Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:36 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,795,846 times
Reputation: 4174

Advertisements

My jaw is hanging open at this one.

I have my problems with the govt collecting all these phone records. But not at the idea of them examining records with a warrant, but at the idea that the govt itself owns the database of records - an obvious temptation for abuse, quietly going in to their own records without getting a warrant as the 4th amendment requires.

But now I hear that, even though they were going in and examining these records, they deliberately didn't do it where a mosque was involved???

WHAT THE HELL?????

Did they also back off if they found a phone number they were chasing, led to a Catholic church, or Baptist, or a synagogue, or Mormon etc.?

As cynical as I am about what this administration does, I've never bought into the idea that they would deliberately REFUSE to investigate Islamic groups simply because they were Islamic groups. That would be a little like, during WWII, refusing to investigate Nazi-sympathizer groups simply because they were Nazi sympathizers, even as people with clear Nazi connections went around derailing trains and blowing things up.

Even the TSA, when it screens airline passengers, special-screens SOME middle-Eastern people speaking Arabic, and doesn't screen others, even as it special-screens some 80-year-old grandmothers and doesn't screen others. But has the TSA ever been ordered not to special-screen ANY middle-eastern-looking people, after the vast majority of hijackings, bombings etc. have been done by middle Eastern people?

The article mentions that a few Islamic groups (CAIR etc.) "pressured" the government to back off. Please, please tell me that the govt's response was, "Go take a hike, we treat everybody the same, including middle eastern people".

Please.

The implications of any other response, are too monstrous to be borne.

-----------------------------------------------------

Obama Restricts Spying In Mosques While Spying Everywhere Else - Investors.com

Obama's Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers

Posted 06/12/2013 06:34 PM ET

Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.

That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.

Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.

Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.

We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel's formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.


One of the Muslim bombers made extremist outbursts during worship, yet because the mosque wasn't monitored, red flags didn't go off inside the FBI about his increasing radicalization before the attacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:39 PM
 
8,091 posts, read 5,918,832 times
Reputation: 1578
I'm sure it excludes all places of worship....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:42 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,795,846 times
Reputation: 4174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz View Post
I'm sure it excludes all places of worship....
I would very much like to see evidence supporting this guess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:46 PM
 
8,091 posts, read 5,918,832 times
Reputation: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
I would very much like to see evidence supporting this guess.
I would too...

How about you find the bill that "excluded mosques" and we will have our answer... because as of right now all you are doing is parroting.

At the current moment... I can't find anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 12:46 PM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,953,424 times
Reputation: 2385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
I would very much like to see evidence supporting this guess.
How would more information than what they already had... have helpped in any why to make the FBI or any other governmental agency act any differently than as they did?

More spying does not equal better results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 01:20 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,469,789 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz View Post
I'm sure it excludes all places of worship....
Yeah right... First of all, how do they know what is what if they are only collecting numbers that they have no idea who they are? Think about it, if what you said is true, then they DO know who those numbers belong to. What about FBI infiltration? Should they also not be allowed to infiltrate ANY private meetings or gatherings?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 01:21 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,469,789 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones View Post

More spying does not equal better results.
Holy cow, and you support them collecting on ALL Americans after saying this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 01:24 PM
 
1,209 posts, read 1,037,569 times
Reputation: 522
So the Boston bombers were making phone calls from phones in a mosque?????????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 01:28 PM
 
8,091 posts, read 5,918,832 times
Reputation: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
Yeah right... First of all, how do they know what is what if they are only collecting numbers that they have no idea who they are? Think about it, if what you said is true, then they DO know who those numbers belong to. What about FBI infiltration? Should they also not be allowed to infiltrate ANY private meetings or gatherings?
Well, if they did exclude all places of worship...it would be consistent with what many Americans want, wouldn't it? Places of worship free from state influence and vice versa?

That being said...even if this were the case, I don't give any points for being consistent. I don't think he blatantly supports extremists in the name of any religion...but this bombing, IMO, now has even stronger implications of a false flag attack.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2013, 01:32 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,920,254 times
Reputation: 14345
I think the OP has misread their link.

The phone companies are turning over their COMPLETE phone records. They aren't editing out phone calls that are initiated from or routed to mosques. In the case of cell and mobile phones, they wouldn't even be able to tell that information.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:29 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top