Enemies, foreign and domestic | Napa Valley Register

Home » Opinion » Editorial

Enemies, foreign and domestic

Sunday, September 14, 2008

Comment

America has been at war for nearly seven years. Terrorists struck on U.S. soil on Sept. 11, 2001, and within weeks U.S. soldiers were attacking Taliban redoubts in Afghanistan. Shortly afterward, President George W. Bush and Congress created a new Department of Homeland Security to address concerns about enemies within the United States. In 2003, President George W. Bush expanded the war on terror to Iraq, where more than 100,000 U.S. troops are in service today.

Here’s where the two leading presidential candidates stand on what the presidential oath of office calls their responsibility to defend against “enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Sen. Barack Obama has largely disagreed with the policies of the Bush Administration.

He co-sponsored legislation linking funding for the war in Iraq to a firm timetable for redeployment of U.S. troops, a bill rejected by the president. Obama voted against the funding bill that ultimately passed, which did not include a timetable.

He has called for a greater U.S. presence in Afghanistan, where U.S. and Allied forces are seeing an increase in attacks and control by the Taliban.

While he voted for the recent change to the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act, which allowed for more government wiretapping of phone conversations and electronic transmissions with less judicial oversight, he opposed the Military Commissions Act, the administration’s most recent plan for court proceedings against enemy combatants captured in the war on terror.

Obama is among the critics who say the laws unnecessarily infringe on constitutional rights.

Obama was a critic of the “surge” in Iraq, a strategy implemented earlier this year to bring more U.S. troops to Iraqi soil to quell ethnic violence and terrorism.

John McCain has been a supporter of this administration’s efforts in the war on terror, though he has been critical of what he has termed strategic errors in the prosecution of the war in Iraq.

Earlier this Congress, he voted against Obama’s legislation tying Iraq funding to a redeployment timetable, and voted for the funding bill that did not contain a timetable.

McCain stance during the campaign had been that troop levels in Afghanistan were sufficient, but in July said an additional 15,000 soldiers should be deployed there.

McCain supported the FISA revisions that increase the government’s ability to intercept electronic communications without a warrant.

McCain also favored the Military Commissions Act, the Bush Administration’s response to U.S. Supreme Court rulings rejecting earlier military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.

Unlike Obama, McCain was in the Senate at the time of 9/11. He voted for the Patriot Act, the first major piece of legislation that addressed new security concerns.

McCain has been a champion of the troop surge in Iraq, and has noted the dramatic drop in sectarian violence in Iraq since the policy was implemented.

Obama: “Fighting a war without end will not force the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. And fighting in a war without end will not make the American people safer.”

McCain: “America has a vital interest in preventing the emergence of Iraq as a Wild West for terrorists … By leaving Iraq before there is a stable Iraqi governing authority we risk precisely this, and the potential consequence of allowing terrorists sanctuary in Iraq is another 9/11 or worse.”

78 comment(s)

Rocketman wrote on Sep 14, 2008 6:42 AM:

" That pretty much says it for me........McCain for President...... "

common sense wrote on Sep 14, 2008 8:43 AM:

" John McCain and Sarah Palin seem to be the only logical choice. "

kevin wrote on Sep 14, 2008 8:45 AM:

" B.O. wants to grant Constitutional Rights to the foreign terrorists?

That's INSANE!

Vote McCAIN! "

Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Sep 14, 2008 8:57 AM:

" Senator McCain is a warmonger. "

MarkMathews wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:05 AM:

" I agree Rocketman! If you listen to the words of our terrorist enemeis over the past years (since many neighborhood flags have come down), you will find out that they sound very similar to what many leaders of the democrat party have been parroting for a strangly similar number of years now; aid, comfort and agreement, followed by more of the same. Birds of a feather in words... Hands down for McCain. "

glenroy wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:34 AM:

" There is no sharper knife than the facts….Obama’s years of community organizing for radicals and radical causes, his extraordinarily short employment history, his lack of military experience and of course his unfounded arrogance all add up to being another footnote. "

Dwayne wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:07 AM:

" Every radical Muslim leader on the planet supports Obama.... What does that tell you...???...!!! Hmmmm...??? "

St.Hell.comNative wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:08 AM:

" Must have been written by a Republican! And once again the focus is not on Afghanistan, where we should be hunting down the Taliban, as they were responsible for 9/11. It is shifted back to Iraq, the Bush smokescreen, who had nothing to do with 9/11, but everyone thinks they did! AAARRGH! Obama is right to want to send in more troops to Afghanistan and lessen them in Iraq. And didn't you know that McCain actually died and that is a robot in his skin? Botox heaven! "

Sandra wrote on Sep 14, 2008 11:38 AM:

" When I made this post there were 6 comments, 5 for McCain, and 1 claiming McCain is a warmonger....You know, I really wonder...is that the best MJH could come up with? It is about as accurate as saying Obama is a muslim, or Obama wasn't born in the U.S.....I grow very tired of the people marching in lockstep to spread lies....Nothing intelligent comes to mind, so they name call. They do not seem to have the ability to look at all the information available, and form a logical decision. Their reactions are based on emotions. They can only see what their group wants to look at. It is a pack mentality, that allows them to be told what to think, and how they should think. It is dangerous. It is what is behind the continued spread of misinformation from both extreme points of view. I hope most people will not be caught up in the emotional rhetoric, and will remember that he said, she said, is not a good way to come to a decision on who should be our next president. "

musikluvr wrote on Sep 14, 2008 12:51 PM:

" Bill Clinton gave us 9/11 - George Bush is giving right back to the militant Islamists in their territory. It takes me back to the campaign slogans in the 2004 election - Who would terrorists rather have in the White House, Bush or Kerry? Nuf said! "

glenroy wrote on Sep 14, 2008 2:57 PM:

" A vote for Obama…as vote for Osama…what’s the difference? "

Dwayne wrote on Sep 14, 2008 3:11 PM:

" Sandra......

I agree with your premise, but you have to admit that there is some validity to certain questions about Obama. You can't just ignore the obvious, unless you want to put it to rest because it may reveal something you don't want to hear....

If you have looked at the birth certificate on line, you already know it doesn't look like yours and mine... I was born in Hawaii in 1944, and mine has the doctor's signature, birth weight, father's name, etc, but Obama's does not...

Concerning being a Muslim, look at the credentials of Reverend Wright, Obama's mentor for 20-years... His hate speech wasn't taken out of context, as claimed. The church has sold CD's of his sermons like that for years. It's black-America hate speech. I challenge you to think of how many services you would attend at that church listening to that kind of ilk. No reasonable person would stick around there for 20-years unless they were victims of the anti-white radicals....

Just because we question things that may be negative about Obama, doesn't mean it's trash-talk... There are serious considerations to be made here, including why anti-American leaders (like Venezuela and Gadaffi) are openly endorsing Obama. That's definitely something to worry about.... "

Sickothis wrote on Sep 14, 2008 3:16 PM:

" musikluvr - you mean those Saudi Arabian 9/11 terrorists? Nice job with that eh? "

Dwayne wrote on Sep 14, 2008 3:33 PM:

" Oh, and Sandra, my footprint is on my birth certificate... No such thing on Obama's, so questioning the validity of the birth certificate is a salient point to ponder, especially since a law suit has been filed regarding it....

I know there are those who want to bury the question, but it does need to be resolved, one way or the other...

Also, have you noticed that Obama has not released his medical records like every other candidate...??? What's to hide...??? "

dellasumbrella wrote on Sep 14, 2008 5:42 PM:

" I didn't find the first 5 comments in favor of McCain particularly rich in substance. If anyone does the work on their own of going to Obama's website and looking at McCain's website, they will see that Obama is the one addressing the real, modern-day needs of the military in ways called for by experts in terrorism and lessons learned from 9/11. As an example, from a summary of testimony to Congress from Bruce Hoffman of Rand: "The lesson... is not that we need to be unrealistically omniscient, but rather that we need to be able to respond across a broad technological spectrum of potential adversarial attacks. Terrorists seek to elicit an irrational, emotional response. Our countermeasures therefore must be at once designed to blunt that threat but also to utilize the full range of means we can bring to bear in countering terrorism: psychological as well as physical; diplomatic as well as military; economic as well as moral."
Obama proposes, among many other ways to improve military effectiveness, building up special operations forces, information operations and other units and capabilities & investing in foreign language training, cultural awareness, human intelligence and other counterinsurgency skills. He wants to expand to meet military needs on the ground, fully equip troops for missions, ireview weapons programs to ensure the agility & lethality of our forces and ensure missile defense is appropriate for modern threats and is cost effective. There is no evidence, based on his proposals, that he would either ignore the importance of the military or neglect the need for a strong defense. Yet this misperception is continually repeated, backed up only by soundbytes, exaggerations, and preconceived notions about liberal democrats. No wonder liberals bare their teeth and bark back! "

cameltoedoc wrote on Sep 14, 2008 6:35 PM:

" WHAT IF YOU DON'T LIKE EITHER CHOICE? I guess one good thing with the former POW and the alaskan pitbull with lipstick is that we don't have to wonder who we are going provoke an all out war with...hmmm. I heard McCain's secret presidential agenda is codenamed, NINJA - Nuke Iran Next January Agenda "

Miann wrote on Sep 14, 2008 6:47 PM:

" And this war has been successful? The horrible loss of life among the military and the civilians justifies our thirst for oil and finding (or the lack thereof) the weapons of mass destruction? If we really want to fight the Taliban go back to Afghanistan (and perhaps read The Kite Runner) for an understanding of that country's history. "

Sandra wrote on Sep 14, 2008 7:46 PM:

" Dwayne, there are absolutely valid questions concerning Obama, his birth cert., his assoc. w/ Rev. Wright, William Ayers, etc. Just as there are valid questions concerning Palin and troopergate, etc. My point is that these issues have not been resolved, and spreading gossip concerning them is a waste of intelligent thought. We definetly need to be aware there are unresolved questions, but saying things like War Monger, Osamaobama, etc., is just plain stupid.
I have definite reservations about Obama because of some of his associations. Just as I am waiting to see the outcome of Troopergate. I am intelligent enough to make up my mind without having to be subjected to others stupiity.
As for birth cert. there are many reasons why it could appear different from yours. Until we know the whole story, we need to wait before we shoot off our mouths...that is just my opinion. FYI, my birth cert. has no footprints. "

antipc wrote on Sep 14, 2008 7:57 PM:

" To all you pacifists... compare American lives lost compared to the Jihadists dead & incarcerated since the war began. This war has been a huge success compared to the alternative.Too bad you don't understand what the alternative is. Every American wants the war over with, every Muslim believes it's just beginning. I just wish all you America hating, Jihadist coddlers would be the first to fall to sword of the religion of peace. Our brave soldiers are paying the price for the same trash that criticize them. "

Dwayne wrote on Sep 14, 2008 8:01 PM:

" Afghanistan has to be protected, because it supplies most of the opium and heroin to the world and the US...

Without the drug input, there can be no "drug war", and with no drug war there can't be all that funding for police, which has taken on a life of its own like a huge corporation. Think of the job losses without a drug war to fight...

No, no, no...We can't stop the incoming drugs from the main suppliers. That would devastate our drug war economy even worse... "

bchiloquin wrote on Sep 14, 2008 8:04 PM:

" the last time we were in the gulf we left those poor people hanging {literally}we need to finish the job.not like what happened in vietnam we can win this!we need to back our president score a victory for us and the people of iraq, they are depending on us to do so.to leave now would be a big mistake. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:35 PM:

" The problem with Iraq is that it is a vacuum. At one time it wasn't but now it is. Think of it as housecleaning; you sweep and dust one week but in seven days, the film of dust has settled once again on the furniture. Same with Iraq. No matter how hard we try, either extremists from elsewhere or neighboring countries are available to fill the Iraq void up. We cannot make the Iraq void go away. There is someone born everyday who wants to make a name for themselves there. The country and surrounding area are filled with "nobodies" wanting recognition. There will never be a lack of new bodies to fill that void up.

At this point the people of Iraq need to take ownership. They should begin the process of cleaning their own homes up. If they have an inferiority complex, they need to deal with it. We cannot stand around forever, waiting for the dust to settle enough to react to. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Sep 14, 2008 10:32 PM:

" antic -- wow...no pacifist you.
Well if insults win the lottery, guess you'll be rich as rock a feller.
Who's criticizing the soldiers? Can you read?
Gee, I hope no one's offended by that insult. He's up to throwing swords at people who care enough to speak out on behalf of the soldiers. A little mud in his eye won't hurt, will it. "

rogers wrote on Sep 15, 2008 11:48 AM:

" Have to agree with Sandra here, one of the few voices with balance. Dwayne if you want your opinion to be taken somewhat seriously, quit parroting musikluver! I think we are very competent, thank you very much, with purchasing our drugs from South America and we are pretty good at making our own crystal meth and cannabis in these parts. I think you just hate the fact that Obama is right about Afghanistan. Your lawsuit info about Obama (or is that Osama?) is just more bad internet noise, read a little deeper please.

And antipc...this war is a huge success? At what? The people who attacked us are still hiding out in Afghanistan and Pakistan (which does have nukes). And why blame Clinton for 911? Let's take it back a bit further - Carter, Kennedy, Truman, FDR, Wilson...hell why not Ulysses Grant. Anyone BUT this precious administration must be the true culprits.
Guess we could conveniently blame the afore mentioned for our current banking woes as well? Let's hear it again for an unregulated "Free Market"! Mission accomplished! You guys are hilarious. "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 15, 2008 1:31 PM:

" I would suggest reading an article written by Amir Taheri and published in the NY Post today. See what your boy Obama was up to while in Iraq last July. "

Raven wrote on Sep 15, 2008 1:50 PM:

" Dwayne, order a copy of your birth certificate from Hawaii and see what you get....my original from Idaho in 1953 had footprints on it but when I ordered one for a passport applications 5 years ago, lo and behold, no footprints...and Hawaii's vital records people have said it is a valid, legitimate record of his birth... "

antipc wrote on Sep 15, 2008 4:16 PM:

" I read just fine thank you. But I am tired of hearing liberals profess how much they support the troops but not the war. You know… Bush & Cheney are war- mongers, Bush lied, it’s all about oil, the surge isn’t working, blah, blah, blah. You cannot have it both ways, all the anti-war rhetoric plays into the hands of our enemies & emboldens them. They see that divisive sentiment & perceive it to be weakness, which leads to more attacks on our soldiers.

The war has been a success & I’m aware that admitting it would imply you are/were wrong. "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 15, 2008 4:55 PM:

" You cannot ignore the fact that we have not had a major terrorist attack since 9/11. It is not a stretch to say that the war on terror has had a direct effect on that "tiny" fact that you keep swatting at. The war has not been a perfectly executed war but I call it a success because of the absence of a terror attack on US soils. Don't you? "

rogers wrote on Sep 15, 2008 8:35 PM:

" Cab e-girl - you bet I can ignore the fact that we haven't had a major attack since 9/11. You conservatives have been pushing that piece of drivel for some time now. That argument has no more validity than claiming the sun rises each morning because of George Bush and company.

You don't know that had Al Gore or anyone else been in power at the time, we would have had the same result. In fact no president could have escaped public scrutiny and wrath had they not taken severe measures. You should not be so willing to accept talking points from a desperate administration.

Remember this was the same team that wanted to hand over the operation of our ports to the UAE maritime management firm Dubai Ports World in 2006. They were to oversee the ports in New York and New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Miami, Florida; and New Orleans, Louisiana. Fortunately an alert Congress and public said "Like hell you will!" "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 15, 2008 9:53 PM:

" Rogers- I don't listen to talking points, I use good old fashioned common sense. Had Al Gore been in office on 9/11 it would have been a disaster.

We are in agreement on the ports issue, and I was one of the public screaming about it because of good ol common sense again. "

Raven wrote on Sep 15, 2008 10:07 PM:

" cab-e-girl, you also cannot prove that Bush's policies had anything to do with that....

just because A happens (no attacks,) doesn't mean it was caused by B (Bush policy.) "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:22 AM:

" Raven-You cannot prove that Bush's policies have not stopped a terrorist attack. You leftists are so filled with hate when it comes to George Bush. I am not happy with everything he has done. I hate his stance on illegal immigration, he as allowed spending to go unchecked in Congress, there are plenty of things to criticize GWB on, but lets give credit where credit is due. Terrorist attacks have been stopped here in the US due to his policies and the diligent work of law enforcement etc. "

Raven wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:38 AM:

" Cab-e...it cannot be proven either way.....that is all I am trying to say each time someone trots out that example....

it is like saying I sacrificed a chicken after the last earthquake and we have had no earthquakes since then, therefor I have stopped the earthquakes....

as for his polices...which ones, the ones that have allowed the government to put agents inside churches with no probable cause...the ones that allow the government to listen into a phone call I may make to relatives in Great Britain with no probable cause...the ones that have kept prisoners in confinement with no access to the courts, have allowed torture....those policies? "

kevin wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:03 AM:

" Those are a GOOD START... "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 11:29 AM:

" Raven: Those are the ones. I would recommend you not be planning terrorist attacks when talking to relatives abroad. "

Raven wrote on Sep 16, 2008 12:47 PM:

" ahhh....but tell me why I should have any of my calls monitored if I am not under suspicion of being a terrorist?

tell me why I should allow the FBI to wander into a library and ask what books I may have checked out and then tell the librarian it is illegal to even tell me about the visit if I am not a terrorist..

tell me why the FBI should be able to put an agent inside a church to monitor it if there were no suspicions of the church being a hideout for terrorists..

we have moved from a country where you were presumed innocent and the government needed probable cause to move against you to one where you are guilty until proven innocent and not given the chance to prove your innocence and the government can strip away all your rights by the whim of the executive branch and never see a day in court "

cab e-girl wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:05 PM:

" Pretty simple Raven, we are at war with an enemy that knows how to embed themselves into a civilian population. They have adapted to and use our freedoms against us. They use children, women and the disadvantaged as a shield and in order to stay ahead of their tactics we have to morph our tactics and if that means electronic surveillance, sending agents in to mosques and monitoring books that raise red flags, then that is what we should do until this war is over. I direct my hostility at the people who blew up our planes and buildings on 9-11, not at the people that are trying to keep this country secure. "

Raven wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:02 PM:

" it cannot be repeated too many times but as Benjamin Franklin said,"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." "

kevin wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:10 PM:

" Key word being "essential". I don't CARE if your conversation with your in-laws in England is listened to or not. I'm sure it was a scintillating conversation... "

Raven wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:50 PM:

" so being secure in your conversations is not essential to you kevin.....no problem with me listening in at any time...anywhere? "

suze wrote on Sep 17, 2008 12:45 PM:

" I am still waiting for Palin or anyone else out there to tell me HOW we are going to 'win this war?' Are they all going to bow down and do as we tell them, or do we completely exterminate large swathes of territory and population (some of them might be terrorists.) We need to look at why they hate us so much. Unless we start to look at some alternative attitudes in foreign policy, it will indeed be a conflict without end. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Sep 17, 2008 4:15 PM:

" Suze--I doubt we'll hear from republicans how the war will be won, or even how that would look (other than magically disappearing all evil terrorists). There's no realistic objective, except to "avoid another attack" (even though attacks still happen in the world). So we will just keep killing chickens, I guess, to keep the earthquakes at bay. (See Raven, above)
Conventional military wisdom speaks of using techniques that include responding militarily to specific threats, updating intelligence techniques and addressing underlying conditions. Regardless of progress coincidental with the surge, the fact remains that terrorists can still surprise us and strike, are not afraid to strike, & that US military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan have created more support in the Islamic world for Al Quada. It's pretty well accepted that the military needs to be a key element in the strategy on the war on terror, but that it shouldn't be the primary means for achieving victory. The number of military members (i.e. soldiers) and officers and experts who admit our approach so far has been inadequate and inappropriate for dealing with the terrorist threat supports the more comprehensive approach to the "war on terror" that Obama is proposing. If military reports have been written about lessons learned, testimony given to congress, & trainings given to officers & troops, it’s meant to improve strategies, not to aid the terrorists. Anyone who equates that with "not supporting the troops" is merely repeating republican tortured logic. Supporting the troops consists of putting them to work where we really need them to defend us, keeping them as strong and healthy as possible, and taking the appropriate steps to reduce terrorism. This idea of being able to kill off the evil terrorists, , although apparently embraced by some, is radically unrealistic. "

kevin wrote on Sep 17, 2008 6:54 PM:

" Della, in the short term the Islamofascists won't attack us as long as they know we will respond militarily; immediately and forcefully.

In the long run we need to foment the same Reformation movement in Islam that Christianity went through. It's out there, it just needs a little nurturing... "

dellasumbrella wrote on Sep 17, 2008 7:34 PM:

" Kevin -- I'm not convinced there will be no attacks just because we responded militarily, and trying to get back at terrorists is like whack-a-mole, or a moving target that shatters into thousands of reproductions of itself, but I do agree we need to keep a strong military, along with improved intelligence and well-informed diplomacy and....Did you say the word "nurturing"? "

suze wrote on Sep 17, 2008 8:05 PM:

" Thank you Della, I particularly enjoyed your last sentence; and Kevin, you even used the nurture word! I'm beginning to feel a little hope for our bedraggled planet. "

Sandra wrote on Sep 18, 2008 11:07 AM:

" Kevin IS correct. Della, you need to studty the history of Radical Islam to undertsand the mind set, and how they think and implement their goals. It is very scary, and fanatical. Most of the Muslim world is very traditional in it's beliefs, and is probably closer to Radical Islam, than Reform Islam. This is why most Muslims do not stand up as one and cry foul to terrorist tactics. Well that, and the fact that terrorists have the guns, and the average muslim on the street in the Middle East is just trying to survive and mainly hears what the Imans feed them. The support for Al Qaeda was growing whether we fought this war or not. Do your research and you will understand what I mean.
Fighting terrorists in one place will not completely stop attacks all over the world, but it will drain their resources and slow them down....and while they are slowed down we need to work with the reformists in Islam.
Reform Islam needs to be encouraged. The followers of Reform Islam are very brave individuals, who have to watch their backs everywhere they go. They are the one hope Islam has of joining the modern world, and show a path away from terrorism. They are the ones who are courageous enough to speak out against terrorism, at the risk of their lives and their families lives.

As for the war in Iraq...well, it is my belief that Bush messed up big time, and if he kept ignoring McCain's advice we would even be in a worse place than we are. McCain pulled his cajones out of the fire by his continued push for the surge. McCain was one of the few who knew what needed to be done under the circumstances. "

St.Hell.comNative wrote on Sep 18, 2008 3:06 PM:

" Just to break it up a bit--- come on,
cameltoedoc! I laughed sooooo hard on that one!!!!!! "

dellasumbrella wrote on Sep 18, 2008 5:41 PM:

" Sandra -- I did read up on some of the sites you suggested way back, and it was interesting and informative. I had some of them as "favorites" so i could go back, but alas, my computer had a heart attack and they all disappeared. But I will go back for more eventually, because we all need to be way more informed than we are. And I do like the idea of reforming Islam and all other extremist religions so they catch back up with science, civil rights, tolerance, etc. I was kind of teasing Kevin about his use of the "nurture word", as Suze called it. It actually made me feel a little more open to what he had to say. But just a little. "

kkkkaty wrote on Sep 20, 2008 1:13 AM:

" We hardly need enemies, foreign or domestic, as long as we have the Republicans removing our freedoms and sending our children overseas for slaughter. Maybe things are quieting down in spite of the fact the US military is in Iraq. We've been there longer than we were in Europe and Japan for WWII. "

Sandra wrote on Sep 20, 2008 2:40 PM:

" I can only shake my head....It's all the Republicans fault...Gee now that we have that solved, the world will be a better place.
Could it be any simpler? "

Raven wrote on Sep 20, 2008 8:33 PM:

" no Sandra...its all Clinton's fault, remember? "

kevin wrote on Sep 20, 2008 11:15 PM:

" FINALLY! Something I can agree with Raven! "

Sandra wrote on Sep 21, 2008 11:17 AM:

" Cliton's fault? well possibly some of it was...you know what we women say about men?...they have two heads but can only think with one at a time....His less intelligent head did seemed to be the one he used quite often.... "

incognito wrote on Sep 21, 2008 11:26 AM:

" Wow!! Interesting comments!!

It is simple if you dont travel or meet people from other cultures and religions, we tend to judge everything by what we get fed on t.v. or newspapers.

Why weren't there any terrorist attacks before before the west became involved with the oil expropriation in the Middle east?

Maybe if we stop meddling in their business and topple their goverments, telling how to follow their religion, stop interfering in their millenary tribal wars,etc. If another country did the same on us with would retaliate in the same way.

Is time we start respecting other countries beliefs. We need to stop our greed from letting us become involved in other countries for our own selfish purposes.

Vote for Obama!!! More prepare then Mc Cain! "

incognito wrote on Sep 21, 2008 11:39 AM:

" Stabilize a goverment in Irak?? Just like in Pakistan??

What is Mc Cain talking about?

Even Chenney said it back in 1994 that attacking and destabilizing any Middle Eastern country especially Irak would be a big mistake. He even explained with details. Same details that are occurring now. But I guess greed is stronger and it does not matter if you have to topple other goverments to obtain more wealth. "

Raven wrote on Sep 21, 2008 3:36 PM:

" roflma, sandra..... "

anticommie wrote on Sep 21, 2008 3:43 PM:

" Raven wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:02 PM:

" it cannot be repeated too many times but as Benjamin Franklin said,"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

I have to agree with Raven on this discussion, and we usually dont agree!!!! I could think of no greater quote to prove his point. FBI should have the right to record SUSPECTED terrorist activities, but they should first get a search warrant.

Now there is a flip side to that coin. When, and I mean when, the US gets attacked again (and it will) we could honestly say that we didnt do everything that we could have to prevent it. That (to me) is a sad concept. We cherish our freedom of speech, and we also cherish our safety. The terrorists only have to be right 1% of the time to carry out an attack. We have to be right 100% of the time to prevent it. To be 100% right all the time would mean giving up some of our most beloved liberties. That is something we just shouldnt do. I dont want to live in a facist state. Does anyone?

As terrible as 9/11 was, the men and woman that were murdered were victims of war. The reason America is still "the shining city on top of a hill" is because we hold these liberties very closly to our hearts. Liberty and freedom above all else. "

glenroy wrote on Sep 21, 2008 10:44 PM:

" Some of the posts here seem to be confusing ‘data mining’ with ‘wire tapping‘…. it should be pointed out that since the 9/11 attacks, not a single civil action has been brought against the Federal Government for wire tapping abuse… for good reason, 99.5% of traffic monitoring is ’data mining.’

There is not a major international corporation that doesn’t ’data mine’ in some fashion, though clearly not for anti terrorist purposes more to find effective marketing methods.

It is not only impractical to seek a warrant for ’data mining’ there isn’t any cause to do so because the process does not take into consideration individuals per se, it purely tracks the volume of traffic to various addresses and measures the frequency over period of time against terrorist attacks and/or the transfer of terrorist funding….from that pattern models are made which are continuously refined to size, duration and time of…it‘s all about bulk patterns. Data mining eventually provides ‘likely’ targets…whether cell number, group of cell numbers, duration and time of call, words within text messages, frequency, periods of use etc…mind numbing combinations are analyzed…humans have little to do in the process.

The process of dealing billions of pieces of data daily eventually determines a traffic pattern to known or suspected terrorists….so unless you happen to making contact with these know terrorist or suspected terrorist making contract down line, or someone is using your phone or computer to do so…the likelihood anyone being illegally tapped is slim to none, and slim left town on 9/11. "

Raven wrote on Sep 22, 2008 12:52 AM:

" well said anti... "

Raven wrote on Sep 22, 2008 8:55 AM:

" glenroy, unless they have probable cause, then the probability should be none.....under the standards of the data mining that have been made public...even our discussion using the word terrorist could trigger a look see by big brother... "

Sandra wrote on Sep 22, 2008 10:18 AM:

" Geez, Raven, if thats so I guess I should say hi to the FBI everytime I use my phone.... "

Raven wrote on Sep 22, 2008 5:30 PM:

" yep.....give them my regards as well "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Sep 23, 2008 2:05 PM:

" glenroy - that was a very good reciting of Republican Talking Points about warrantless wiretapping and a good attempt at re-framing the program to the less sinister-sounding 'data-mining'.

However the reason nobody has brought a successful action is that the FISA law 'overhaul' gave the government and phone companies immunity from listening in on innocent Americans going about their daily lives without a warrant.

Also, the Supreme Court said nobody has standing to sue unless they can prove their phones were tapped, and nobody can because the phone company can legally refuse to tell you if you ask.

Nice double-bind there... but then it goes right along with the usual Republican Orwell-speak.

Now, glenroy, imagine Barack Obama were US president, and declares every political party besides his to be a terrorist organization... then the phone company 'data-mines' your phone and email... and suddenly discovers that you have conversations with terrorists!

You mutter something about the Constitution as the president declares you a terrorist and the Feds impound your money, trash your house searching for Republican books and leaflets, and drag you away on President Obama's say-so to a military prison where you are denied a lawyer for years.

See, LIBRULZ don't want your phones tapped by Democrats any more than we like our phones tapped by Republicans.

It's called the right to privacy, glenroy!

Still think the government should have that kind of power when it is held by your worst political 'enemies'?

~Ruff "

Raven wrote on Sep 23, 2008 5:39 PM:

" and this just in, according several newspapers the Bush administration has overturned a 22-year-old policy and now allows customs agents to seize, read and copy documents from travelers at airports and borders without suspicion of wrongdoing, civil rights lawyers in San Francisco said Tuesday in releasing records obtained in a lawsuit.
The records also indicate that the government gives customs agents unlimited authority to question travelers about their religious beliefs and political opinions, said lawyers from the Asian Law Caucus and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They said they had asked the Department of Homeland Security for details of any policy that would guide or limit such questioning and received no reply. "

jwk wrote on Sep 24, 2008 6:37 AM:

" Our enemies within (Liberal Democrats & ACLU) are nearly as Dangerous to Our Country, Constitution and Survival as the radical's abroad. Unlike the other anti-american, pro socialist-Communist terrorist's, We Can't blow them up and destroy them before they destroy us!!! "

Raven wrote on Sep 24, 2008 10:14 AM:

" sounds a lot like the Viet Nam quote.....we destroyed that village to save it... "

glenroy wrote on Sep 26, 2008 3:05 PM:

" Jwk….ditto…but drop the ‘nearly’….

Crow…’I think most terrorist, though nobody knows for sure, would avoid using words like attack, bombs, terror etc….the very purpose of data mining…incidentally,…‘bow-wow’ on your Republican talking point comments….I’ve never been to the Republican website,…data mining has nothing to do with specific words per se….it’s first about volume of traffic and then filtering information to identify replacement words, to whom, when and where…essentially it is back tracking after the call or test message, not during‘….besides, there still has never been a suit filed where an ‘instance of abuse was the core argument and for good reason you can‘t illegally tap after the fact‘….yet they remain committed to arguing against something they can’t even comprehend…no doubt Republicans appear better equipped to understand this simple but massive effort….at least if these posts are any indication of the libs competency.

So, the resin impaired anti-Vietnam logic is indeed alive and well….’keep throwing accusations up against the wall and when nobody calls you on the carpet…call it a fact’…. "

Raven wrote on Sep 26, 2008 8:32 PM:

" Cute glenrot,

data can and does include searches for specific key words and phrases, along with searching every database they can access .... but you miss the point in your eagerness to strip away the protections you have on your privacy and civil liberties....unless they have a reason to suspect you, they shouldn't be looking for anything about you....period.

as for the expertise of Republicans.....I can see where it has gotten us so far in the last 7.75 years "

jwk wrote on Sep 27, 2008 2:27 AM:

" The last 7.75 years included Record Low unemployment, Record High Stock Market, More jobs added than The Clintoon era. And all of this happened after W inherited a recession and 09/11. No new attacks, Terroist's killed in the thousands. But the last year and a half high not been so good with The Lowest rated Democrat led Congress in US History. Between that and not being allowed to Produce our own energy has been our downfall. So the problem it seems lies again with the Demo's. Oh. lets not forget the Democrat controlled Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac Debacle.. ie; Barney Frank, Jamie Gorelick, Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, Chris Dodd & Osamabama. All of the previously mentioned should be in Leg Irons and Orange Jump Suits... "

Raven wrote on Sep 27, 2008 1:07 PM:

" dont forget the record drops in the stock market, rising unemployment, the nearly tripling of the national debt...record deficits.....a never ending war in Iraq....a second war we are on the verge of losing in afghanistan.... "

glenroy wrote on Sep 27, 2008 5:21 PM:

" Crow….just like a crow all you do is crow, crow, crow….

When your party has a history of being on the wrong side of history….there isn’t much you can do but crow…crow…crow… "

glenroy wrote on Sep 27, 2008 6:39 PM:

" Crow....ain't even close understanding the process....as I asked...give me a single example of an abuse under this Administration....there were thousands under Clinton during is anti corporate drive...where was your outrage then? "

Raven wrote on Sep 27, 2008 11:57 PM:

" what anti corporate drive?...it was a republican house after 1984 so anything he did had to be given the Repub stamp of approval........

and one big abuse is warrantless eavesdropping ........

just for your info...crows and ravens are two different birds.....surely you can come up with something better than that if you try...come on,...give it your best effort "

jwk wrote on Sep 28, 2008 7:53 AM:

" unRaven, we know you guys Cheer and Root against the USA on any and every War or Defense of Our Offense. A good Offense is your Best Defense!!! Wow and that darn eavesdropping is a real crisis isn't it? It was Jamie Gorlick (Clintoon Administration who put up the wall that Wouldn't allow the CIA, FBI & Pentagon to share Information (Eavesdrop), that gave us 09/11. If it saves American Lives, they can listen in to any and all of my conversations at any time. Like that's a big deal. Get real!! Unless you have something to hide OR ARE supporting The Terrorist's (Demo Lib's in Congress) then you have nothing to worry about. Do I see "ParaNoia" within the Leftist Ranks?? And I like The fact that the Terroist's are meeting their makers in Afghanistan and not in New York or L.A. or Israel.. I know you hte it we we are winning!!! "

Raven wrote on Sep 28, 2008 10:36 AM:

" the wall was established in 77 after the church hearings on the abuses and violations of the law by the FBI and CIA, reaffirmed by each and every administration since then, including Bush prior to 9/11....

and for you info we are not winning in Afghanistan...the taliban and al qaeda are stronger there now than at any time since we invaded.

any time that government violates my civil rights, which includes the right not to have them listening on on my phone calls annywhere without probable cause, it is a crisis... "

jwk wrote on Sep 28, 2008 9:47 PM:

" Speaking of Civil Rights, It's the ACLU , Enviromentalist & ADA types that have ruined our country. Them and the Trial Lawyers. They gave us afirmitaive action, and Frivalous Lawsuits that have almost shut down Our Freedoms and abilities to operate and own a Business of any type. I'll take the information of the Generals and Military personnel's opinion over some layman that hasn't a clue about "Our Military Actions and success's everytime. I suppose your type was right there with Hillary to try to Disrespect General "Betray-us" I believe was the mantra you Lib's were quoting. Our country would not of survived with the Anti-American attitudes of you on the left.. And I wonder How quickly your head would have rolled in all these Radical Countries your side protects and defends as you snivel about "Our Rights" here in America and speak the way you do about any Administration that isn't Leftivist!!Your side (Al Quaida and the Taliban) will lose as long as we keep up the battle on Worldwide terror not just in the Middle East but everywhere they are and have been PRIOR to the blaming "W" derangement syndrome era.. You can NEVER say anything positive or ever a pat on the back for Our Leaders can you?? "

dellasumbrella wrote on Oct 1, 2008 3:28 PM:

" jwk and others caught in extremist, contentious, divisive intolerance are blind to the nuances of reality.
Try reading some of the REAL military experts on lessons learned from recent wars. Check out the Air War College website for a wide array of testimony, studies and opinion. This is a military sponsored website. Most of what we find there is quite complex, and nowhere near the "leftist-liberal-Anti-American-diplomacy-mongering-soldier-hating-terrorist-loving-anti-freedom tree-huggers-who-have-ruined-your country (huh?)" attributions you wannabee warriors keep spouting.
You're words are shameful, plain & simple. Your attitudes are counter-productive. "

cop105 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 1:32 PM:

" Everyone...we have won the war in Iraq. You don't hear about it because the liberial sell out media wants Obama to win. You also don't hear the claims that he went to Iraq and asked that any troop withdrawl be postponed after his election. Liberals wants us to lose, they salivate when they hear of mayhem in Iraq. Even Obama has had to change his mind on taking the troops out because he knows what wil happen if he does it right away. Fellow Americans, I say turn CNN off. They don't want to inform you, they want to blind you so that you vote for the candidate of big unions, big corporations and big spending. "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: