"I think it is pathetic that the FBI says they couldn't pursue the bomber after Russia told us about him because they couldn't find he broke any laws. Think about it. This guy went to bomb making sites and studied how to make bombs. Would any of us go there to even browse around? Hell no, we'd all expect to get on an FBI or Homeland Security list immediately. Here is this guy, already flagged and on a list, and he still freely surfed frequently in how to make bombs without any notice. The Feds can catch someone's niece downloading an MP3 and charge her, but here they don't catch what a terrorist did? Heads need to roll. sid
You started this thread complaining that the FBI hadn't done enough, in spite of legal limits, to get the Boston Bomber.
Now that there has been an approved increase of surveillance options, since Boston, watchng basically nothing but numbers, phone numbers, calling other phone numbers, and visitors going to certain internet site addresses, being surveilled, your complaining about that, too.
Make up your mind. Are you going to bash our security experts when something slips by, and something bad happens, and then turn right around and bash them at the same time for increasing surveillance, to prevent that same sort of slip from happenning again?
Additionally, no it is not worse than Bush, not by a long shot! Bush didn't go anywhere for approval. Bush did what he did secretly, No FISA Court, No Congressional oversight, totally against the laws of this country, even sending people into the hospital room of the United States Attrtorney General when he was at deaths door, to try to force him to sign off on his ilegal behavior, so he could continue to break the law, AFTER the Acting Attorney General, had already told Bush's thugs NO! You cannot continue to break the FISA laws.
President Obama has not broken ANY laws. No one is beinng listened to!!!!
Congress has known every single thing the administration has been doing. Everything comes under their scrutiny about every three months for re-authorization, or for authorization of any broadening of surveillance tools.
Take your pick. More legal surveillance, to keep us safer, or less to put us more at risk?
You can't have it both ways.
There is no such thing as privacy anymore. Even if you take anything and everything the government does, out of all of it, that is still a fact.
Surely you are not so Naive' as to think you have had any privacy since Bush was president, are you? You are being watched, everywhere you go, and you might just as well accept it, because it isn't going to go away.
The only people who are bitching about our country increasing surveillance since the Boston Bombings, are the Libertarians, who are totally nuts, unrealistic, and irresponsibly ignorant of our threats, to complain about increasing our safety in the dangerous world we live in today.
Basically, if your not talking to terrorists, e-mailing terrorists, or going to internet sights to learn how to buy or make WMD's, or committing treason by leaking classified information which puts our people at risk, or our humann assets in other countries at risk, then you have nothing to worry about, as far as your personal privacy is concerned. No one gets, "Listened to" unless a FISA Court, and the Congress, agree that there are actionable and factual red flags going up that represent a serius threat, and require it.
The basic surveillance law doesn't allow any listening, without approval by the Congress, and the FISA Court. This is nothing but a data base of numbers that pull up, or red flag, threatening behavior.
I have absolutely no problem with any of it, because all of it is making this country safer, and gives us a far better shot at preventing terrorist attacks here in America.
This program has already prevented one horrible attack. Check out what the retiring National Security Advisor is saying about it, maybe then, you won't be so offended by it, and so critical of our President.