It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Where was I smug? Any more smug than when you said that you "love" it when non-New Yorkers have an opinion about something in NY? I wasn't being smug, I thought it necessary to bring up that searches occur to various extents everywhere. You made comments that about was I searched myself or not regarding this particular search. The topic of searches and terror alerts are not unique to NY.
My point all along has been who "deemed" the whole exercise necessary? Yes it was "deemed" necessary. SOmeone needs to deem it so, but who and based on what? That is not something that needs to be kept from voters and taxpayers.
Anyway, why is the ACLU so important? They barely care about anything that goes on online at all and I disagree with some of the "stands" that they do take. They aren't me and I'm not them and I don't use them as a moral or legal dipstick based on what they fight or don't fight.
I live by roads that close down during some "elevated alerts". I have no idea why or when it will happen. Warranted or not, it is intrusive to my daily routine. Why is a road shut down on say a tuesday and then open on Wednesday? Hardly anyone asks why. Personally, it makes me feel like an ant when someone puts a hand in their path.
Originally posted by Crakeur
[...] and the ACLU jumped all over it saying it was a violation of the riders' rights. They went to court to put a stop to the random searches. They took your stand that it wasn't fair.
when this new threat was announced (before we knew some dude in Iraq was punking us) they backed off the fight for the time being, saying the searches were warranted.
so the ACLU has major relevance here.
Originally posted by 2nd Hand ThoughtsNot every source is going to be factual and it is better to be safe than sorry. It seems though that there is something wrong with the system. Too many alerts due to bad sources and there is a risk that the alerts lose their impact.
The alerts do become comical after a while. That is why, when the alert is raised nationwide, we always get the disclaimer on our local news that "we have been at that level since 9/11" so any new threat to the nation is just more of the same. That is also why, when this recent threat was announced, it seemed that much more serious to the locals. Personally, I don't believe the hoax b.s. - if this plot was a hoax, who were the three men arrested in Iraq? Why was the military told that, in the event these three men tried to head to Syria, they were to be detained and, if need be, shot and killed?
nydailynews.com...
Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Now I'm starting to see media stories that the feds are implying that NY over-reacted. The feds saying someone OVER-REACTED. That's pretty bold. As opposed to under-reacting I suppose, which would appear to be their collective performance standard where terrorist attacts are concerned.
Originally posted by Crakeur
[...]
I'll take safe over loose when it's my butt sitting on the subway.