Thomas Nelson knew someone had been going through his northeast Portland law office. He didn’t know who, or why, but several times—from January to July 2005—he noticed that papers on his desk had been moved and his computer rebooted. Yet, he says, “as far as I [could] tell, nothing was taken.” Then he got an e-mail from Jon Norling, another… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (19)Page 1 of 1 pagesProbably the last time they’ll bother to cover it up.
Posted by lynnbradway on May 8, 2006 at 8:06 AM Another example of why “LIBERALISM is a MENTAL DISORDER”
ITEM A:
Liberals were and still are screaming that Bush rushed us to War because of bad intelligence.ITEM B:
And Liberals are screaming when Bush is using intelligence.Libs scream and complain if they think you don’t, then Libs complain if you do.
Here is another example…
ITEM A:
Back in the summer of 2004 Bush visited Punta Gorda and the Ft. Myers Florida area 2 days after Hurricane Charley hit ... and Liberals were jumping up and down complaining and screaming that Bush was taking advantage of the situation and he was in the way of rescue workers. Libs were saying that Bush should stay out of the area.ITEM B:
Then Liberals were complaining when Bush waited 4 days to visit N.O. and Mississippi after Katrina. Libs were saying that Bush waited to long.So 2 days is too quick and 4 days is too long.
I wonder what Liberals would say about 3 days? THEY WOULD STILL COMPLAIN.
More proof that Liberals are “mentally ill”. They just complain about everything.
Posted by tina1 on May 8, 2006 at 5:30 PM hey goofy tina 1 is back. Still trying to defend bush? You have to love a die hard neo-con. Keep plugging away not many bush defenders are left.
Posted by brian28 on May 8, 2006 at 6:52 PM Tina1 has absolutely no grasp on reality. She compares apples and oranges. Comparing Hurricane Charley to Hurrican Katrina is just ridiculous, even if you are only talking about reaction times. All your points are based on pure opinion. Please unplug your keyboard and never post on this website again. Thanks
Posted by Justin on May 8, 2006 at 10:20 PM It is kind of funny that all the libs do is make personal attacks for their arguments.
If someone does not agree with you:
1) Call them a name. (neo-con, racist, homophobe, et cetera.)
2) Do not mention the original comment/question.
3)Instead mention Iraq, but leave out the part where we bombed them between the years 1991 through 2000.
4) Say Bush lied.
5) Attack them personally.
6) Scream and get passionate.
7) If they refuse to change their mind stop talking to them. (If you are Muslim go to #8)
8) Cut the infidal’s head off.
And they think, once again, they are taking Congress back?
Posted by think4yourself on May 9, 2006 at 6:25 PM Hey think4yourself,
You are so correct and what the libs just don’t understand is that elections are not won by the far-left or far-right. Elections are won by the middle swing voters.
The great thing is that because the left wing libs have so much hate and all they do is attack, protest and call names .... and they NEVER have any solutions, thus turning off the swing voters who at the last minute vote GOP. Then all the libs scream that the election was rigged.
Classic…
And what is really funny is… Libs still don’t get it.
lol…
PS - Hey Libs, make sure you bring back Michael Moore, Whoopi Goldberg, Susan S. and the rest of the “hollywood moonbats” for the 2006 elections. Why? Because that plan worked so well in 2000, 2002 and 2004.
lmao…
Posted by tina1 on May 9, 2006 at 7:46 PM In response to the original article posted about this lawyer allegedly having been visited in the middle of the night by the NSA/FBI/Delta Force/(perhaps the FAB 5?) :
You play with international terrorists you run the risk of being burned. I hope the government NEVER have to divulge every single reason that would lead them to investigating someone further, especially if they’re dealing with such characters. If we had to lay it all in the open as many of you libs desparately want we will never get anywhere against the extensive Wahhabist organizations that desparately seek our destruction. There is a fine line between security and freedom/privacy, but sometimes one has to trust that the appropriate officials are making sound judgements.
Posted by Hyjinx22 on May 9, 2006 at 8:48 PM “Liberals were and still are screaming that Bush rushed us to War because of bad intelligence.”
I dont see one single thing wrong with statement. Its 100% fact. Bush has an approval rating in the low 30s and it costs me 45.00 to fill up my Honda Civic. Money is being spent in the wrong places, as for instance, the article you obviously just skimmed over and didn’t comprehend. People in the not so distant future will look on this time as being the absolutely low point in Republican history. Do what you can now. Stay Hungry
Posted by Justin on May 10, 2006 at 3:09 AM Justin - Ummmm… isn’t it generally the libs that want us to:
1) Not drill for oil
2) Conserve (I’m sure you can cut back somewhere)
3) Not build refineries because they may be unsightly
4) Endorse tremendous environmental regulations on blends of gasoline and its distribution which makes the refining process much less efficient.
5) Switch to ethanol even though the supply simply wasn’t there to meet demand which would inevitably drive up prices.
6) Tax the hell out of oil companies in direct violation of a law of reality:
If you want less of something (behavior, product) tax it.Oh ya, didn’t we go to Iraq for oil? I distinctly remember “No Blood for Oil!” So where the hell is it?
PLEASE DO NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT FILLING UP YOUR FRIGGIN’ CIVIC! This is the kind of craziness and hypocrisy I cannot stand from you people.
Posted by Hyjinx22 on May 10, 2006 at 8:15 AM Way to sway completely off topic hyjinx. There was not one bit of ‘hypocrisy’ in anything I said. I simply mentioned the high gas prices just as about every US citizen is right now.
“You People” ... speak to me as an individual not a demographic. Its ignorance like that which proves you are a single issue whiner. I like how you completely failed to mention anything about the NSA / CIA
Posted by Justin on May 10, 2006 at 11:26 AM Justin - If you hadn’t noticed, I had 2 posts, the 1 prior to yours covered the article, the other responding to your complaint about gas prices. Try READING.
Posted by Hyjinx22 on May 11, 2006 at 2:24 PM Justin - Another thing. I was making the point that your party and the people that usually visit this site (the ‘you people’) are all for every measure that would curtail our production of gasoline. So, that being the position, you do not have a right to bitch about the price since it is the policies (’you people’) support that lead to it.
Posted by Hyjinx22 on May 11, 2006 at 2:27 PM Here we go again wth the switcheroo arguments. An article about an individual case about the domestic spying program gets the Bush idolizers talking about?...Oh wait, lets review. Tina calls up Hurricanes, Thinkforyourself calls up liberal personal attacks, Hyjinks is on about oil.
Do any of you actually think you are accomplishing anything? Do you really think completely changing the subject away from the article’s storyline endears you to the opposition? At what point will you ever see yourselves as uselessly wasting your time stirring up anger toward yourselves from others? What is your point to being here?
Personally I have to laugh at your efforts. What has it gotten you so far. Let’s see.. a president with a 30% approval rating, a Republican Congress with an approval rating below that, and a world that hates our country. Must be feeling satisfied, eh?
But that’s what you get when devotion of a man and politics mix, I guess. I don’t even see Bush defending much anymore, it must be all secret love by now. Have you torn down your alters of Georgee yet, or do you still pray to him when no one’s looking?
Yet with all your adoration of the man, you ignore simple conservative principles. It apparently doesn’t bother you that our government is now amassing phone records on all of us, or that they now search businesses and homes without our knowledge. I thought conservatives hated totalitarian communism. I thought things like KGB tactics were something to fight against not something to accept simply because your Bush God says it’s OK. It doesn’t bother you that first your Bush God lied about domestic wiretapping, “we get warrants” then it turns out they don’t.
I’d laugh even harder, but it’s more tragic, about this aspect of your blind devotion. Have you considered that all this presidential power you have no problem handing out, this attack on our Constitution and Bill of Rights won’t always be in control of Republicans? Do you really expect that Republicans will rule forever? Are you ready to allow a Democrat controlled White House to have these expanded powers in their hands? You don’t think a Democratic Washington might use those powers against your own kind and even attempt to expand them more? Because the problem is that once these types of precedents are seen as normal and “legal” they are hard to undo.
Your pathetic Bush devotion is purely unpatriotic because you’ve let your lust for the man blind you to what should be sacrosanct, the Constitution, which is supposed to be above political partisanship. The Bushies spy on anti-war people, who do you think the Democrats will use these spy powers on when they gain power? Something that you favor I might think.
Maybe it’s time to just tear up the Constitution, it’s what you bunch really want. You want Soviet style rule with KGB secretly searching our homes, our businesses, our conversations, our cars, our life. And it’s not about “if you’re not guilty what are you worried about.” It’s about “I’m not guilty and proud of it, but damn it I want the respect of being innocent without secret intrusions into my life.” I want the same things as the founding fathers, like the Fourth Amendment. You people want what Stalin wanted, no thank you. But go on with your off topic crap, live your pathetic lives as if the government loves just you.
Posted by Jon B on May 11, 2006 at 5:10 PM Jon B - Dammit man! READ my original post about THIS article - as usual no attention to detail from the libs… just feeling.
Posted by Hyjinx22 on May 12, 2006 at 8:23 AM Excellent post, Jon B. Nicely capsulizes their troll tactics and brings the issue back to the basic argument - the fact that our Constitution and the Bill of Rights are under seige by this administration and that they must be stopped before we morph into a totalitarian society.
Posted by bootsrey on May 12, 2006 at 8:25 AM Hyjinx22 said, “There is a fine line between security and freedom/privacy, but sometimes one has to trust that the appropriate officials are making sound judgements.”
Sorry, Hyjinx22, but misplaced trust is what got us into an unnecessary war hyped on false and/or cherry-picked misleading information, and why we took our eye off the real terrorists in Afghanistan. And now that country is rapidly devolving back to the Taliban while Osama continues to roam free. Yeah, based on this fine record, I suppose we can also trust these “appropriate officials” to make sound judgements about warrantless wiretapping and illegal break-ins.
Posted by bootsrey on May 12, 2006 at 8:35 AM Jon B - congrats on capturing the real points. Imagine the hypocrisy of the posters here - specifically “tina1” types if the politicians in control were democrats and they were doing this. The blow hards on talk radio would be assailing them and demanding investigations/impeachments.
True conservative values were always founded on small gov’t and less intrusive gov’t. I am astonished at how this radicalization of the right has hijacked conservative ideology and I think you explained the reasons perfectly. Bush’s followers would support him to the latter w/o regard to the substance; shame on them for being ideologically brainwashed.
Well done.
Posted by csmelnix on May 12, 2006 at 9:06 AM Hyjinx, I stand corrected. You did in fact devote four sentences to the subject. I have to wonder whether your trust in government is sincere. Did you have that trust under Clinton and will you have that trust if a Democrat wins in 2008?
A CNN poll just released today about the trust factor. Who do you trust more Bill Clinton or George Bush? Clinton wins 46% to 41%. Of course it’s a loaded question as both were liars, but it shows the state of Bush’s integrity with the public, how far it has fallen. That Bush promise back in 2000 to bring back honesty and integrity to the White House was full of pressed meat.
I also wonder where Bush’s popularity goes now after the phone record data basing has been exposed. I also wonder what other wide nets into our lives are going on. I just assume emails. I’ve read about cases of opened snail mail.
What bothers me most about the phone records issue is that it will net not one terrorist. Since 9/11 it’s been known, that like many criminals in our country do, using throwaway cells is the way to avoid tracking calls. So what’s the point? To spend more tax dollars for no reason is the best I can surmiss. For the NSA to justify their budget and their importance? The NSA showing they are doing something?
And how many terrorists have been caught by searching homes and offices anyway? It’s one thing to argue that giving up civil rights for our “protection” is valid, but is it effective? How much do we give up before it does become effective? The KGB was effective in a sense, but then we’ve lost any shred of freedom when we become like Soviet Russia. The SS in Nazi Germany was “effective” but do you want to be a fascist nation?
Thankfully much of America has become so disenchanted with the Bush methods and that includes true conservatives and libertarians that I believe that our march toward totalitarian type rule will swing the other way or at least begin running a treadmill.
Thank you csminix and bootsrey for your support.
By the way bootsrey, apparently the Taliban is not on our terrorist list anymore. The story goes that because Karzai is attempting to negotiate with warlords and others aligned with the Taliban, that it’s not in our best interest to label them terrorists anymore. And the reasoning that because the Taliban is not running a country isn’t the cause of their fall from terrorist status as groups like Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, etc. are listed. But Bush has flip flopped on the Taliban before. It was prior to 9/11 that the Bushies were negotiating with the Taliban over that oil pipeline (involving a trade for bin Laden) something the Clinton Administration abandoned a couple of years before, mainly because of pressure from womens rights groups here in the US..
Posted by Jon B on May 12, 2006 at 3:07 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Kristian Williams
- Counterinsurgency 101
General Petraeus says he thinks the war in Iraq is winnable. His recent manual suggests otherwise. - Undercover Cover-Up
Was a Portland attorney the target of the NSA domestic spying program? - Torturers R’ Us
President Bush denies reality
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
