To those of you liberals who have been calling for Bush's impeachment, resignation, and/or prosecution regarding the warrantless wiretapping, what is your opinion of the Clinton administration spying on Princess Diana's phone calls without permission from the UK government? Was Diana a threat to US security?
Will you now be calling for the prosecution of Bill Clinton? How about Congressional investigations?
2006-12-11 04:16:05 · 19 answers · asked by Uncle Pennybags 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
My source? No, not the National Enquirer, or Weekly World News.
Try CBS News - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/10/world/main2244146.shtml
Or MSNBC - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16153112/
2006-12-11 04:35:31 · update #1
Interesting. So far 19 answers, and not one Liberal condemning the spying, or outraged by it. Not one. Plenty of deflecting the issue, but not one outraged.
2006-12-11 05:21:14 · update #2
I love the answers I am reading here. Libby's coming up with dumb excuses to cover for thier asses. Now had the Bush adminstration been responsible for this, there would be international outrage, Bush would be held accountable for Diana's death, and non stop coverage on the news. But since a liberal did it, it's sweept under the rug!
2006-12-11 04:30:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Spied? Spied, you said? you're not supposed to spy on other countries. But I think that the CIA will become obsolete now that Obama is in office and is making his rounds in the nations of the world building trust and hope in America once again. (tingles up my leg). The CIA can't do that!
2016-05-23 05:30:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You apparently think such prestigious publications as the National Enquirer and the Star are trustworthy news sources.
Thank you - that gave me a lot of insight into why neocons can actually believe what they believe.
The article is lifted from a British tabloid. And it doesn't say anything about Clinton ever authorizing this - only that somebody from U.S. intelligence tapped the conversations.
EDIT: Read carefully: Some British Tabloids, whom your sources are apparently too ashamed to actually name, are saying that a journalist alleges that official British sources (also unnamed) state that SOME PEOPLE involved with U.S. intelligence tapped some of Lady Diana's cell phone conversations.
If you can't even read critically through that one, it's no wonder you still believe Iraq had something to do with "The War on Terror".
That's like saying: My sister knows a guy who has a cousin that has a friend, and her aunt said that...
What do you want us to be outraged about?!? There's no story there - it says someone at the CIA tapped a conversation. Clinton's name is nowhere near the story. I'm outraged at the yellow journalism, but that's it!
2006-12-11 04:29:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
can you include a source?
EDIT:
after reviewing your source (thanks by the way) i don't feel any outrage for this act.
according to the cbs article we were (if we were) spying on here because the UK asked us to, only to keep track of her where they couldn't because they feel obliged to continue to keep her safe.
a second reason given is that she was being watched because of her work on illegal landmines. if she was looking into the pentagon's use of illegal landmines the us intelligence community might have kept an eye on her. i find this to be in poor taste in the same vein that i see the spying of john lennon to be in poor taste.
but i feel no outrage nor would i demand for clinton's resignation (had i know these facts at the time of his presidency) simply because we were allegedly spying on a non citizen, in another country and possibly at the UK's request. this is a world of difference than spying on americans inside america without a warrant where we have a constitution which gives us due process.
but then again, i'm not one of those calling for bush's resignation.
2006-12-11 04:28:09 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. O 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Oh, Liberals don't have a position. In their minds, all Democrats are good because they are Democrats. They will only vote for Democrats, no matter what they have to say. To them, all Republicans and Conservatives are wrong. It's funny though, because there are Conservative Democrats also.
2006-12-11 04:51:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Get off it! Compare: Spying on Diana or illegally invading a soverign nation that was NO THREAT to anyone outside of the Middle East. Sniff a little reality instead of that glue bottle next to you, Bub.
2006-12-11 04:30:29 · answer #6 · answered by Peter S 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
It's entirely possible that Clinton had no knowledge of this- after all, this seems to be a very small thing in light of running the country. Whereas Bush not only authorized the illegal wiretaps of his OWN CITIZENS, but then when he was caught doing it he stated that he WOULD CONTINUE, EVEN THOUGH IT IS ILLEGAL! Don't you see a difference?
2006-12-11 04:26:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
For me, the story is indeed troubling. Why do you mix apples and oranges? Mr. Bush, etal, have broken U.S. law, international laws & treaties and committed crimes against humanity. Why do you buy into the divisive stance, using "liberal" as if your concept of "liberal" were universally known, let alone accurate. What might we agree on? That no one is above the law.
2006-12-11 04:37:05 · answer #8 · answered by S. B. 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
YES! and everyone that's ever taken Presidential office should be investigated too. Maybe we would then find out who the Pelican's brief was ooh hang-on wouldn't that be wasting more tax dollars that the democrats are so fond of doing??? hum a dilemma
2006-12-11 04:28:16 · answer #9 · answered by wondermom 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Key word here being "warrantless". If you have a warrant, it is legal to spy on people, despite their objections. Warrantless is where the outrage comes from.
2006-12-11 04:20:55 · answer #10 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋