RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your

RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

egern -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 6:42:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: egern quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 General question: Do you want less invasion of privacy, or more terrorist attacks. You cant have both without giving the FBI leeway. That is what they keep saying, but how many terrorist attacks have the world since all these rules came into being, and are they helping any? What about Boston?? All the surveillance already have netted this result: 0 I am inclined to think that our rules are more of a threat to democracy than the terrorists are about to lives. Do yourself a favour and do some research, then get back to me. In this case I got most of it from tv programs about surveillance, Uk mostly but I think one was US.

egern -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 6:44:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 General question: Do you want less invasion of privacy, or more terrorist attacks. You cant have both without giving the FBI leeway. Less invasion of privacy... hands down. Living with the random, occasional nut job being nutty is WAY better than living in an Orwellian police state. This constant bullshit that its an Orwellian police state doesnt hold water. But for arguments sake, lets say it does. Would you be happy for another 9/11 nd all the loss of life incured during and since ? 9/11 is what - 11l years back now? And the Boston bomb was not stopped in spite of all the surveillance there is in place now.

tj444 -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 12:44:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I mentioned the liquid bomb plot, one of those involved worked at the airport, so I for one was okay with taking my shoes off and having my bag checked. how does you taking your shoes off make it safer if there are terrorists already working at the airport & they can just walk in thru the side door? Richard Reid.......... Ring any bells ? you are missing the point.. all the terrorists need to do is get a job at the airport (or recruit someone that works there) and they can easily smuggle a bomb into the cargo bin.. you taking your shoes off wouldnt stop that from happening.. and imo taking your shoes off is fairly pointless if they leave the back door wide open.. I would think it would be easier to do that than use liquid bombs where the terrorists have to be on the planes they want to blow up..

Politesub53 -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 12:57:39 PM)
Some days I have to spell stuff out..... Reid, had a bomb in his shoe, a search have found this as the fuse had to be visible. No matter how much you insist I am "missing the point" nothing negates the fact about the shoebomber.

tj444 -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 1:26:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Some days I have to spell stuff out..... Reid, had a bomb in his shoe, a search have found this as the fuse had to be visible. No matter how much you insist I am "missing the point" nothing negates the fact about the shoebomber. I know he was a shoe bomber.. but targeting only part of the problem (shoebombers) doesnt mean you are safe (from bombs planted by baggage handlers, etc).. It is a false sense of security..

Politesub53 -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 4:53:34 PM)
Of course only targetting shoes wont keep you safe. That doesnt mean targetting them is ineffective. There is also a secondary reason why it is helpful, in as much as it allays passengers fears to see security is tight.

Dunamis2009 -> RE: FBI 'wiretapping' your (5/18/2013 6:31:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC The more tech savvy you are the more Orwellian it looks like. I must say, this line is completely true. quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 The so called wire tapping is nothing of the sort. A computer does a mass search of all emails and picks out "trigger" words. They also keep tabs on who visits terrorist web sites. Nothing Orwellian about that. The problem isn't what is used with the best intentions, it's how laws are generalized. There's been a huge push toward the "If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" mentality, which I shouldn't need to explain to this particular group why it's wrong. What happens when the agent looking over your emails decides that BDSM constitutes terrorism? Or when encrypting one's own email becomes a federal crime? What happens when, in forcing you to hand over your phone to check for supposed evidence that may or may not exist for a crime that may or may not occur, your data is deleted? Your accounts compromised? Your identity stolen? What happens when your political leaning determines how much in tax you pay? What happens when the government makes a mistake in classifying you? I actually fly fairly often, and I follow the rules. It doesn't mean I enjoy them, nor does it mean I believe they're particularly effective. On a side note, for people who are actually paying attention to the main topic, this might be an interesting read (found on /. a few days ago): US Court of Appeals rules against warrantless searching of phones

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125