View Full Version : TSA expands duties beyond airports
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/06/us/tsa-expands-duties-beyond-airport-security.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Oh joy. :angry:
They were on the interstates in TN a few years ago.
As expected. Small step by step.
Moose-Knuckle
08-06-13, 19:19
TSA VIPR team in Chicago 15 March 2013
VIDEO: Feds Swarm Metra Train After Detecting Nuclear Risk
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/03/15/video-feds-swoop-in-on-metra-train-after-detecting-nuclear-risk/
The special security team must have picked up on him as he entered the station and walked up the stairs, Jones says. Little did he know a nuclear stress test he had at a hospital earlier in the day had set off silent alarms and sent security scurrying.
mikelowrey
08-06-13, 19:53
From what I can see they managed themselves in a professional way with respect and knowledge, not like the rude ones in the airport that think they are the biggest sh*t.
ForTehNguyen
08-06-13, 21:25
deine Papieren bitte
Moose-Knuckle
08-06-13, 21:29
deine Papieren bitte
Godwin's Law is becoming a everyday reality in our Republic.
gunrunner505
08-06-13, 22:47
It would appear the Gestapo is alive and well.
It's all for the greater good.....trust us.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
coming soon to bus stations then you thought road blocks and regular LEO were a hot button ! cant wait for this to happen:)
I kinda miss the uncertainty of Honduras :) at least there it was easy to see who the bad guys were !
Alaskapopo
08-07-13, 02:06
From what I can see they managed themselves in a professional way with respect and knowledge, not like the rude ones in the airport that think they are the biggest sh*t.
That is the real issue. TSA or at least the mission they are tasked with is needed. However they need to improve their level of professionalism and training. If that happens most of the abuses and complaints will go away.
That is the real issue. TSA or at least the mission they are tasked with is needed. However they need to improve their level of professionalism and training. If that happens most of the abuses and complaints will go away.
Um, I'm pretty sure the real issue at hand is the ever expanding operational role of the TSA and the agencies intrusion into the lives of Americans. Putting a smile on the face of said entity doesn't change the reality. That's like saying one would rather go see Doctor A over Doctor B because Dr. A's bedside manner is better and he is nicer irrespective of either individuals medical competencies and ability to fix whatever the hell it is wrong with you...
Alaskapopo
08-07-13, 02:46
Um, I'm pretty sure the real issue at hand is the ever expanding operational role of the TSA and the agencies intrusion into the lives of Americans. Putting a smile on the face of said entity doesn't change the reality. That's like saying one would rather go see Doctor A over Doctor B because Dr. A's bedside manner is better and he is nicer irrespective of either individuals medical competencies and ability to fix whatever the hell it is wrong with you...
There is a real reason to have a force to try and stop another 911. Seems some of us have forgotten what happened that day. Using your doctor analogy yes the prostate exam needs to be done and its not pleasant but its better than dying of cancer.
I remember it vividly.
Pat
There is a real reason to have a force to try and stop another 911. Seems some of us have forgotten what happened that day. Using your doctor analogy yes the prostate exam needs to be done and its not pleasant but its better than dying of cancer.
I remember it vividly.
Pat
However, if you were to opt out of that prostate exam, and it was forced on you (like the TSA does) it is rape.
Rape, rape, rape.
There is a real reason to have a force to try and stop another 911. Seems some of us have forgotten what happened that day. Using your doctor analogy yes the prostate exam needs to be done and its not pleasant but its better than dying of cancer.
I remember it vividly.
Pat
Negative. I am sure all of us remember what happen that day and just as vividly as you. But most of us also remember what happened immediately following it in the form of legislative responses because for we were to told we had to do these things and give up some of our privacy in order to make sure such terrible things never happen again... Yes we remember just as vividly. And where did that get us? If you believe the powers to be then the boogey man is always just around the corner waiting to attack so as a result were seem to be in a perpetual state of fear and anxiety of which the gov utilizes continually to justify further curtailments of our collective civil liberties. No one disputes that America has enemies but there are some serious issues over how we are going about defending ourselves from them..
Alaskapopo
08-07-13, 03:25
However, if you were to opt out of that prostate exam, and it was forced on you (like the TSA does) it is rape.
Rape, rape, rape.
You don't have to go to the doctors office and you don't have to fly.
Pat
Alaskapopo
08-07-13, 03:26
Negative. I am sure all of us remember what happen that day and just as vividly as you. But most of us also remember what happened immediately following it in the form of legislative responses because for we were to told we had to do these things and give up some of our privacy in order to make sure such terrible things never happen again... Yes we remember just as vividly. And where did that get us? If you believe the powers to be then the boogey man is always just around the corner waiting to attack so as a result were seem to be in a perpetual state of fear and anxiety of which the gov utilizes continually to justify further curtailments of our collective civil liberties. No one disputes that America has enemies but there are some serious issues over how we are going about defending ourselves from them..
Some people fear the government like the boogy man you speak of. The truth is we live in a dangerous time and certain security measures are necessary.
Pat
Those who trade essential liberties for ..........
Alaskapopo
08-07-13, 04:05
Those who trade essential liberties for ..........
Yep tired old statements taken out of context in todays world. Also you have the freedom to not fly.
Pat
polymorpheous
08-07-13, 05:18
Perhaps you don't value liberty, but I sure as hell do.
And frankly, the way I see it Pat, people like you are an enemy to liberty.
I really question your motives on this board sometimes.
It really seems like you go out of your way to stir the pot with authoritarian comments knowing full well what will become of them.
Then you can sit back and wait for someone to get agitated by your deliberate trolling so you can click that report button and have the thread locked.
This seems to be you primary goal here as every thread you post in goes south and gets locked.
Now, go ahead and click that report button.
I'm tired of your tripe.
the only thing that is dangerous is out of control gov !
and the knee pad wearing lefties who like to say this is a dangerous country we need to give up our rights
we live in such a pussy weak society ! far from dangerous unless running low on your EBT card balance and not having the latest iphone is dangerous
go live in Honduras and go to San Pedro Sula and hang out if you want dangerous !
what we need to do is grow a pair and attack terrorists like its WWII !! not some leaders like we have had last few times around who think fighting is being nice
let our troops take the gloves off and tell them WIN any way you can and as quick as we can !
Yep tired old statements taken out of context in todays world. Also you have the freedom to not fly.
Pat
Ahh, but the fly in the ointment is that here the TSA ain't just at airports anymore. Yeah, you can opt not to fly. Or go to a concert. Or a sporting event. Or drive (see my post above about VIPR teams on TN highways). Or............
What else can we opt out of? You don't see the mission creep?
Pat if you turn the volume on your computer up all the way might be able to hear the sound of me repeatedly smashing my face into my keyboard on disbelief ..
You don't have to go to the doctors office and you don't have to fly.
Pat
Did you forget to read the article?
That is the real issue. TSA or at least the mission they are tasked with is needed. However they need to improve their level of professionalism and training. If that happens most of the abuses and complaints will go away.
I understand your reasoning for your post. However, I'm getting to the point of having had enough w/ intrusion form the government in whatever form, in my life. I live in NJ and frequently fly out of Newark airport. The TSA at Newark is probably the worst I've seen from anywhere I've traveled in the country. I've had reasonably pleasant experiences in Phoenix and Palm Springs, but even so, I find myself feeling intruded upon/violated. I've been "stopped and frisked" in NYC for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The recent NSA revelations, courtesy of Edward Snowden (who in my mind is a hero and would always find sanctuary in my home), just compounds the "gestapo" perception I have of the government.
Living in NJ, I watched the towers come down live from across the Hudson river and lost some friends in the "event". If you live in this area, you knew someone who was lost on 9/11. I also remember the smoke trailing out of the twin towers in '93 or so, when the 1st attempt was made to bring down the towers. 9/11 was undoubtedly a tragic event. However, the government's response, in the form of the Patriot Act, was even more tragic.
Ultimately, I really have a problem w/ the government doing their warrantless searches and violating my rights as outlined in the BOA, and will never ever make it easy for them to do so. Before long, the TSA will have roadblocks setup to do random road searches. How long before they are going house to house to do random searches looking for terrorist activity? It's scary that the government continually tries to justify the expanded use of surveillance and intrusion. What's scarier is that the public is not putting up more of a fight against this.
Some people fear the government like the boogy man you speak of. The truth is we live in a dangerous time and certain security measures are necessary.
Pat
Yes, we do live in dangerous times. Unfortunately, I think that the government is the bigger danger because it has more power, reach and resources to harm me than AQ does... *this post has been flagged by NSA due to anti-government sentiment, I've probably just put myself on a "domestic terrorist" watch list*
Pat - You have no clue as to what freedom really is. The fact of the matter is you're more likely to be killed by choking on your own vomit, hot weather, accidental suffocation in bed and you're even 8X more likely to be killed by a police officer than terrorism.
http://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/tsa-touch-their-balls-osama.jpg
Link to statistics here (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/04/statistics-you-are-not-going-to-be-killed-by-terrorists.html) and here (http://www.policymic.com/articles/37775/you-re-8x-more-likely-to-be-killed-by-a-police-officer-than-a-terrorist).
MountainRaven
08-07-13, 09:28
There is a real reason to have a force to try and stop another 911. Seems some of us have forgotten what happened that day. Using your doctor analogy yes the prostate exam needs to be done and its not pleasant but its better than dying of cancer.
I remember it vividly.
Pat
If the TSA had existed prior to 9/11... it still would have happened.
So, no, the TSA is not necessary. The private security paid for by the airlines did and was doing a stand-up job.
You don't have to go to the doctors office and you don't have to fly.
Pat
"Freedom of movement" is freedom. Governments in which you're not free to move around the country at will? You know, like Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, those countries? Not exactly bastions of liberal democracy and protectors of civil rights.
Or are you seriously proposing that people who want to visit Hawai'i, Alaska, or Europe ought to swim there?
Some people fear the government like the boogy man you speak of. The truth is we live in a dangerous time and certain security measures are necessary.
Pat
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation, We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland."
- Adolf Hitler writing about creation of the Gestapo in Nazi Germany
Army Chief
08-07-13, 10:45
Well, now you boys have gone and forced me break out my Fred Rogers on you.
All together now ...
It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood,
A beautiful day for a neighbor,
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?
It's a neighborly day in this beautywood,
A neighborly day for a beauty,
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?
I have always wanted to have a neighbor just like you,
I've always wanted to live in a neighborhood with you.
So let's make the most of this beautiful day,
Since we're together, we might as well say,
Would you be mine?
Could you be mine?
Won't you be my neighbor?
Won't you please,
Won't you please,
Please won't you be my neighbor?
Better.
AC
Why not? The boogey Taliban-man could be anywhere........
So could Al-cia-ada. I mean seriously, who wouldn't want an army of blue shirted pedophiles setting up molestation checkpoints and searching door to door? It would make us so much more safer from the evil muslim boogey men that WE FUND AND SUPPLY, OPENLY. (just do a little digging into Benghazi)
Seriously though, if you've ever been through an airport and took your shoes off and went along with program, its your fault. If you've allow them to radiate you, its your fault. If you've allowed them to search you illegally, its your fault.
They are expanding because the dipshits in this nation either don't care, or think "its fine to give up some liberties for a false sense of security".
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-07-13, 10:53
DEA, FBI, DHS, NSA, CIA, TSA, secret courts..
Can we just simplify things and refer to them the Stasi??
Doc Safari
08-07-13, 11:07
Well, now you boys have gone and forced me break out my Fred Rogers on you.
Fred Rogers was gay. :D
Now, Bob Ross....there was a guy to contend with. He would have had Al Qaeda painting "happy little trees" instead of blowing up shit.
Seriously, though, doesn't anyone remember Obama promising a "civilian security force" with power and authority equal to the military?
I'll let you get back to sleep now.
There is a real reason to have a force to try and stop another 911.
Pat
You can not be serious??????? Let me guess the NSA spying is ok too, because of 911? Same with the Drones?
Spoken like a true mass media fed jellyfish.....
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-13, 11:24
Aww yes the old .gov is here to protect you routine . . . :rolleyes:
The funny thing is the same .gov that is wiping their ass with the Constitution in the name of safety and security is the same .gov that new about the 9/11 hijackers prior to their attack, look up a DIA op known as Able Danger. The same .gov that was conducting "bomb" drills at the Boston marathon and won't commit on the PMCs wearing khaki's, Craft Int. hats, and talking on SAT phones.
I am still of the opinion that all TSA employees are criminals and should be treated as such. My limited interaction with them has been overwhelmingly negative. This most recent stretch in their powers is disturbing to say the least.
They do nothing to stop terrorist attacks and are in fact a direct attack on our rights as citizens. I really don't buy the whole necessary evil to keep us safe argument. The constitution was not written with a provision saying "as long as things are easy"
Aww yes the old .gov is here to protect you routine . . . :rolleyes:
The funny thing is the same .gov that is wiping their ass with the Constitution in the name of safety and security is the same .gov that new about the 9/11 hijackers prior to their attack, look up a DIA op known as Able Danger. The same .gov that was conducting "bomb" drills at the Boston marathon and won't commit on the PMCs wearing khaki's, Craft Int. hats, and talking on SAT phones.
truth
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-07-13, 12:16
Some people on M4C would even test Mr. Rogers patience....
http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/graphics/middle.jpg
Some people fear the government like the boogy man you speak of. The truth is we live in a dangerous time and certain security measures are necessary.
Pat
Yep tired old statements taken out of context in todays world. Also you have the freedom to not fly.
Pat
Did you not read the title?
I'd say this fits in nicely here. Our rights as protected by the constitution can not become subject to the opinions of others.
http://www.breachbangclear.com/site/10-blog/449-it-is-not-so-easy-sometimes.html
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-13, 15:11
I'd say this fits in nicely here. Our rights as protected by the constitution can not become subject to the opinions of others.
http://www.breachbangclear.com/site/10-blog/449-it-is-not-so-easy-sometimes.html
Bravo, I think I just found me a new blog. Thanks for sharing! :cool:
Alaskapopo,
I'd like to apologize to you if I was out of line in what I wrote to your statement. Obviously, you see things through the perspective of your law enforcement career vs. the eyes of a civilian. I wish I had the poetic grace of Army Chief as he so elegantly explains his point w/out the need for antagonistic jibes. You're one of the folks on this site that has great contributions w/ your experience w/ your firearms, drills and training and what not. I have to say though, that when it comes discussions involving matters of privacy, rights, expanded government powers and so forth, I, and apparently others, have a very hard time relating to your position on these issues.
I grew up w/ my grandparents as a child. My grandfather grew up in Germany during WWII. He was taken from his home at age 11 to work on a farm to help feed the Reich. At age 15, he was drafted in Jan 1945. He was shot in the leg and rode out the remaining months of the war at home...which became East Germany. His father worked on the trains and was almost successful in getting my grandfather out of East Germany w/ a forged rail pass. He was caught and spent a couple of weeks in an East German prison getting tortured (daily whippings with a cable, beatings, etc.) by the Soviet commander at the base (this is pre-Stassi). His father was finally notified where my grandfather was and went to go get him. The Commandant said my grandfather could work for the Soviets or go to Siberia. He was sent to West Germany a few times to try to find Nazi's in hiding. On one return trip, the Soviet Commandant was not at their meeting point. My grandfather took his pen knife out and carved in a tree "Ich wahr heir...Ingo" and then managed to escape East Germany. BTW, I visited Germany w/ my grandfather in 1993 and saw that tree in the park where he would meet the Soviet Commandant. I also met one of my grandfather's friends that also attempted, but was not able to escape.... a surreal experience for sure. I'm sorry for my family history tangent, but I mention this to give understanding to my absolute hate and intolerance of what I consider government overreach and anything approaching a surveillance state, secret courts, etc.
In my mind, the only thing that did not occur to prevent 9/11 happening, was info sharing between the CIA and FBI. And yet, because of that, we now have the Patriot Act and all the absolute bullshit that goes with it. Instead of rewriting the rules for sharing of info between intelligence agencies, our rights are being taken away. We are told it's for our own good...bullshit. We are told it's to make us safer....bullshit. We used to be the bastion of the idea of freedom. Now, we're just like everyone else....and that's bullshit.
IrishDevil
08-07-13, 19:01
Mission creep, of a completely unneeded agency, will eventually lead to cavity searches on every sidewalk in America. Especially once they're bolstered by Obama's citizen army.
Pat,
Please explain something in a rational and cohesive manner without all the H.R. Pufnstuf nonsense.
1. Why do we need another corrupt/incompetent agency on our streets, highways, etc.. when we already have local/state and federal LE?
2. When auditors at the DHS(under which they fall) are raising concerns about training and their usage that's usually a CLUE that something isn't right.
3. The fact that they can conduct searches as mentioned in the article should raise concerns.
4. You seem to be missing the fact that this isn't just about (1) agency or issue. It's about repeatedly revelations about U.S gov't entities that are abusing power or acting is such ways that give the appearance of a US vs. Them mentality.
When you look at the totality of the situation (Fast and Furious, IRS Gate, Benghazi Gate, Drone issues, and on and on...) people are getting concerned and worried.
Alaskapopo,
I'd like to apologize to you if I was out of line in what I wrote to your statement. Obviously, you see things through the perspective of your law enforcement career vs. the eyes of a civilian.
Just for the record, he is a civilian. The only ones who aren't are miltary folks.
mikelowrey
08-07-13, 22:37
That is the real issue. TSA or at least the mission they are tasked with is needed. However they need to improve their level of professionalism and training. If that happens most of the abuses and complaints will go away.
Pat,
I understand your point and don't get me wrong, I do the same thing you do but there is a point in time where you have to ask yourself when is enough? I mean, I have seriously lost count already on how many "agencies" there is and I am not saying that I exactly "agree" with them, I just wanted to point out that they were respectful. As other have said like IG:
Pat,
Why do we need another corrupt/incompetent agency on our streets, highways, etc.. when we already have local/state and federal LE?
I dont really think we need another one. State, County and Local Police have already many resources to work with including the assistance of the FBI, CIA etc.. and not only that, in my city there is plenty to work with, from Counter-Terrorism to Joint Terrorism Task Force to you name it..., and again if I am not mistaken most of the transit system in every state have their own police including response units. I understand that we live in times where we need to be vigilant and aware of our surroundings, but TSA is not needed outside of the airports.
I understand your reasoning for your post. However, I'm getting to the point of having had enough w/ intrusion form the government in whatever form, in my life. I live in NJ and frequently fly out of Newark airport. The TSA at Newark is probably the worst I've seen from anywhere I've traveled in the country. I've had reasonably pleasant experiences in Phoenix and Palm Springs, but even so, I find myself feeling intruded upon/violated. I've been "stopped and frisked" in NYC for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The recent NSA revelations, courtesy of Edward Snowden (who in my mind is a hero and would always find sanctuary in my home), just compounds the "gestapo" perception I have of the government.
Living in NJ, I watched the towers come down live from across the Hudson river and lost some friends in the "event". If you live in this area, you knew someone who was lost on 9/11. I also remember the smoke trailing out of the twin towers in '93 or so, when the 1st attempt was made to bring down the towers. 9/11 was undoubtedly a tragic event. However, the government's response, in the form of the Patriot Act, was even more tragic.
Ultimately, I really have a problem w/ the government doing their warrantless searches and violating my rights as outlined in the BOA, and will never ever make it easy for them to do so. Before long, the TSA will have roadblocks setup to do random road searches. How long before they are going house to house to do random searches looking for terrorist activity? It's scary that the government continually tries to justify the expanded use of surveillance and intrusion. What's scarier is that the public is not putting up more of a fight against this.
Absolutely superb. Hope is indeed not lost in NJ.
But alaska fanices himself a solider in battle with civilians as his enemy !
He goes out just like soldiers on patrol !
Just for the record, he is a civilian. The only ones who aren't are miltary folks.
SeriousStudent
08-08-13, 00:02
But alaska fanices himself a solider in battle with civilians as his enemy !
He goes out just like soldiers on patrol !
Okay. Enough.
Talk about the TSA and the reasons for extending or not extending their operations.
If you want to talk about members here, don't. Talk about the topic at hand.
"So if ever a man should ask you for your business or your name
Tell him to go and f*ck himself, tell his friends to do the same
'Cause a man who'd trade his liberty for a safe and dreamless sleep
Doesn't deserve the both of them and neither shall he keep"
Frank Turner
Sons of Liberty.
Since Army Chief has already broke out some music here is my humble addition. I think it speaks more loudly than my words might.
I'd say this fits in nicely here. Our rights as protected by the constitution can not become subject to the opinions of others.
http://www.breachbangclear.com/site/10-blog/449-it-is-not-so-easy-sometimes.html
Thanks for the link. Good stuff!
Belmont31R
08-08-13, 12:16
At this point I think the gov response to 9/11 is worse than 9/11 itself. For one, as touched on earlier, terrorism is pretty far down on the list of ways to die. There are a ton of ways people die that get very very little attention, and kill more people than terrorists have on our soil.
And TSA has not thwarted anything. They do their own testing of trying to sneak things through, and they are successful a majority of the time.
The only reason there hasn't been a successful take down of a plane is because of the terrorist incompetence. The shoe bomber and underwear bomber come to mind.
This is like any other War on _______. The gov needs a boogeyman as an excuse to grow in size and power. They've been playing this game on us for decades. However, despite the the increase in size, spending, and power, the drug addiction rate has basically stayed the same, poverty rates are about the same, and we aren't really much safer from terrorism because of the TSA.
The biggest thing that keeps planes safe is the attitude of the passengers. Pre 9/11 the attitude was that you were just being used for ransom, and fighting back was just going to make things worse. Now we have the attitude of becoming a part of the defense of the plane. They figured it out on Flight 93, and at least were able to keep the plane from being used as a weapon. Also, hardening the cockpit doors helps keep hijackers from gaining access. Nothing the TSA is doing has anything to do with that plane once its up in the air. We also have FAM's which are a benign way to enhance air safety.
You basically have to decide if you think liberty takes a back seat to the argument of security or vice versa. Notice I said the argument of security, because security cannot be guaranteed. Same thing with liberty taking a back seat to the WOD. We have things like asset forfeiture which has been heavily abused, and takes away a persons right to unreasonable seizure and due process. Just type in Tenaha, Texas. That's just what one small town of 1500 people were able to do. Yet drugs are still all over the place and violence is way up.
This is a very dangerous precedent where the government simply has to cite public safety or the common good and rights take a back seat. There's literally no point in having rights if public safety or the common good come first. We all know we have the right to bear arms but courts can easily rule common good comes first. This is how other things, like DUI checkpoints, have been ruled legal. The court basically said that, while they are an intrusion, the public good of catching drunks outweighs the intrusion. Even still, DUI checkpoints are now just a way to issue tickets en masse under the guise of catching drunks. In a study Cato did, they found that less than one half of one percent of citations issued at checkpoints were for DUI.
With regards to the TSA searches the court ruled they were ok because they were not used to charge people with criminal offenses. They were for safety. But the TSA quickly took the route of using them for criminal referrals which would make them unconstitutional. The TSA administrators have a blanket rule of using contraband found in their safety searches for criminal referrals. This has led the actual TSA employees to become focused on things other than preventing terrorism, and instead focus on finding drugs or other contraband.
http://www.cato.org/blog/tsa-profiling-security-theater-fourth-amendment
The_War_Wagon
08-08-13, 13:02
I no longer fly because of these wannabees. Looks like trains are out now, too. :mad:
Those who trade essential liberties for ..........
Yep tired old statements taken out of context in todays world. Also you have the freedom to not fly.
Pat
I thought I'd quote this, so folks would get a birds eye view of the statist mentality behind national democratic socialism, horrifying to say the least....
Belmont31R
08-08-13, 14:51
The freedom not to do something perfectly legal so you don't get your rights violated is laughable and scary.
Don't own a gun so your house doesn't get searched at will.
Don't drive so your car isn't subject to roadside searches.
Don't speak out so you aren't put in jail.
That logic should not be considered a valid argument when discussing rights.
One way to nip this, at least partially, is to declare anything found outside the realm of transportation security inadmissible in court. i.e. some guy with a joint in his pocket cannot be charged with possession, etc.
The spirit of the Fourth Amendment (as well as how it is written) should be applicable in these situations. A warrant is a legal consent to search, and while TSA "searches" aren't warrants per se they should be viewed in that light with regards to specifics. To wit: "....particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Open-ended fishing expeditions must be stopped cold. That will help staunch the growth of the ever-expanding cancer of government intrusion. Same would apply to the NSA spying, like when DEA is using it to tip off LE agencies about stuff totally unrelated to the claimed "national security".
Doc Safari
08-08-13, 15:14
The freedom not to do something perfectly legal so you don't get your rights violated is laughable and scary.
Don't own a gun so your house doesn't get searched at will.
Don't drive so your car isn't subject to roadside searches.
Don't speak out so you aren't put in jail.
That logic should not be considered a valid argument when discussing rights.
I can't link to it because I just glanced at it, but I ran across a news story that some apartment complex somewhere is banning gun owners from renting.
Although I support private property rights, since when do they supercede constitutional rights?
I can't link to it because I just glanced at it, but I ran across a news story that some apartment complex somewhere is banning gun owners from renting.
Although I support private property rights, since when do they supercede constitutional rights?
That turned out to be a county run housing complex. When the county got wind of it, they put the kibosh on the new "rule". It was in Colorado, BTW.
why can't we just all tell our lawmakers that another attack is acceptable? we can do without the tsa. just disband that whole part of dhs.
it's a worthwhile experiment. the fact is it's very difficult to prevent attacks. targets change, methods change, everything changes.
one of the fundamental problems is that one segment of the population believes they're entitled to a sanitary world where they won't be unduly injured. the other segment believes they should live in a sanitary world where no one does anything they don't like. no one ever wins, so why try?
the number of crimes prevented is probably not 0 and it's definitely not 100%. but who really cares? what if there were another attack? how would that affect anyone? what would m4carbine say if there were another successful attack on american soil. hell forget american soil what about libya? what did m4carbine and like minded people have to say about that? conspiracy, blame the current administration that is not the same as political affiliation, government didn't do enough, government always does too much.
amirite?
how did the Boston bombing happen ? again they were told they were terrorists and instead of kicking them out we gave them over $100,000 for education and helped them out
how did the fort hood shooting happen ?
they were told and had evidence ?
the stopped attacks had nothing to do with check points and TSA BS !
and if they would just profile people they could do much better !
the fact they lost over 1,000,000 people who are not citizens shows they cant do anything !
this is all a scam to control people as a whole they do not care one bit what happens to anyone below them
the stopped attacks had nothing to do with check points and TSA BS !
this is true. i wonder how many stopped attacks or dead bad guys have resulted from the nsa's extensive international eaves dropping. do the ends justify the means?
and if they would just profile people they could do much better !
this is all good until they start doing it to the tea partiers. cuz you can't profile tea partiers, that's not allowed. i'm not saying tea partiers are bad, i'm pointing out that this line of logic works really well until it crosses into your lane.
btw, if they profile people really really well, will you let them do warrantless wiretapping? why not??? you don't trust their profiling? or you think it's unethical to wiretap without a warrant? but it's fine to profile... slippery slope when you decide to obey some constitutionally protected stuff and ignore others.
the fact they lost over 1,000,000 people who are not citizens shows they cant do anything !
how exactly do _you_ keep track of 1 million people? perhaps that's what most people come to america seeking, to be tracked thoroughly and harassed until the day they swear in as a naturalized citizen. oh yeah, we don't want people coming to america. now, if we could just make this place so bad that no one would want to come then the government would have no one to watch but us.
this is all a scam to control people as a whole they do not care one bit what happens to anyone below them
do you feel like you're very well controlled? how much of any of this actually affects anyone on a day to day basis? even the tsa at the airport you don't see everyday, although i again feel if you just got rid of the tsa and we allowed a few attacks every year, y'all would be a lot more free and we could save the taxpayer a lot, like a shit ton of money.
profile anyone from terrorist countries here on visas
no profiling US citizens unless they are traveling to countries tied to terrorism
tap phones and internet sure if they are here on a visa !
if they are a citizen no !
if they are a citizen that has traveled to a country known for terrorism then yes !
and not our troops of course !
I mean traveling on free will !
as far as control ?
yes myself and family have had issues !
well I have been slowed down at airports !
my dad was a pilot for United and a fighter pilot in Korea !
my mom traveling on a employee pass at 78 years old was strip searched ! why ? OH we just do this to random folks since we cant profile she was told ! and she was the pick !
being stopped in AZ for security checks !!! when traveling on roads !
knowing they are breaking laws that have made the gun problem huge causing me to pay more !
many think twice about traveling the road blocks and hassles do effect us as so called free citizens !
you get idiots like alaskapopo who say well dont travel then !
now I dont have to but being from Maui you kinda have to use a plane and had to deal with it all the time !
and folks who have to commute at times for work should not be inconvenienced unless they match those details
how did the Boston bombing happen ? again they were told they were terrorists and instead of kicking them out we gave them over $100,000 for education and helped them out
how did the fort hood shooting happen ?
they were told and had evidence ?
the stopped attacks had nothing to do with check points and TSA BS !
and if they would just profile people they could do much better !
the fact they lost over 1,000,000 people who are not citizens shows they cant do anything !
this is all a scam to control people as a whole they do not care one bit what happens to anyone below them
Underwear bomber was turned in by his own father, but "the system worked" according to Big Sis.
this is true. i wonder how many stopped attacks or dead bad guys have resulted from the nsa's extensive international eaves dropping. do the ends justify the means?
Don't know they wont tell us but I don't consider a case where they fed the desire of individual with the false means to carry out an attack to be a valid one to begin with. The disgruntled guy who tries to blow something up with material the feds gave him is a no go in my book.
this is all good until they start doing it to the tea partiers. cuz you can't profile tea partiers, that's not allowed. i'm not saying tea partiers are bad, i'm pointing out that this line of logic works really well until it crosses into your lane.
btw, if they profile people really really well, will you let them do warrantless wiretapping? why not??? you don't trust their profiling? or you think it's unethical to wiretap without a warrant? but it's fine to profile... slippery slope when you decide to obey some constitutionally protected stuff and ignore others.
Last I knew the tea party wasn't advocating for the use of suicide bombers and chanting death to America. That would radical Islam... could probably start there... The tea party stuff is political besides, it has nothing to do with national security your twisting the argument.
how exactly do _you_ keep track of 1 million people? perhaps that's what most people come to america seeking, to be tracked thoroughly and harassed until the day they swear in as a naturalized citizen. oh yeah, we don't want people coming to america. now, if we could just make this place so bad that no one would want to come then the government would have no one to watch but us.
Could actually overhaul the immigration system in such a way that is actually conducive to national security and locking down the borders. Overstay your Visa gtfo. Again extra scrutiny for these immigrating places hostile to us. Seems like common sense. The fed can put all this time, money, and manpower into expanding entities like the TSA and VIPR teams but they can't fix the obvious? Priorities me thinks..
do you feel like you're very well controlled? how much of any of this actually affects anyone on a day to day basis? even the tsa at the airport you don't see everyday, although i again feel if you just got rid of the tsa and we allowed a few attacks every year, y'all would be a lot more free and we could save the taxpayer a lot, like a shit ton of money.
It comes down to this. Terrorism is about fear, pure and simple. Instilling fear in a particular populations while simaltaneosuly forcing said population and by extension government to exhaust critical capital and resources all in an effort to combat this fear. The goal of Bin Laden and 9/11 was never to kill all the infidels or burn America to the ground it was to get the U.S. government to do exactly what it is doing through the continued and targeted erosion of our constitutional liberties. What is it about America that defines us as a nation? Our freedoms... take those away and what is left, what then makes us different than any other nation on the planet? Nothing...
Now much the American public being what they are and being that they lack much of the critical thinking capacity to rationalize understand this perceive fear as this constantly present problem that needs to be dealt with. You can't have something bad happen and then not expect someone (politicians and the government specifically) to do something. After 9/11 (same with sandy hook) something had to be done.. And a decade later much of the debacle that is DHS and by extension the TSA among others is a shameless attempt to make it look like the government is actually doing something about the problem. But in fact as you noted their is very minimum that can actually be done when it comes right down to it. Considering the statistical improbability that one will be killed in a terrorist attack as compared to some other mundane event like a car accident does not justify the system that has been created out of and abundance of unbridled fear and political opportunism.
SO send the TSA packing, put the money where it should be, and lets stop curbing our collective civil liberties for the sake of some perverted and perceived false reality and sense of security.
Moose-Knuckle
08-08-13, 18:08
this is all good until they start doing it to the tea partiers. cuz you can't profile tea partiers, that's not allowed. i'm not saying tea partiers are bad, i'm pointing out that this line of logic works really well until it crosses into your lane.
Someone doesn't like the Tea Party (aka liberty and freedom). :cray:
Way to go labeling a member you don't agree with as a "tea partier" so as to insult him and anyone who aligns with the party's ideologies. The Israelis have had a positive return on their profiling of military aged men of Middle Eastern descent. But hey as long as your JBTs get to sexually assault young children and visually strip search old ladies with diapers your okay with it . . .
btw, if they profile people really really well, will you let them do warrantless wiretapping? why not??? you don't trust their profiling? or you think it's unethical to wiretap without a warrant? but it's fine to profile... slippery slope when you decide to obey some constitutionally protected stuff and ignore others.
LOL, I guess you buy into your president's phony scandal routine . . . pssst they're already doing "unethical wiretapping" and have been for a many moon now. Next please . . .
how exactly do _you_ keep track of 1 million people? perhaps that's what most people come to america seeking, to be tracked thoroughly and harassed until the day they swear in as a naturalized citizen. oh yeah, we don't want people coming to america. now, if we could just make this place so bad that no one would want to come then the government would have no one to watch but us.
The same way they track us all . . . 9/11 hijackers’ yeap on a list being watched by the DIA and FBI was not allowed to arrest them. Boston brothers . . . yeap again on a list and allowed to go about their merry way. So yeah red blooded Americans don't want these oxygen thieves coming to our homeland. But that's racist in your eyes is it not? People with your leftist views are doing a really good job at making this place so bad more and more Americans are becoming expatriates.
do you feel like you're very well controlled? how much of any of this actually affects anyone on a day to day basis?
The fact you have to question a fellow American in this day and age if he feels controlled while we are forced by the rule of law to pay the highest taxes in history speaks volumes. Not to mention the gross invasion of our privacy and Constitutional rights by the Federal government.
even the tsa at the airport you don't see everyday, although i again feel if you just got rid of the tsa and we allowed a few attacks every year, y'all would be a lot more free and we could save the taxpayer a lot, like a shit ton of money.
Not so, let's revisit your previous point, the one where you were attempting to make Americans look evil for not wanting to let terrorists in the first place. Problem solved and a tax payer you're damned right I want to save MY money.
FlyingHunter
08-08-13, 19:12
Consider the unbelievable growth of .gov employees that have been created which are specifically tasked with keeping us safe from the bad guys. Liberties and constitutional rights be damned, full speed ahead and don't complain because, after all, this is for your safety.
Risk of being killed by a terrorist:
1 in 20 Million
Source: http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/06/how-scared-of-terrorism-should
Taking these figures into account, a rough calculation suggests that in the last five years, your chances of being killed by a terrorist are about one in 20 million. This compares annual risk of dying in a car accident of 1 in 19,000; drowning in a bathtub at 1 in 800,000; dying in a building fire at 1 in 99,000; or being struck by lightning at 1 in 5,500,000. In other words, in the last five years you were four times more likely to be struck by lightning than killed by a terrorist.
Odds of being killed by a shark:
1 in 3.7 Million
Source: http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2011/11/22/nat-geo-wild-what-are-the-odds-some-surprising-shark-attack-stats/
Well. We taxpayers want a solid return on our investments right?
May I suggest: Since the odds are clearly in favor of death by shark, we should re-task all 55,000 + TSA employees to immediately begin protecting us from sharks. Perhaps even a new name:
Taxpayers Shark Antagonist
An additional benefit of this re-tasking...if they need to search you at the beach...you may already have your shoes off.
profile anyone from terrorist countries here on visas
mistakes aren't allowed to happen i assume. i wonder what a terrorist country is. i wonder why anyone would want to leave a terrorist country and come to america and if the numbers for those reasons outnumber the reason of doing america harm.
no profiling US citizens unless they are traveling to countries tied to terrorism
why not extend that to if they're related to terrorism suspects? why not extend that to if they've contacted terrorists? why not extend it to many different places, but the point is eventually you will dislike where that extends to...
tap phones and internet sure if they are here on a visa !
if they are a citizen no !
this would be called domestic warrantless wiretapping whether or not you include citizens of the united states.
if they are a citizen that has traveled to a country known for terrorism then yes !
why worry about the travel if homegrown terrorism is the concern. i thought the whole point of this discussion was that it doesn't matter what you do, you can't prevent any of the attacks. so why are you even trying? why are you recutting the pathway and the redistributing how much pie they can eat if the pie is rancid?
as far as control ?
yes myself and family have had issues !
well I have been slowed down at airports !
my dad was a pilot for United and a fighter pilot in Korea !
my mom traveling on a employee pass at 78 years old was strip searched ! why ? OH we just do this to random folks since we cant profile she was told ! and she was the pick !
being stopped in AZ for security checks !!! when traveling on roads !
you've been inconvenienced. that's hardly control.
also the az checks by border patrol are likely a result of trying to make it seem like we shut down the border and prevent illegal mexican nationals from traveling about the country freely. you mean that's not what you wanted?
Basically this all boils down to the notion that much of what they fed does in name of national security is frugally irresponsible, ineffective, and nothing more than feel good nonsense to make it look like they are doing something other than obliterating budgets, all the while encroaching on and curbing our civil liberties. No?
Lock down the boarders, revamp our immigration system (I wish we could do like other countries and you know only immigrate people that have skills we need...) and uncurtail the damage that has already been done to our constitutional republic. And let us start with constitutional carry and nationwide reciprocity first. :D
you've been inconvenienced. that's hardly control.
also the az checks by border patrol are likely a result of trying to make it seem like we shut down the border and prevent illegal mexican nationals from traveling about the country freely. you mean that's not what you wanted?
You understand the trajectory we are on correct? Every year the system takes a little bit more, and then a little bit more, people get upset but eventually the outrage subsides and its business as usual. If history is any guide it is the natural evolution of man made government to eventually become self-cannibalizing if left unchecked. There was a reason our founders created a system where government was restricted to what it was ONLY allowed to do, not what it couldn't do. As for the border if Washington was serious about doing it it could be done.
Moose-Knuckle
08-08-13, 20:09
you've been inconvenienced. that's hardly control.
Here it is layed out for you ladies and gentlemen . . . your 4th Amendment rights are merely a whimsical "convenience".
History repeats . . . "Ihre Papiere bitte".
FlyingHunter
08-08-13, 20:11
Basically this all boils down to the notion that much of what they fed does in name of national security is frugally irresponsible, ineffective, and nothing more than feel good nonsense to make it look like they are doing something other than obliterating budgets, all the while encroaching on and curbing our civil liberties. No?
:D
Gospel right there!
did I ever say mistakes are not allowed to happen ?
ummm terrorist countries are just that !
and yeah for sure basic things like known terrorists ? thats a no brainer
its like saying put your shoes on ! do I need to tell you to tie them ?
come on !
homegrown terrorism is not our problem compared to outside
yes it happens and yes they can monitor for things like that
bomb material checks were put in place a long time ago !
Boston bomber was not homegrown !
and the checks are no where near the border !
and the illegals ? that's a whole other BS thing
my wife is not a US citizen she has her green card though :) so I do happen to know a lot about the whole INS alien resident and stuff !
and anyone who did not stand in line and do it legal should be booted !
head back to hufpo and your crowd :)
Here it is layed out for you ladies and gentlemen . . . your 4th Amendment rights are merely a whimsical "convenience".
History repeats . . . "Ihre Papiere bitte".
SO TRUE !!!! people are buying the BS hook line and sinker !!
and willing to give up everything we have for it !!!
all the sheeple we have these days
OH its just a inconvenience !
had to go look up the term again forgot it :)
Argumentum ad populum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
but the term is fitting with so many folks.
why can't we just all tell our lawmakers that another attack is acceptable? we can do without the tsa. just disband that whole part of dhs.
it's a worthwhile experiment. the fact is it's very difficult to prevent attacks. targets change, methods change, everything changes.
one of the fundamental problems is that one segment of the population believes they're entitled to a sanitary world where they won't be unduly injured. the other segment believes they should live in a sanitary world where no one does anything they don't like. no one ever wins, so why try?
the number of crimes prevented is probably not 0 and it's definitely not 100%. but who really cares? what if there were another attack? how would that affect anyone? what would m4carbine say if there were another successful attack on american soil. hell forget american soil what about libya? what did m4carbine and like minded people have to say about that? conspiracy, blame the current administration that is not the same as political affiliation, government didn't do enough, government always does too much.
amirite?
My gut tells me you aren't just expressing yet another controversial opinion but rather fulfilling a however feeble agenda.
Why is that?
Don't know they wont tell us but I don't consider a case where they fed the desire of individual with the false means to carry out an attack to be a valid one to begin with. The disgruntled guy who tries to blow something up with material the feds gave him is a no go in my book.
so that means guys that show up at a house to have sex with an underage girl they met on the internet, who promised to bring jack daniels and condoms... totally innocent huh? so that's not a successful operation in your book, that's a no go. i suppose the government shouldn't set up a pretend crack house and arrest people who show up to buy crack, or set up fake prostitutes and arrest those who try to get a quickie after work. these are all no gos to you. got it. i hate to assume, but i'm betting that you would like there to be no way for illegal activity to be prosecuted because you don't want it to be possible for evidence to be gathered. i really got to wonder what you do with your life that you want so badly to be uncaptureable.
Last I knew the tea party wasn't advocating for the use of suicide bombers and chanting death to America. That would radical Islam... could probably start there... The tea party stuff is political besides, it has nothing to do with national security your twisting the argument.
no the tea party didn't do that, but you do know as well as everyone else here there has been some more extreme rhetoric. the least of which the likes of the liberal media has drummed up plenty of paranoid fanfare about. the sword cuts both ways is the point. it does have something to do with national security, specifically because people on this very forum made a huge deal when articles in the press talked about law enforcement being cautioned about "right wing activists." but it's fine if you don't want to accept the point.
Could actually overhaul the immigration system in such a way that is actually conducive to national security and locking down the borders. Overstay your Visa gtfo. Again extra scrutiny for these immigrating places hostile to us. Seems like common sense. The fed can put all this time, money, and manpower into expanding entities like the TSA and VIPR teams but they can't fix the obvious? Priorities me thinks..
can you really execute these goals of yours without becoming more like the police state that you so dread? lock down the border... how much manpower and how feasible would this even be in real life to serve your single minded goal? as if that actually solves the problem too... because it doesn't. that would only mean more "immigration" check points and other places where you have to encounter law enforcement and claim that your rights are being violated and you feel controlled etc.
It comes down to this. Terrorism is about fear, pure and simple. Instilling fear in a particular populations while simaltaneosuly forcing said population and by extension government to exhaust critical capital and resources all in an effort to combat this fear. The goal of Bin Laden and 9/11 was never to kill all the infidels or burn America to the ground it was to get the U.S. government to do exactly what it is doing through the continued and targeted erosion of our constitutional liberties. What is it about America that defines us as a nation? Our freedoms... take those away and what is left, what then makes us different than any other nation on the planet? Nothing...
the goal of terrorism is to kill enemies. it's the proverbial us vs. them. does the gangbanger use terrorism? yes. drive by shootings, executions/assassinations. is there some long thought out agenda and public relations or psyops campaign behind any of that? no. there isn't. there's one goal, kill the enemy. leverage the power your have to dominate the terrain, whether physical or mental, that you want to have control over. whatever ancillary benefit comes from their reaction is just that, ancillary. are terrorists really winning when they make us more vigilant? who knows. you can argue both ways, it makes their attacks more difficult to some degree and it makes our lives a little worse to some degree. what would the alternative be? they kill some of us, we kill some of them. it still boils down to that same basic math.
do we cause terrorism on them when our ninjas kick in the doors and kill all the armed men in a house? i don't know. some of the armed men in that house were waiting for their card to be pulled. some aren't. some yearn for the fight, some are dragged into it. does it take away all their freedoms knowing that they are all being listened to and they can all be killed at any time for being in the wrong place with the wrong gun in their hands? maybe... but is that the primary goal? or is the primary goal to kill people who are actively trying to kill us? terrorism is just as bad of a label as war on drugs.
Now much the American public being what they are and being that they lack much of the critical thinking capacity to rationalize understand this perceive fear as this constantly present problem that needs to be dealt with. You can't have something bad happen and then not expect someone (politicians and the government specifically) to do something. After 9/11 (same with sandy hook) something had to be done.. And a decade later much of the debacle that is DHS and by extension the TSA among others is a shameless attempt to make it look like the government is actually doing something about the problem. But in fact as you noted their is very minimum that can actually be done when it comes right down to it. Considering the statistical improbability that one will be killed in a terrorist attack as compared to some other mundane event like a car accident does not justify the system that has been created out of and abundance of unbridled fear and political opportunism.
the problem with the mundane deaths is you can't really save yourself or others from stupid. every once in a while you can save someone from evil. isn't that why warriors long for the righteous fight? isn't that why people here carry? but i agree. let's accept attacks as a reality and do away with the preventative measures that inconvenience people on a daily basis.
i would like to keep the other investigative tools that don't inconvenience people daily that help the government identify bad people and kill them overseas.
Someone doesn't like the Tea Party (aka liberty and freedom). :cray:
Way to go labeling a member you don't agree with as a "tea partier" so as to insult him and anyone who aligns with the party's ideologies. The Israelis have had a positive return on their profiling of military aged men of Middle Eastern descent. But hey as long as your JBTs get to sexually assault young children and visually strip search old ladies with diapers your okay with it . . .
that type of profiling doesn't already exist? i just saw an instagram of a brown dude with some sort of "ethinic" headgear in a tsa line with a caption "about to be randomly selected for screening."
this type of screening is not effective against homegrown sympathizers of radical islam. were the boston bombers of middle eastern decent? they were russian or something right?
The same way they track us all . . . 9/11 hijackers’ yeap on a list being watched by the DIA and FBI was not allowed to arrest them. Boston brothers . . . yeap again on a list and allowed to go about their merry way. So yeah red blooded Americans don't want these oxygen thieves coming to our homeland. But that's racist in your eyes is it not? People with your leftist views are doing a really good job at making this place so bad more and more Americans are becoming expatriates.
so who's watching A-C on that list? you think someone is really just watching a list? is that what you do at work? is that how anything works in the real world? people watch a list all day? do you think all the names were right next to each other on the list if there were a list? or if the list is of 1 million people... then the names were probably spread out a little bit. does that make sense? finding needles in a stack of needles isn't so easy, is that safe to conjecture? and let's say someone points out a needle and says it's got some aids on it and you pick up the needle, test it for aids and there's no aids on it at that moment. does that mean that needle will never have aids on it? no it doesn't, it means you just didn't find the aids on it when you tested it for aids.
the whole reason americans can even become expatriates is because of how we accept oxygen thieves. if we denied everyone do you think we would be able to go anywhere in the world? there are other nations that do deny everyone... who wants those people in their homeland?
you assume i'm leftist... but what have i said that suggests i'm left leaning? i'm just trying to be practical here and point out how the real world works.
The fact you have to question a fellow American in this day and age if he feels controlled while we are forced by the rule of law to pay the highest taxes in history speaks volumes. Not to mention the gross invasion of our privacy and Constitutional rights by the Federal government.
how has the government surveillance impacted your life personally?
how has the tsa and all the other bullshit affected you? how many hours out of your life has it taken? real questions, let's give an accurate accounting. cuz i'm damn sure that the people in the cia and the fbi have way more hours into this "bullshit" than you.
i'll give you the taxation bit. let's just disband the tsa and save you that chunk of change. if a bomb gets on a plane though, we as a nation just suck it the **** up, calm down and carry on. agreed?
Not so, let's revisit your previous point, the one where you were attempting to make Americans look evil for not wanting to let terrorists in the first place. Problem solved and a tax payer you're damned right I want to save MY money.
i didn't say it's evil to not let terrorists in. i'm saying the world is huge. millions of people cross many different borders daily. eternal vigilance is not cheap, nor is it even possible to the 100% degree that many people assume is the standard. most people we let in are not terrorists, is that fair to say? fact--the amount of terrorists we let in isn't even 1% because 1% would be a huge freakin' number of terrorists in our borders agreed? but you are willing to sacrifice the rest of the system to disallow less than 1%. however in other aspects of life you are not willing to concede that. i suppose i'm supposed to understand that.
You understand the trajectory we are on correct? Every year the system takes a little bit more, and then a little bit more, people get upset but eventually the outrage subsides and its business as usual. If history is any guide it is the natural evolution of man made government to eventually become self-cannibalizing if left unchecked. There was a reason our founders created a system where government was restricted to what it was ONLY allowed to do, not what it couldn't do. As for the border if Washington was serious about doing it it could be done.
this i will concede to you then. we should draw down on a lot of the ridiculousness. there are consequences though.
people don't want to go through border patrol check points that does mean more illegals and more overstays will make it into the interior.
people don't want to go through tsa check points and all the other airport security. a bomb will eventually make it on to a plane and put a hole in that plane midflight.
all these things are fine and will become business as usual eventually as long as we all accept it. there are way worse things that happen on a daily basis in other parts of the world. there are places on earth where a car blowing up with the magnitude of an anti tank mine outside of a police station is normal. i have heard these places, like jerusalem, aren't even terrible places to live, just every once in a while the big boom that you didn't expect.
i have opinions on what should happen to people who try to make those big booms and i think that the government should be allowed to find those people without inconveniencing the general public, but we will have to disagree on that one as i know your stance.
did I ever say mistakes are not allowed to happen ?
you are citing the mistakes and counting them as the rule. just like righteous shoots by law abiding gun carriers the success stories of counter terrorism aren't not celebrated by the press. these are principles that should not be lost on this crowd.
ummm terrorist countries are just that !
and yeah for sure basic things like known terrorists ? thats a no brainer
its like saying put your shoes on ! do I need to tell you to tie them ?
come on !
the fact that you would trivialize this point means you don't have a complete understanding of how the world really works. might i add, even if there are labeled terrorist sponsoring countries, are the majority of visa holders from those places terrorists? that's a resounding no. fact. but you're willing to sacrifice the entire system for less than 1%. we will disagree.
homegrown terrorism is not our problem compared to outside
yes it happens and yes they can monitor for things like that
bomb material checks were put in place a long time ago !
really... that's all there is to it? when terrorists make bombs do they strap them to themselves? they go through all the education and training to become a bomb maker and the cell will just allow them to be detonated? no. bomb materials are acquired by mules, just like drugs are ferried by mules. the assembler just makes the bomb. the cute blonde that loves allah is the one that detonates. it's not checkers man. why would you ever think it was checkers?
My gut tells me you aren't just expressing yet another controversial opinion but rather fulfilling a however feeble agenda.
Why is that?
because i learn stuff from you guys. i also like the truth.
OK I have no idea how the world works :) hahaahha
you have no clue :) what I know or things I have done
sorry but some countries are known terrorist countries :)
most all of the Terrorists are from those countries so tracking in and out of those countries is key !
you are good for a laugh :)
you are citing the mistakes and counting them as the rule. just like righteous shoots by law abiding gun carriers the success stories of counter terrorism aren't not celebrated by the press. these are principles that should not be lost on this crowd.
the fact that you would trivialize this point means you don't have a complete understanding of how the world really works. might i add, even if there are labeled terrorist sponsoring countries, are the majority of visa holders from those places terrorists? that's a resounding no. fact. but you're willing to sacrifice the entire system for less than 1%. we will disagree.
really... that's all there is to it? when terrorists make bombs do they strap them to themselves? they go through all the education and training to become a bomb maker and the cell will just allow them to be detonated? no. bomb materials are acquired by mules, just like drugs are ferried by mules. the assembler just makes the bomb. the cute blonde that loves allah is the one that detonates. it's not checkers man. why would you ever think it was checkers?
so that means guys that show up at a house to have sex with an underage girl they met on the internet, who promised to bring jack daniels and condoms... totally innocent huh? so that's not a successful operation in your book, that's a no go. i suppose the government shouldn't set up a pretend crack house and arrest people who show up to buy crack, or set up fake prostitutes and arrest those who try to get a quickie after work. these are all no gos to you. got it. i hate to assume, but i'm betting that you would like there to be no way for illegal activity to be prosecuted because you don't want it to be possible for evidence to be gathered. i really got to wonder what you do with your life that you want so badly to be uncaptureable.
Perhaps I articulated my previous point poorly. What I'm saying is I take issue with the fed coming out at saying see we stopped all of these terrorist plots and are keeping you safe but they essentially manufactured the plots to begin with. I'm fine with setting up stings to catch would be bad guys but don't come out touting your successes like your doing something magical in the name of public safety. That is their fvcking job. Now how many would be plots have stopped where the bad guys had more at their disposal than just the intent and desire to do something evil and actually had or were actively procuring the neccesary operational means to carry out said attacks? I don't know because again were not always told so maybe its a lot maybe not. As to what I bolded Really?? I mean really? :eek: I guess since I have nothing to hide I shouldn't care about my privacy rights? It's called good ole fashion police work. Get out work leads, apply for warrants, build cases, you know that sort of stuff but do so within the constraints of the law.
no the tea party didn't do that, but you do know as well as everyone else here there has been some more extreme rhetoric. the least of which the likes of the liberal media has drummed up plenty of paranoid fanfare about. the sword cuts both ways is the point. it does have something to do with national security, specifically because people on this very forum made a huge deal when articles in the press talked about law enforcement being cautioned about "right wing activists." but it's fine if you don't want to accept the point.
And all of that drummed up rhetoric occurred for political reasons with the emphasis always coming down not on those who actually intend to do us harm (a la radical islam because that would be PC) but instead some perversion of those who support liberty. And yes I agree that goes both ways, neither of which are healthy for our country.
can you really execute these goals of yours without becoming more like the police state that you so dread? lock down the border... how much manpower and how feasible would this even be in real life to serve your single minded goal? as if that actually solves the problem too... because it doesn't. that would only mean more "immigration" check points and other places where you have to encounter law enforcement and claim that your rights are being violated and you feel controlled etc.
Again it comes down to priorities. Have you seen the data center the NSA is building and the surveillance programs they have in place? We wouldn't need random check points if we had a better handle on who was coming in and out of this country be they U.S. civilians or foreigners.
the goal of terrorism is to kill enemies. it's the proverbial us vs. them. does the gangbanger use terrorism? yes. drive by shootings, executions/assassinations. is there some long thought out agenda and public relations or psyops campaign behind any of that? no. there isn't. there's one goal, kill the enemy. leverage the power your have to dominate the terrain, whether physical or mental, that you want to have control over. whatever ancillary benefit comes from their reaction is just that, ancillary. are terrorists really winning when they make us more vigilant? who knows. you can argue both ways, it makes their attacks more difficult to some degree and it makes our lives a little worse to some degree. what would the alternative be? they kill some of us, we kill some of them. it still boils down to that same basic math.
do we cause terrorism on them when our ninjas kick in the doors and kill all the armed men in a house? i don't know. some of the armed men in that house were waiting for their card to be pulled. some aren't. some yearn for the fight, some are dragged into it. does it take away all their freedoms knowing that they are all being listened to and they can all be killed at any time for being in the wrong place with the wrong gun in their hands? maybe... but is that the primary goal? or is the primary goal to kill people who are actively trying to kill us? terrorism is just as bad of a label as war on[drugs.
This is fundamentally wrong. That is not what terrorism. It is about fear nothing more. You could argue their are varying degrees depending on what definition you want to use but again fundamentally it comes down to use of fear to force political change and post 9/11 it worked unimaginably well unfortunately. As to the rest again your just being argumentative. But agree that the term terrorism is overused why? because it is politically expedient to do so. What to get something done and get people to support say it is necessary to prevent terrorism (sound familiar? DiFi defending the NSA? et al) so anyone who opposes is against protecting the homeland and the American public. Political posturing at its finest.
the problem with the mundane deaths is you can't really save yourself or others from stupid. every once in a while you can save someone from evil. isn't that why warriors long for the righteous fight? isn't that why people here carry? but i agree. let's accept attacks as a reality and do away with the preventative measures that inconvenience people on a daily basis.
i would like to keep the other investigative tools that don't inconvenience people daily that help the government identify bad people and kill them overseas.
This is not a rational argument. The fight should be viewed within the rational context of what is. The ability to balance freedom with national security is fine line for sure but when the prevention measures in place do nothing more in most instances than provide a false sense of security then they do more harm then good. The simple reality is that there is a (or should be anyway) wall of constitutional protections to which any security measures should not be permitted side step under any circumstances. Does that make us less "safe" maybe maybe not but I for one would rather live free than be subjected to whimsical and incompetent solutions to protect me from a statistically improbable event. Learning to control the weather in order to reduce the annual death rates from tornadoes would be a more fruitful venture I reckon.
As for overseas ops and targeted killings I'm fine with that. In fact their should be more of it. I want the CIA to doing what they used to do, kill bad guys discreetly. Lets grow SOF and cut them loose. No more pussyfooting around like we've done for years.
sorry but some countries are known terrorist countries :)
most all of the Terrorists are from those countries so tracking in and out of those countries is key !
yes there are many known terrorist sponsoring countries. the majority of visa holders from these countries that are withing the united states and her territories are not terrorists. this nation will not forgo all the visitation from nationals of other countries for the sake of stopping some small number of evil people. it's not going to happen, it's not at all practical. is that a stretch to believe?
do you not think the united states government tries to monitor as much as they can of known terrorists? mistakes are made. finding a needle in a stack of needs isn't easy. if you don't feel like they're doing a good enough job then i say you get yourself to a place where you can do better.
yes there are many known terrorist sponsoring countries. the majority of visa holders from these countries that are withing the united states and her territories are not terrorists. this nation will not forgo all the visitation from nationals of other countries for the sake of stopping some small number of evil people. it's not going to happen, it's not at all practical. is that a stretch to believe?
do you not think the united states government tries to monitor as much as they can of known terrorists? mistakes are made. finding a needle in a stack of needs isn't easy. if you don't feel like they're doing a good enough job then i say you get yourself to a place where you can do better.
If they can put in place Obamacare (granted its a tragedy) which extends itself so intimately into the lives of every American they can sure as hell do a better job when it comes to border security overall. America doesn't need Obamacare, it needs better border security. priorities...
Perhaps I articulated my previous point poorly. What I'm saying is I take issue with the fed coming out at saying see we stopped all of these terrorist plots and are keeping you safe but they essentially manufactured the plots to begin with. I'm fine with setting up stings to catch would be bad guys but don't come out touting your successes like your doing something magical in the name of public safety. That is their fvcking job. Now how many would be plots have stopped where the bad guys had more at their disposal than just the intent and desire to do something evil and actually had or were actively procuring the neccesary operational means to carry out said attacks? I don't know because again were not always told so maybe its a lot maybe not. As to what I bolded Really?? I mean really? :eek: I guess since I have nothing to hide I shouldn't care about my privacy rights? It's called good ole fashion police work. Get out work leads, apply for warrants, build cases, you know that sort of stuff but do so within the constraints of the law.
if there is a notion that the war on terror is somehow over and that the fbi is putting up victory banners and throwing high fives and slapping backs that notion should be terminated immediately.
i am an advocate for good old fashion police work also. a lot of that is just waiting. a lot of that is getting lucky. there are tons of crimes both moral offenses and otherwise that go uncaught everyday.
the one defense that i have for the nsa is would you want the nsa and the cia to wait two to three weeks for verizon to respond to their court order before they can make a kill or no kill decision on a target? a kill or no kill order on a mission that would produce american casualties both domestic and abroad. would you? i would want them to have all the information on tap and restrict their ability to search that information only as it pertains to real targets of real investigations that are of high value. but that's me... i'm ok with them having everything i ever said as long as they don't look at it. they can look at it if i start making plans to cause grave or severe bodily harm to americans, but under no other circumstance. if i am growing weed in my back yard and i tell my best friend about it, forget it, go get a warrant. hell, if i stole the crown jewels of england, get a warrant. i would understand if a lot of people here aren't on that page with me.
And all of that drummed up rhetoric occurred for political reasons with the emphasis always coming down not on those who actually intend to do us harm (a la radical islam because that would be PC) but instead some perversion of those who support liberty. And yes I agree that goes both ways, neither of which are healthy for our country.
i am not saying liberty is bad, liberty is good. perhaps the concern of most here lies in the fact that a mental law enforcement presence actually does something to the calculus of decision making of free law abiding people. that concern comes from a logical, reasoned place. the criminal element doesn't retain these features, but they're not a part of this system anyway. i do encourage a deep look at what's truly going on in the modern surveillance state. i encourage it as a holistic view however. balancing what problems we have to contend with, what decisions have to be made, what operational necessities exist and the compromises this administration and this nation has made. it will absolutely be unreasonable to some, but i would say the fine line of this type that has to be walked will certainly always displease some.
Again it comes down to priorities. Have you seen the data center the NSA is building and the surveillance programs they have in place? We wouldn't need random check points if we had a better handle on who was coming in and out of this country be they U.S. civilians or foreigners.
i don't think the united states doesn't have an idea of who comes in and who goes out. i think the united states has a very good idea of that.
however if people make noise about mexican nationals coming and going as they please without documentation, how else can the government respond but by putting out more border patrol tracking more foot prints, asking more motorists their immigration status near the border?
the real problem lies in the fact that we can't stop people from crossing the rio grande no matter how many people we put there. people make mistakes, get bored, check their phone, play solitaire, some immigrants are ninjas. the same person can get caught at the border over and over again until one day the border patrol don't see him anymore... and they will assume he finally made it into the interior. that's just the rio grande, how much other vast expanse is there? you're faced with the unfaltering will of someone who is desperate to get the f out of mexico. the human will is a terrible thing to wage war against. so to put pressure against the illegal immigration of mexican nationals into the united states, you must put more people on more shifts to catch and release, catch and release, catch and release. is it a waste of money? maybe. you brought up priorities. that's a priority that you can spend more money on than auto racing. quick way to turn a billion into a million.
This is fundamentally wrong. That is not what terrorism. It is about fear nothing more. You could argue their are varying degrees depending on what definition you want to use but again fundamentally it comes down to use of fear to force political change and post 9/11 it worked unimaginably well unfortunately. As to the rest again your just being argumentative. But agree that the term terrorism is overused why? because it is politically expedient to do so. What to get something done and get people to support say it is necessary to prevent terrorism (sound familiar? DiFi defending the NSA? et al) so anyone who opposes is against protecting the homeland and the American public. Political posturing at its finest.
is aq's goal to turn american into a surveillance state? they don't have to do that. russia and china and saudi arabia and the uk did that to us. everyone has a survillance state and the united states has to keep up.
aq wants to kill americans. they want the downfall of america. can they assure that downfall by turning us into a surveillance tyranny? hardly. that's not their goal or what they want. they want the ideological punishment of our arrogant society. to that i would say they can try, but when they do they force our hand to kill they who act against us.
it is perhaps our own government that wants to leverage public opinion (whether that's fear based or not, there are plenty of issues that are swayed by not fear but other social factors, gay marriage is an example). they may be right to leverage that opinion to create change, luckily we live in a system where there are pressures and counter pressures and as the situation evolves we can change the system to re-adapt. perhaps it's time to stop the changes that were resultant of knee jerk fear. we should evaluate what is acceptable in terms of losing to those that wish to do us harm.
This is not a rational argument. The fight should be viewed within the rational context of what is. The ability to balance freedom with national security is fine line for sure but when the prevention measures in place do nothing more in most instances than provide a false sense of security then they do more harm then good. The simple reality is that there is a (or should be anyway) wall of constitutional protections to which any security measures should not be permitted side step under any circumstances. Does that make us less "safe" maybe maybe not but I for one would rather live free than be subjected to whimsical and incompetent solutions to protect me from a statistically improbable event. Learning to control the weather in order to reduce the annual death rates from tornadoes would be a more fruitful venture I reckon.
i would agree that many measures may be placebo or unrealistic hopes. costly ones. typically in an organization like an employer, if someone is to die that is the most costly outcome. lessons learned have to be enacted to prevent death. insurance has to be purchased to cover the costs of death. how much did 9/11 cost? there were the lives lost, that's a number in the millions of dollars. there's the lives medically irreparably affected that will be in the millions also. the buildings and infrastructure, millions. stock market, airline reputation damage, billions probably.
is it getting to the point where we spend more than we spent on 9/11? is the cost benefit outweighed yet? this is a despicable way to evaluate things, but political discussions and displeasure with the government always seems come down to money. so have we?
As for overseas ops and targeted killings I'm fine with that. In fact their should be more of it. I want the CIA to doing what they used to do, kill bad guys discreetly. Lets grow SOF and cut them loose. No more pussyfooting around like we've done for years.
this was already being done without you even asking. courtesy of your american government.
so the Boston bomber was a mistake in your eyes ?
one that slipped through ?
even though they were told you have a terrorist on your hands and they did interview him let him go its just a slip through the cracks ?
simple yes or no if it was just a slip a mistake ?
yes there are many known terrorist sponsoring countries. the majority of visa holders from these countries that are withing the united states and her territories are not terrorists. this nation will not forgo all the visitation from nationals of other countries for the sake of stopping some small number of evil people. it's not going to happen, it's not at all practical. is that a stretch to believe?
do you not think the united states government tries to monitor as much as they can of known terrorists? mistakes are made. finding a needle in a stack of needs isn't easy. if you don't feel like they're doing a good enough job then i say you get yourself to a place where you can do better.
so the Boston bomber was a mistake in your eyes ?
one that slipped through ?
even though they were told you have a terrorist on your hands and they did interview him let him go its just a slip through the cracks ?
OK
i'm not saying it was a mistake for sure. i was not the person notified. i was not the person who conducted the interview (likely not the same person that was notified i would imagine). i was not there at any point. neither were you. this is called monday morning quarterbacking and you're acting the arm chair hero.
if you were law enforcement, you were told someone was a terrorist and the only option you had was to talk to him. how weak is that case? if you had more you wouldn't be talking to the person and giving away the fact that the person was under investigation. with so little to go off of, what else would you do? on the outside the guy probably looks like he has a college life with his overly aggressive brother.
even if you did know exactly that he was up to something. what can you do unless you catch him in the act of doing something that screams terrorist? read his terrorist emails? how did you obtain the probable cause to read his email? unless you offer him explosives and he buys them, how else do i obtain probable cause to arrest him? if you can answer these questions then feel free to blame whoever it was that obviously botched the job that you could have done so much better. if not, then i'm pretty sure that guy's still having a shittier day than you, so at least you can feel good about that.
i am an advocate for good old fashion police work also.......they can look at it if i start making plans to cause grave or severe bodily harm to americans, but under no other circumstance. if i am growing weed in my back yard and i tell my best friend about it, forget it, go get a warrant. hell, if i stole the crown jewels of england, get a warrant. i would understand if a lot of people here aren't on that page with me.
I think most people here are on the same page with what I quoted above from you. That is the essence of the arguing back and forth. Okay to use for bad guys overseas or terror plots here, but NOT for any other domestic LE activity. Problem with the whole thing is who's watching the watchers? The DEA's shenanigans come to mind, and only because it leaked out.
Houston, we have a problem........
i suppose the government shouldn't set up a pretend crack house and arrest people who show up to buy crack, or set up fake prostitutes and arrest those who try to get a quickie after work. these are all no gos to you. got it.
No, they shouldn't.
because i learn stuff from you guys. i also like the truth.
You may be here to learn but it isn't about the truth. If you gave two shits about that you'd acknowledge the obvious, which is that unparalleled intrusive powers are being wielded by an equally unparalleled manipulative, deceitful and agenda-driven administration.
Whatever you're up to it's rather unusual.
montanadave
08-09-13, 11:35
You may be here to learn but it isn't about the truth. If you gave two shits about that you'd acknowledge the obvious, which is that unparalleled intrusive powers are being wielded by an equally unparalleled manipulative, deceitful and agenda-driven administrations.
Whatever you're up to it's rather unusual.
Not excusing the actions of the current administration one iota. But let's not kid ourselves. This shit did not commence in January of '09, it merely picked up speed and rolled on. The die was cast long ago and each succeeding administration has continued to push the envelope of executive power in the face of a feckless Congress and a complicit Supreme Court.
Not excusing the actions of the current administration one iota. But let's not kid ourselves. This shit did not commence in January of '09, it merely picked up speed and rolled on. The die was cast long ago and each succeeding administration has continued to push the envelope of executive power in the face of a feckless Congress and a complicit Supreme Court.
Show me where I said all previous administrations were clean or tell us why your statement is relevant to mine.
montanadave
08-09-13, 12:13
Show me where I said all previous administrations were clean or tell us why your statement is relevant to mine.
My apologies for the misinterpretation.
Merely emphasizing "what's past is prologue." No offense intended.
BTW, did you see this thread?: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=136361
My apologies for the misinterpretation.
Merely emphasizing "what's past is prologue." No offense intended.
BTW, did you see this thread?: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=136361
Nice attempted deflection Dave, although perhaps I am just that foolish for not ignoring you. Who knows? ;)
The problem is that those who have taken an oath to protect the constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic do not. They just serve.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.