Liberal Judge Makes Intercepting Enemy Communications ILLEGAL

Perhaps you should go back to school and learn how to read? What I said and what you said I said, are completely different.

Citizens who place calls to SUSPECTED terrorists. Meaning no evidence, no warrant - only suspision. That's not good enough.

No... it's the exact same logic. So why not give us an answer lorien? After all, guns kill more people every single year than terrorism ever has total.

What's your plan to stop gun violence? Are we going to wire tap everyone who owns a firearm? We obviously can't wait until they've shot someone, that's no way to defend people! I guess we better ban the owning of firearms according to you lorien.

 

Actually, if you had even a remote clue at how many plots have been prevented with this program, including the recent plot in the UK where 23 people were arrested, and the Canadian bust a few months ago, you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself.

 

It has to be to al qaeda. Not suspected terrorists.

It's the same thing. Murder is the completion of the act. You suggested they should look at investigations after the act is done (murder). Again, dance around it all you want. Its what you said. Just another yo-yo post that is easier to type than it is to read. I know the routine, yo.

Answer the govt should confiscate weapons? I'd never be for that. That's crazy. A well armed populace is our defense against tyranny. But, you cannot lump in everyone who is an idiot with their gun in the same camp as a terrorist. That is what you are doing, with your false analogy, which you love so much.

Ban criminals and people who call up terrorists wondering who they should fire at is a more apt analogy. But moral equivolance, I know.

 

Oh my god I`m such a fool. A plot in the UK busted way in advance. How could I forget. It was only all over the news.

This is what I`m saying, the US govt. wants you to think there are thousands of angry hate driven terrorist out there just dying to kill you.

I think this is total BS. The facts show us there are only a small handful of these people - like those caught in the UK.

If there were a lot of terrorist hell bent on destroying us they could - but they don't.

Or if the terrorist had 1/2 a brain the could do a lot better.

I can think of 5 ways to use 23 people a whole lot better than getting them all arrested.

Moral of the story :

1. There are not that many terrorist.
2. They are not that smart.
3. They are not trying that hard.
4. More people die from drowning in bath tubs than from terrorism (don't let the fear get over blown).

edit : you want to see what a terrorism problem looks like ? look at israel - they have a terrorism problem, WE do not have a terrorism problem.

 

I've been quite impressed with not only his answers, but in making valid points as well.

What I have not been impressed with, is that the only time you ever mention the Constitution is when it comes to the rights of terrorists. Nor can I even remotely fathom (other than the genuine hatred you've displayed for America over the last year) why you want to protect a perceived notion of protecting a terrorist's right to harm our country. I supose you have valid reasons why you are always on the side that would most benefit terrorists?

 

I think you have a better chance of being bitten by a white shark while sleeping in your bed, in the midwest, than being injured or killed by "terrorists"....

But the fear mongering must go on, so bush can continue to erode and encroach upon our civil rights. And he even get's the help of idiots right here at home!

 

I don't think anyone would argue that. I certainly don't.

Another alex jones nutjob? Maybe you don't follow the news, but I sure do.

That's all it took for 9/11. That's all it took for the London bombings, the Madrid bombings, the embassy bombings, the USS Cole bombing, the Bali bombings, the bombings going on around the world, every day.

Because this very program has been successful in preventing them.

If only we could tie the government's hands behind their back to fight them, like this attempt, your wish could come true

That's probably what they thought too.

Moral of the story...inaction is not the best course of action.

So what you are saying is, you support the rights of terrorists to be able to effectively plan and carry out plots without the possibility of being caught? I bet you are proud of that position too, eh?

 

And yet so disappointed in this very fact, you want to take away the very program that makes it possible? No one stands behind a terrorist's rights more than yo!

Are you saying you are a member of al qaida? That's who the target was. Is this the same fear mongering you've espoused every time alex jones makes a new post on his site about how "the man" is spying on you? Fear of being al qaida? Oooh, a "police state" is coming!

 

Know what lorien? I don't think you believe what you post... I'm getting the distinct impression that you are only doing it to stir up the whack jobs off of their medications on both sides of the argument.

That's not nice, you know. It's not thier fault(s).

You're just mad cause you can't pick on anthony any more... go on, admit it.

-Michael

 

Can we get a quick head count here?

Who supports terrorists by making it clear they do not want the NSA to monitor their international phone calls?

So far, we have

yo-yo
mvandemar
noobie

Are we missing anyone? Who else supports terrorists in this manner?

 

I never said anything like this. Why do you think this of me ?

I follow the news too and yes - Alex Jones is a nut job.

So I take it you know we routinely set free people arrested as terrorist ? The news splashes big headlines of "suspected terrorist" and "terrorist plots" but the story about them being innocent gets buried in the back pages.

Ya and there's no way to stop someone with a really good plan. I mean you can spend a lot of money trying, and that's the right thing to do but don't over hype it. The FBI spent forever looking for the Unabomber. I assume you know how he got caught... (for those of you who don't, his brother tipped off law enforcement)

Let's get real - the US really doesn't care about everyones problems. If the UK or Israel has a terrorism problem hey that sucks, but we don't really care. I'm only talking about the US's terrorism problem - or lack there of.

The fact of the matter is anyone can come across either land border at any time - millions of immigrants have proved this point many times over.

So if a huge global well funded terrorist organization like Al Quaida(sp) wanted to oh say - import 200 suicide bombers to the US it really wouldn't be that hard.

Then place the 200 suicide bombers in random malls and schools around America - now you're talking about a terrorist problem which for the record and per the examples I've laid out - America doesn't have.

 

Are you some kind of special moron ?

Jesus Christ - I never said ANYTHING about my view on the NSA phone monitoring.


I never said anything about supporting terrorist in ANY manner.

Get a grip before you go off saying retarded crap like this about other people when you don't have any idea what their views are.

 

You need to re-read your post, noob.

 

You know it's weird.. .I'm looking at all these statistics... "odds" of dying from "X" factor... and what do ya know? Terrorism isn't anywhere to be found?

http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm
http://www.livescience.com/forcesofnature/050106_odds_of_dying.html

How many people have died on US soil from terrorism this year? Yet we must continue to be afraid of our own shadows right gtech and lorien?

 

Any other terrorist supporters to add to the list?

 

There's several theories as to why gtech acts the way he does. One is that he's gone senile, and the other is sociopathy.... who knows really. who knows.

 

You guys can work out the name calling, etc. Make them good ones too!

If you are through hiding behind the Constitution to defend the rights of terrorists and celebrating on their behalf, I think we have a "mission accomplished" here

 

And yet, yoyo still hasn't thanked the President. And, your point is, that in order for you to care about terrorism, many people have to die every week? month? 2 months? how often do people have to die for you to pay attention.

 

Thank the president for what? You think people were dying everyday on US soild before george came and saved the day? Get real man!

 

Seemed like a good pattern was happening back in the 90s:

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.


Again. How many people must die each year before yo thinks terrorism is an issue more serious than sharks in the midwest?