Arkansas Blog

We have a president who feels that he is above the Constitution and every other law and a governor who also feels that he has some special status. BTW, did he fly commercial (of course not!). When he is willing to share the problem rather than his "share the pain", then we should believe him.

The Rovian tactic of creating a straw man and destroying him is getting old. There is no one who doesn't support the troops. We just don't care for the management that put them in the horrible place they are. (Stay the course is the definition of insanity-keep doing what you are doing and expecting a different result).

No one wants the snooping to stop. Just make the law conform to what you are doing and not say that you are King George and whatever you wants is right.

What are their plans with the 2008 election-the people don't know enough to not keep them on indefinately? The greater divider keeps dividing the people and then wonders why no one with a lick of sense trusts the government to actually speak the truth (the truth is what we say it is). Fortunately, the latest information came from the London police and Scotland Yard which I don't think is a branch of Bush world yet.

Anyone who votes for a candidate in November with an "R" after their name is just aiding and abetting the takeover of the government by big business and their puppets in Washington.

Am I missing something? I thought that our heros in Washington had squat to do with the latest apprehension. Instead, it was the far more civilized British, who have managed not to shred their civil rights nor to resort to torture as public policy who may have saved many American lives.

Wish they would have been in charge in the fall of 2001.

Well goodness, governor. As much as you've tried to prevent the press from prying into YOUR DAMN BUSINESS, your remarks are completely stupid. As always.

This post is completely plagiarized from a Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (he states it much better thatn I could)

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/

The White House is sure to follow suit any minute now, insinuating - or explicitly claiming - that this incident proves that Bush was right about the whole array of our country's foreign policy disputes, from Iraq to the current Israel-Lebanon war. This naked exploitation of terrorist threats for political gain occurs every time a new terrorist plot is revealed, no matter how serious or frivolous, no matter how advanced or preliminary, the plot might be. Each time a new plot is disclosed, administration officials and their followers immediately begin squeezing the emotions and fears generated by such events for every last drop of political gain they can manufacture.

But this effort is as incoherent as it is manipulative. Nobody doubts that there are Muslim extremists who would like to commit acts of violence against the U.S. and the West. No political disputes are premised on a conflict over whether terrorism exists or whether it ought to be taken seriously. As a result, events such as this that reveal what everyone already knows - that there is such a thing as Islamic extremists who want to commit terrorist acts against the U.S. - do nothing to inform or resolve political debates over the Bush administration's militaristic foreign policy or its radical lawlessness at home. Opposition to the war in Iraq, for instance, is not based upon the premise that there is no terrorist threat. It is based on the premise that that invasion undermines, rather than strengthens, our campaign to fight terrorism.

Invading and bombing Muslim countries do not prevent terrorism or diminish the likelihood that British-born Muslims will blow up American airplanes. If anything, warmongering in the Middle East exacerbates that risk by radicalizing more and more Muslims and increasing anti-U.S. resentment. And the more military and intelligence resources we are forced to pour into waging wars against countries that have not attacked us, the less able we are to track and combat al-Qaida and the other terrorist groups that actually seek to harm us. There are few things that have more enabled terrorism than turning Iraq into a chaotic caldron of anarchy and violence - exactly the environment in which al-Qaida thrives.

Nor is opposition to the president's lawbreaking somehow undermined when it is "revealed" that there are terrorists in the world who are trying to attack the U.S. Opposition to warrantless eavesdropping, for instance, is predicated on the fact that a constitutional republic that exists under the rule of law cannot tolerate a president who defies the law at will, and is further based on the indisputable fact that the president is fully able to eavesdrop on terrorists in compliance with the law, i.e., by obtaining warrants. Screeching about terrorist threats as though it justifies such illegal conduct is a complete non sequitur. Nobody opposes surveillance of terrorists.

But Bush followers who exploit terrorist threats for political gain and to gin up support for the president's policies are not pursuing rational arguments. They leap at the chance to manipulate terrorist stories because they want to ratchet up the fear levels, precisely because fear obviates rational analysis and increases the willingness of citizens to cede more power and control to the government, to place more blind faith in political officials in exchange for a feeling of protection.

I think what you have missed here, Warwick, is that no judge has ruled the NSA surveillance program to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

That is, unless, you have been recently appointed to the bench and are able to rule on such things.

And you call yourself a journalist?

ARKBLOG: You conveniently overlooked the part of the sentence that reads "federal officials willfully ignoring federal laws governing domestic surveillance." That is in reference to the Bush administration's admission they violated existing laws by not obtaining necessary warrants before instituting domestic wiretaps. As you note, the constitutional question has yet to be settled.

Someone help me with English law, but does the UK have a fourth amendment to violate?

Maybe what Huckabee means is that we should model our practices off of the British. Wait, I have it! We've done away with the Constitution....the Declaration is next!!! Damn these guys are good!

I hereby announce that I am against terrorism, that I am for spying on terrorists, and that I applaud any law enforcement agency that arrests a terrorist, today or in the future. Oh yeah, I'm for American troops too, wherever they are deployed and whether that deployment was justified or not.

Now. Can I be president?

As much as you've tried to prevent the press from prying into YOUR DAMN BUSINESS, your remarks are completely stupid. As always.

BINGO!

Additionally, Bush doesn't have the snooping powers granted by FISA because they never declared war.
They=U.S. Congress, only authorized military action. Thus FISA which allows snooping without immediate warrants (up to 7 days) is not in effect.
So let the dumbass Arkie whine his hinny off, he too will be held to the standard of law.
_

It appears the Lamont win brought out an Orange Alert. Coincidence? Hahahahahaha.

A "straightforward security incident"? Never miss an opportunity to downplay and minimize a plot that British officials described as "mass murder on an unimaginable scale".

The national Democratic Party is looking pretty foolish right now.

ARKBLOG: I meant it was "straightforward" in the sense that it was a security matter that did not have political implications one way or another. The law enforcement authorities should be congratulated for their investigative work. Period.

Instead, Huckabee wasted no time turning the incident into an indictment of the president's critics by accusing them of being against "intelligence gathering," which is ridiculous.

You know, the Republican contempt for the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments to the Constitution (I would like the Huckster to find the definition of this country being a Christian nation in the Constitution - we've been waiting!) bodes ill for the 2nd Amendment.

Just like kindergarten, the rules have to be the same for everyone. We're waiting for your explanation, soon-to-be ex-Governor.

"Am I missing something? I thought that our heros in Washington had squat to do with the latest apprehension. Instead, it was the far more civilized British, who have managed not to shred their civil rights nor to resort to torture as public policy who may have saved many American lives.Wish they would have been in charge in the fall of 2001.Posted by: Silverback66"

The British have NO RIGHTS!

Thank god the United States govt. is activelly, looking for these threats. And using any means necessary to find them including listening in on your phone calls. OMG they are listening to you talk to whoever and what ever.
So how has that affected you. Was the phone call used against you in a court of law? Any one Any one?

I know I know blah blah stoop to they're level we are the same as them blah blah.

ARKBLOG: Who ever said surveillance and intelligence gathering are "unnecessary," as Huckabee put it?

No one.

The British have NO RIGHTS!

Posted by: green bean

Funny that none of my Brit friends agree with you, and they don't have to spend half the time defending their rights that we do.

Ark, Blog
The Question is still open

ARKBLOG: So I am supposed to agree to the possible infringement upon my rights as a U.S. citizen because you say it hasn't been used against me ... yet?

No thanks.

"Funny that none of my Brit friends agree with you, and they don't have to spend half the time defending their rights that we do.Posted by: My2sense"

Okay what Civil Right do they have?

Well of course Huckabee is chiming right in, he's on the Karl Rove mailing list. Wherever he is today he got his instructions in the mail and he's crowing the neo-con Republican line. BOO BOO BOO BOO BOO America...run...hide....and if you vote Democrat, you're voting for Osama!

If you think the fear level is high now, just wait till September....October...and right up to election day. By god if you're scared now, you ain't seen nothing yet. Bush-Cheney-Blair are losing the War in Iraq and next they're going to lose the mid-term elections. If the Democrats only win back the House, it's going to be a hot time in the White House in 2007.

The neo-cons see the end is coming unless they can scare Ma and Pa Average Voter plumb to death. And Huckabee, while not a Decider, is definitely a fanner of the Republican flames of fear.

Be scared America! Be scared of everyone in the White House today!

Why do people hate the Bill of Rights? Why not just get rid of the entire thing?

Huckabee just read Lieberman's playbook

Seeking Retroactive protection = an admission of guilt

"WASHINGTON -- The Bush dministration drafted amendments to the War Crimes Act that would retroactively protect policy makers from possible criminal charges for authorizing any humiliating and degrading treatment of detainees, according to lawyers who have seen the proposal."

http://www.streetprophets.com/storyonly/2006/8/10/14653/8193

Here's what stands out to me: the British intelligence services arrested suspects who had recently traveled to Pakistan, many of whom were of Pakistani descent. Ties to Al Qaeda are suspected. Arrests have also been made in Pakistan.

This is the kind of investigative work I expected the U.S. would pursue - not a pre-emptive strike on Iraq.

I pinned a great deal of hope on the excellent services of British and European intelligence services to identify and investigate likely suspects and plots. In other words, I thought the U.S. would cooperate with other countries to detect them OVER THERE before they got OVER HERE.

Instead, it became the Bush administration's m.o. to twist these sensible ideas into "attacking them over there" before "we have to fight them here."

Today, Bush jumps over the steps of logic (again) to claim that the arrests in Britain justify the war in Iraq. The American people are slowly beginning to comprehend that "If A, then B then K" logic is nuts.

This is what we get for putting a stick in a hornets nest. The problems in the Middle East have been around for thousands of years and we are not going to solve them. Save our men and women in uniform, as well as our civilians throughout the world and get us out of the Middle East.

Just read a report from a European reporter stating that BushCo were informed about this alledged threat FRIDAY, updated twice over the weekend. But no, they would never play politics with this. Click over to AmericaBlog for the full article.

Isn't one of the goals of terrorists to instill TERROR into the hearts of people? It seems to me like the government has done an excellent of supporting this goal. They try to keep the American public scared and thinking that voting Republican will keep them safer. I believe we are not safer today than on September 10th, 2001.

But, I am no more scared of terrorism now than I was then. What I am scared of is the direction our administration is taking our country, especially when it comes to our international policies.

Terrorism is not a "war" that we can win. It has always existed and always will. The current administration uses that "war" to perform all sorts of illegal activities and say it's all in our best interest. I say balderdash.

Investigations are necessary, and there are laws and courts by which those in charge can get all the information they need. I think the tide is turning, and I hope the elections in November prove that.

"The British have NO RIGHTS!"--green bean.

So, you got an F on your history exam. To remedial history for you. You assignment is to read the history of the Glorious/Bloodless Revolution of 1688 and to read their Bill of Rights.

The American people are slowly beginning to comprehend that "If A, then B then K" logic is nuts.
Posted by: mag

Mag,
Everything in your post showed a good deal of insight and I agree completely. But that last sentence...I'm just not sure that's true. I hope so, but when twice as many believe in Iraqi WMD now, compared to a year ago, I have to put my chips on the utter ignorance and gullibility of our countrymen.

Sad, but, I fear, quite true.

"This is what we get for putting a stick in a hornets nest. "

Wow, it took 20 posts for the Neville-Chamberlin-Betty-Bumpers-unilateral-disamament nuts to start blaming the US for this attack. WW II wasn't our fault, the Soviet Union wasn't our fault, and al Qaida isn't our fault. These people are evil and you can resist or submit. Thankfully a majority of Americans have always chosen to resist.

"Instead, it became the Bush administration's m.o. to twist these sensible ideas into "attacking them over there" before "we have to fight them here." "

Can anyone say "Vietnam?" Does anyone remember?

"These people are evil and you can resist or submit. Thankfully a majority of Americans have always chosen to resist."

At least that's what Cheney-Bush is leading them to believe. How do you know any of your statement is true? What real basis do you have for making those assumptions?
Bill Maher did the Leno show this week. He commented that the numbers of concealed weapons getting thru airport security is the same as it was Jan 2002. Additionally Cheney-Bush is spending militarily just the same as if we were preparing for a major land war while busy crippling the CIA because many of them didn't go along with C-B's original con-game for taking Iraq's oil. Our Southern , Northern, and Western borders are just as insecure now as they were
Jan 2001.

Do I think the Islamics are mostly nuts? YES
Do I think Cheney-Bush are mostly theives? YES
Unless you come up with a viable genocide plan to eliminate 1.5 billion Islamics then you better review and understand our treatment of Islamics for the last 70 years. We've been bombing them for over 50 years and assasinating their leaders, sabotaging their elections, etc which has become the U.S. way of doing empire.

It took U.S. "interests" about 50 years to turn just about every nation in So.America against us.
It will be many decades before they forget that their own torture squads were trained at U.S. Army camps.
Gitmo is making sure every 5 year old in MidEast will recoil at the mention of U.S. for the coming 50 years. So the hornet's nest was poked a long time ago. But don't bother yourself wth attempting to learn because a good dose of Christain hatred is much easier to understand and exercise.
It's about the oil stupid.

al Qaida isn't our fault.
Posted by: hornet's nest my a$$

You're right, al Qaida is not our fault. Its formation had nothing to do with us. They formed to try and take control of Saudi Arabia and spread their own brand of Islam across that part of the world. We messed with their nest.

But that doesn't mean it's wrong to say we stuck a stick into that hornets nest. The reason we're involved with their internal war for control of Islam is that we have had a military presence in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries.

If we'd leave the hornets alone, they'd leave us alone.

That being said, if they're left alone I'd hate to see their hard-line brand of Islam spreading beyond the Middle East and, of course, we need to get the world off oil dependence, both so don't have to associate with them over there, and also to cut off their money supply. All that oil money going into al Qaida coffers is not a happy thought.

Some types of intelligence gathering are impossible to do when you require a warrant. Warrants are issued against a person or persons. The methods that that the NSA are using involve the filtering of key words. It is not directed at a specific person or call but scans for these key words among millions of calls.

It was an embedded operative that was key here.

We stayed out of WWII and you know what that got us---Pearl Harbor. You must recognize that we have to meet this threat head on or we will cease to exist as a civilization. If you don't recognize that fact, we in the west are all doomed. Maybe the western civilization as it has become today should cease to exist. We will find that out.

I like John Stewart's take...'these' terrorists may have been of Pakistani descent but they were British citizens so...evidently Democracy isn't the cure to all the world's woes and we must now invade England.

If we're 'at war with Islamic Fascists' (aka evil people) how/when will this war end? I'm not a historical scholar but I seem to remember that there have always been evil people...and there have always been struggles (violent differences) between religions (especially between Christians, Jews and Muslims.

I'm beginning to think that monkeyboy's gang is using 9/11 to push its world view on the rest of us and strip us of enough Civil Liberties to handicap any attempt to check their Crusade. I don't believe a word that comes out of monkeyboy's lying mouth.

...at least Iraq is a successful, shining example of American foresight, caring and Democracy.

If we'd leave the hornets alone, they'd leave us alone.

Spirit, have you considered starting a new version of the 'America First Committee'? President Ford was one of their charter members back in the late 30s so he could give you some guidance. Unfortunately, they disbanded in December of 1941. I'm sure if we just stick our heads in a hole all will blow away. Islamic fascists are really peace loving folks and don't won't war with us.

Just another sleasy GOP whore who can read the talking points.
Do you think al Quada could sneak onto the State Police plane???

"You know, the Republican contempt for the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments to the Constitution (I would like the Huckster to find the definition of this country being a Christian nation in the Constitution - we've been waiting!) bodes ill for the 2nd Amendment. "

I'll show it to you in the Arkansas constitution smartass:

Constitution Of The State Of Arkansas Of 1874.

Article 19.
Miscellaneous Provisions.

§ 1. Atheists disqualified from holding office or testifying as witness.

No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.

"It should give some pause to the President's most vocal critics who have said this is unnecessary, to engage in surveillance and to try to really do a thorough job of intelligence gathering. Because clearly, intelligence gathering is exactly what gave the authorities the opportunity to apprehend these people before they were able to carry out their intentions," he said in a phone interview. "

Say, what? It was the Brits who busted this case. Good ole fashioned "Scotland Yard" with shades of Sherlock Holmes. They infiltated the group and waited until the right time to "bust" them. We have not yet heard from the recovered laptops and cell phones. Good word by our UK alies.

The Brits admitted that the US provided intelligence for this operation.

Is this the same British/American Intelligence crews that gave the world the Iraq WMD intelligence or did both agencies clean house?

Anonymous, who cites the Arkansas Constitution to support the notion that this is a "Christian nation," should read the same constitution better. Its declaration of rights article says there shall be no religious test to vote or hold office or to testify under oath. Moreover, the provisions he cited do not specify Christianity. Nearly all religions, including all the Muslim faiths, hold allegiance to a god, a supreme being of some nomenclature. Anyway, the provisions he cites conflict with the Arkansas Declaration of Rights and the U.S. Constitution.

If this were truly a Christian nation, we wouldn't be occupying Iraq, executing criminals, persecuting immigrants, tying life and death health care to one's income, and on and on and on.

If you don't have the works, then you don't have faith. You may say you believe in Jesus and walk his path, but if your actions say otherwise then I question if you are really saved or born again.

As a nation, we are about as far from Christianity as Muslims.

I like the hornet's nest analogy, it's right on the mark. Notice not a soul on earth has ever opposed the US invasion of Afghanistan? Though it's done us little good, no one protests that move, and I might say no one gives any thought to Afghanistan these days either. Are we still there and how is that working out for us? My heroin bill is half what it used to be.

But every President and Congress since the beginning of time has pretended the Middle East doesn't exist, just like that crazy old aunt no one in your family talks about, or your cousin, the rapist.

As dull as Millard Fillmore was, he left the Middle East alone. As clueless as Warren G. Harding was, he left the Middle East alone. Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, all left it alone....and then we come to the President who has been relegated to simpley a sperm donor, George H. W. Bush. He dipped his toe in the Middle East and then got out fast.

While I learned a few things from my father, George "Haditha" Bush did not. And now we're mired in a war we cannot win, growing more enemies everyday than we can kill and watching the Middle East ignite into what could be WWIII. Gee...thanks a lot to the Bush family for all the bounty we are about to receive.

Love your kids now, be extra nice to them, tell them that you love them and are proud of them. Next year you may be pulling bits of them out of the bomb crater you once called home now that the hornets are screaming mad.

I don't think anyone who sees the threat is going to be swayed by someone who is the winner of the 'Neville Chamberlain' award. Do nothing and they will be coming for us after they have finished off the IDF. I would include europe but they will do what they always do---capitulate. The Brits will probably put up a fight when they are pushed to the wall. However, the best strategy for the jihadists would be to pick us off one at a time. We will probably the last on the list.

Jefferson was told to leave the Barbarry Pirates alone(sink hole) and just pay the ransom. He decided that paying wasn't a good option and letting them shanghai our sailors wasn't either so he built a navy and sent them and the marine corps. We 'persuaded' them at the point of a marine bayonet and a US Navy Man-o-war not to mess with us. 'Nuff' said.

Jefferson was told to leave the Barbarry Pirates alone(sink hole) and just pay the ransom. He decided that paying wasn't a good option...

You pick your battles. Barbary Pirates we can handle. The Middle East? Jefferson was too smart to stir them up.

The 'barbarry pirates' was just a euphemism for muslims. At least, that is how Jefferson viewed it.

The 'barbarry pirates' was just a euphemism for muslims

Okay, let's talk history. They were indeed pirates, sailing ships out of Tunis, Tripoli (hence "the shores of Tripoli" in the Marine Hymn), Algiers and ports in Morocco. They were Muslims a long way from the Middle East. Jefferson didn't see the action as taking on Muslims. He saw it as taking on pirates.

The US Navy took them on starting in 1801 but couldn't finally defeat the pirates on the water until 1815.

Jefferson's navy was finally able to handle Libya's boats, but they had more sense than to wade ashore and try to occupy Baghdad.

"So, you got an F on your history exam. To remedial history for you. You assignment is to read the history of the Glorious/Bloodless Revolution of 1688 and to read their Bill of Rights.Posted by: Cato"

So you don't know the difference...civil rights...civil liberties... Bill Of Rights... the British...the U.S.
'Lord' Rules, you have Rights...when I agree to let you have them.

As dull as Millard Fillmore was, he left the Middle East alone. As clueless as Warren G. Harding was, he left the Middle East alone. Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, all left it alone..

Oh I wish it were true DBI. We propped up Saddam, yippers our own CIA helped him ascend to Ruler n' Cheif.
Who was president when a few leaders were assasinated or elections in Saudi Arabia were jammed? They are in your list.

Can you imagine how a 65 yr old Iraqi must view the U.S. if the Iraqi happens to know the entire story and since it's mostly an oral culture many of them do. We set him up , arm him to the nth degree while he uses our arms against his own people, we invade Iraq once to get them out of Kuwait (after Bush Sr gave them the go ahead to recapture their territory), then we go in a blow the place to pieces and occupy their oil , banks, media.

What's next? Giving the country to India in exchange for a cheap labor resource contract?