FBI pressures Internet providers to install surveillance software

[Pogo]

Liar. Making it political is exactly what you want. And, this started long before Eric Holder.

Just once, you blind rw's should try to look beyond the end of your racism and idiotic hatred.

So let me get this straight...the BUSH administration still calls the shots at the justice department.

That's amazing.

Obama is weaker than anyone ever imagined.

Those are your two choices...

Obama isn't in control of his own administration...or Obama is no different than Bush.

Pick you poison...

FTR, I am trying to wake you and your fellow liberals up...cast off your blinders.

Obama is doing all the things you Crucified the Bush administration for doing...

And STILL you protect him...

I don't know where you are getting that anyone is supporting Obama authorizing these things.

On the contrary, it's Progressives and Liberals who are the most upset at all this surveillance. Glenn Greenwald is certainly no conservative. Neither is Julian Assange. I would bet that Snowden didn't vote for Romney, either.

And do you really believe this wouldn't be happening under Mittens?

Heard this on the radio yesterday, interesting stuff:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAORasAZO00]Greenwald: Is US Exaggerating Threat to Embassies to Silence Critics of NSA Domestic Surveillance? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Synthaholic]

So let me get this straight...the BUSH administration still calls the shots at the justice department.

That's amazing.

Obama is weaker than anyone ever imagined.

Those are your two choices...

Obama isn't in control of his own administration...or Obama is no different than Bush.

Pick you poison...

FTR, I am trying to wake you and your fellow liberals up...cast off your blinders.

Obama is doing all the things you Crucified the Bush administration for doing...

And STILL you protect him...

I don't know where you are getting that anyone is supporting Obama authorizing these things.

On the contrary, it's Progressives and Liberals who are the most upset at all this surveillance. Glenn Greenwald is certainly no conservative. Neither is Julian Assange. I would bet that Snowden didn't vote for Romney, either.

And do you really believe this wouldn't be happening under Mittens?

Heard this on the radio yesterday, interesting stuff:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAORasAZO00"]Greenwald: Is US Exaggerating Threat to Embassies to Silence Critics of NSA Domestic Surveillance? - YouTube[/ame]

And if that doesn't work, they will just orchestrate another attack, like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon.

And the sheep will fall in line.


US lawmakers: Embassy closures prove we need NSA spying

Congress members claim the surveillance program warned them about possible attacks on 19 US diplomatic posts abroad

 

[Jackson]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!

Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Clapper doesn't have two brain cells that meet. He does what he is told.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!


Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wow, that was an amazing display of a pathetic attempt to rewrite the chain of command in the DOJ. By the way, your link does not support your claim that Holder does not have any authority over the FBI, all it does is explain how the intelligence briefing, which used to go to the president, now goes to the DNI.

I suggest you educate yourself instead of relying on Wiki articles written in a langauge you don't understand.

For example, this chart of the DOJ, which is signed by Holder, shows that the FBI answers to him.

Is this another example of the liberal bias of reality?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Liar. Making it political is exactly what you want. And, this started long before Eric Holder.

Just once, you blind rw's should try to look beyond the end of your racism and idiotic hatred.

So let me get this straight...the BUSH administration still calls the shots at the justice department.

That's amazing.

Obama is weaker than anyone ever imagined.

Those are your two choices...

Obama isn't in control of his own administration...or Obama is no different than Bush.

Pick you poison...

FTR, I am trying to wake you and your fellow liberals up...cast off your blinders.

Obama is doing all the things you Crucified the Bush administration for doing...

And STILL you protect him...

I don't know where you are getting that anyone is supporting Obama authorizing these things.

On the contrary, it's Progressives and Liberals who are the most upset at all this surveillance. Glenn Greenwald is certainly no conservative. Neither is Julian Assange. I would bet that Snowden didn't vote for Romney, either.

And do you really believe this wouldn't be happening under Mittens?

Which progressives are upset by this?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh here's a good plan -- get all hung up on the red and blue puppets while the puppeteers get away with murder. That would never be exactly what they had in mind as a distraction...

Frankly, I see the Republican Congress as responsible for letting Obama get away with the stuff he does. He is like a child testing what the boundaries are. 'No consequences? OK to do it...what can I try next?'

Congress have a responsibility to stop executive branch overreach, and are doing nothing. At least the Democrats stopped Nixon when he tried to use authority he did not have.

It's not overreach if Congress authorized it in the first place, which they did, under Bush.

You're just butthurt that a Democrat gets that same authority.

Didn't you just claim to be outraged by this? Why are you lying and claiming that Congress authorized this when I can point to a Democrat and a Republican who both sit on the oversight committee that claim that this is part of a secret interpretation of the PATRIOT ACT that was not authorized by Congress?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh here's a good plan -- get all hung up on the red and blue puppets while the puppeteers get away with murder. That would never be exactly what they had in mind as a distraction...

I think every gets the fact that Obama is either one of the puppet masters or one of the puppets.

Even if many are loath to admit it...

So, that said, I agree.

It took balls for Synth to post this article, and I don't want to be responsible for derailing it.

I don't see this article as a jab against Obama or Bush.

I think that when one becomes President, one gets overly cautious about protecting American lives, and always defaults to more security.

I blame political partisanship. If Americans are attacked, Republicans will immediately blame Obama. Especially if it happens on American soil.

When there is a suicide bombing in Israel, you don't see finger-pointing by Likud, Labor, and Yesh Atid. They tend to blame the bomber, not their political opponents.

I also don't believe Presidents have the real power to dismantle these operations by themselves. That's Congress' job, through oversight and funding.

I think that people who run for president do so only to get hold of the reigns of power and that anyone that actually wants the job should automatically be disqualified. The simple proof of this is that presidents always expand the power of the executive branch even if it costs the lives of Americans.

In other words, you are still an idiot.

 

[Luissa]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Bush would be in prison if he tried half of the things Obama gets away with.

He did, and got away with it.
Neither him, Obama, or the FBI will be held accountable.
And if one thinks it started with Bush or Obama, they were born yesterday.

 

[Synthaholic]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!

Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Clapper doesn't have two brain cells that meet. He does what he is told.

Then why did George W. Bush nominate him?

Why did George H. W. Bush nominate him?

 

[Synthaholic]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!


Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wow, that was an amazing display of a pathetic attempt to rewrite the chain of command in the DOJ. By the way, your link does not support your claim that Holder does not have any authority over the FBI, all it does is explain how the intelligence briefing, which used to go to the president, now goes to the DNI.

I suggest you educate yourself instead of relying on Wiki articles written in a langauge you don't understand.

For example, this chart of the DOJ, which is signed by Holder, shows that the FBI answers to him.

Is this another example of the liberal bias of reality?

You're so dishonest. That chart shows the departmental hierarchy.

Wiki had the correct info:

The director would brief the President on any issues that arise from within the FBI until the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 was enacted in response to the September 11 attacks. Since then, the director reports to the Director of National Intelligence, who in turn reports to the President.[1]
​

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!


Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wow, that was an amazing display of a pathetic attempt to rewrite the chain of command in the DOJ. By the way, your link does not support your claim that Holder does not have any authority over the FBI, all it does is explain how the intelligence briefing, which used to go to the president, now goes to the DNI.

I suggest you educate yourself instead of relying on Wiki articles written in a langauge you don't understand.

For example, this chart of the DOJ, which is signed by Holder, shows that the FBI answers to him.

Is this another example of the liberal bias of reality?

You're so dishonest. That chart shows the departmental hierarchy.

Wiki had the correct info:

The director would brief the President on any issues that arise from within the FBI until the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 was enacted in response to the September 11 attacks. Since then, the director reports to the Director of National Intelligence, who in turn reports to the President.[1]
​

Even after I explain what it means you try to argue that it means something else.

Let me try to use small words. The FBI boss used to report to Bush about scary things. After the big scary thing they wanted one person to know more, so they had every boss report to one guy who talked to Bush.

Get it now?

 

[RoadVirus]

Bush would be in prison if he tried half of the things Obama gets away with.

Oh here's a good plan -- get all hung up on the red and blue puppets while the puppeteers get away with murder. That would never be exactly what they had in mind as a distraction...

Frankly, I see the Republican Congress as responsible for letting Obama get away with the stuff he does. He is like a child testing what the boundaries are. 'No consequences? OK to do it...what can I try next?'

Congress have a responsibility to stop executive branch overreach, and are doing nothing. At least the Democrats stopped Nixon when he tried to use authority he did not have.

The Republicans in Congress are letting Obama hang himself. Just sitting back and making a list.

"He's doing what now? Okay...we'll add that to the list of things to remind voters of next year!"

 

[RoadVirus]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!


Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Clapper? Oh yeah. He's the guy that lied to Congress about NSA wiretaps, admitted it months later, and still hasn't been charged with perjury.

 

[Missourian]

Liar. Making it political is exactly what you want. And, this started long before Eric Holder.

Just once, you blind rw's should try to look beyond the end of your racism and idiotic hatred.

So let me get this straight...the BUSH administration still calls the shots at the justice department.

That's amazing.

Obama is weaker than anyone ever imagined.

Those are your two choices...

Obama isn't in control of his own administration...or Obama is no different than Bush.

Pick you poison...

FTR, I am trying to wake you and your fellow liberals up...cast off your blinders.

Obama is doing all the things you Crucified the Bush administration for doing...

And STILL you protect him...

I don't know where you are getting that anyone is supporting Obama authorizing these things.

On the contrary, it's Progressives and Liberals who are the most upset at all this surveillance. Glenn Greenwald is certainly no conservative. Neither is Julian Assange. I would bet that Snowden didn't vote for Romney, either.

And do you really believe this wouldn't be happening under Mittens?

I agree that that was indeed the dynamic when Bush was president, but look around the board.

Many of your fellow Liberals are DEFENDING these programs because to oppose them means opposing their president.

Now, I'll be the first to say this particular sword cuts both ways...many Conservatives who defended these programs have demonstrated a remarkable shift of opinion, now that their fair haired boy is no longer the leader of the free world.

I myself supported the patriot act when it was sold as intercepting calls from and to foreign nationals.

That is a far cry from what it has been discovered is the TRUE nature of this program.

The truth that we can that Edward Snowden for revealing.

Here is a policy that Conservatives and Liberals can agree on...and that realization should spur us to cooperation in defeating it.

Obama is not going to on this as long as he is not feeling the heat from his own base.

That's you and your fellow Liberals.

P.S.- I do think this program would have continued under Romney, and I doubt Republicans would have risen up against him.

But Obama is SUPPOSED to be different, and liberals BOISTEROUSLY protested this same program before Obama was president.

 

[Synthaholic]

Wow, that was an amazing display of a pathetic attempt to rewrite the chain of command in the DOJ. By the way, your link does not support your claim that Holder does not have any authority over the FBI, all it does is explain how the intelligence briefing, which used to go to the president, now goes to the DNI.

I suggest you educate yourself instead of relying on Wiki articles written in a langauge you don't understand.

For example, this chart of the DOJ, which is signed by Holder, shows that the FBI answers to him.

Is this another example of the liberal bias of reality?

You're so dishonest. That chart shows the departmental hierarchy.

Wiki had the correct info:

The director would brief the President on any issues that arise from within the FBI until the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 was enacted in response to the September 11 attacks. Since then, the director reports to the Director of National Intelligence, who in turn reports to the President.[1]
​

Even after I explain what it means you try to argue that it means something else.

Let me try to use small words. The FBI boss used to report to Bush about scary things. After the big scary thing they wanted one person to know more, so they had every boss report to one guy who talked to Bush.

Get it now?

Please show who is reporting to Eric Holder.

 

[Synthaholic]

Not so much to make this political, but this is Eric Holder's Justice Department.

Hope you are coming around to the realization that Obama/Bush are two sides of the same coin.

Sorry, but Holder has nothing to do with the FBI, which, while classified under the Justice Department, answers to the Director Of National Intelligence, who in turn answers to the President Of The United States.

That would be James Clapper, not Eric Holder.


Nice attempt at more Holder-Hate, though!


Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Clapper? Oh yeah. He's the guy that lied to Congress about NSA wiretaps, admitted it months later, and still hasn't been charged with perjury.

So why hasn't the Republican Chairman of that committee charged him?

You know that's how it works, right?

In fact, where has this Republican Chairmen even complained about Clapper's perjury?

 

[Synthaholic]

So let me get this straight...the BUSH administration still calls the shots at the justice department.

That's amazing.

Obama is weaker than anyone ever imagined.

Those are your two choices...

Obama isn't in control of his own administration...or Obama is no different than Bush.

Pick you poison...

FTR, I am trying to wake you and your fellow liberals up...cast off your blinders.

Obama is doing all the things you Crucified the Bush administration for doing...

And STILL you protect him...

I don't know where you are getting that anyone is supporting Obama authorizing these things.

On the contrary, it's Progressives and Liberals who are the most upset at all this surveillance. Glenn Greenwald is certainly no conservative. Neither is Julian Assange. I would bet that Snowden didn't vote for Romney, either.

And do you really believe this wouldn't be happening under Mittens?

I agree that that was indeed the dynamic when Bush was president, but look around the board.

Many of your fellow Liberals are DEFENDING these programs because to oppose them means opposing their president.

Now, I'll be the first to say this particular sword cuts both ways...many Conservatives who defended these programs have demonstrated a remarkable shift of opinion, now that their fair haired boy is no longer the leader of the free world.

I myself supported the patriot act when it was sold as intercepting calls from and to foreign nationals.

That is a far cry from what it has been discovered is the TRUE nature of this program.

The truth that we can that Edward Snowden for revealing.

Here is a policy that Conservatives and Liberals can agree on...and that realization should spur us to cooperation in defeating it.

Obama is not going to on this as long as he is not feeling the heat from his own base.

That's you and your fellow Liberals.

P.S.- I do think this program would have continued under Romney, and I doubt Republicans would have risen up against him.

But Obama is SUPPOSED to be different, and liberals BOISTEROUSLY protested this same program before Obama was president.

Obama is not swayed by loud voices from the Left. On the contrary. Ignoring Liberals gives him cover.

And the breakdown of pro-con has Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, and Michelle Bachmann all agreeing.

And on the other side, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, John Conyers, Glenn Beck, Alan Grayson, and Michael Moore all agreeing.

So it's not a Left-Right issue.

 

[Missourian]

I don't know where you are getting that anyone is supporting Obama authorizing these things.

On the contrary, it's Progressives and Liberals who are the most upset at all this surveillance. Glenn Greenwald is certainly no conservative. Neither is Julian Assange. I would bet that Snowden didn't vote for Romney, either.

And do you really believe this wouldn't be happening under Mittens?

I agree that that was indeed the dynamic when Bush was president, but look around the board.

Many of your fellow Liberals are DEFENDING these programs because to oppose them means opposing their president.

Now, I'll be the first to say this particular sword cuts both ways...many Conservatives who defended these programs have demonstrated a remarkable shift of opinion, now that their fair haired boy is no longer the leader of the free world.

I myself supported the patriot act when it was sold as intercepting calls from and to foreign nationals.

That is a far cry from what it has been discovered is the TRUE nature of this program.

The truth that we can that Edward Snowden for revealing.

Here is a policy that Conservatives and Liberals can agree on...and that realization should spur us to cooperation in defeating it.

Obama is not going to on this as long as he is not feeling the heat from his own base.

That's you and your fellow Liberals.

P.S.- I do think this program would have continued under Romney, and I doubt Republicans would have risen up against him.

But Obama is SUPPOSED to be different, and liberals BOISTEROUSLY protested this same program before Obama was president.

Obama is not swayed by loud voices from the Left. On the contrary. Ignoring Liberals gives him cover.

And the breakdown of pro-con has Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, and Michelle Bachmann all agreeing.

And on the other side, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, John Conyers, Glenn Beck, Alan Grayson, and Michael Moore all agreeing.

So it's not a Left-Right issue.

You know what we need Synth?

A poll.

A bipartisan, reach across the aisle poll just to see what the numbers are.

It's your thread, you can do the honors.