Obama's .gov put Police Cameras in Tampa neighborhoods!

reply to post by StarrGazer25


Good luck living the Orwellian dream.

"I don't have anything to hide so I don't NEED privacy".

Nice one.

Originally posted by StarrGazer25
you ask how far is to far? You ask how sacared our my conversations? You want to know if it bothers me that they can listen on my conversations?? Well, Im not a terrorist, so on the average I think my conversations are slightly boring! I talk about bills that need to be paid, how broke my family is, how I was denied foodstamps because I "MAKE TO MUCH MONEY @ 9.50/hr when my rent alone is almost 700$!" I talk about how I need to clean out my fridge do dishes, and laundry. I talk about how my 2 year old child pooped in the tub, I talk about my job and how rude some people are... I doubt they pay any attention to my house/conversations when they see how boring I am. As far as cameras in my home??... ARE U SERIOUS? Please?! Oh and if they want to listen in to any dirty talk to my man they will be waiting ALONG TIME! The only dirty talk they will hear is how I tell him to leave the room when he farts! LOL If they listen to 5 minutes of a conversation with my bestfriend who COMPLAINS and B*tches about everything BELIVE ME they will shoot themselves in the head! Sometimes I want too LOL

Not everyone lives such a boring life as you. Some people do have loud sex, like to walk around naked, etc. and they should not be subject to a camera recording their every move. Mrs. Kravitz will be very dissapointed that her job has been taken away.

reply to post by K J Gunderson



Foot in mouth disorder. Sorry KJ.

[edit on 5/29/2010 by endisnighe]

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

I would like EVERYONE to notice this comment was the FIRST TIME anyone mentioned Obama.

Why don't you just go ask him to marry you already?

Actually the OP's title mentions Obama...for no reason at all.

It's crazy what you guys will blame on him.

And none of you call the OP on saying this was Obama doing it...you are just as bad as the OP claiming it is Obama doing it.

Dishonesty is ugly.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Sorry Gunderson, I did not even see it in the title.

Thanks OS, I will edit my previous post.

reply to post by endisnighe


If I was a Mod I would applaud you.

We don't have this enough around here...it's simple to admit to a mistake...we all make them and it's nothing to be ashamed of as long as you admit to it and not try to dodge it.

Kudos to you End


p.s. - I think it's better to read the post and not the title rather than what some others do and read the title and not the post

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


See, this is the thing that drives me crazy. I am fallible, everyone is.

When people continue to try and cover it, it just gets worse.

I should learn to go back and try to see everything that is inferred from what others are postulating. I think it is my inherent disdain for government in general.

Back at ya.

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Foot in mouth disorder. Sorry KJ.

[edit on 5/29/2010 by endisnighe]

LOL. Well for one - it happens to all of us. At least you and me both.

Another thing, I never got to see what you said so we can pretend it was nothing.

...and good job on correcting or admitting or both. Rare as hell around here.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by K J Gunderson]

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

Sorry Gunderson, I did not even see it in the title.

Thanks OS, I will edit my previous post.

On the note of pretending I still do not know what you said.

Tell me, do you think it is odd or fitting that Obama is in the title of this thread? I am just curious what you thoughts on that are, not looking to argue them.

You guys are just way in over your head! Im laughing at most of you who truely believe they will put cameras in your homes.... LMAO... Can we say paranoid? Jesus, no wonder The Government wants to put a stop on conspiracist, you guys are the reason people go into a panic! My fiances mothers boyfriend has a friend that is an ATS member and her boyfriend believes everything the guy talks about coming from these boards and this man who is 50 years old really talks about aluminum hats and other things that I will not mention... I believe in somethings just not adding up right, but this? come on! And my life is average thank you, but to some it might seem boring, which is why I stated if the government was to listen in on my house hold I would be considered boring Because Im not talking about bombs and guns and shooting up places.... Ask yourselves this if they are listening in on conversations why did that guy shoot two pentagon officers? If they listened in at his home dont you think they would of stopped it?! Please use logic and reason when posting.. It makes you look very ignorant! Why are there still major drug dealers? Dont you think they would bust them already? And its not so much "IF Im not doing anything wrong I dont need privacy" Its the fact that Im not doing anything wrong I DONT CARE if they listen in... The people that believe this is true are so self centered to think the government would watch their every move 24/7 365?? COME ON! How would they come up with the money to have officers watch so much photage of ALL 6 BILLION CITIZENS IN THE UNITED STATES?!

Your worried about the government listening in on your loud sex but you dont care if it wakes your neighbors... LMFAO.... Wheres your privacy now?

reply to post by K J Gunderson


I think it was ignorant to include Obama in the thread. There is no difference between him or the previous tyrant. None whatsoever.

I never even noticed his name in the title. After reading the OP and going through the thread and coming across your comment, I did go back and read through the previous comments and still missed it.

I think maybe people include Obama to get more shock value.

But of course not being the great swahili, I do not know what was in the mind of the OP. Maybe that Obama is the symbol of the government. Which is actually a bad thing to do. It furthers the fallacy that the congress is not where a LOT of the power resides.

We can see by their approval rating that people realize this. Of course, Obama's approval rating shows that the propaganda for him is quite compelling.

Here is a thread where I did mention Obama, but I am sure someone will fall on their sword for him-Blagojevich first, NOW Sestak; I never had conversations with that man.



[edit on 5/29/2010 by endisnighe]

reply to post by endisnighe


Thanks for answering. It is just refreshing to see that you will not just take any opportunity to bash Obama no matter how small. I mean I read all about the great conspiracy over his daughter not having a middle name and then saw this headline. I did not get it. Cameras in cities are old news. I was curious what your thoughts were and thanks.

Originally posted by endisnighe
I think it was ignorant to include Obama in the thread. There is no difference between him or the previous tyrant. None whatsoever.

Not really...

Did you watch his victory speech? That was one of the most disturbing events of my life, meanwhile vast millions of people lapped it up like warm milk sprinkled with opiates, and do to this day. And as long as there are people suckered into all that these approaches are required. I did it with Bush for years, and now I have to remind myself to not forget Obama. At least with Bush people had 9/11, the the propaganda twist on religion, as an excuse for all the worship. With Obama, they just had Bush, yet there are people out there and in here that worship the O man even harder.

CHANGE?

This would be a change, because this is the first time I've heard about cameras right in neighborhoods in the US. The camera boxes have blue lights on top of them, in the County jurisdiction area. The adjacent Tampa police jurisdiction ones have the blue strobing light on the bottom. I've been told that in the dark you can see the blue lights illuminating the streets as far ahead as you can see. I'm working on getting video of all this up on GooTube.

And people should blame Obama. When you say the things he said, especially that victory speech, everything about civil rights, and teaching constitutional law, and the laundry list of rhetoric that could be interpreted as nothing but being anti-Big Brother, it IS needed on this front in particular.

I used to hold the torch to Bush's nuts over these exact issues on a constant, but the thing is he didn't campaign on these things. Obama did.

For instance, if Obama campaigned against the president of the US using this crazy stage ensemble (from Singapore) as propaganda:

Yet a year later still Obama is still using it acting like he never said that:

And in reality even adds more new flashy stuff to it, and then calls you a racist if you criticize the stage.

So when you see Obama's Justice Dept. involved with outfitting nationwide police with a backdoor to web users private data, and more importantly, fights in court to retain the legal ability to monitor and track people with their private cell phones, yes you do have to blame Obama.

He's the big man, he campaigned for civil liberties, criticized the Patriot Act (which he ironically voted for then and resigns now), and now his crew are going even further with the Big Bro.

Now he campaigns for full body scanners. Bush campaigned for no new nation building, but then 9/11 happened and now he had his excuse for such. With Obama we already had 9/11, but then the 'Panty Bomber' comes along, who was let on the plane without a passport, and didn't actually hurt people, and now we "need" to have our genitalia scanned by perverted power tripping TSA thugs. Even if Obama wasn't now actively campaigning for the scanners, he could stop them. Instead, he puts a military intelligence spy in charge of the TSA.

In Tampa, police have been teamed up with Homeland Security and the TSA
to set up checkpoints at bus stations, which is a good sign full body scanners are one the way there too. Hey StarGazer, do you mind that?


[edit on 29-5-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

People aren't angry about the cameras because they are doing illegal activities, they are angry because of what they might be used for. Lets say our leaders decide we have had enough freedoms and start taking them away. How easy is would it be for them to monitor us? There will be no hope for a resistance of any kind. They will already have too much control. Denying these systems is only a precaution. I'll leave you with this.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

MT

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss



Ok there but uh...


...what does Obama have to do with the topic of THIS thread?

If you would not mind.

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

I think maybe people include Obama to get more shock value.


[edit on 5/29/2010 by endisnighe]

Especially since it was Hillborough county government that put those cameras in. There have been tons of news articles on this. literally tons.

*Also the cameras face business not houses. The few business that decide to stay in poorer areas need the extra protection.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by dukeelric]

Yes. This is how Big Brother starts. it's a really good idea to protect the people who need it up until the time it starts getting abused and becomes a tool to oppress the people.

That's what Tampa needs if they are going to do this.. an independent watchdog group to monitor how this is being used.

Originally posted by dukeelric

Originally posted by endisnighe
I think maybe people include Obama to get more shock value.

Especially since it was Hillborough county government that put those cameras in. There have been tons of news articles on this. literally tons.

Hmm...

A $1.3 million federal grant paid to install the cameras, a first for the Sheriff's Office, in an area bounded by N 23rd Street and Fowler, Bearss and Nebraska avenues. www.tampabay.com...

Should people in Utah etc be paying federal taxes to install these cameras in a failed area of Tampa? And the thing is, the criminals will just move over a few blocks. They'll spread their crimes outwards. Before the cameras, in a certain sense, much of the crime was contained in one area. Decent folk would know better than to live there.

*Also the cameras face business not houses. The few business that decide to stay in poorer areas need the extra protection.

That's not the way it was told by someone who has seen them, nor is that how the article I found describes it. If you have something else that would help.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

reply to post by K J Gunderson


Obama has turned Big Brother into Big Bro', yo. First stop: poverty areas. Way to go Mr. "1st Black President".

The FedGov paid for the cameras, and you can bet they're hooked into Homeland Security data centers.



[edit on 29-5-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Yes, but who will watch the watchers.

I say we make it mandatory everyone over the age of 21 is required to carry.

That would end the crime.