Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Manedew on November 23, 2003, 11:09:47 AM
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/23/national/23FBI.html?ei=1&en=90b63f376db6b63d&ex=1070534438&pagewanted=print&position=
I was always taught we belived in innocent until proven guilty .....
Seems the FBI has other ideas .... Because YOU might be a terroist he needs to keep track of you.... watch you.... .. thats basicly what these FBI agents say behind a bunch of BS
They try to strike fear in us by saying these are good places for terroist attacks.... What BS ....
What they are saying is background checks for being a citizen who 'might' do somethign crazy .... and they aren't talking about Al'Queda .... they mean like the socialists etc .. and ya they maybe annyoing .. but thats the USA....or they may mean you.... if you disagree too loudly.....
-
Shame on the FBI for trying to gather information on people that assault police officers, destroy private property, and commit corporate vandalism.
-
Peacefull protest is protected. Vandalism, assault, arson and riot are not. Once the first overt act is committed the situation has changed. Mob mentality is not pretty and the situations tend to escalate extremely fast.
Public gatherings in LARGE numbers are also a bit hard on the infrastructure of a city such as transportation when they block public access like streets.
I am not happy about the gathering of intel on citizens who have not done anything but I have to state after having been through a less than peacefull "gathering" I understand it.
Personally I cannot fathom the restraint shown by the Korean police during the "annual spring student protests". Facing molotave cocktails is hardly a sign of a peacefull demonstration. As far as I am concerned a person throwing a molotov cocktail is commiting attempted murder and deserves to be stopped.
-
The point is they are assumeing that these people are guilty of vandalism, assault, arson and riot... before the fact...... And the FBI is more than happy to admit it .. and the media seems little bothered by it
This doesn't bother you? That is searching without cause without warrent etc ... that's not what we're about .. we arn't cowards that need to spy on our own countrymen in fear,.... are we?
-
Originally posted by Manedew
The point is they are assumeing that these people are guilty of vandalism, assault, arson and riot... before the fact...... And the FBI is more than happy to admit it .. and the media seems little bothered by it
This doesn't bother you? That is searching without cause without warrent etc ... that's not what we're about .. we arn't cowards that need to spy on our own countrymen in fear,.... are we?
Does it bother me that the FBI is investigating groups that participate in events that destroy public property, private property, and injure citizens and public servants?
Nope, not in the least bit.
-
The point is they are not assuming anything. They are merely keeping an eye on a situation that could have negative consequences. If they did not then when a situation developed an accusation for doing nothing would be brought since they didn't prevent it from happening. Similar to the 9/11 critics who are now claiming the govt. is responsible for not preventing the attack.
Merely surveiling is not a search. Your implication of a warrantless search is invalid in the scope of the article you linked. You are reading more into the article that was stated.
-
so I'm assuming you guys are okay with being downgraded from citizen to potential criminal suspect.
-
Originally posted by Dinger
so I'm assuming you guys are okay with being downgraded from citizen to potential criminal suspect.
Yeah? Can you point me to where you saw my name on that list? You've never seen me at any protest that turned violent.
-
"We're not concerned with individuals who are exercising their constitutional rights," one F.B.I. official said. "But it's obvious that there are individuals capable of violence at these events. We know that there are anarchists that are actively involved in trying to sabotage and commit acts of violence at these different events, and we also know that these large gatherings would be a prime target for terrorist groups.
I suppose this statement could apply to any large group...sporting event, political rally, parade etc.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Shamus
I suppose this statement could apply to any large group...sporting event, political rally, parade etc.
shamus
Sure, any large group where assault, vandalism, and destruction of property (public and private) were the rule, not the exception.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Sure, any large group where assault, vandalism, and destruction of property (public and private) were the rule, not the exception.
Like when the Gaydors used to win.
-
The point is they are assumeing that these people are guilty of vandalism, assault, arson
Freaking hippies, lock em all up! :D
Seriously, if the FBI didn't excerise a little caution and kept an eye on these people, and they did something nasty, there would be a line of people ready to blast them for doing nothing. They provide a little (legal) surveilance, and you complain. FBI just can't win with some people.
Doesn't bother me if they keep an eye on the protestors, and if they protestors are not up to or planning anything illegal and just are excercising their right to lawful demostration, they shouldn't be bothered by it either.
dago
-
Gee I can't understand why the FBI and the police would take an interest in people who create pro-terrorist riots.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Gee I can't understand why the FBI and the police would take an interest in people who create pro-terrorist riots.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
I do believe the article is a little misleading.
"War protestors"
I'd have a tendancy to say Waco, Oklahoma City, the WTO and the ELF are also reasons behind this... not everything has to do with war protestors, though many cross back and forth.
The attempt to deal with domestic terrorism was also included in recent efforts. Not all of it his religious, nor has anything to do with the Middle East.
MiniD
-
I have to admit I like this technique better than the Clinton/Reno technique of roasting them alive or machine gunning their wives and children.
-
Mane, every and all governments keep intel on their own citizens. dem. govs just do a much better job at doing it without people noticing.
Personally, it doesnt bother me in the least. If I was to be one of those being investigated, theres ZILCH i could do about it. What can you do against a gov anyway? Pick up a big cardboard banner and waste a day of your life outside some building screaming? Give thanks to this 'right to bear arms' crapola? Wake up call, a militia is useless against a modern military. Its not armed citizens that keep the tyrants out, its those in the military that dont support them INTO power.
In any case, if the fbi or cia or whatever wanted to keep tabs on you, they will. whether you think its right or constitutional or not. Everything goes down the toilet in 'national security' issues. you have your rights as long as the gov. decides you can have them.
its the nature of the beast, dont try to fight it, just dont get bitten :)
-
What's this plastic cylinder lodged under the epidermal layer of my neck?
-
"Sure, any large group where assault, vandalism, and destruction of property (public and private) were the rule, not the exception."
So do we agree that if there is no history of these actions or no history of the group at all that government surveillance should not be allowed?
shamus
-
Matter of fact, just look at what has been happening in the past few years in the internet.
Gov. decides they can 'search' your computer's connection to 'sniff' out if you are downloading illegal stuff (porn, movies, etc).
Is it big brother? Hrmm..well, yeah..sort of... youre not supposed to be doing that stuff anyway right? (nevermind its the gov. that tells you not to..laws...). You all know the first thing you sacrifice to live in a society with laws and yes, even a constitution, is a great number of your 'freedoms' (im free to download any movie i want to no? hehe).
In any case, if you think all this is bad, you'd better read up on how companies share your information. Your credit status, age, criminal records, school records, medical records... heck, the federal goverment dont need to have someone tailing you, they can just get that information from your Credit card company, your HMO, your employer, the tax records, etc etc etc.
*bite*
"So do we agree that if there is no history of these actions or no history of the group at all that government surveillance should not be allowed?"
Morally... I agree. Realistically... the fbi/cia wont mount surveillance on Granny's weekly Cooking club meetings..but they just might do it on the Civil Engineers who Love Explosives club...even though one of the grannies could be the antichrist teaching impressionable 90 year olds how to make plastic boom from fruitcake icing if you know what i mean.
-
Morally... I agree. Realistically... the fbi/cia wont mount surveillance on Granny's weekly Cooking club meetings..but they just might do it on the Civil Engineers who Love Explosives club...even though one of the grannies could be the antichrist teaching impressionable 90 year olds how to make plastic boom from fruitcake icing if you know what i mean. [/B][/QUOTE]
You are probably right, most Grannies in the quilt club more than likley dont have anything to worry about, but I sure dont want to have to rely on if someone in the" fbi/cia" feel's like watching them.
What bothers me is we seem to be going from "probable cause to possible cause" as a reason for government action...read your history, legal limits must be placed on the powers of government to act against the citizens if freedom is the goal, it seems that that is secondary right now tho.
shamus
ps: wasnt that long ago that the CIA was not leagaly allowed to operate inside the Country.
-
Yeah, but like i said, if they want to do it, they will. And you will not know about it.
"What bothers me is we seem to be going from "probable cause to possible cause" as a reason for government action..."
and yet, when the dung hits the fan, gov. action is harshly criticized for not taking 'enough' action. Negative feedback loop.
"read your history, legal limits must be placed on the powers of government to act against the citizens if freedom is the goal, it seems that that is secondary right now tho."
free and unsafe, mostly free and mostle safe, or not so free but safe.... choose one.
The ironic thing is, legal limits to be placed on the powers of goverment to act against citizens.... but who will place them? the gov? Hah! Politics is a self serving reality. This 'right to bear arms' thing is a good example. How many states DONT allow you to? Isnt that acting against the citizens by ignoring legalities set forth by the gov. itself? Dont fool yerself, when the need is there, they will do it, whether people like it or not, whether they think its legal or not. The gov is the law.
-
Just because your cynical doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop to sobs..... the laws are in place to TRY .. keyword TRY... to keep the govement in check .....
but you just think we should roll over and say .. aww they have all the guns and power ... better just let them push us around .... whatever man.....
and no Ididn't say the Gov' slacked letting 911 happend .. if anyone did it was airport secuirty or the CIA ....
and what does the CIA , Al' Queda, and air port sercuirty have to do with this ...... what do terriorists have to do with this, nothing, nada, zilch ... no histroy ... none, not here.
(btw CIA is resposible for operations outside the US, not inside, ike the FBI)
And why do I care.... because the Aholes are actully BRAGGING about it... they are proud to be spying on thier fellow citizens.... they are pround to be searching without warrents ..... hidden courts...... hidden trials ... this BS .. what else will we see in years to come .... and you just say whatever .... ya whatever... maybe I'll just move north
-
They're proud to be taking steps to prevent idiot protesters from breaking store windows. I would be too.
-
dangit mane, shut up. im on a roll here :D :D
-
Originally posted by OIO
[
free and unsafe, mostly free and mostle safe, or not so free but safe.... choose one.
[/B]
HeHe, ya had me going, thought you were serious till I saw this :)
shamus
-
*throws shamus back into the water*
damn pufferfish!
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
I have to admit I like this technique better than the Clinton/Reno technique of roasting them alive or machine gunning their wives and children.
Yup...and ol Bill just used the IRS audit as well...what a guy.