Terrorists dont use credit to buy WMD!?!?

[bparker]

Roger that but the missing link I cant establish between the two is this:

Our credit reporting system is soley based and tracked for citizens of the USA and those that have a SSN# (green card holders, etc). Right? Now, having said that:

99.9% of Terrorism is financed by black market activities outside the USA none of which you will find in our Credit Reporting system here in the USA. If you are late paying your drug or arms dealer he can not report you to any of our 3 credit reporting agencies. He has other means of getting you to pay

99.9% of Terrorists are not citizens of the USA. They do not have a SSN# to report under to keep track of or any sort of credit history here in the USA.

So to me, it seems very silly to need to go looking into our credit records to find something that we know isnt there.

[NewHummerGuy]

"So to me, it seems very silly to need to go looking into our credit records to find something that we know isnt there."

Jesus bparker. Are you hiding something you are afraid will be found???????

If not then who cares

[bparker]

Thats the whole point for me.. there is nothing there to see so why make a law to see it? Thats why it was funny.. and to think we are so stupid to name it "in the acts of terrorism we need to do this" is just even more funny.

I guess "we" really are to a point of "paranoia" - holy sheet I see I am the very evident minority here and just tuning in.

Originally Posted by NewHummerGuy

"So to me, it seems very silly to need to go looking into our credit records to find something that we know isnt there."

Jesus bparker. Are you hiding something you are afraid will be found???????

If not then who cares

[bparker]

I surrender - I give in - lets just let govt and any police offical do what ever they want to us without any question as to why they want to do it.

Holy fawk I thought I would never see the day where the citizens were asking for less freedom.

Ok, I am on the bus now. Fuk it let them do what ever they want I wont ask "WHY" again.

hahahahaha

[h2co-pilot]

Originally Posted by bparker

I surrender - I give in - lets just let govt and any police offical do what ever they want to us without any question as to why they want to do it.

Holy fawk I thought I would never see the day where the citizens were asking for less freedom.

Ok, I am on the bus now. Fuk it let them do what ever they want I wont ask "WHY" again.

hahahahaha

What is the difference between saying credit cards and credit history exactly? They aren't looking at the plastic itself. The article says, It's all about records- again I'll quote:

The Pentagon and to a lesser extent the CIA have been using a little-known power to look at the banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage within the United States, officials said Saturday.

Records> Records that track movement and financial sponsors of cells and individuals infiltrated in our country and abroad with very bad intentions.

What does credit history mean to you exactly?

No matter that your purchases, habits and history is well documented and reviewed by the institutions that will it.

I am grateful for our offensive defense and the innovation that has taken place to do just that.

IMHO, the scenario of "Why?" with the conclusion "It's wrong." Without a shred of knowledge on the subject or any "solution" to the supposed wrong doing for the sake of the country has become an all too familiar route with certain individuals and parties. This is unfortunate.

[bparker]

Ahh, the difference would be (to me) would be Credit and Banking History in this case would be reffering the Credit Reporting institutions for lines of credit, (secured and unsecured) loans, business loans, propery loans pretty much anything with a large "credit line" associated with it that would not show as a "credit transaction" and to how well we have handeled those lines of credit. Thats about all I can think of that the 3 agencies" could offer up as far as info.

Where as, credit cards are merely a financial transaction when you make a purchase which is already tracked and reported on. We have given "the govt" lawful access to this data years ago.

Originally Posted by h2co-pilot

What is the difference between saying credit cards and credit history exactly?

[h2co-pilot]

Originally Posted by bparker

Ahh, the difference would be (to me) would be Credit and Banking History in this case would be reffering the Credit Reporting institutions for lines of credit, (secured and unsecured) loans, business loans, propery loans pretty much anything with a large "credit line" associated with it that would not show as a "credit transaction".

Where as, credit cards are merely a financial transaction when you make a purchase which is already tracked and reported on. We have given "the govt" lawful access to this data years ago.

Okay, so I see what you mean.

But the requests are for suspected people only and if they are submitted a subpeona- those suspects would be onto the investigation itself and the operation would be botched on that individual.

Where as before an investigative agency would let you know prior to an investigation via subpeona.

Where as you or me as an individual would have one look at this 'history' if we were to apply for a loan of some sort.

I can see where, yes, allowing an agency to view records without your knowledge or subpeona can be viewed as a threat to some with privacy/law issues. The credit card transactions- the same.

It seems harmless to me in this situation, especially if they had the go ahead for the other measures. They could be able to look anyway if they wanted. You would just know about it first.

Why?:

There could be loans for flight school tuition, cars, vans, planes. Paid for by someone else outside the country or obtained with co-signers affiliated with a known terror group. Cash would draw attention, therefore the standard loan/credit and the records would show the trail.

I believe it is more about the sponsorship. The "martyrs" have a free life scholarship for their duties so to speak.

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by bparker

Holy fawk I thought I would never see the day where the citizens were asking for less freedom.

I personally have not, and I do not know anyone who has, lost any freedoms here. What ?freedoms? have we lost? The ?we don?t know how much we?ve lost, but it might be tremendous if only we knew? theory just seems ludicrous to me after my recent trips. People there (and the Saudi populous has a lot more freedoms than much of the world) KNOW they aren?t free because they cannot do a lot of the basic things we do every day (e.g., drinking, watching women drive, attending a non-Muslim church, accessing large portions of the Internet). I suspect if you don?t even know that your freedoms have been infringed, you probably haven?t lost a lot in the grand scheme, especially in wartime. The mere suspicion that someone might look at your library card or credit history, compared to the rigid and punitive limitations imposed on much of the world?s populous seems beyond negligible to me, especially in wartime. Between Zacarias Moussaoui?s August 16, 2001 arrest and September 11, we did not search his laptop computer out of respect for his rights. Wouldn?t want to do that, it might infringe on a civil liberty. Never mind what the families of the 3,000 who died as a consequence might think about that.

[CO Hummer]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

I personally have not, and I do not know anyone who has, lost any freedoms here. What ?freedoms? have we lost?

How about "due process"? How about protection from illegal search and seizure?

[bparker]

I dont want to get started on this because I know hes a Jar Head that puts his life on the line for us - BUT - when I saw the MP take all the guns away from the private citizens hands INSIDE thier own houses leaving them defenseless against looters when hurricane katrina hit I almost lost it.

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

How about "due process"? How about protection from illegal search and seizure?

[KenP]

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

How about "due process"? How about protection from illegal search and seizure?

CO Hummer is a terrorist! (tags: radical, muslim, bomb, alf, elf, peta, fertilizer, plane, lessons, jihad, cleric, fear, poppy, WTC, gecko, camel jockey, infidel, UBL, dirty, uranium, iraq, quran, butt sex, afganistan, ied)

I have no problems with the Gov't checking people out. I've got nothing to hide.

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

How about "due process"? How about protection from illegal search and seizure?

I just don't see those rights as I understand them to have been violated.

4th amend't says: "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."

I'm just not aware of any unreasonable searches. Maybe there have been some. I just can't fathom how we would have defeated some of the powerful enemies we conquered in the past, such as the Nazis or Imperial Japan, if we had been complaining about the government looking at our library cards. In that situation, the government was rationing basic necessities and (as was necessary) drafting and forcing young men out of their private lives in the MILLIONS to don a uniform and risk, and in 400,000 cases, lose their lives. It seems that worring about the government looking at credit reports seem so, so insignificant in comparison - such a minor intrusion, if there is any chance it could help us defeat our enemies or save any of the lives of our civiliians or troops.

[CO Hummer]

Originally Posted by bparker

Holy fawk I thought I would never see the day where the citizens were asking for less freedom.

bparker,
Despite your stinky Doritos breath, I completely agree with you.

Everyone has completely thrown out the concept of liberty and freedom in search of a little "security". I put that in qoutes because it's clearly PERCEIVED security and not real.

So....I guess it's pretty much just you, me, and Benjamin Franklin. We should form a club.




Now....back on Topic. Do you think the American Express Gold Card is better than their gold "Rewards Plus" card? Is it worth the extras cost for the Plus version?

[bparker]

No way, Amex Blue is the best - ya know the one with the chip inside that secretly videos you havin nasty butt sex and sends it to the govt for everyone at the pentagon to watch on Fridays..

Originally Posted by CO Hummer

Now....back on Topic. Do you think the American Express Gold Card is better than their gold "Rewards Plus" card? Is it worth the extras cost for the Plus version?

[CO Hummer]

Originally Posted by bparker

No way, Amex Blue is the best - ya know the one with the chip inside that secretly videos you havin nasty butt sex and sends it to the govt for everyone at the pentagon to watch on Fridays..

I always wondered why my Blue card had a meatspin hologram on it. I thought it was just buyer protection.

[DennisAJC]

Now we know why you're so worried.

Originally Posted by bparker

with the chip inside that secretly videos you havin nasty butt sex

But I definitely agree with you on some points. They give you reasons why, but it feels like a road towards dictatorship.

But I still love everyone!