NYT: "The administration has now lost all credibility."

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: NYT:


    most transparent administration ever  says obama.....

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    You have one big case of cognitive dissonance going on.

    On the one hand you want the gov't to monitor "known" cell phones but you don't want to allow them the latitude necessary to determine which cell phones are the ones to be "known".



    lol oh angry you are a tool.

    Known (verb) be acquainted with (a thing, place, person, etc.), as by sight, experience, or report:

    I would not "mine for information by gathering bulk data on citizens"

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:


    Hey dumas, how exactly do you expect to get the phone numbers? Yellow Pages?



    Every progressive with even a shred of moral consistency should side with the New York Times against the White House

    Guess that leaves angrybird out.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:


    Hey dumas, how exactly do you expect to get the phone numbers? Yellow Pages?

    Why don't you lay out a general scenario where the NSA could find a "known" terrorist cell phone number without mining large amounts of data? Just one idea that could be applied to all the "known" and/or "suspected" terrorists communicating by cell phone.

    C'mon moron, you think you're sooo smaht, have at it.



    The same way they did before this!

    Investigations, visual surveliance, tips, tracking leads, sharing information between agencies!

    You are not that stupid but, you are that partisan.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:


    Still can't come up with a plausible way of finding the "known" terrorist cell phones without data mining.



    Re: NYT:

    posted at 6/7/2013 3:36 PM EDT

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:


    Hey dumas, how exactly do you expect to get the phone numbers? Yellow Pages?

    Why don't you lay out a general scenario where the NSA could find a "known" terrorist cell phone number without mining large amounts of data? Just one idea that could be applied to all the "known" and/or "suspected" terrorists communicating by cell phone.

    C'mon moron, you think you're sooo smaht, have at it.

    [QUOTE]

    The same way they did before this!

     

    Investigations, visual surveliance, tips, tracking leads, sharing information between agencies!

    You are not that stupid but, you are that partisan.


     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    that does nothing to get the phone number.

    Heck, you could watch the guy talking on a phone right in front of you but ya still wouldn't know his cell number.

    That would also mean you would have to have one observer per suspect, around the world!

     



    LMAO!

     

    So, wait lol, your position is that without the govt mining through millions of Americans phones they have no way to find out what a suspects phone number is? bwaaaaa@@@

    You are a funny little tool. lmao

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    They have now wussed out and snuck in "The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue.

     



    I guess they got a call about possibly being audited by the IRS.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: NYT:


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    Re: NYT:

    "This administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom. That means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.” Obama 2007. Where did this guy go?

     

    "The thing about quotes on the internet is you cannot confirm their validity." - Abraham Lincoln  

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    Hey dumas, how exactly do you expect to get the phone numbers? Yellow Pages?

    Why don't you lay out a general scenario where the NSA could find a "known" terrorist cell phone number without mining large amounts of data? Just one idea that could be applied to all the "known" and/or "suspected" terrorists communicating by cell phone.

    C'mon moron, you think you're sooo smaht, have at it.

     

     



    The same way they did before this!

     

     

    Investigations, visual surveliance, tips, tracking leads, sharing information between agencies!

    You are not that stupid but, you are that partisan.

     

     




     

    Hey dimwit, that does nothing to get the phone number.

    Heck, you could watch the guy talking on a phone right in front of you but ya still wouldn't know his cell number.

    That would also mean you would have to have one observer per suspect, around the world!

     

    As usual, you are a partisan hack that resorts to regurgitating echo chamber insults without understanding the logic, or in this case lack of.

    What a maroon.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you are standing near the terrorist, you can "pair" his phone and listen in.  I saw it on a tv show, so I know it works.

     

    As far as using cell phone metadata to track terorrists, the process is more like this:

      EVERYONE is a suspect.  The order covers nearly EVERY PERSON IN THE COUNTRY.

      We will run algorithmns to determine who is MOST guilty.

      Oh, BTW, we will also help the IRS find out who the TEA party groups are talking to. (kidding, but maybe not)

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: NYT:


    Obama is immune from being held responsible for anything he does because nobody cares......the end justifies the means with this administration and individual rights and the Constitution don't matter.

    Obama represents everything our founding fathers feared.  I probably need to stop exercising a right granted to me under the Constitution before it gets me in trouble. 

    Silencing opposing ideas is one way to win when your own ideas don't stand on their own merit. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     Lost credibility would only apply to those that gave them it in the first place.


     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    When the NYT says he has no credibility, I think more than nobody cares..... 

    Now, when you say "held responsible," what do you mean? This isn't impeachable because it was apparently legal. The trouble is his incredible hypocrisy in campaigning so hard against this, then doing it, then keeping it secret.....

     



    Illegal and acceptable are 2 different things. The law cannot do anything therefore it is up to the people to decide if, it is acceptable.

    The REALLY sad part is most dont give a flyingfvck unless it hits them directly!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: NYT:


    Bush used patriot act to watch terrorists....Obama uses it to watch the people he hates the most...fellow Americans..

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    They have now wussed out and snuck in "The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue.

     



    Well, at least the NYT's rejected the Obama re-write that said "republican holdovers from the Bush administration have lost all credibility."

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: NYT:

    In response to macnh1's comment:

     


    Bush used patriot act to watch terrorists....Obama uses it to watch the people he hates the most...fellow Americans..

     



    There is more truth to that than one might think.  Wasn't it Obama's homeland security department that warned us that troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan were likely to turn into terrorists? Or, how about the trip wire response that the Boston bombing was likely TEA parties?  Or his insistence on disarming law abiding Americans?  What about the IRS targeting of conservative groups?  At some point, you have to connect the dots and admit that the Obama administration is corrupt and lawless in their pursuit to do harm to law abiding Mericans.

     

    Yes, it seems like the Obama administrations key targets for worry and surveillance are Mericans. Yet, at the same time, the occupy movement gets a pass, 1.7 billion goes to the Muslim brotherhood, and we make video apologizing for offending Muslims with a video.

    Obama bows to every crank with a bug up their posterior about Merica, while giving the finger to Mericans.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: NYT:

    here's some credibility.........

    President Obama and his family will be going to Africa later this month. But the trip won't be cheap; it's expected to cost American taxpayers $60 to $100 million, according to the Washington Post.

    he should be ashamed of himself.....

     

Share