Mad_Hatter
New member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 10
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Why did you dishonestly snip this from my post when you quoted it?
What is the FBI’s role in combating terrorism?
The FBI is the nation’s lead federal law enforcement agency for investigating and preventing acts of domestic and international terrorism. It is the lead federal agency for investigating attacks involving weapons of mass destruction—those involving chemical, radiological, or biological agents or nuclear weapons. The FBI is also responsible for specific terrorism-related offenses, such as violence at airports, money laundering, attacks on U.S. officials, and others. The FBI also works closely with the Director of National Intelligence and other U.S. intelligence agencies to gather and analyze intelligence on terrorism and other security threats. It is the number one priority of the FBI to protect the U.S. and U.S. persons and interests around the world from terrorist attack.
The secene is under the control of the investigators. As they are the one's with the expertise in this area. If they don't tell the State Dept. anything or ask them not to say anything what do you want the State Dept to do? Give some pablum feel good rhetoric?
I think they are doing the right thing by keepping very tight lipped.
No. I'm just pointing out nobody should be surprised.
After all, we are a nation that admits to running secret prisons and engages in kidnapping on the international scene. Ideas like the Rule of Law are nothing but dusty good hearted jokes.
This is what it says:
I don't have a problem with the FBI using its keen resources to investigate the scene. What I have a problem with is hiding behind it, and pretending that because they're doing it, you can't say anything. This isn't a crime scene, as you agree, and nothing here indicates that an FBI investigation, internationally, makes it a crime scene. There's no "law" to be enforced here.
Of course you do. :roll: But this doesn't answer my question -- why did you snip my post and make a sarcastic remark I had already addressed in what you snipped?
I'm hesitant to even post this, as I'm afraid I'm going to make your head explode....but here goes:
Can I obtain detailed information about a current FBI investigation that I see in the news?
No. Such information is protected from public disclosure, in accordance with current law and Department of Justice and FBI policy. This policy preserves the integrity of the investigation and the privacy of individuals involved in the investigation prior to any public charging for violations of the law. It also serves to protect the rights of people not yet charged with a crime.
Can I get a "LOL"?
Why are trying to use this attack as political fodder?
I'm not sure why my head would explode. This is what I've been saying. None of those concerns are at play here.
What "political fodder"?
That's ridiculously lame. Like others, you attempt to quash criticisms of the Administration with this nonsense. Fortunately, as with the others, I'm not beholden to you.
The reason I was worried about marked increase in head pressure is the very last word..."crime"...this is an FBI investigation and they do treat it as a crime.
Nope you're not beholden to me and fortunately your partison hackery is fairly transparent.
As I said, I will not yield to the lame name-calling. It's a legitimate criticism, and I will offer it whether or not it bothers you, and whatever you wish to call it.
It's poilotical fodder. There are perfectly legit reasons to be very tight lipped
I don't see anything out of line with what the State Department said here.
The State Department isn't subordinate to the FBI.
Nor is the FBI subordinate to the State Department...they are subordinate to the Department of Justice and truthfully, critical elements may not ever be shared with Dept of State...basically, State is deferring to the FBI, as the FBI is the agency that has full authority over this investigation.
I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face. Batman was a crime scene -- we had information galore. Zimmerman/Martin was a crime scene -- we had information galore...recordings...photographs...likely scenerios...coppers constantly updating the press.
This is bull****. And know what it tells me? All is not as it seems. Wake up.
They do not have "full authority." They have no authority that State doesn't grant, or that the President doesn't specifically order. State is a separate department over which Justice does not have authority.
State may well be granting the authority, but the point is, they make it sound like they have no choice. That's not correct, and it's lame.
I'm sorry, but since when does the FBI get its authority from the Dept of State? You just stated that State and DoJ are two separate departments but then state the FBI takes its marching orders from State??? I think I'm misinterpreting your post...can you clarify?
Okay how do we go about persecuting this war?
If not treating the scene as a crime scene and gathering as much information as possible.
Nor is the FBI subordinate to the State Department...they are subordinate to the Department of Justice and truthfully, critical elements may not ever be shared with Dept of State...basically, State is deferring to the FBI, as the FBI is the agency that has full authority over this investigation.