No Snooping Permitted of Mosques in the U.S

[DeepseekerADS]

This should help you sleep at night.

No Snooping Permitted....

The source of this article is an Investor's Business Daily editorial. How in the hell can they say that they need NSA spying on all of us and then turn around and make an exclusion like this?

Guess what Obama’s NSA snooping excludes... Mosques.



Now this makes perfect sense doesn’t it? Obama’s NSA snooping exempts one part of America from their spying. Muslim mosques. You couldn’t make this crap up if you tried. Mosques being off limits by the NSA isn’t something that was started in the Bush administration either. Exempting Mosques from the NSA began in October 2011 and they are off-limits to FBI agents. Kind of defeats the purpose of ‘protecting America’ by snooping when 95% of terrorism in this country is from Muslims.

Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover sting operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee. Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret. We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel’s formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.

===============================================
Obama's Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers

Posted 06/12/2013 06:34 PM ET

Obama Restricts Spying In Mosques While Spying Everywhere Else - Investors.com

Homeland Insecurity: The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.

That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized.

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

If only they were allowed to continue, perhaps the many victims of the Boston Marathon bombings would not have lost their lives and limbs. The FBI never canvassed Boston mosques until four days after the April 15 attacks, and it did not check out the radical Boston mosque where the Muslim bombers worshipped.

The bureau didn't even contact mosque leaders for help in identifying their images after those images were captured on closed-circuit TV cameras and cellphones.

One of the Muslim bombers made extremist outbursts during worship, yet because the mosque wasn't monitored, red flags didn't go off inside the FBI about his increasing radicalization before the attacks.

This is particularly disturbing in light of recent independent surveys of American mosques, which reveal some 80% of them preach violent jihad or distribute violent literature to worshippers.

What other five-alarm jihadists are counterterrorism officials missing right now, thanks to restrictions on monitoring the one area they should be monitoring?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Old Bookaroo]

DeepseekerADS:

You posted "The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.

"That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized."

That's beyond nonsense.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

[Dave44]

DeepseekerADS:

You posted "The White House assures that tracking our every phone call and keystroke is to stop terrorists, and yet it won't snoop in mosques, where the terrorists are.

"That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized."

That's beyond nonsense.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

OOOPs Edit it for you. "In your opinion".

 

[Chadeaux]

Nonsense is ... what the NSA is doing per the original post.

Nonsense is ... when you step on a bear trap, looking up to see what's hurting.

Nonsense is ... when the NSA is not allowed to monitor the ONLY group that has committed terror on U.S. soil such as the Boston Bombings and 9/11.

Stupidity is ... trying to make it sound like they have any reason to spy on peace loving, law abiding U.S. Citizens.

Stupidity is ... trying to justify spying on peace loving, law abiding citizens while ignoring mosques which have been the point of origin of the worst terror attacks on U.S. soil.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Chad:

More errors.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

[Dave44]

Chad:

More errors.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

You are terrible at this! Help for you again...... IMHO Your "opinion"

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Dave44:

There is a difference between facts and errors, lies, mis- and dis-information.

There is a difference between facts and assertions.

There is a difference between facts and opinions.

And not all opinions have equal validity.

Recently on TN someone posted that the US Military brought us over two hundred years of domestic peace. That's obviously not true. Whether it is an assertion, an opinion, a lie or a non-deliberate error. It is easily proven to not be factually accurate. Unless one considers the Indian Wars, the Civil War and the War of 1812 to be peaceful.

Chad claimed Mr. Obama swore an oath as President to defend the states. Anyone who bothers to read the US Constitution can easily see that is not true.

You defended Chad's claim the Tesla car company was "given" TARP funds. Factually wrong on two counts.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

[Chadeaux]

Don't worry with him Dave, he's not intelligent enough to understand that his posts show his bias and lack of cogent thought. All he can do is try to derail threads and act like a tick.

 

[Dave44]

Don't worry with him Dave, he's not intelligent enough to understand that his posts show his bias and lack of cogent thought. All he can do is try to derail threads and act like a tick.

You are right about that! I didn't even see Tesla on this thread. All of a sudden, BOOM, there it was. Does it have something to do with this topic?

Ole Pard does like to rant though!

 

[loco oro]

this is the first i ve heard of selective domestic spying ,i see a double standard here,how is it that ice agents can walk on any construction site and demand proof of citizenship of ALL present,and do on the spot background checks,but yet they are not allowed to check out mosques. they do this because there is a good chance they will find what they are looking for. it would be the same with mosques.now before the authorities on all that is factual ,and what is dis info, i am speaking from first hand experience to this . ive seen this happen on construction sites,and i remember a few years back when i was working in boston,on a (petrol tank farm) that daily we had homeland there ,and had to provide id and security verification cards upon demand,now this was a pain in the a$$, but we complied ,because we had nothing to hide ,i wonder why the c.a.i.r has issue with being open to uncle sam like therest of us?

 

[Chadeaux]

I mentioned money being given to Tesla when I should have said loaned and he just couldn't stand it.

With all this money getting paid back (GM says they paid back their loans, Tesla says they paid back their loans, etc. etc. etc.), how are we still on the hook for the entire TARP package?

If there were still "investigative reporters" in this country, that might be a great place to start. You know, just wondering how much is being paid into kickbacks and other forms of graft within Scandaldaddy's administration.

 

[old digger]

Maybe that's where they are stockpiling all that ammo that this government purchased.

 

[Dave44]

Ol pard is just trying to derail another thread Chadeaux, Or maybe he can't tell the difference. Either way,, his problem. He is full of dis information, errors and erroneous opinions.. I think we should let him pass through the hall mumbling incoherent thoughts on his way to another clinic.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Chad:

Geez - could it be because the Tesla loan had nothing to do with TARP? You also mentioned no jobs - wrong on that one, as well. Makes you 0 fer 3. Stuck out.

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo

 

[jerseyben]

Make of it what you will but here is a piece that debunks the information claimed by the OP's article:

Daily Kos: Right-wing claiming Muslims are exempt from govt. spying

Say what you will about credibility of DailyKOS but at least they backed up their claims with sources. The OP article doesnt back up a single thing. Are we supposed to just believe it simply because someone wrote it?

Remember, it is an editorial!

 

[Dave44]

Make of it what you will but here is a piece that debunks the information claimed by the OP's article:

Daily Kos: Right-wing claiming Muslims are exempt from govt. spying

Say what you will about credibility of DailyKOS but at least they backed up their claims with sources. The OP article doesnt back up a single thing. Are we supposed to just believe it simply because someone wrote it?

Remember, it is an editorial!

OK make of it what I will?
From the article;
"Predictably, the ludicrous idea that Muslims are exempt from the Obama administration’s numerous spying programs is now catching on in the right-wing puke funnel. It is an especially cruel myth to promote since Muslims have faced some of the worst civil liberties violations in the US in modern times. Apparently, the only way the right-wing can get outraged by government surveillance is by imagining red-blooded, white, patriotic Christians such as themselves as the primary target. "

With a statement like this we are supposed to believe it is a level headed critique? Another Socialist Blog propagandizing the masses.

There are those on this site that dislike opinion pieces, especially ones that use misdirection and subterfuge to make a point.

 

[jerseyben]

OK make of it what I will?
From the article;
"Predictably, the ludicrous idea that Muslims are exempt from the Obama administration’s numerous spying programs is now catching on in the right-wing puke funnel. It is an especially cruel myth to promote since Muslims have faced some of the worst civil liberties violations in the US in modern times. Apparently, the only way the right-wing can get outraged by government surveillance is by imagining red-blooded, white, patriotic Christians such as themselves as the primary target. "

With a statement like this we are supposed to believe it is a level headed critique? Another Socialist Blog propagandizing the masses.

There are those on this site that dislike opinion pieces, especially ones that use misdirection and subterfuge to make a point.

Dave,

No doubt, the DailyKos is left leaning. There are only a few sites that expose right wing nonsense (such as DailyKos). There are hundreds if not thousands of sites that will post and repost the same nonsense articles (such as the one posted by the OP).

"That's right, the government's sweeping surveillance of our most private communications excludes the jihad factories where homegrown terrorists are radicalized."

To quote you, regarding the above, "With a statement like this we are supposed to believe it is a level headed critique?"

My point is, if you believe the OP's article/source then my source is just as believable. IMO, my article at least backed up its claims.

 

[Dave44]

Ben;
"There are only a few sites that expose right wing nonsense (such as DailyKos)"

Why is it that I am still skeptical of your reviews?

 

[UncleMatt]

I agree Ben, and still searching for any relevance to the 2nd Amendment...

 

[jerseyben]

I could go "tit for tat" with you on bias. You are just as guilty as anyone of exposing your bias. Not a road either one of us would like to go down, I dont think.