Obama's Admin exceeding the Bush Admin in blocking citizen's ability to sue the gov't?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:57 AM GMT
    Obama's admin is seeking to prevent lawsuits to obtain information about the spying activities of the Bush Admin.

    The story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#30096316

    Interview with Jonathan Turney, constitutional law professor, on this story:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#30096358

    This doesnt sound good!!! ... icon_evil.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 5:18 PM GMT
    Tell me if I am wrong, but from what I gathered they're only seeking to block the lawsuits pertaining to wiretaps. I'm not saying that's good, but I don't think it's as huge of a problem as, say, making the federal government immune to any and all lawsuits.

    With that said, I understand the reason they would want to do this (apparently to keep the intelligence agency cooperative), but this seems a little too similar to when we "temporarily gave up our rights" to find terrorists after 9/11 (Patriot Act? Excuse my limited info, I only just started keeping tabs on the news). I hope that if this actually happens, that this isn;t a slippery slope into immunizing the government from lawsuits on other fronts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 5:30 PM GMT
    I'll expect this will be just something the ACLU will take up, hopefully to the Supreme Court. Er, maybe that won't work out so well either.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 8:53 PM GMT
    I'm glad someone has finally brought this up.

    This marks a continuity of policy in spying and illegal wiretapping.

    This, contrary to popular belief, did NOT start with Bush. Just look at the Echelon program, which was an extensive spying program operated jointly by the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, and was exposed in the late 1990s:
    http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/docs/000219-echelon.htm
    http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/066l-111399-idx.htm
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT2001-0264+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN


    In terms of Bush, he obviously expanded the program. The NSA has secret rooms in AT&T buildings where they monitor all internet traffic.

    Watch the Olbermann interview with an AT&T whistleblower:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1036636588261025844

    The whistleblower has said he felt as if he was asked to plug in the "Big Brother machine" and that the Telecommunications Immunity Bill creates the "infrastructure for a police state":
    http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/att-whistleblow.html

    The Obama Department of Justice is continuing spying and the protection of the telecommunications companies in colluding the the NSA and other intelligence agencies in illegal wiretapping:
    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/06/obama/index.html
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123638765474658467.html

    So much for "change".


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 9:03 PM GMT
    Caslon10000 saidObama's admin is seeking to prevent lawsuits to obtain information about the spying activities of the Bush Admin.


    This doesnt sound good!!! ... icon_evil.gif


    I wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 9:21 PM GMT
    Blackguy4you said
    Caslon10000 saidObama's admin is seeking to prevent lawsuits to obtain information about the spying activities of the Bush Admin.


    This doesnt sound good!!! ... icon_evil.gif


    I wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif


    In other words, no matter what he does, It's all good, because it's Obama doing it?

    As a history student, i have to say, blind faith in political leaders terrifies me, because EVERY case of this happening in history never ends well.

    As a student of political economy, I have to say, Obama is continuing with the same global trends that are underway (this is not about Bush vs. Obama - they are both puppets, this is about the real powers behind political leaders).

    It is "change" in strategy, not goals.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 9:30 PM GMT
    Blackguy4you saidI wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif

    Oh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.
  • UncleverName

    Posts: 741

    Apr 08, 2009 9:57 PM GMT
    Caslon10000 saidOh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.


    Seems similar to what I saw in Frost V. Nixon. Didn't Nixon's successor (Ford?) grant Nixon complete immunity? From a president's perspective, it makes sense that you'd want to protect your successor; you're probably going to make some unpopular (or outright illegal) decisions during your own term, and would have to hope that your successor's would grant you the same immunity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:02 PM GMT
    Caslon10000 said
    Blackguy4you saidI wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif

    Oh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.


    I agree it is something to be investigated. But I do recall seeing an interview with O where he said that there were more important things on the agenda and he prefers to look forward rather than back
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:06 PM GMT
    jprichva said
    Caslon10000 said And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.

    I read yesterday that Republican senators are threatening to filibuster every one of O's remaining sub-cabinet nominations if any of these torture memos are released.

    The threat needs to be more widely publicized, and the memos need to go online NAO.


    wait - isn't that what we call extortionicon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:11 PM GMT
    UncleverName said
    Caslon10000 saidOh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.


    Seems similar to what I saw in Frost V. Nixon. Didn't Nixon's successor (Ford?) grant Nixon complete immunity? From a president's perspective, it makes sense that you'd want to protect your successor; you're probably going to make some unpopular (or outright illegal) decisions during your own term, and would have to hope that your successor's would grant you the same immunity.

    I think it is more due to the distraction that such an investigation would cause that a president doesnt want while he is trying to push his programs....which is hard enough.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:11 PM GMT
    Blackguy4you said
    Caslon10000 said
    Blackguy4you saidI wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif

    Oh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.


    I agree it is something to be investigated. But I do recall seeing an interview with O where he said that there were more important things on the agenda and he prefers to look forward rather than back


    I know I will likely get my head bitten off for saying so, given the amount of Obama supporters, but:

    That's called political rhetoric. It is a great way to say he is letting Bush & Co. scott free for all their heinous crimes, and continuing with his own agenda.

    It's called maintaining the status quo. The US doesnt investigate its own crimes, they protect and cover up their crimes and criminals.

    "Moving forward" is just another way of saying, "forget the past".

    Yet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    Obama's statement seems to fly in the face of the entire discipline of history... we study history so that we may not repeat it, and so that we can understand how we got to the present.

    To refuse investigating ALL Bush crimes is to not study (or cover up and ignore/hide) how we got to where we are, and thus, we cannot logically move forward in a rational manner.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:15 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidYet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    ...especially since foreign countries are likely to do it for us....note the spanish courts ruling to proceed in investigating Bush and co. If the US wants to stay at the head of its "empire" it has to be seen as a moral leader.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:26 PM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    Blackguy4you said
    Caslon10000 said
    Blackguy4you saidI wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif

    Oh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.


    I agree it is something to be investigated. But I do recall seeing an interview with O where he said that there were more important things on the agenda and he prefers to look forward rather than back


    I know I will likely get my head bitten off for saying so, given the amount of Obama supporters, but:

    That's called political rhetoric. It is a great way to say he is letting Bush & Co. scott free for all their heinous crimes, and continuing with his own agenda.

    It's called maintaining the status quo. The US doesnt investigate its own crimes, they protect and cover up their crimes and criminals.

    "Moving forward" is just another way of saying, "forget the past".

    Yet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    Obama's statement seems to fly in the face of the entire discipline of history... we study history so that we may not repeat it, and so that we can understand how we got to the present.

    To refuse investigating ALL Bush crimes is to not study (or cover up and ignore/hide) how we got to where we are, and thus, we cannot logically move forward in a rational manner.




    There are lots of stuff that we do not care to "look back on" coz they are not palatable. This would just be another one of those things
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:34 PM GMT
    Caslon10000 said
    MeOhMy saidYet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    ...especially since foreign countries are likely to do it for us....note the spanish courts ruling to proceed in investigating Bush and co. If the US wants to stay at the head of its "empire" it has to be seen as a moral leader.


    So that means.... NOT persecuting its political criminals? I'm not sure I follow your logic.

    But then again, are you advocating FOR empire? And by the way, the US empire has hardly been a moral leader from its existence.

    Also... the US empire is in decline. It is crumbling and is on the verge of collapse. However, this holds massive ramifications:

    - the dollar will end as reserve currency
    - historically, any time there has been a phase of empires or hegemons in decline, it is marked by massive international violence and war
    - a New World Order is being shaped to take the place of the US empire's hegemony over the global political economy

    Obama is simply leading the US into this new world order, and playing his part in gathering political and popular support for this agenda.

    It is just interesting that with the decline of the US empire, it is experiencing a brief expansion - into Pakistan, NATO expansion into central Europe, the newly created AFRICOM command, operations in Sri Lanka, expansion into Afghanistan, maintenance of the Iraqi colony, continuation of the ballistic missile program aiming missiles at Russia to "protect Europe from Iran" (laughable).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:38 PM GMT
    Blackguy4you said
    MeOhMy said
    Blackguy4you said
    Caslon10000 said
    Blackguy4you saidI wouldn't say exceeding. but damn!!!!! Mr. O has done more in a several months than bush did in several years. see no matter which way you cut it. President O will be brilliant at what he doesicon_razz.gificon_evil.gificon_biggrin.gif

    Oh I am a great supporter of President O. But I am alarmed by these reports. It is hard for a bureaucracy to give up powers.

    And I am afraid that O doesnt want to get into investigating Bush and company's dirty deeds, while doing the rest of his agenda. I think it is important to investigate what Bush and co. did.


    I agree it is something to be investigated. But I do recall seeing an interview with O where he said that there were more important things on the agenda and he prefers to look forward rather than back


    I know I will likely get my head bitten off for saying so, given the amount of Obama supporters, but:

    That's called political rhetoric. It is a great way to say he is letting Bush & Co. scott free for all their heinous crimes, and continuing with his own agenda.

    It's called maintaining the status quo. The US doesnt investigate its own crimes, they protect and cover up their crimes and criminals.

    "Moving forward" is just another way of saying, "forget the past".

    Yet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    Obama's statement seems to fly in the face of the entire discipline of history... we study history so that we may not repeat it, and so that we can understand how we got to the present.

    To refuse investigating ALL Bush crimes is to not study (or cover up and ignore/hide) how we got to where we are, and thus, we cannot logically move forward in a rational manner.




    There are lots of stuff that we do not care to "look back on" coz they are not palatable. This would just be another one of those things


    Not palatable??? You don't investigate something because it isn't palatable??? I'm sorry... but that statement... has me without words.

    Most of history is unpalatable... so I guess that means we should just ignore it, because it is offensive to our cozy little bubble?? I'm sorry if I am coming off as rude, but... I just can't imagine that being an excuse to NOT investigate the past.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:39 PM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    Caslon10000 said
    MeOhMy saidYet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    ...especially since foreign countries are likely to do it for us....note the spanish courts ruling to proceed in investigating Bush and co. If the US wants to stay at the head of its "empire" it has to be seen as a moral leader.


    So that means.... NOT persecuting its political criminals? I'm not sure I follow your logic.

    No. Sorry for not being clear. I am agreeing with you. The actions of the Bush admin needs to be investigated ...for just the reasons you say....to maintain our moral leadership in the world ...and because, as I was trying to say, the foreigners are going to investigate this and hold us accountable.



    Please note that I edited out material from the quote that was not necessary to my response so I would not be in violation of Calson's Forum Fail Law #3.........hint, hint, you two!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:40 PM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    Caslon10000 said
    MeOhMy saidYet, if you were really to "move forward" the past is absolutely essential in reviewing, specifically in relation to crimes committed by Bush & Co., of which almost every member of the previous administration was involved in some criminal activity, and the key players should face new Nuremberg trials, but oh, no, let's just forget about that and move on. Not punishing criminals sends a great message about abusing political power - that you can get away with it.

    ...especially since foreign countries are likely to do it for us....note the spanish courts ruling to proceed in investigating Bush and co. If the US wants to stay at the head of its "empire" it has to be seen as a moral leader.


    So that means.... NOT persecuting its political criminals? I'm not sure I follow your logic.

    But then again, are you advocating FOR empire? And by the way, the US empire has hardly been a moral leader from its existence.

    Also... the US empire is in decline. It is crumbling and is on the verge of collapse. However, this holds massive ramifications:

    - the dollar will end as reserve currency
    - historically, any time there has been a phase of empires or hegemons in decline, it is marked by massive international violence and war
    - a New World Order is being shaped to take the place of the US empire's hegemony over the global political economy

    Obama is simply leading the US into this new world order, and playing his part in gathering political and popular support for this agenda.

    It is just interesting that with the decline of the US empire, it is experiencing a brief expansion - into Pakistan, NATO expansion into central Europe, the newly created AFRICOM command, operations in Sri Lanka, expansion into Afghanistan, maintenance of the Iraqi colony, continuation of the ballistic missile program aiming missiles at Russia to "protect Europe from Iran" (laughable).



    Well China is already advocating for a new world currency other than the $$ and since they already own us....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:44 PM GMT
    Yes, and the G20 has taken the moves to establishing the creating of a global currency under the auspices of the IMF Special Drawing RIghts (SDRs) acting as a global reserve currency.

    The global currency has long been in the plans and is now coming to fruition. We are also seeing the emergence of a global central bank to act as a global lender of last resort, and also issuer of the new global currency. Currently, most discussion points to the IMF as playing this role, however, there has been some discussion of bringing the BIS in to play this part. Jeffrey Garten has continuously, since 1998, been writing about and advocating for a global central bank, now it looks as if his hopes are being realized.

    Interesting times we are in, indeed.

    I just wished the "solutions" we are being offered weren't worse than the actual problems.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 10:50 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidYes, and the G20 has taken the moves to establishing the creating of a global currency under the auspices of the IMF Special Drawing RIghts (SDRs) acting as a global reserve currency.

    The global currency has long been in the plans and is now coming to fruition. We are also seeing the emergence of a global central bank to act as a global lender of last resort, and also issuer of the new global currency. Currently, most discussion points to the IMF as playing this role, however, there has been some discussion of bringing the BIS in to play this part. Jeffrey Garten has continuously, since 1998, been writing about and advocating for a global central bank, now it looks as if his hopes are being realized.

    Interesting times we are in, indeed.

    I just wished the "solutions" we are being offered weren't worse than the actual problems.


    world problems
    World bank
    world currency
    one world government
    one world religion
    apocalypse

    and all christians rise and say amen!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 08, 2009 11:05 PM GMT
    Blackguy4you said
    MeOhMy saidYes, and the G20 has taken the moves to establishing the creating of a global currency under the auspices of the IMF Special Drawing RIghts (SDRs) acting as a global reserve currency.

    The global currency has long been in the plans and is now coming to fruition. We are also seeing the emergence of a global central bank to act as a global lender of last resort, and also issuer of the new global currency. Currently, most discussion points to the IMF as playing this role, however, there has been some discussion of bringing the BIS in to play this part. Jeffrey Garten has continuously, since 1998, been writing about and advocating for a global central bank, now it looks as if his hopes are being realized.

    Interesting times we are in, indeed.

    I just wished the "solutions" we are being offered weren't worse than the actual problems.


    world problems
    World bank
    world currency
    one world government
    one world religion
    apocalypse

    and all christians rise and say amen!


    Well, I'm not a Christian, and I'm not religious, but my main area of study is in Global Political Economy, and I research these topics for a think tank i work for as a Research Associate, so I base my research upon hard facts, not faith and belief. For example, I just wrote a report documenting the movies towards one currency, one central bank of the world, and a world government.

    It is amazing to see how open and available these documents and information is, and how they are openly discussing this agenda now.

    For example, a Financial Times article from December:
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html

    Also, there is extensive research within Global Political Economy academic journals on the moves toward this goal.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2009 2:48 AM GMT
    well i'll just say that any President who is subservant to bow down to a King of Saudi Arabia is a pretty wimpy leader for the USA. Way to go Obama, you've made the USA look like we are now the followers of every country instead of one of the leaders.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2009 2:55 AM GMT
    icon_eek.gifINA!

    She's fed him well!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2009 2:57 AM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    Blackguy4you said
    MeOhMy saidYes, and the G20 has taken the moves to establishing the creating of a global currency under the auspices of the IMF Special Drawing RIghts (SDRs) acting as a global reserve currency.

    The global currency has long been in the plans and is now coming to fruition. We are also seeing the emergence of a global central bank to act as a global lender of last resort, and also issuer of the new global currency. Currently, most discussion points to the IMF as playing this role, however, there has been some discussion of bringing the BIS in to play this part. Jeffrey Garten has continuously, since 1998, been writing about and advocating for a global central bank, now it looks as if his hopes are being realized.

    Interesting times we are in, indeed.

    I just wished the "solutions" we are being offered weren't worse than the actual problems.


    world problems
    World bank
    world currency
    one world government
    one world religion
    apocalypse

    and all christians rise and say amen!


    Well, I'm not a Christian, and I'm not religious, but my main area of study is in Global Political Economy, and I research these topics for a think tank i work for as a Research Associate, so I base my research upon hard facts, not faith and belief. For example, I just wrote a report documenting the movies towards one currency, one central bank of the world, and a world government.

    It is amazing to see how open and available these documents and information is, and how they are openly discussing this agenda now.

    For example, a Financial Times article from December:
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html

    Also, there is extensive research within Global Political Economy academic journals on the moves toward this goal.


    christians believe all of these things were predicted in the bible. perhaps you should have just read it and saved yrself the effort icon_razz.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 11, 2009 2:58 AM GMT
    bocaguyfl saidwell i'll just say that any President who is subservant to bow down to a King of Saudi Arabia is a pretty wimpy leader for the USA. Way to go Obama, you've made the USA look like we are now the followers of every country instead of one of the leaders.


    well your idol bush did it. so what boots iticon_question.gif