BL wouldn't do that.  Would he?

It really depends what you're talking about.  If you want an government agency to show up at your doorstep when you start reviewing bomb-making and terrorist organizations over the internet, that's fine.  If I get bored one day and start looking at how people make cocaine, just because I'm curious (I really don't know how it's done) and the same thing happens, that's not OK.

I'm not sure how privacy rights at home would have much to do with getting better intelligence with ISIS in Iraq, however.

Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 1:50:00 PM (view original):
It really depends what you're talking about.  If you want an government agency to show up at your doorstep when you start reviewing bomb-making and terrorist organizations over the internet, that's fine.  If I get bored one day and start looking at how people make cocaine, just because I'm curious (I really don't know how it's done) and the same thing happens, that's not OK.

I'm not sure how privacy rights at home would have much to do with getting better intelligence with ISIS in Iraq, however.

I'm just talking about terror attacks not drug crimes.

It may have no effect on better intelligence on anyone in Iraq.   But it seems that there is a believ that ISIS has Western followers that could begin attacks elsewhere.  Honestly, I'm not overly concerned about beheaded journalists in Iraq.   They knew the risk was there and went anyway.   I'm more concerned with domestic terror threats. 

Sure, that's fine.  Go PATRIOT ACT!

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 1:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 1:10:00 PM (view original):
Um, sure.  OK.

"Prosecutors seeking a death penalty conviction of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Wednesday said the FBI at the time of his arrest last year believed he and his brother Tamerlan had been trained by a terrorist group because of the sophistication of their weapons and tradecraft."

They may indeed have been trained by a terrorist group.  That does not mean that the attack was in any way sponsored or organized by a terrorist group.

They took their new found skills and went off on their own.  Or so all the evidence says.  If this was sponsored in any way by an organized group, we would have heard it by now, nearly 1 1/2 years after the fact.

You're coming off as a person desperate to try to win a point in an argument by making **** up.

You're splitting hairs.

Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 1:59:00 PM (view original):
Sure, that's fine.  Go PATRIOT ACT!

Of course, that's trusting our government to not overstep their bounds.   And, as we've seen with the IRS and Snow, they have been. 

Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 1:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 1:10:00 PM (view original):
Um, sure.  OK.

"Prosecutors seeking a death penalty conviction of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Wednesday said the FBI at the time of his arrest last year believed he and his brother Tamerlan had been trained by a terrorist group because of the sophistication of their weapons and tradecraft."

They may indeed have been trained by a terrorist group.  That does not mean that the attack was in any way sponsored or organized by a terrorist group.

They took their new found skills and went off on their own.  Or so all the evidence says.  If this was sponsored in any way by an organized group, we would have heard it by now, nearly 1 1/2 years after the fact.

You're coming off as a person desperate to try to win a point in an argument by making **** up.

You're splitting hairs.

LOL.

Keep trying.

Lol? I think you get the LOL here.

You say: the Boston bombing was a lone wolf attack.
I say: FBI thinks they were trained by a terrorist group
You say: Maybe they were trained by a terrorist group but they weren't sponsored "IN ANY WAY" by a terrorist group.

Riiiiight. Training is definitely not sponsoring in any way.

Who's coming off looking desperate?

You are. 

Because you can't understand the difference between being trained, and then going off on your own and applying your knowledge independently of the trainer.

Lol, keep trying.

Hair splitter.

We're off on a tangent anyway. Whether or not those attackers were directly sponsored by a terror group as opposed to trained and then cut loose by a terror group (to inflict terror, I imagine), the dead people are still dead.

Fighting ground wars in the middle east doesn't stop terror attacks at home.

Is al-Qaeda as big of a threat to the US as it was 10 years ago?

Probably not.

Why do you suppose that is?