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 15:14:21 -0800 (PST), wf3h
wrote:

On Nov 3, 10:34*am, Loogypicker wrote:

No, no. He's doing it because he's a liberal, hates his country and
doesn't want anything good. Just wait and see. The conservatives here
will go there!-

you forgot that he's an arab muslim socialist.

In the words of our esteemed opposition... Kill him!!