FBI Flying Planes Over U.S. to Track Suspected Terrorists

FOX News Network/AP ^ | Friday, March 14, 2003

[John Lenin]

WASHINGTON

[John Lenin]

Whatever it takes.

[John H K]

WASHINGTON — The FBI has a fleet of aircraft, some equipped with night surveillance and eavesdropping equipment, flying America's skies to track and collect intelligence on suspected terrorists and other criminals.

I'm gonna hazard a guess that 90% of this surveillance is actually War-on-Drugs work and it's being passed off as all being anti-terrorism to avoid complaints.

[holyscroller]

Those Muslims love cell phones, so have it it FBI. Listen to as many of them as you can.

[Born on the Storm King]

Uh, how about guarding the borders?

[MeekMom]

"Whatever it takes"

How about The FBI with a spine?
Why are they breathing American air?

[Fractal Trader]

Read several reports about Cessnas buzzing around Indiana. Were even acknowledged (belatedly) by the FBI.

Wonder if this is part of the action outlined in this article?

[aeronca]

"Whatever it takes.

I'm not sure I'm willing to accept the blanket "whatever it takes"...you know that little saying about "those who trade liberty for security deserve neither-thing"? I have nothing to hide, but I would rather not be subject to thermal surveillance, computer hacking, background checks and spy camera's on every corner.

Maybe air surveillance does allow agencies to monitor suspicious activity around high risk areas with out having to worry about that problem of "profiling"? I say fine....fly our borders. Cause it ain't you or me sleazing over the border trying to get away, right?

[John Lenin]

The FBI has been using airplanes since 1938, when an agent in a Stinson monoplane helped stop an extortion attempt that involved a payoff package thrown from a moving passenger train.

Does that answer your question ?

[Tamzee]

Just thinking of those folks leaping off towers 100 stories up....

I'm willing to gamble that they wouldn't have minded FBI planes in the air if it had prevented their 9/11. I bet they wouldn't have even minded Carnivore if it meant they got to go home to their families instead of saying terrified goodbye-i-love-you's on cell phones.

[seams2me]

Hot Dang!

[aeronca]

"Does that answer your question ?

Well my post contained 2 questions and a package thrown from a train doesn't really answer either specifically, but I catch your point (I think).

:\

[ALS]

What if it takes implants and you reporting to re-education camps?

I'm sure you didn't mean it the way it sounded, but "whatever it takes" is a bit VERY extreme.

If it becomes a little cloudy on what's ok and what isn't, just think of it in context of Swillary being president with all these "whatever it takes" under her belt as she steps into office...

[isthisnickcool]

I have nothing to hide, but I would rather not be subject to thermal surveillance, computer hacking, background checks and spy camera's on every corner

"Spy camera's on every corner". What are you talking about?

You are not "subject" to anything you list above. The FBI does not care about you.

[John Lenin]

Thats even more reason for people to take seriously the chatacter of the people they vote for.

[aeronca]

"Spy camera's on every corner". What are you talking about?

Surveillence (ie: "Security Camera's") in public places are becoming commonplace.

They are being used at high traffic intersections to record traffic incidences.

Every time you go shopping and walk across a parking lot, you are on camera. Inside the store--on camera. Everytime you buy gas, you are on a camera, in the bank...or haven't you noticed?

"You are not "subject" to anything you list above"

Ever hear of Carnivore? Ever hear of internet tracking?

I'm sure the FBI doesn't "care" about me, like I said, I have nothing to hide, but I believe that "security" can be taken a little too far. However, I do believe we have a serious problem on our borders.

[isthisnickcool]

I do believe we have a serious problem on our borders.

I agree with that.

What does "security cameras" have to do with the FBI? By the way, the FBI, overall, is a very low-tech operation. Don't believe what you see on TV.

[aeronca]

"What does "security cameras" have to do with the FBI?

They can access any video on the pretense of "suspicious activity?" All the intelligence agencies are going to fall under one heading: Dept Of Homeland Security, who will most likely help solicit funding for large cities and venues for outdoor surveillance equipment?

By the way, the FBI, overall, is a very low-tech operation.

Anyone who saw what happened 9-11 can vouche for that. But I'm confident that things will improve.

Don't believe what you see on TV

I don't watch any mainstream,network,primetime, TV trash, just cable news..(for what its worth).

[hottomale]

I believe aerostats would better serve in these functions. They could be mass produced at much greater cost savings than conventional aircraft and they fly, hover and are acoustically less detectable. They are already using renewable fuels at least partially.

[eno_]

Why would you defend the creation and enlargement of domestic surveillance mechanisms when there is an obvious alternative: Deport radical moslems that are here, and secure our borders.

Sure, we have "domestic terrorists" but they are small in number and FBI surveillance of them can be done up close and personal.

Freedom Lite will lead to Patriotism Lite.

[Stew Padasso]

Oh yeah, if Hillary and her globalist Marxist buddies take control, they are gonna love this kind of leeway and authority.