Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Stinky The Clown

(67,786 posts)
Mon May 13, 2013, 08:52 PM May 2013

While you're talking around the water cooler with your winger coworkers, consider this . . . . .

. . . . from the Wayback Machne. While your friends are yammering on in fits of apoplexy about Obama lying and spying on the Teabaggers, think back to those heady days of yesteryear when it was all good . . . .

Rumsfeld Spies on Quakers and Grannies

By Matthew Rothschild
December 16, 2005


For instance, the Pentagon has a file on an anti-war group that was gathering at the Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Florida, to plan a counter-recruiting effort at local high schools.

That group of Quakers constitutes a “threat,” according to a 400-page Pentagon document that MSNBC got hold of.

It was “one of more than 1,500 ‘suspicious incidents’ across the country over a recent 10-month period” that caught the attention of the Pentagon snoops, MSNBC said. Of these, “nearly four dozen” were anti-war meetings or protests.

The Pengaton’s partial file on the spying is available at
DODAntiWarProtestDatabaseTracker.pdf.

It lists 43 events in a six-month period alone, dating from November 11, 2004, to May 7, 2005. Pentagon political spying took place in the following states and the District of Columbia: Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.


http://progressive.org/mag_mc121605




5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
While you're talking around the water cooler with your winger coworkers, consider this . . . . . (Original Post) Stinky The Clown May 2013 OP
And also tell them... Tx4obama May 2013 #1
So let me get this straight. Savannahmann May 2013 #2
Ignoring your disingenuous use of "we" . . . . I would like to congratulate you on either . . . Stinky The Clown May 2013 #4
Again, are we no better? Savannahmann May 2013 #5
k/r Dawson Leery May 2013 #3

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
1. And also tell them...
Mon May 13, 2013, 08:56 PM
May 2013

The head of the IRS, Douglas Shulman, when alleged targeting happened was appointed by Geoge W. Bush.
He didn't leave the IRS until November 2012.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
2. So let me get this straight.
Mon May 13, 2013, 08:56 PM
May 2013

The other side breaks the rules, and unfairly targets groups based upon beliefs. That means we should too? That is an asinine argument, that is a child standing up and pointing at another child screaming he did it too.

Either the principles of the Constitution matter, or they don't. If they don't then do something to get rid of them. Because if we sink to that kind of crap, then the only difference between us and the Rethugs is the letter after our name, we would both be power-mad with no respect or devotion to the rule of law and the ideals that made this nation great.

Stinky The Clown

(67,786 posts)
4. Ignoring your disingenuous use of "we" . . . . I would like to congratulate you on either . . .
Mon May 13, 2013, 09:03 PM
May 2013

. . . . completely missing the point, or more likely, attempting to misdirect the point and advance the argument you wish to make . . . . . its about the hypocrisy of some people's party yowling now when they didn't yowl then.

Have a swell day.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
5. Again, are we no better?
Mon May 13, 2013, 09:07 PM
May 2013

Or are we going to happily sink to their level, wallow in the mud with the pigs as it were? That is the point. I don't have to live with the decisions others make. I don't support my party based upon the decisions and actions of the other side. I support Democrats because of what we stand FOR, and because we are better than they are.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»While you're talking arou...