Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Care to elaborate what a unused plan by Hoover with a democrat as president has to do with your limited posting?
What does this have to do with republicans again?
You are wasting time, I am wasting time too but reading is quicker than posting.
|
We live in the now, influenced by our history. The FBI's history is one of abuse of process, and the DOJ and the FBI are busily engaged in it today...see "national security letters". Nixon responded to a perceived political enemy by approving the burglary of patient records at the man's psychiatrist's office.
The problems outlined in the OP are that the FBI is assembling a "scan tool" that justifies "targets" as "terrorists", based on dubious, unproven technology, and before any judicial check/balance is inserted between use of force, and any hearing to defend oneself, or to assess the government's case.
If, as described in the WaPo article, our "forces" can scan the crew of possible enemy ship to pick out "terrorists", how long would it be, after that, when the scan would be directed at the occupants of domestically operated motor vehicles.
You've missed the irony..."science" says that it seems that conservatives prioritize security over individual rights, motivated by an outsized "fear of death", and of "disorder". If "science" justifies a FBI remote determination, actionable intelligence as to who is or isn't a "terrorist", why isn't it equally legitimate to use what has been obtained by scientific discovery and analysis to determine who is or isn't suitable to uphold the president's oath of office?