Another blow to freedom in the name of anti-terrorism.
- Thread starter LaBang
- Start date
The government knows if they take away our rights slowly enough, the only people who will notice will be the whilstle blowers, and nobody listens to them until it's too late.
as far as I am concerned they can do whatever the hell they want to ensure that there will not be another sept. 11th.
I don't break the law, so go right ahead and do whatever you want....tap my damn phones if you feel as though I am a threat...
by the way...we really need to kill all those afganistan bastards held down in Cuba or else they are going to do it all over again. God do I really really REALLY hate those damn people that are fighting for their rights....did any of you see the damn daniel pearl video??? after seeing that I have zero compassion for those bastards.
IMHO
:|
I don't break the law, so go right ahead and do whatever you want....tap my damn phones if you feel as though I am a threat...
by the way...we really need to kill all those afganistan bastards held down in Cuba or else they are going to do it all over again. God do I really really REALLY hate those damn people that are fighting for their rights....did any of you see the damn daniel pearl video??? after seeing that I have zero compassion for those bastards.
IMHO
:|
Agreed.
This is a conservative regime in office so I'm not too concerned. The rest of you chcken little's out there who can somehow claim we're all losing our freedoms might actually want to go live somewhere else where you'd have more freedom - oh wait! There's no such place! Imagine that...
Linflas
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2001
- 15,395
- 78
- 91
As long as they are not hacking into peoples sites or machines without a warrant what is the problem? Don't we all assume that anything we put on the net is pretty much viewable by anyone? Frankly I am pretty surprised they have not been doing this all along but then again maybe I shouldn't be given what we have done to all of our intelligence services in the past 40 years.
Ok then, you don't mind if I tap your phone? How about if I come by and search your car and house randomly?
You really don't seem to be concerned with anyone's rights, including your own.
Ah, got it. Maybe a
Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
Ah, got it. Maybe anext time to help the slow-witted identify the sarcasm. I'll leave the question there though. Someone who's serious will answer it soon.
Haha. Ok.
Thing is, I'm not even sure how to do the eye-roll smiley...
I guess this bothered me because i'm sure that it will be used against political organizations. They were just given the right to spy on say Greenpeace even if there is no investigation going on.
Al-qaeda is the cause but the enemy can be all of us.
Al-qaeda is the cause but the enemy can be all of us.
XZeroII
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2001
- 12,572
- 0
- 0
For how long will we have our freedoms? I can't even go fishing w/o paying the gov't first. What the **** kind of freedom is that? Maybe if you're willing to have less freedom in exchange for a false sense of security, you should go live somewhere else. I'm happy with my freedoms and security right now. If yo don't like it, move somewhere else.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
I'm going to address this single issue - Fishing and hunting licenses, and wildlife stamps are the only means of revenue for many states wildlife and conservation departments. Public lakes don't get stocked for free, and DNR employees don't work free.
Yes, I can see the argument if you are fishing soley on a private pond or lake, but a vast number of people are not.
<<Ok then, you don't mind if I tap your phone? How about if I come by and search your car and house randomly?>>
If you think that I am a threat, then come on right in.....I have nothing to hide.....it is either this or be in a building when planes fly into it....what would you choose??
If you think that I am a threat, then come on right in.....I have nothing to hide.....it is either this or be in a building when planes fly into it....what would you choose??
Well if the F&WS or the EPA stocks the lakes with fish and cleans the waters and cleans up after you and other fishermen litter all over the place, you probably should be paying them to go fishing.
And please give some empirical evidence for what you consider a false sense of security. I'm the one that likes it as is, and the FBI can gladly search through my property if it'll make us safer.
There is a price to freedom and prosperity. Can't believe how many spoiled punks refuse to own up to it.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,454
- 19,919
- 146
Honestly? Planes flying into buildings. If that's what it takes to secure our right to privacy, and maintain the government's requirement to have probable cause and a search warrant, then so be it.
However, this is not a valid argument. We can keep our country secure without invading privacy, and throwing probable cause limitations out the window. Solutions that give up our freedoms are simply knee-jerk reactions, and are actually counter productive. Even the most oppressive states on Earth have been hit by terrorism. Oppressing one's citizens does NOT stop terrorists.
As to the topic at hand, the government is simply looking at already public actions, events, and websites. From what I understand they are not going beyond that.
The right to privacy. This does not just concern surfing the web. Now FBI agents can walk in on any political or religious meeting, without any probable cause, just to check up on what is happening there. Yes it is nice if they walk in on the al-Queda council meeting, but do you want FBI agents wandering into your next LAN party taking stock of what is happening there?
Again, the point is that they can do these things even if they do not think you are a threat. They've always been able to do this if you are a potential threat. That's called probable cause.
What's your point? Is there some requirement for them to publicly declare there's an investigation before they're allowed to go and look at their web site? Or go to one of their meetings? I don't understand how this is any different than having a cop patrolling his assigned area.
Let's get one thing straight. I have never been to, have interest in or planned a LAN party.
While that may be true, I will still never willingly give up freedoms, that said, this new re-organization does not really infringe upon any freedoms we currently enjoy. Please read over what it does.
What it does:
Grants FBI agents the ability to seek a warrant without notifying the central office (Stream lining the system)
it allows the FBI to gather information on individuals even if they are not under criminal investigation (This one is definitely worrying, and I would like to see it stricken from the new Attorney General guidelines because the government does not have the right to deny my inherent right of privacy, this is definitely violating the bill of rights, and will hopefully soon be repealed)
The FBI can begin monitoring Internet sites, as well as libraries and religious institutions. (This one too is a little difficult to swallow, as long as they are not there with video cameras and tape recorders, and are not using entrapment of any kind I do not have a problem with them monitoring sites, but I do believe that they should issue a warning each and every time they are doing it so people will know that they are being monitored, unless of course the have a warrant. I do disagree with the FBI monitoring religious institutions, unless they have obtained a warrant, this ammounts to profiling. Monitoring Libraries as long as their actions fall under the powers bestowed upon them, I don't have a problem with since they are government property.)
Right after I saw those two jetliners hit the WTC buildings I knew we were in for some loss of freedom, like it or not.
It seems the FBI is in a no-win situation. They're blamed for screwing up and allowing 9/11 to happen even though they weren't really an anti-terrorist organization. Then they're blamed for requesting any additional authority to be more effective at stopping terrorists in the future.
Anyway, what I'd like to see, when a federal agencies gains new powers which can be abused, are new checks and balances. Or perhaps a means to eliminate those powers when they're no longer necessary (this idea comes from my bro.).
Expansion of federal powers well in excess of its mandate is very dangerous especially when the exercisers of that power have little or no accountability to the public.
It seems the FBI is in a no-win situation. They're blamed for screwing up and allowing 9/11 to happen even though they weren't really an anti-terrorist organization. Then they're blamed for requesting any additional authority to be more effective at stopping terrorists in the future.
Anyway, what I'd like to see, when a federal agencies gains new powers which can be abused, are new checks and balances. Or perhaps a means to eliminate those powers when they're no longer necessary (this idea comes from my bro.).
Expansion of federal powers well in excess of its mandate is very dangerous especially when the exercisers of that power have little or no accountability to the public.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter