What if ...

[Wry Catcher]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

 

[asaratis]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

If the dummies watching for them had not gone to sleep at the wheel, they'd likely have been stopped. Even Mother Russia warned us about them.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

That would be impossible absent a warrant to investigate and detain.

This goes to the ignorant idiocy of the entire ‘spying’ non-issue.

The surveillance programs do not constitute ‘law enforcement,’ the intent is to gather information, not pursue criminal prosecutions because none of the ‘evidence’ would be admissible in court without a warrant.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

What if they weren't?

Do you really believe that the NSA stopped a bombing of the stock exchange and then didn't charge the people that were plotting it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

That would be impossible absent a warrant to investigate and detain.

This goes to the ignorant idiocy of the entire ‘spying’ non-issue.

The surveillance programs do not constitute ‘law enforcement,’ the intent is to gather information, not pursue criminal prosecutions because none of the ‘evidence’ would be admissible in court without a warrant.

I might have to go back and reread the Constitution, I had no idea the restrictions that prohibit the government from searching my person, house, papers, and effects only applied to law enforcement. Can you point out the part where it says that so I can find it?

 

[Gracie]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

Hey! You aren't supposed to post pondering question like that!

But it is a good question. Hmmmmm.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

Hey! You aren't supposed to post pondering question like that!

But it is a good question. Hmmmmm.

You do know that the only people that the FBI managed to catch are the ones that they gave the bombs to, don't you?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

Hey! You aren't supposed to post pondering question like that!

But it is a good question. Hmmmmm.

You do know that the only people that the FBI managed to catch are the ones that they gave the bombs to, don't you?

Huh? Who is they?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

That would be impossible absent a warrant to investigate and detain.

This goes to the ignorant idiocy of the entire ‘spying’ non-issue.

The surveillance programs do not constitute ‘law enforcement,’ the intent is to gather information, not pursue criminal prosecutions because none of the ‘evidence’ would be admissible in court without a warrant.

I might have to go back and reread the Constitution, I had no idea the restrictions that prohibit the government from searching my person, house, papers, and effects only applied to law enforcement. Can you point out the part where it says that so I can find it?

There are also "exigent circumstances" exceptions to the warrant requirement. Exigent circumstances arise when the law enforcement officers have reasonable grounds to believe that there is an immediate need to protect their lives, the lives of others, their property, or that of others, the search is not motivated by an intent to arrest and seize evidence, and there is some reasonable basis, to associate an emergency with the area or place to be searched.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

You do realize that the Agencies that failed all work for Obama? That he is ultimately responsible for their success and failure. His leadership his appointments run those agencies and they ignored warnings on 2 separate occasions from Russia. They launched half assed investigations and did not even follow proper procedure.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Hey! You aren't supposed to post pondering question like that!

But it is a good question. Hmmmmm.

You do know that the only people that the FBI managed to catch are the ones that they gave the bombs to, don't you?

Huh? Who is they?

You have problems parsing English sentences?

FYI, they is a pronoun, and you determine who, or what, a pronoun refers to by going to the antecedent noun in the sentence. In the example you are inquiring about the antecedent is the FBI.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That would be impossible absent a warrant to investigate and detain.

This goes to the ignorant idiocy of the entire ‘spying’ non-issue.

The surveillance programs do not constitute ‘law enforcement,’ the intent is to gather information, not pursue criminal prosecutions because none of the ‘evidence’ would be admissible in court without a warrant.

I might have to go back and reread the Constitution, I had no idea the restrictions that prohibit the government from searching my person, house, papers, and effects only applied to law enforcement. Can you point out the part where it says that so I can find it?

There are also "exigent circumstances" exceptions to the warrant requirement. Exigent circumstances arise when the law enforcement officers have reasonable grounds to believe that there is an immediate need to protect their lives, the lives of others, their property, or that of others, the search is not motivated by an intent to arrest and seize evidence, and there is some reasonable basis, to associate an emergency with the area or place to be searched.

Exigent circumstances apply only when the police reasonably believe someone is in danger, which pretty much requires them to hear someone screaming, or there is reasonable belief that a suspect will destroy evidence. Want to explain how you think either of those apply here?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

You do realize that the Agencies that failed all work for Obama? That he is ultimately responsible for their success and failure. His leadership his appointments run those agencies and they ignored warnings on 2 separate occasions from Russia. They launched half assed investigations and did not even follow proper procedure.

Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuush and 9-11 trumps the Boston Bombing.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I might have to go back and reread the Constitution, I had no idea the restrictions that prohibit the government from searching my person, house, papers, and effects only applied to law enforcement. Can you point out the part where it says that so I can find it?

There are also "exigent circumstances" exceptions to the warrant requirement. Exigent circumstances arise when the law enforcement officers have reasonable grounds to believe that there is an immediate need to protect their lives, the lives of others, their property, or that of others, the search is not motivated by an intent to arrest and seize evidence, and there is some reasonable basis, to associate an emergency with the area or place to be searched.

Exigent circumstances apply only when the police reasonably believe someone is in danger, which pretty much requires them to hear someone screaming, or there is reasonable belief that a suspect will destroy evidence. Want to explain how you think either of those apply here?

I won't bother...I'm retired law enforcement, you're not. How many warrants have you written or served. How many times did you act on the believe not acting would result in harm to innocents? As I've said, you don't know shit.

 

[Gracie]

You do know that the only people that the FBI managed to catch are the ones that they gave the bombs to, don't you?

Huh? Who is they?

You have problems parsing English sentences?

FYI, they is a pronoun, and you determine who, or what, a pronoun refers to by going to the antecedent noun in the sentence. In the example you are inquiring about the antecedent is the FBI.

Back in wagon wheel days, I flunked english lit.

 

[Oddball]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

Um....They were identified, just not apprehended.

"What if" you pulled your head out of your Dear Leader's ass?

 

[westwall]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

What if the relevant agencies had done some basic investigation when they were warned by the Russians and not just let it go. Kind of like how they ignored the FBI report prior to 9/11?

 

[westwall]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

What if they weren't?

Do you really believe that the NSA stopped a bombing of the stock exchange and then didn't charge the people that were plotting it?

Yes, he believes any bullshit his dear leader tells him too.

 

[westwall]

There are also "exigent circumstances" exceptions to the warrant requirement. Exigent circumstances arise when the law enforcement officers have reasonable grounds to believe that there is an immediate need to protect their lives, the lives of others, their property, or that of others, the search is not motivated by an intent to arrest and seize evidence, and there is some reasonable basis, to associate an emergency with the area or place to be searched.

Exigent circumstances apply only when the police reasonably believe someone is in danger, which pretty much requires them to hear someone screaming, or there is reasonable belief that a suspect will destroy evidence. Want to explain how you think either of those apply here?

I won't bother...I'm retired law enforcement, you're not. How many warrants have you written or served. How many times did you act on the believe not acting would result in harm to innocents? As I've said, you don't know shit.

Based on your ridiculous comments you were probably a BART cop. Law enforcement Bay Area wide, looks upon them like the glorified security guards they are. One Lt. had NEVER done a felony stop when he went on a ride along with a Richmond cop friend of mine.

Your comments belie your claims.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Boston Bomber Brothers had been identified and apprehended by "spying" before they killed and wounded innocents?

What if...

Wry Catcher stopped justifying government intrusion on our privacy?