Bill to silence 911 recordings moves forward

Am I the only person that this raises a red flag for?



The line between liberty and security is a fine one. For the safety of an individual's identity we risk the potential relenquishing of liberties through blocking different avenues of argument against the official story.

At the risk of showing my backside on this one, to me it seems as though a transcript can leave out so much more than just the names of those involved... where as audio, what you hear is what you get.

What if someone with revealing evidence against the official story had their call recorded and that record could not be used in court?

I personally am grateful my governor is not signing onto this...

Any thoughts?

Source: www.baynews9.com

Edited for misleading title. 911, not 9/11




[edit on 10-3-2010 by Kevinquisitor]

What does this have to do with security?

If it's audio from the aircraft:
If the OS is correct, then security at airports, wiretapping etc. has been stepped up to the nth degree and Saudi Arabian nationals can no longer get into cockpits and fly large modern commercial jets in dramatic, skillful and uncharacteristic ways.

If it's audio from the emergency personnel at ground zero:
If the OS is correct, it will be audio exclusively about roaring fires and structural failures. Why should we not hear that?

If it's from Air Traffic control:
If the OS is correct, it will be audio exclusively about how difficult it is to track these aircraft when all other flights are now grounded, and the military are off on exercises.

If it's from NORAD:
If the OS is correct, it will be audio about how uncharacteristic it is of them not to scramble on a jet with no transponder functioning.

If it's from people calling 911:
If the OS is correct, then nobody calling 911 will have seen or heard anything that doesn't fit into the OS. Why would their identity need to be protected? They didn't do anything wrong.....

That is, if the OS is correct.
If the audio contains anything that would show the OS to be not quite true, then it will be silenced.

The only thing I see being silenced is the truth. Let's hear everything, and make our minds up as to whether the OS and the truth are the same thing. Truthers are looking for the truth, not for conspiracies. Unfortunately, that's all they are finding.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - Some lawmakers want to press the mute button on public airings of 911 emergency calls.

A bill to block access to the recordings has passed a preliminary test in the Florida House, but still faces considerable opposition as it moves through the Legislature.

The measure would ban the release of recorded 911 calls, which are often posted online or aired on television in high-profile cases.

Only transcripts would be available, after a 60-day waiting period. The House Governmental Affairs Policy Committee voted 8-5 to approve the bill Wednesday.

Supporters, including Republican leaders, say it protects callers' privacy. Opponents, including media and civil-liberties groups, say it limits oversight of police and emergency response departments.

Gov. Charlie Crist has indicated he would not sign it.


change your headline i thought this was about 9/11 its about calls and 911


[edit on 10-3-2010 by blankduck18]

[edit on 10-3-2010 by blankduck18]

reply to post by blankduck18

change your headline i thought this was about 9/11 its about calls and 911

I'm not sure the OP realizes that yet...LOL


amazing.

Now for my actual response.........


I do not think this new bill is a good idea at all!
its total rubbish!

I mean i dont like the whole recording idea but for 911 calls its very important
which all your facts supporting 911 from both response could be used here as well

I am having a slice of humble pie right now.

Thanks for pointing out my error.

Although this has nothing to do with 9/11, I still believe it to be a good idea to leave the audio available for review. This information could prove beneficial to ensure the accuracy of testimonies to come.