Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, I know someone is going to go all Patrick Henry on me in about half a second. Just pointing out that there are real costs to weigh here on both sides...
On one hand, you can defend your individual freedoms to the max...and get increasingly what they just had in France.
On the other hand, you can have the NSA snoop around more and get less of what they just had in France...but there's a cost to your individual freedom.
With the new tactics terrorists are taking to weave into society and attack "within", how else are societal authorities supposed to find and stop these guys without having prying ears on internet, telecom, etc? It can't be done without that.
So what say you? Do you want more terrorist attacks here like in France, or do you want the NSA spying? You can't have it both ways and get less attacks and less spying.
Then again, maybe even if there are more of those kinds of terrorist attacks here, they won't make much of a splash given the terrorist attacks our own crazy citizens routinely inflict whenever they get their hands on a gun and hit a movie theater or school...
So what say you? Do you want more terrorist attacks here like in France, or do you want the NSA spying? You can't have it both ways and get less attacks and less spying.
Of course we can. It's called minding our own goddamned business.
Have there been any Muslim extremists attacking Costa Rica lately?
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,171,154 times
Reputation: 8105
OK ..... how many deaths were there from terrorism in this country over the past few years ..... compared to something else such as bee stings or lightning strikes?
What percentage of terrorist plots have been sniffed out by illegal NSA surveillance, as opposed to legal footwork by the FBI?
Terrorism isn't yet something so dangerous that we need to lose our right to privacy. There's far more danger from people tapping into that NSA database - Snowden showed that some private corporations take, as well as give, from them ...... and individuals seeking power could use all that too.
The risks of a terrorist attack are very low, the risks of the loss of privacy, restriction of innocent people's rights, and government and corporate abuses, are higher. No NSA surveillance would have prevented the Boston bomber attacks.
What would make more sense is to stop young men from being allowed to visit countries like Syria or Cheznya for a month or more and then return to the U.S. (Same goes for Europe.) It makes no sense. If young men want to visit those countries let them forfeit the right to return to the U.S. If someone has a pile of relatives in those countries let them use Skype.
I actually don't mind a little snooping. Unfortunately, the NSA went way overboard. I wouldn't mind a little profiling either, but that's not going to happen. It's always the same old story, we either do too little or do too much.
The NSA collects all electronic traffic from everyone and I am sure hones in on parties of interest which would include cabinet officers. At least if I had "Herbert Hoover" like powers, politicians would be given special treatment. Especially "foreign communications" into the US (i.e. Clinton finds a mark in Dubai willing to fund her foundation).
One way or another, Hillary's private Internet traffic would be "collected." So what I am saying, ask the NSA. It knows.
Yes, I know someone is going to go all Patrick Henry on me in about half a second. Just pointing out that there are real costs to weigh here on both sides...
On one hand, you can defend your individual freedoms to the max...and get increasingly what they just had in France.
On the other hand, you can have the NSA snoop around more and get less of what they just had in France...but there's a cost to your individual freedom.
With the new tactics terrorists are taking to weave into society and attack "within", how else are societal authorities supposed to find and stop these guys without having prying ears on internet, telecom, etc? It can't be done without that.
So what say you? Do you want more terrorist attacks here like in France, or do you want the NSA spying? You can't have it both ways and get less attacks and less spying.
Then again, maybe even if there are more of those kinds of terrorist attacks here, they won't make much of a splash given the terrorist attacks our own crazy citizens routinely inflict whenever they get their hands on a gun and hit a movie theater or school...
The NSA and their billions of equipment didn't stop the Boston Bombers did it ?
With our open borders anyone can sneak in, poison the water supply and sneak out.
Yes, I know someone is going to go all Patrick Henry on me in about half a second. Just pointing out that there are real costs to weigh here on both sides...
On one hand, you can defend your individual freedoms to the max...and get increasingly what they just had in France.
On the other hand, you can have the NSA snoop around more and get less of what they just had in France...but there's a cost to your individual freedom.
With the new tactics terrorists are taking to weave into society and attack "within", how else are societal authorities supposed to find and stop these guys without having prying ears on internet, telecom, etc? It can't be done without that.
So what say you? Do you want more terrorist attacks here like in France, or do you want the NSA spying? You can't have it both ways and get less attacks and less spying.
Then again, maybe even if there are more of those kinds of terrorist attacks here, they won't make much of a splash given the terrorist attacks our own crazy citizens routinely inflict whenever they get their hands on a gun and hit a movie theater or school...
" or do you want the NSA spying?"
There is a LOT of MIS-INFORMATION on what NSA does.
But the problem I see is that searches do not fall under the rules setout by the supreme court. We could use same and solved alot of crimes that do a lot more harm at this point than few terrorist attacks we have had. There has always been a reason CIA is not allowed to operate within US and now NSA is even more intrusive. The NSA and official knew some of the actions were not legal under search laws and why they hid what they were doing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Worth re-posting here
