"Bush-Cheney began illegal NSA spying before 9/11, says telcom CEO"

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by philnotfil, Jul 15, 2013.

  1. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    We had "actionable" intel on the Tsarnaev Bros? What was that?

    Yes the point is to "catch the bad guys." But how much liberty are you willing to trade to do that, given that we obviously can't foil every plot?
  2. philnotfil
    Offline

    philnotfil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    12,918
    Likes Received:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +854
    I'm disappointed in those who react to hearing this news with partisanship.
  3. neisgator
    Offline

    neisgator Belligerent Gator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,618
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Quincy IL
    Ratings Received:
    +106
    Im disappointed in those hearing this news reacting at all.
  4. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,848
    Likes Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,885
    You're the one happy about Obama surveiling us all, so you tell me how much liberty you're willing to trade.

    The WHOLE POINT of any NSA surveillance monitoring is to catch guys tike the Boston bombers, but Obama is too busy spending intelligence officers spying on the Republicans like Mitch McConnell's offices to catch anyone that might be a terrorist.

    it's very likey to happen a gain (another Boston type bombing) because Obama is using this Patriot Act to spy on the other side, just like Nixon did before he resigned for fear of impeachment. All his people are too busy spying on the wrong people to catch the next bombers.
  5. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    In all of the history of Too Hot, please find a post where I haven't taken consistent civil libertarian positions on national security and police matters. If you do, then lecture me about Obama, rick. Thanks.
  6. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,848
    Likes Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,885
    Deflecting again... I see. Just explain why you think Obama should get a pass on the NSA surveillance of all Americans.
  7. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    I don't. Next question.
  8. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,848
    Likes Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,885
    So, then why do you think the Boston bombers didn't get caught before hand?
  9. DaveFla
    Offline

    DaveFla VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,448
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +1,026
    My thoughts exactly...
  10. DaveFla
    Offline

    DaveFla VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,448
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +1,026
    LOL...

    The irony...
    • Like Like x 1
  11. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    What? Do you think even the most comprehensive and sweeping surveilance system can be 100% effective?
  12. vaxcardinal
    Offline

    vaxcardinal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    3,742
    Likes Received:
    496
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +773
    I think they've already explained Boston...they did not communicate with foreigners/suspected terrorists and they were in the US. And...they cant be 100% effective.
  13. JerseyGator01
    Offline

    JerseyGator01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,453
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +783
    Like I've said before, the fat white liberal lawyers in DC only care about so-called privacy when it comes to abortion.
  14. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,848
    Likes Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,885
    They were warned about them by at least one other nation. How dense does someone have to be not to even consider that as actionable?
  15. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    What kind of action should be taken based on a "warning," in a country where people have 4th Amendment protections and the presumption of innocence?
  16. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,848
    Likes Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,885
    If we're all presumed innocent then why is the NSA even spying on us in the first place? You can't put those two together without losing your argument. Can you?
  17. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    Legally speaking, the NSA's warrant for gathering "limited" data was approved by the FISA court, and has thus cleared the necessary legal/Constitutional hurdles. A "warning" (whatever that constitutes) from a foreign nation has not cleared that hurdle, until sufficient evident is brought to the court, and a warrant is issued. This is not a justification, just a clear legal distinction.
  18. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,848
    Likes Received:
    2,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,885
    The foreign government (Russia) should have given the NSA the reason to FOCUS on those two bombers, but the NSA failed miserably, and many innocent people are dead because of their inaction.

    In the Preamble of the Constitution is says to "...provide for the common defense..." and to "...insure domestic tranquility..."

    The NSA is not acting in accordance with The Law of the U.S.A..

    Spying on every American on Earth does not promoter "tranquility" in any way shape or form.

    They need to spy on the terrorists.

  19. vaxcardinal
    Offline

    vaxcardinal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    3,742
    Likes Received:
    496
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +773
    Russia gave the FBI information and the FBI should have been able to retrieve the necessary information to connect the dots
  20. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,177
    Actually, the NSA is operating in accordance with the law of the USA, that's what I find particularly troubling. This isnt COINTELPRO or Hoover-type extralegal shenanigans.

Share This Page