| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| US appeals court hears case on NYC police surveillance of Muslims |
| 2015-01-14 |
| [Ynet]. Civil rights groups asked a panel of federal judges on Tuesday to overturn a lower court's ruling that there was nothing harmful in New York City police conducting surveillance on Moslems in neighboring New Jersey without suspicion of a crime. The hearing came days after the deadly attacks in Gay Paree by Islamist gunnies, which have renewed the debate over the balance between government surveillance and citizens' civil liberties. Some Moslems have expressed concern ...meaning the brow was mildly wrinkled, the eyebrows drawn slightly together, and a thoughtful expression assumed, not that anything was actually done or indeed that any thought was actually expended... that the attacks will be used to justify spying on them or spark an anti-Moslem backlash. The Moslem plaintiffs, including New Jersey imams, business owners, a war veteran and a student group, first sued the city in 2012. They said their lives had been disrupted in myriad ways and their constitutional rights breached by New York police surveillance. |
| Posted by:trailing wife |
| #11 They need to expand the RICO laws to cover support of a subversive organization. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2015-01-14 22:47 |
| #10 Everyone else is under surveillance, why not them? |
| Posted by: chris 2015-01-14 18:46 |
| #9 Beso, you are certainly right about that......how about they define the problem as Muslims? Mohammedans would do to, no? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2015-01-14 15:54 |
| #8 Personally, I think the problem is exacerbated if not completely caused by the inability of the "leaders" of the country to clearly define who the enemy is.... "Leaders" have defined the problem as NOT being Islam. I think we can all agree on that. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2015-01-14 12:18 |
| #7 Steve, I was just trying (and failing) to be snarky about all the Muzzie defenders, civil/human rights squealers and there twisted knickers. I was well aware of the mob and all its ins & outs since I was growing up in Joisey from the '50s. I'm also paranoid about government in general and don't doubt for a minute that they would (and do) go after political opponents of the beltway party (see Bundy ranch, IRS etc.) You point out (in a very measured and adult way) what the real problem is. Where's the line and how do you walk it? The one question I've got is why hasn't the gov't been a little more forthcoming with the results of all the wiretaps that the NSA and others have been gathering? They don't need to give away people and methods any more than Snowden et al have already. Let's know what's going on so we, the people, can form an informed opinion. Personally, I think the problem is exacerbated if not completely caused by the inability of the "leaders" of the country to clearly define who the enemy is and what our goals are for fighting. How much of this is pure PC cowardice, how much is Saudi money I'll leave as an exercise for the reader. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2015-01-14 12:14 |
| #6 Goes against the whole BS "lone wolf" narrative. Would love to see the jihadists subjected to RICO. |
| Posted by: regular joe 2015-01-14 11:46 |
| #5 Alan: yes, as it turns out, the police DID have actionable suspicion of crime when they surveilled the Mafia. All those wiretaps were authorized by a judge in pursuant to a warrant. That the federales at that time could get a wiretap on a ham sandwich was a different yet related matter. There's a fine line here: allow the Feds to do surveillance on a group just on appearance, and next thing you know it'll be the Tea Party being surveilled. That's certainly where Champ, ValJar and Holder would like to go. I'm all for surveillance. I'm also all for civil rights. The two can co-exist but sometimes it isn't easy. The NYC police have to make a better case than what they've (apparently) made in court. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2015-01-14 11:23 |
| #4 Did the police have an actionable suspicion of crime when they surveilled the mafia? Until something is done congregating while Muslim is probably enough for rational people to presume a crime, conspiracy at least, is in play. So, now what? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2015-01-14 07:37 |
| #3 The potential problem I see with police surveillance is that it could turn into another kind of lawfare, misuse triggered by miscreants like Obola and Place Holder using it to further their agenda and against the general well-being. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2015-01-14 07:12 |
| #2 Liberals love Paris. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2015-01-14 03:09 |
| #1 Case dismissed! |
| Posted by: Raj 2015-01-14 00:16 |