A couple days ago the US media were saying that the FBI said an attack was imminent within days.
Then yesterday we get hit with another terrorist attack, if the authorities knew how come they didnt stop it?
Also why do authorities keep saying on American TV that its impossible to track all the known terrorists in America? Just saw an FBI representative say its impossible to track all terrorist suspects or anyone convicted of a terrorist related offense.
How is that impossible when America has a registry for sex offenders, why not just put them on a registry where they have to report every month to the police and their personal information is posted online so everyone can watch them then problem solved?
>>57377304
why arent these terrorist attacks ever called hate crimes since the suspects use their philosophy as the motivation to kill others? If a person used white supremist philosophy it would be a hate crime???
>>57377304
>How is that impossible when America has a registry for sex offenders, why not just put them on a registry where they have to report every month to the police and their personal information is posted online so everyone can watch them then problem solved?
Sex Offenders are put on a list after they've been convicted of a crime, kind of hard to do that with Terrorists as most of them die in the act and the ones that don't go to prison for life.
>>57377895
hmmm but thats not true, people are arrested and charged all the time in thte US for planning attacks or school shootings and most get a couple years or just probation? So if their out walking around planning more crimes why not put them on a registry?
>They cant be put on a registry unless charged
Sounds like a technicality that someone needs to be convicted to be on a registry so why not pass a law arresting those suspected of being terrorists charging them with whatever got them suspected as being potential terrorists to begin then boom instant registry?
Clearly the FBI has a list of people its just a private registry, how is that different than making that registry public so we can protect ourselves from these nutjobs?
>>57377304
>>57378072
Most of the people who are suspected of being terrorists by the government are never convicted of anything, so turning the private government watch list of potential terrorist would just end creating public witchhunts, and potential force people the FBI/CIA wants to keep tabs on to go underground, making them harder to track. There's also the numerous issues of personal privacy that would be threatened by such a law as well. Also I think the big 3 letter agencies would be opposed to such a list as most of the persons on said list are probably Muslims and they don't want to catch flak from the media over "racial" profiling.
Honestly I think people worry far to much about potential terror attacks, you're more like to die in an accident driving your car to work everyday than to be involved in a terror attack, you, in general don't need to be afraid of every brown person you see, and even if you knew for sure which brownie was the next one that was going to try and blow himself up, it's not like you'd be able to do anything your self to stop him, with out breaking the law.
>>57378645
>Making the FBI registry public would create witch hunts
That is a false claim with no proof, there are no witch hunts of convicted sex offenders on the lists because being on the list doesnt mean a person is actively committing a crime or even involved in crime. Men in my town are on the sex registry for life for peeing in public and having sex with their girlfriends who they married just because the GF was under 18????
>>57378645
>No registries due to personal privacy
I dont think there is any law protecting personal privacy can you name one? The sex offender registry is all legal, so just saying copy paste that for terrorists and problem solved.
>>57377304
So if all tracking if ineffective ass they telll us then there would be no need for data-mining and agencies like the NSA all that they are saying is that their system is ineffective . Wouldn't it be effective infiltrating ISIS in order to gather information actually everyone can join. 1. They are not looking for terrorists they just want information. 2. Why infiltrate ISIS if they are playing in the same team if you are the hand guiding and the ISIS is the sword
>>57378769
Well the sex offenders registry isn't a list of people that might potentially kill you, and even then, people on the registry are generally treated a degree of suspicion and condemnation that's usually undeserved.
>>57378810
>Amendment IV
>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The 4th Amendment is generally understood to be a protection of personal privacy and there are many other Federal Laws protecting your personal privacy as well. The sex offenders registry is legal because it is only applied to persons convicted of a crime. A terrorist watchlist of a similar nature would be useless, as many people, especially muslims, who commit terrorist acts, have no previous criminal record, or if they do their previous crimes have little connection to terrorist acts.
>>57377304
their culture is blowing yourself up? so they admit it now?
>>57379103
>says 4th ammendment protects privacy
Courts already ruled that the registries for sex offenders are legal because they could kill anyone at anytime even if never convicted of a violent offense. so making terrorist registries for people not convicted is easy to do and pretty much legal already. Couldnt this logic and legal basis be used to justify a terrorist registry? Even the FBI say its impossible to track the terrorists in america due to there being to many of terrorists and not enough FBI agents to track them.
Keep in mind that means the number of terrorists in the US outnumbers the number of FBI agents since the FBI admits they lack the manpower to track terrorists meaning there are not enough FBI agents. The FBI only has 35,000 employees meaning there are more than 35,000 terrorists in the USA so why cant we just double the size of the FBI until they have the manpower they need to track the terrorists?
>>57377304
Wait, but if all muslimes aren't terrorists, then the guy in the pic isn't depicting her culture, but rather a terrorist or is she acknowledging that all muslimes are terrorists?
>>57379347
>so making terrorist registries for people not convicted is easy to do and pretty much legal already. Couldnt this logic and legal basis be used to justify a terrorist registry?
No, because once again, registered sex offenders have already been convicted of a crime. While you could create a public registry for people convicted of an act of terror or conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism, you couldn't make the governments list of suspected terrorist public with out running into issues of personal privacy.
> The FBI only has 35,000 employees meaning there are more than 35,000 terrorists in the USA so why cant we just double the size of the FBI until they have the manpower they need to track the terrorists?
1. Not all FBI agents or employees are engaged in the monitoring of potential or active terrorists, in fact most aren't, and many of the FBI's employee's have little to nothing to do with law enforcement or crime prevention at all.
2. Of those FBI agents monitoring potential threats, there is not a 1:1 ratio of agent to target. Some agents may be assigned multiple persons to keep track of, while other targets may take a coordinated group of agents to monitor.
3. As to why we don't increase the size of the FBI, that mostly has to due with budget and diminishing returns. Increasing the size of any government agency costs a ton of money, and the return on that money is not 1:1.
This is the will of Allah (PBUH)
>>57377304
>culture
>a man dressed up as a suicide bomber
You aren't doing yourself any favours with this comment. If anything, its mocking radicals and extremists, not your culture. Unless this poster is trying to defend jihadists?
