Support
Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
Appeals Court: NSA Bulk Phone Data Collection Is Illegal
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court in New York on Thursday ruled that the once-secret National Security Agency program that is systematically collecting Americans' phone records in bulk is illegal. The decision comes as a fight in Congress is intensifying over whether to end and replace the program, or to extend it without changes. In a 97-page ruling, a three-judge panel for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that a provision of the USA Patriot Act known as Section 215 cannot be legitimately interpreted to allow the systematic bulk collection of domestic calling records. ... Thursday’s ruling did not come with any injunction ordering the program to cease, and it is not clear that anything else will happen in the judicial system before Congress has to make a decision about the expiring law.What?
... The court, in a unanimous ruling written by Judge Gerard E. Lynch, held that Section 215 "cannot bear the weight the government asks us to assign to it, and that it does not authorize the telephone metadata program." It declared the program illegal, saying, "We do so comfortably in the full understanding that if Congress chooses to authorize such a far-reaching and unprecedented program, it has every opportunity to do so, and to do so unambiguously."Oh I see. Their idea is that Congress should either explicitly authorize these bulk collections, or else the power will be retired. These bulk collections, it turns out, are being done thanks to Obama's claimed reading of a law, and the Court found the law does not support his assertion of claimed powers. Kind of like Obamacare, maybe.
Comments
(Jump to bottom of comments)Posted by: kathysaysso at May 07, 2015 12:52 PM (fMQoG)
2
Can I assume then that I can arrest any Govt official I see? This Govt is a CRIME SYNDICATE not a Govt so, no...
Posted by: Despiser at May 07, 2015 12:54 PM (LQg6n)
3
But how will the Government now collect data about Tea Party members, disabled veterans, and Christian bakers so they can give it to ISIS North America for targeted domestic attacks?
Posted by: DNC-ISIS, LLC, A Progressive Joint Venture at May 07, 2015 12:54 PM (7u7u7)
4
I'm sure Congress will bend over backwards to give President Boyfriend what he wants.
Posted by: Chupacabras at May 07, 2015 12:54 PM (q/kmn)
5
It's like a turn key police state or sumptin'
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 12:56 PM (W6iIX)
6
The fix is in. The law doesn't say that, and since we know you'll fix it so it will say that, there's no reason for us to order the practice stopped.
It's too late.
It's too late.
Posted by: Chupacabras at May 07, 2015 12:56 PM (q/kmn)
7
No citizen has standing to object to these measures in the same way they would have if they were being spied upon by another private citizen. This is because government is always benevolent and trustworthy.
Posted by: Barack Obama at May 07, 2015 12:57 PM (xkSSa)
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (7ObY1)
9
Wait, wasn't Will Smith in this movie?
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (W6iIX)
10
Judges today don't know the law. Maybe I should go back to teaching to make sure future generations understand the Constitution like I do.
Posted by: SCOAMT at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (yywyy)
11
so why is it that if I break the most minor law it's to be vigorously enforced against me, but if the federal government, say.... violates the 4th amendment rights of 300 million people, it's no big deal?
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (AkOaV)
12
Whether it is legal or not is not going to change the operation.
Who will prosecute the prosecutors?
Whether it is legal or not is not going to change the operation.
Who will prosecute the prosecutors?
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 12:59 PM (eW+UG)
13
4 I'm sure Congress will bend over backwards to give President Boyfriend what he wants.
We all know who the orange butt belongs to.
We all know who the orange butt belongs to.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:59 PM (7ObY1)
14
The Left really has no credibility on civil liberties. As long as someone with a (D) after their name does it, it's A-OK.
The absolute hissy fit they threw over the Patriot Act for all sorts of urban legends that even if they were true were silly, like access to library cards?
But here's Obama out-and-out spying on all Americans and collecting their phone records and you barely hear a whimper from the same group.
The absolute hissy fit they threw over the Patriot Act for all sorts of urban legends that even if they were true were silly, like access to library cards?
But here's Obama out-and-out spying on all Americans and collecting their phone records and you barely hear a whimper from the same group.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 12:59 PM (yiX3f)
15
Its one of those natural laws I think, all passed laws will continue to expand until it it runs out of room. The Patriot Act was originally meant to stop terrorism and expanded to monitoring the whole of society. That should end.
Its one of those natural laws I think, all passed laws will continue to expand until it it runs out of room. The Patriot Act was originally meant to stop terrorism and expanded to monitoring the whole of society. That should end.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:00 PM (ODxAs)
Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:00 PM (8XRCm)
17
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (7ObY1)
They're no longer really untracable either with the NSAs meta data collection they can draw "social circles" and figure out with high confidence who you are based on who you call.
So unless all your family and friends are rotating through multiple burner phones like crazy, too, they know exactly who you are.
They're no longer really untracable either with the NSAs meta data collection they can draw "social circles" and figure out with high confidence who you are based on who you call.
So unless all your family and friends are rotating through multiple burner phones like crazy, too, they know exactly who you are.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:00 PM (AkOaV)
18
You know, I wouldn't mind the NSA spying on phones and such if they were actually trying to find America's enemies, rather than punishing her friends.
Posted by: Null at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (xjpRj)
19
Yeah, even if they "stop" it will keep going on.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (LA7Cm)
20
Untraceable to the user pay-as-you-go phones.
They're not just for drug dealers anymore.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (7ObY1)
-----
Ummmm...... unless you pay by credit card....
They're not just for drug dealers anymore.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (7ObY1)
-----
Ummmm...... unless you pay by credit card....
Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (8XRCm)
21
Bulk email collections are allowed by our Constitution.
I wish you people would read out Founding Documents before you start making blind assertions!
I wish you people would read out Founding Documents before you start making blind assertions!
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (wwBdj)
22
How many divisions does the court have?
Posted by: Bandersnatch at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (JtwS4)
23
Ok.... so let me get this straight...
The Modern US Court system sees something Illegal, yet DOES NOT STOP IT...
Are they not, then accomplices after the fact?
Are they not now part of a criminal conspiracy which denies the RIGHT to privacy of the US Citizen???
Are they not, PART OF THE DAMN PROBLEM?
The Modern US Court system sees something Illegal, yet DOES NOT STOP IT...
Are they not, then accomplices after the fact?
Are they not now part of a criminal conspiracy which denies the RIGHT to privacy of the US Citizen???
Are they not, PART OF THE DAMN PROBLEM?
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (qh617)
24
Ace I am trying not to be a 1/2 empty kind of guy but the court justified the ruling by saying, "NSA exceeded Congressional mandates to the program" not "Hey dumb fucks the 4th amendment"
My line of thinking goes like this...
You have to appreciate their pretending Congress can override the 4th amendment on a whim. In saying "Congress authorized you violate THIS far not this far" is in fact saying Congress *can* give permission. That'll be just swell when applied to OTHER amendments beyond the 4th. It does match the media and society's indifference to Obama's "hey look I found new powers!" actions though.
SCotUS in all likelihood will not slap down the entire idea of Congressional "power" to override the 4th Amendment short of an amendment which means the Bill of Rights already weakened WRT the 1st, 2d, and 5th amendments sages a little more under the weight of "expediency."
My line of thinking goes like this...
You have to appreciate their pretending Congress can override the 4th amendment on a whim. In saying "Congress authorized you violate THIS far not this far" is in fact saying Congress *can* give permission. That'll be just swell when applied to OTHER amendments beyond the 4th. It does match the media and society's indifference to Obama's "hey look I found new powers!" actions though.
SCotUS in all likelihood will not slap down the entire idea of Congressional "power" to override the 4th Amendment short of an amendment which means the Bill of Rights already weakened WRT the 1st, 2d, and 5th amendments sages a little more under the weight of "expediency."
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (/4AZU)
25
Barack Obama is a SCOAMT.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (kff5f)
26
"Thursday's ruling did not come with any injunction ordering the program to cease, and it is not clear that anything else will happen in the judicial system"
So its like the Clinton Foundation? Illegal but there is no controlling legal authority who can make it stop.
So its like the Clinton Foundation? Illegal but there is no controlling legal authority who can make it stop.
Posted by: Hondo Phrestrae at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (lkXeQ)
27
Man, every time I do a good "Imam" joke, a new thread goes up before everyone can congratulate me on how funny/clever it was. At least, I assume that's why no one has said anything.
Posted by: Turd Ferguson at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (VAsIq)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (kff5f)
29
It looks like the judges are a bit fearful and paranoid about their decision. I wonder why.
Posted by: Soona at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (xFPd9)
30
23 Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:01 PM (qh617)
One reason may well be they know NSA and Obama will simply ignore them anyway.
Judges tend to understand weak rulings are better than ignored ones.
One reason may well be they know NSA and Obama will simply ignore them anyway.
Judges tend to understand weak rulings are better than ignored ones.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (/4AZU)
31
How come this program has not stopped any attacks?
Boston Marathon
Garland Texas
and a few others I can't think of right now
How come this program has not stopped any attacks?
Boston Marathon
Garland Texas
and a few others I can't think of right now
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (W6iIX)
32
It is not that it is illegal. I may *also* be illegal, but that is not the primary flaw.
The primary flaw with the NSA's program is that it is unconstitutional.
4th Amendment, Motherf*cker, do you speak it?
The primary flaw with the NSA's program is that it is unconstitutional.
4th Amendment, Motherf*cker, do you speak it?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (kff5f)
33
Yet with all this they missed Speedbump and lil bro.
If it doesn't serve the intended purpose, what's the point?
If it doesn't serve the intended purpose, what's the point?
Posted by: Golfman at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (++uS+)
Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (8XRCm)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (ODxAs)
36
These bulk collections, it turns out, are being done thanks to Obama's claimed reading of a law, and the Court found the law does not support his assertion of claimed powers.
Kind of like Obamacare, maybe.
And McConnell is working to do what he can to make the legislation work with the claimed reading.
These bulk collections, it turns out, are being done thanks to Obama's claimed reading of a law, and the Court found the law does not support his assertion of claimed powers.
Kind of like Obamacare, maybe.
And McConnell is working to do what he can to make the legislation work with the claimed reading.
Posted by: buzzion at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (zt+N6)
37
This is totally in The Constitution, read it.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (TV9BR)
38
The part about the phone data that's so absurd is a true terrorist cell
is going to have a bunch of disposable cell phone "burners", just like
every other criminal enterprise. It's a little bit like demanding a gun
registration to fight crime, obviously criminals aren't going to
register their guns.
You can go into a store and pay cash for a phone with X amount of minutes that's easily reloadable.
After the abuse we've seen with the IRS, I
would much rather have a federal government without this power and take
my chances with the terrorists.
I fear Obama's federal government more than I fear ISIS in my hometown.
is going to have a bunch of disposable cell phone "burners", just like
every other criminal enterprise. It's a little bit like demanding a gun
registration to fight crime, obviously criminals aren't going to
register their guns.
You can go into a store and pay cash for a phone with X amount of minutes that's easily reloadable.
After the abuse we've seen with the IRS, I
would much rather have a federal government without this power and take
my chances with the terrorists.
I fear Obama's federal government more than I fear ISIS in my hometown.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (yiX3f)
Posted by: Harley Quinn at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (hKWIM)
40
4th Amendment, Motherf*cker, do you speak it?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon
4th Amendment? Pretty sure that's not in the Constitution.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon
4th Amendment? Pretty sure that's not in the Constitution.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (VAsIq)
41
What this court is saying, just like what Roberts said in the socialized medicine case, is that congress has the right to do anything it wants on a whim, damn the constitution, and that the executive branch does not have to obey the laws of the land.
Literally.
What this court is saying, just like what Roberts said in the socialized medicine case, is that congress has the right to do anything it wants on a whim, damn the constitution, and that the executive branch does not have to obey the laws of the land.
Literally.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (eW+UG)
Posted by: Justice Roberts at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (W6iIX)
43
I may just be a creepy neck-beard, hipster mofo, but-
eh, I got nuthin'.
The NSA collects your data,
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
eh, I got nuthin'.
The NSA collects your data,
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (0cMkb)
44
congress?
Imagine how many recorded phone calls there might be of Senate and congress's phone calls.
Tin Foil, is not needed as they self admit to gathering all calls as they 'need'
Imagine how many recorded phone calls there might be of Senate and congress's phone calls.
Tin Foil, is not needed as they self admit to gathering all calls as they 'need'
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (nqBYe)
45
It's a tax, so it must be legal!
Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (oDCMR)
46
I hope it holds up because I like being presumed innocent until proven guilty as opposed to this administration who sees everyone as guilty until proven innocent.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (6Poxk)
47
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (VAsIq)
48
How come this program has not stopped any attacks?
Boston Marathon
Garland Texas
and a few others I can't think of right now
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (W6iIX)
----
Because they're not watching radical muslims.... that would be *profiling*.
They're watching returning veterans, Republican 501-3c's, Tea Party groups, Gadsen Flag purchases, firearms records..... and blogs just like this one.
Boston Marathon
Garland Texas
and a few others I can't think of right now
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (W6iIX)
----
Because they're not watching radical muslims.... that would be *profiling*.
They're watching returning veterans, Republican 501-3c's, Tea Party groups, Gadsen Flag purchases, firearms records..... and blogs just like this one.
Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (8XRCm)
49
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (/4AZU)
The phrase which damaged American Liberty the most... which destroyed the very concept of Natural Rights... was said in the Supreme Court...
That 'the Constitution is not a suicide pact'....
ie... it can be ignored.... vice being amended...
The phrase which damaged American Liberty the most... which destroyed the very concept of Natural Rights... was said in the Supreme Court...
That 'the Constitution is not a suicide pact'....
ie... it can be ignored.... vice being amended...
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (qh617)
50
So if you buy one of those burner phones with your credit card. . .
Posted by: Hondo Phrestrae at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (lkXeQ)
51
If it doesn't serve the intended purpose, what's the point?
The point and intended purpose became to use the info at a future date during your political show trial. They only find it in their storage when it becomes an interest.
The point and intended purpose became to use the info at a future date during your political show trial. They only find it in their storage when it becomes an interest.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (ODxAs)
52
Didn't they state in testimony that not one arrest has been made because of this data collection? The f'ing day after each attack, regular people are looking at the terrorist Facebook pages and are asking "WTF, he says he was going to do this right here on his page."
Posted by: ryukyu at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (j29PP)
53
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:02 PM (/4AZU)
Our constitution has not really been... operative for decades at this point.
They'll give it lip service, but... well, you know.
Our constitution has not really been... operative for decades at this point.
They'll give it lip service, but... well, you know.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (AkOaV)
54
the administration to
Justice Roberts.
If you like your children you can keep them.
for a price.
ok i did slip on the tin foil, but some things are inexplicable or so corrupt i cannot tell the difference
Justice Roberts.
If you like your children you can keep them.
for a price.
ok i did slip on the tin foil, but some things are inexplicable or so corrupt i cannot tell the difference
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (nqBYe)
55
I hope it holds up because I like being presumed innocent until proven guilty as opposed to this administration who sees everyone as guilty until proven innocent.
You hope what holds up? The non-injunctive relief? The permission the Court just gave to the Legislature to literally ignore the Constitution?
This ruling is about as far from a "win" as you can get without the Court explicitly saying "eh, it's the Government, we can do whatever we want."
You hope what holds up? The non-injunctive relief? The permission the Court just gave to the Legislature to literally ignore the Constitution?
This ruling is about as far from a "win" as you can get without the Court explicitly saying "eh, it's the Government, we can do whatever we want."
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (kff5f)
56
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (VAsIq)
A-n-n-nd, your special sauce.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (VAsIq)
A-n-n-nd, your special sauce.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar at May 07, 2015 01:07 PM (0cMkb)
57
What this court is saying, just like what Roberts said in the socialized medicine case, is that congress has the right to do anything it wants on a whim, damn the constitution, and that the executive branch does not have to obey the laws of the land.
Literally.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (eW+UG)
And, in the words of William Marcy Tweed, "What are you going to do about it?"
March on Washington? We have jobs.
Vote? Worthless.
Protest? The State comes down on you like a fucking hammer.
Literally.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (eW+UG)
And, in the words of William Marcy Tweed, "What are you going to do about it?"
March on Washington? We have jobs.
Vote? Worthless.
Protest? The State comes down on you like a fucking hammer.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at May 07, 2015 01:07 PM (zF6Iw)
58
27 Man, every time I do a good "Imam" joke, a new thread goes up before everyone can congratulate me on how funny/clever it was. At least, I assume that's why no one has said anything.
Wait, there were some GOOD jokes?
Wait, there were some GOOD jokes?
Posted by: Everyone Else at May 07, 2015 01:07 PM (7ObY1)
59
The Bill of Rights only goes to 3. Read it sometime.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:07 PM (TV9BR)
60
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (VAsIq)
A-n-n-nd, your special sauce.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
You didn't make that!
I did. You helped.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (VAsIq)
A-n-n-nd, your special sauce.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
You didn't make that!
I did. You helped.
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (VAsIq)
61
If you outlaw the collection of all of our phone data, then only outlaws will collect all of our data.
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
Posted by: Barky O'Douche at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (FcR7P)
62
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (ODxAs)
The real point? My tin foil hat on?
The meta data "social circles" is the real point of the whole program.
They know who you are, everyone you interact with, everyone THEY interact with, and can draw diagrams and "circles" of everyones social spheres.
So, if god forbid, there is ever a situation where people get... violently angry... at the government, they know *exactly* who to go after, who sympathizes with them, and who their "social circles" are.
The real point? My tin foil hat on?
The meta data "social circles" is the real point of the whole program.
They know who you are, everyone you interact with, everyone THEY interact with, and can draw diagrams and "circles" of everyones social spheres.
So, if god forbid, there is ever a situation where people get... violently angry... at the government, they know *exactly* who to go after, who sympathizes with them, and who their "social circles" are.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (7ObY1)
64
There are plenty of quotes out there about trading freedom for security.
The fact is that freedom is dangerous to everybody. It is dangerous to the power hungry because it stifles them. As we are seeing now, it is dangerous to the fearful because it doesn't assuage their fear. And, it is dangerous to the free because it puts them in danger from those who envy or want to take their freedom from them.
Free people become brave people or they cease being free.
The fact is that freedom is dangerous to everybody. It is dangerous to the power hungry because it stifles them. As we are seeing now, it is dangerous to the fearful because it doesn't assuage their fear. And, it is dangerous to the free because it puts them in danger from those who envy or want to take their freedom from them.
Free people become brave people or they cease being free.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (BZAd3)
65
I saw Fourth Amendment open for Leviathan on the Washington Mall.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (JtwS4)
66
46 Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM (6Poxk)
The entire program's a joke.
Obama doesn't want the reason d'aitrie of the fucking program executed (ie stopping Rad Muslims from toppling buildings) sop much as he wants that sweet sweet eye of sauron power...
I am angry and ashamed at the motherfuckers who were right when warning me(and I eventually joined them in warning) "Bush won't be Prez forever dude"...
I am depending on my mood as angry at Bush not weaponizing the Civil Service as I am at them/me though.
The entire program's a joke.
Obama doesn't want the reason d'aitrie of the fucking program executed (ie stopping Rad Muslims from toppling buildings) sop much as he wants that sweet sweet eye of sauron power...
I am angry and ashamed at the motherfuckers who were right when warning me(and I eventually joined them in warning) "Bush won't be Prez forever dude"...
I am depending on my mood as angry at Bush not weaponizing the Civil Service as I am at them/me though.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (/4AZU)
67
Yeah but they're still collecting all our posts here on AOSHQ. The NSA.
Then.
I called the IRS to find out where my refund is, and she said, "Oh, I see you post on that Ace blog."
Then.
I called the IRS to find out where my refund is, and she said, "Oh, I see you post on that Ace blog."
Posted by: the littl shyning man at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (U6f54)
68
When do we get to wear jodhpurs, stompy boots and Sam Brown belts? Obama fascism is totes not fashionable.
Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (oDCMR)
69
the govts rights to do as it wants supercedes everything. while even using Tax to make you comply.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (nqBYe)
70
"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were- cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?"
Posted by: B'roke O'Brien at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (xQX/f)
Posted by: Kreplach at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (bckL9)
72
53 Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:06 PM (AkOaV)
Pick... 1933 or 1968...but yeah the merry-go-round broke down.
Pick... 1933 or 1968...but yeah the merry-go-round broke down.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (/4AZU)
73
I believe it was one of the Democrat Presidents celebrated by Democrats at their Jefferson - Jackson Day festivities who told a court "You have made your decision, now let us see if you can enforce it."
It seems to me that there actually is a way for courts to enforce their decisions against lawless members of the executive branch. The courts can declare them outlaws. That means that they are outside the protection of the law. You can take their stuff. You can kill them. You could enslave them if you had that physical capability.
Usually outlaws had their rights restored as soon as they turned themselves in to the authorities but in this case the authorities themselves are the outlaws so I am not sure how that would work.
It seems to me that there actually is a way for courts to enforce their decisions against lawless members of the executive branch. The courts can declare them outlaws. That means that they are outside the protection of the law. You can take their stuff. You can kill them. You could enslave them if you had that physical capability.
Usually outlaws had their rights restored as soon as they turned themselves in to the authorities but in this case the authorities themselves are the outlaws so I am not sure how that would work.
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (KDbAT)
Posted by: Null at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (xjpRj)
75
"Did you know I was a Constitutional scholar? Whatever. Pass the joint Reggie!"
Posted by: Preznit Fookinstick at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (5buP8)
Posted by: The NSA at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (W6iIX)
77
The FBI recently said that the Jihadis who attacked Gellar's event were known, but indistinguishable from too many other persons of interest.
Think about that. Who were those men? They were people who are willing to kill over cartoons. They are people whose view of their god's honor is so stunted, they have to kill people for slights not to themselves, but to an abstraction.
Now think about the fact that there are so many people EXACTLY like them, that the federal gov't doesn't have the resources to monitor them.
Note too: the Boston Marathon bombers were virulently anti-American, and their anti-Americanism was so indistinguishable from others in Cambridge, Mass that they were unremarkable.
Think about that. Who were those men? They were people who are willing to kill over cartoons. They are people whose view of their god's honor is so stunted, they have to kill people for slights not to themselves, but to an abstraction.
Now think about the fact that there are so many people EXACTLY like them, that the federal gov't doesn't have the resources to monitor them.
Note too: the Boston Marathon bombers were virulently anti-American, and their anti-Americanism was so indistinguishable from others in Cambridge, Mass that they were unremarkable.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (jhqr1)
78
now i'm hungry
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (nqBYe)
79
I have mixed feelings. We need to be protected from our enemies. On the other hand I don't trust Fredo or much of anybody in Government.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (rDqRv)
80
Can't wait until their is a Republican administration in power and we get to see all the phone calls between the Clinton Foundation and Fenton Communications.
Posted by: Jean at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (ztOda)
81
Look. At this point I'll take anything remotely winnish I can get.
Posted by: alexthechick - Oh please intervene SMOD at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (mf5HN)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (W5DcG)
83
I'm sorry, but does anyone think something as silly as a court decision at any level will stop anything this administration wants to do?
Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (vgIRn)
84
50
So if you buy one of those burner phones with your credit card. . .
Posted by: Hondo Phrestrae
Like with a Visa gift car you can also buy with cash?
Even if you can "trace" the account, so what. How many illegal aliens are running around buying things with credit cards? It's not like "ISIS Inc." is going to be on the credit cards a terrorist uses.
To basically snoop on nearly every American for this useless program is a gross overreach of power.
So if you buy one of those burner phones with your credit card. . .
Posted by: Hondo Phrestrae
Like with a Visa gift car you can also buy with cash?
Even if you can "trace" the account, so what. How many illegal aliens are running around buying things with credit cards? It's not like "ISIS Inc." is going to be on the credit cards a terrorist uses.
To basically snoop on nearly every American for this useless program is a gross overreach of power.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (yiX3f)
85
So, I've decided I agree with Ace about the whole national divorce thing.
As long as it is a messy, violent divorce.
So, I've decided I agree with Ace about the whole national divorce thing.
As long as it is a messy, violent divorce.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (eW+UG)
86
The FBI recently said that the Jihadis who attacked Gellar's event were known, but indistinguishable from too many other persons of interest.
Think about that. Who were those men? They were people who are willing to kill over cartoons. They are people whose view of their god's honor is so stunted, they have to kill people for slights not to themselves, but to an abstraction.
Now think about the fact that there are so many people EXACTLY like them, that the federal gov't doesn't have the resources to monitor them.
Note too: the Boston Marathon bombers were virulently anti-American, and their anti-Americanism was so indistinguishable from others in Cambridge, Mass that they were unremarkable.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (jhqr1)
Actually I think we have the where with all to deal with most of them. What we don't have is the will to act.
Think about that. Who were those men? They were people who are willing to kill over cartoons. They are people whose view of their god's honor is so stunted, they have to kill people for slights not to themselves, but to an abstraction.
Now think about the fact that there are so many people EXACTLY like them, that the federal gov't doesn't have the resources to monitor them.
Note too: the Boston Marathon bombers were virulently anti-American, and their anti-Americanism was so indistinguishable from others in Cambridge, Mass that they were unremarkable.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (jhqr1)
Actually I think we have the where with all to deal with most of them. What we don't have is the will to act.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (rDqRv)
87
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
For the prices I'm paying for hamburger, you don't want to know what I'd do to you for stealing that.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
For the prices I'm paying for hamburger, you don't want to know what I'd do to you for stealing that.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (jhqr1)
88
Why haven't we rounded up all the clowns that were indistinguishable from the Geller attacker?
Posted by: Jean at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (ztOda)
89
I have mixed feelings. We need to be protected from our enemies. On the other hand I don't trust Fredo or much of anybody in Government.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (rDqRv)
Becauze i don't trust them..
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM (rDqRv)
Becauze i don't trust them..
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Your GOP Congress on truth serum at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (NUCTk)
91
Imagine how many recorded phone calls there might be of Senate and congress's phone calls.
You know that Fellow Travellers are exempted from this, right?
You know that Fellow Travellers are exempted from this, right?
Posted by: t-bird at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (FcR7P)
92
Your 2016 GOP Candidate on the issue:
Jeb Bush said Tuesday that President Obamas greatest accomplishment was keeping in place controversial spying programs at the National Security Agency.
"I would say the best part of the Obama administration would be his continuance of the protections of the homeland using the big metadata programs," Bush said in an interview on the Michael Medved radio show.
The former Florida governor said the NSAs bulk collection of Americans phone data was "an important service" carried out in a way that protects individual civil liberties.
He lauded the Obama administration for refusing to buckle under pressure from Democrats, civil liberties groups and some Republicans. "He has not abandoned them," Bush said.
4/21/2015
Your 2016 GOP Candidate on the issue:
Jeb Bush said Tuesday that President Obamas greatest accomplishment was keeping in place controversial spying programs at the National Security Agency.
"I would say the best part of the Obama administration would be his continuance of the protections of the homeland using the big metadata programs," Bush said in an interview on the Michael Medved radio show.
The former Florida governor said the NSAs bulk collection of Americans phone data was "an important service" carried out in a way that protects individual civil liberties.
He lauded the Obama administration for refusing to buckle under pressure from Democrats, civil liberties groups and some Republicans. "He has not abandoned them," Bush said.
4/21/2015
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (kdS6q)
93
This is totally in The Constitution, read it.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo
The 3rd and a half Amendment, right?
Posted by: Chris Cuomo
The 3rd and a half Amendment, right?
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (/Ho8c)
94
How come this program has not stopped any attacks?
Boston Marathon
Garland Texas
and a few others I can't think of right now
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (W6iIX)
In the program's defense, there haven't been any attacks by the Tea Party.
Boston Marathon
Garland Texas
and a few others I can't think of right now
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 01:03 PM (W6iIX)
In the program's defense, there haven't been any attacks by the Tea Party.
Posted by: mugiwara at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (3a584)
95
I steal your meat.....yeah, that's right.
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM
So am I. Ewww....
I. Steal. Your. Meat.
Posted by: The New Hamburglar
I'm listening....
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at May 07, 2015 01:05 PM
So am I. Ewww....
Posted by: Bob #4,597 at the NSA at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (h4vJk)
Posted by: Mom Jeans everywhere at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (W6iIX)
97
By the way, as I read it, this is a bullshit decision. It is not stopping the Gov or the NSA from doing anything at the moment, just kinda expressing an opinion. And letting the Gov off the hook anyway but saying just pass a better worded law.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (rDqRv)
98
The source for this is the NYT. I will read the decision and see what the Court stated, I am surprised they got the judge's name right.
Posted by: Penfold at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (Fbt5B)
99
now i'm hungry
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (nqBYe)
*crunch, chew, chew, chew, chew, chew*
Care for a locust?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:10 PM (nqBYe)
*crunch, chew, chew, chew, chew, chew*
Care for a locust?
Posted by: Kofi Annan at May 07, 2015 01:13 PM (xQX/f)
100
So, I've decided I agree with Ace about the whole national divorce thing.
Will there be alimony and which side has to pay?
Will there be alimony and which side has to pay?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (W5DcG)
101
83
I'm sorry, but does anyone think something as silly as a court decision
at any level will stop anything this administration wants to do?
Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains
It's better than a rubber stamp and it does make a difference because the programs will have difficulty being funded if they are deemed illegal.
I'm sorry, but does anyone think something as silly as a court decision
at any level will stop anything this administration wants to do?
Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains
It's better than a rubber stamp and it does make a difference because the programs will have difficulty being funded if they are deemed illegal.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (yiX3f)
102
Becauze i don't trust them..
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (nqBYe)
I don't trust them, but I trust our enemies less
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (nqBYe)
I don't trust them, but I trust our enemies less
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (rDqRv)
Posted by: A dot at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (vgIRn)
104
Well...
these phone calls all pretty much cross state lines, and the equipment used is owned by National Companies, with subsidiaries in many States...
Therefore, we declare this is all covered by Interstate Commerce.
these phone calls all pretty much cross state lines, and the equipment used is owned by National Companies, with subsidiaries in many States...
Therefore, we declare this is all covered by Interstate Commerce.
Posted by: Judge Roberts at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (qh617)
105
Becauze i don't trust them..
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow
Yes, exactly. And I admit my failure: I was all like, Patriot Act warrantless phone taps are to catch terrorists, and I'm not a terrorist, so why worry?
Got that one completely wrong.
Becauze i don't trust them..
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow
Yes, exactly. And I admit my failure: I was all like, Patriot Act warrantless phone taps are to catch terrorists, and I'm not a terrorist, so why worry?
Got that one completely wrong.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (/Ho8c)
106
I jjust reread The Bill of Rights and it pretty much says government can do whatever they want to you citizens....if there is a democrat as POSTUS.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (TV9BR)
107
"70
"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested
in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or
luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure
power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the
oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the
others, even those who resembled ourselves, were- cowards and
hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close
to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize
their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they
had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just
round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free
and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power
with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an
end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a
revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the
dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of
torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to
understand me?"
Posted by: B'roke O'Brien at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (xQX/f)"
Quoting from Obama's speech at the Nike headquarters in Beaverton, Oregon?
"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested
in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or
luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure
power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the
oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the
others, even those who resembled ourselves, were- cowards and
hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close
to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize
their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they
had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just
round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free
and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power
with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an
end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a
revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the
dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of
torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to
understand me?"
Posted by: B'roke O'Brien at May 07, 2015 01:09 PM (xQX/f)"
Quoting from Obama's speech at the Nike headquarters in Beaverton, Oregon?
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (KDbAT)
108
I hope it holds up because I like being presumed innocent until proven guilty as opposed to this administration who sees everyone as guilty until proven innocent.
It's not just this Administration. Consider asset forfeiture. If a cop finds any significant amount of cash on your person or in your vehicle, they can take it. Then you have to use your resources to prove it wasn't earned illegally, at which point you might get most of it back, without interest.
It's not just this Administration. Consider asset forfeiture. If a cop finds any significant amount of cash on your person or in your vehicle, they can take it. Then you have to use your resources to prove it wasn't earned illegally, at which point you might get most of it back, without interest.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (jhqr1)
109
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:08 PM (/4AZU)
Remember a few years ago when the FBI and other federal law enforcement began the process of removing the words "Islam" and "Muslim" from their training manuals?
All these "anti-terrorist laws" and the enforcement of such are now against the generic "extremists".
And DHS recently said (and has said multiple times) "right wing extremists" are the biggest threat to national security... so...
I don't know.
Remember a few years ago when the FBI and other federal law enforcement began the process of removing the words "Islam" and "Muslim" from their training manuals?
All these "anti-terrorist laws" and the enforcement of such are now against the generic "extremists".
And DHS recently said (and has said multiple times) "right wing extremists" are the biggest threat to national security... so...
I don't know.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (AkOaV)
110
I hope this puts to rest the meme that Hillary Clinton had no real, lasting effect at the State Department.
She appears to have spread and institutionalized the sentiment, "what difference, at this point, does it make," and that's something!
I really do get the impression that government agents are finally thinking of themselves as separate from and better than "the citizenry," not just as a cynical joke, but as policy.
Really, *really* scary times.
She appears to have spread and institutionalized the sentiment, "what difference, at this point, does it make," and that's something!
I really do get the impression that government agents are finally thinking of themselves as separate from and better than "the citizenry," not just as a cynical joke, but as policy.
Really, *really* scary times.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (bLnSU)
111
Because they're not watching radical muslims.... that would be *profiling*.
They're watching returning veterans, Republican 501-3c's, Tea Party groups, Gadsen Flag purchases, firearms records..... and blogs just like this one.
The program is working! We've completely eliminated the risk from those groups!
They're watching returning veterans, Republican 501-3c's, Tea Party groups, Gadsen Flag purchases, firearms records..... and blogs just like this one.
The program is working! We've completely eliminated the risk from those groups!
Posted by: The NSA at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (FcR7P)
112
Therefore, we declare this is all covered by Interstate Commerce.
Posted by: Judge Roberts
It's a tax!
That originated in the Senate, which can't generate tax bills!
Posted by: Judge Roberts
It's a tax!
That originated in the Senate, which can't generate tax bills!
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (/Ho8c)
113
I have mixed feelings. We need to be protected from our enemies.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM
---
Government isn't there to prevent bad things from happening. It is there to arrest, prosecute, and imprison people who perpetrate bad things, so that justice is served, and other bad people take a lesson from it.
I have mixed feelings. We need to be protected from our enemies.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:11 PM
---
Government isn't there to prevent bad things from happening. It is there to arrest, prosecute, and imprison people who perpetrate bad things, so that justice is served, and other bad people take a lesson from it.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (eW+UG)
114
I have mixed feelings. We need to be protected from our enemies. On the other hand I don't trust Fredo or much of anybody in Government.
For me it's pretty simple.
Domestically, I -and not the government- should be responsible for my own safety and should be empowered to secure that safety myself. It should not *matter* that when seconds count the cops are minutes away- I should be responsible for my own safety.
Would this be perfect? No. But it would limit the ability of government to get up to mischief.
Internationally, the government is responsible for my safety. It should be empowered to secure that safety. This means things like having a standing army and so forth.
So the government is completely within what I believe should be its powers to attempt to prevent terrorists from getting here in the first place. Once they are here, The People are the ones who have to take care of the matter.
Some caveats apply for things like actual organized military forces.
But, in the main, that means this kind of mass domestic spying is an unnecessary -and illegitimate- burden on our liberty.
For me it's pretty simple.
Domestically, I -and not the government- should be responsible for my own safety and should be empowered to secure that safety myself. It should not *matter* that when seconds count the cops are minutes away- I should be responsible for my own safety.
Would this be perfect? No. But it would limit the ability of government to get up to mischief.
Internationally, the government is responsible for my safety. It should be empowered to secure that safety. This means things like having a standing army and so forth.
So the government is completely within what I believe should be its powers to attempt to prevent terrorists from getting here in the first place. Once they are here, The People are the ones who have to take care of the matter.
Some caveats apply for things like actual organized military forces.
But, in the main, that means this kind of mass domestic spying is an unnecessary -and illegitimate- burden on our liberty.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (kff5f)
115
102 Becauze i don't trust them..
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (nqBYe)
I don't trust them, but I trust our enemies less
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (rDqRv)
The chances of a Jihadi taking my life, or liberty, or property is very very small...
The chance of an out of control government taking my Liberty, or property.... and maybe my life if I fight back.... is much greater...
isn't that why they shouldn't be given the power in the first place?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:12 PM (nqBYe)
I don't trust them, but I trust our enemies less
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (rDqRv)
The chances of a Jihadi taking my life, or liberty, or property is very very small...
The chance of an out of control government taking my Liberty, or property.... and maybe my life if I fight back.... is much greater...
Posted by: Judge Roberts at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (qh617)
116
>>How come this program has not stopped any attacks?
<<
How do you know what its stopped? There seems to be a lot of people who get read in on this program and suddenly become supporters.
That should give everyone a moment of pause.
I understand people's concerns. But this isn't a one sided coin with that traitor Snowden's face on it.
<<
How do you know what its stopped? There seems to be a lot of people who get read in on this program and suddenly become supporters.
That should give everyone a moment of pause.
I understand people's concerns. But this isn't a one sided coin with that traitor Snowden's face on it.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:17 PM (GGCsk)
117
I don't trust them, but I trust our enemies less
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (rDqRv)
But CLEARLY these programs are not being used to monitor jihadists even in this country.
Boston Bombers? On the radar.
Major Hassan? On the radar
These guys in TX? On the radar.
They're all known, but not being actively tracked.
So then who is being actively tracked? And who else (outside of Muslims) is "known" to law enforcement?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (rDqRv)
But CLEARLY these programs are not being used to monitor jihadists even in this country.
Boston Bombers? On the radar.
Major Hassan? On the radar
These guys in TX? On the radar.
They're all known, but not being actively tracked.
So then who is being actively tracked? And who else (outside of Muslims) is "known" to law enforcement?
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:17 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:17 PM (qh617)
119
The Court said it did not need to address the constitutional grounds for s215 of the Patriot Act because it found that the program itself had exceeded the scope of s215 of the Patriot Act and that s215 of the Patriot Act does not permit the bulk collection of telephone metadata.
Posted by: Penfold at May 07, 2015 01:17 PM (Fbt5B)
120
OT, but the "Undercommoning" sidebar article misses a key point. If military service becomes required it will accelerate the destruction of military effectiveness in one key regard. If all young people serve the left will appropriate the service time as a "finishing school" for radicalism, and the military as we know it will cease to exist.
With required service, Bill Ayers will be a General overseeing combat development and people like General Mattis, whom I think even Heinlein would respect, would be history.
No worse idea I can contemplate than required military service.
With required service, Bill Ayers will be a General overseeing combat development and people like General Mattis, whom I think even Heinlein would respect, would be history.
No worse idea I can contemplate than required military service.
Posted by: MTF at May 07, 2015 01:17 PM (FCsIb)
121
look when they use their positions of authority to write in those they Politically disagree with as Terrorists.
They are so untrustworthy to do something as gross as to use their power and govt agencies to hassle and break LEGAL political discourse and opposition..
why should we Believe giving them this type of power is necessary to the greater good?
If they can't find real Terrorists with their thumbs up their asses. but scale the universe instead for people that have issues with late term abortions or feel uncomfotable with SSM or whatever cause they are funneling this week , while sending that information to their groupy media matters and such to help attack fellow citizens and use any dissent against other citizens openly WHY should we back them when rounding up all americans information, bank accts, phone calls, emails. etc?
They are so untrustworthy to do something as gross as to use their power and govt agencies to hassle and break LEGAL political discourse and opposition..
why should we Believe giving them this type of power is necessary to the greater good?
If they can't find real Terrorists with their thumbs up their asses. but scale the universe instead for people that have issues with late term abortions or feel uncomfotable with SSM or whatever cause they are funneling this week , while sending that information to their groupy media matters and such to help attack fellow citizens and use any dissent against other citizens openly WHY should we back them when rounding up all americans information, bank accts, phone calls, emails. etc?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:18 PM (nqBYe)
122
We can't take ONE DAY out of our lives to march on Washington??
You know, to salvage the republic.
We can't take ONE DAY out of our lives to march on Washington??
You know, to salvage the republic.
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:18 PM (cCGjf)
123
We can't take ONE DAY out of our lives to march on Washington??
You know, to salvage the republic.
Posted by: Soothsayer
Well, the years of incarceration that would ensue could be a problem, ya know.
You know, to salvage the republic.
Posted by: Soothsayer
Well, the years of incarceration that would ensue could be a problem, ya know.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (/Ho8c)
124
109 Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:15 PM (AkOaV)
Oh I do know. The DHS, DoJ let's Jihadis slip through "despite hteir being so many" b/c they are not in the "stop Islam" business. Their literature on "extremism" highlights several diverse groups of "potential terrorist seedbeds."
http://tinyurl.com/nxbwnto
I'm on the list twice, quick you know who is not?
Osama Bin Ladin.
Oh I do know. The DHS, DoJ let's Jihadis slip through "despite hteir being so many" b/c they are not in the "stop Islam" business. Their literature on "extremism" highlights several diverse groups of "potential terrorist seedbeds."
http://tinyurl.com/nxbwnto
I'm on the list twice, quick you know who is not?
Osama Bin Ladin.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (/4AZU)
125
Government isn't there to prevent bad things from happening. It is there to arrest, prosecute, and imprison people who perpetrate bad things, so that justice is served, and other bad people take a lesson from it.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (eW+UG)
Sure Gov is there to prevent things. That is the whole point of a robust Military
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (eW+UG)
Sure Gov is there to prevent things. That is the whole point of a robust Military
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (rDqRv)
126
Yes, exactly. And I admit my failure: I was all like, Patriot Act warrantless phone taps are to catch terrorists, and I'm not a terrorist, so why worry?
Got that one completely wrong.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (/Ho8c)
^This. It's also why I don't like the idea of cops being able to roust people just because. Some people rationalize by saying "well, they only do it to thugs, and I'm not a thug!" but when they turn your sights on you, well...
Got that one completely wrong.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (/Ho8c)
^This. It's also why I don't like the idea of cops being able to roust people just because. Some people rationalize by saying "well, they only do it to thugs, and I'm not a thug!" but when they turn your sights on you, well...
Posted by: Insomniac at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (2Ojst)
127
Why haven't we rounded up all the clowns that were indistinguishable from the Geller attacker?
Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?
Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (kff5f)
128
>>No worse idea I can contemplate than required military service.<
Amen.
It's hard enough to find qualified recruits who actually want to serve and can materially contribute to the mission. We don't need to make it a social welfare program full of sloths, sponges and malingerers.
Amen.
It's hard enough to find qualified recruits who actually want to serve and can materially contribute to the mission. We don't need to make it a social welfare program full of sloths, sponges and malingerers.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (GGCsk)
129
And the rest of the GOP Varsity Squad joining in to defend the electro-Stasi:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other top Republicans on Thursday defended the National Security Agencys surveillance program as vital to protecting national security.
McConnell has pushed for a flat extension of the program, known as Section 215, but there are Democrats and Republicans in the Senate who want to approve legislation that would curtail it.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, suggested that a discount card for a grocery store could be a greater threat to privacy than the NSAs program.
GOP Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Tom Cotton (Ark.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.) also joined the discussion, suggesting that the NSA program is required to help combat and prevent a terrorist attack within the United States.
thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/241335-mcconnell-gop-defend-nsa
And the rest of the GOP Varsity Squad joining in to defend the electro-Stasi:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other top Republicans on Thursday defended the National Security Agencys surveillance program as vital to protecting national security.
McConnell has pushed for a flat extension of the program, known as Section 215, but there are Democrats and Republicans in the Senate who want to approve legislation that would curtail it.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, suggested that a discount card for a grocery store could be a greater threat to privacy than the NSAs program.
GOP Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Tom Cotton (Ark.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.) also joined the discussion, suggesting that the NSA program is required to help combat and prevent a terrorist attack within the United States.
thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/241335-mcconnell-gop-defend-nsa
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (kdS6q)
130
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:16 PM (kff5f)
...And can we just back up and say that until the Snowden disclosures, the official position of the US government was that none of these programs were being used on "US persons or US citizens"?
And that we were told the NSA *exclusively* dealt with shit overseas, and the head of the NSA testified in front of congress that they don't ever spy on americans?
And can we remember that the NSA is part of the DOD, and thus in open and brazen violation of posse comitatus by operating on US soil at all and acting as "domestic law enforcement"?
...And can we just back up and say that until the Snowden disclosures, the official position of the US government was that none of these programs were being used on "US persons or US citizens"?
And that we were told the NSA *exclusively* dealt with shit overseas, and the head of the NSA testified in front of congress that they don't ever spy on americans?
And can we remember that the NSA is part of the DOD, and thus in open and brazen violation of posse comitatus by operating on US soil at all and acting as "domestic law enforcement"?
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (AkOaV)
131
So a bunch of unanswered questions remain. Should we be pissed the Court did not go further? Would you consider it judicial activism if it did so?
Posted by: Penfold at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (Fbt5B)
132
Where is my McTaco
Posted by: Juan at McD's at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (kQBSd)
133
I have mixed feelings. We need to be protected from our enemies.
Say with border control and voter ID? I denounce myself.
Say with border control and voter ID? I denounce myself.
Posted by: t-bird at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (FcR7P)
134
You all are presuming this Data collection has not prevented a terror attack? I am not sure how you come to that conclusion. You really don't know the facts and if I were in charge of counter intelligence you'd know even less. Enough of this tell the public everything crap. THAT is the way to national suicide
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (rDqRv)
135
"...Obama's reading of the law."
Good one!
Obama believes the law is what he says it is, he doesn't need to *read* it, he *is* it.
L'etat c'est MOI!!!
Good one!
Obama believes the law is what he says it is, he doesn't need to *read* it, he *is* it.
L'etat c'est MOI!!!
Posted by: Lizzy at May 07, 2015 01:21 PM (2TN4k)
136
I fear Obama's federal government more than I fear ISIS in my hometown.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (yiX3f)
******
The one enables the other.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:04 PM (yiX3f)
******
The one enables the other.
Posted by: Barack Obama at May 07, 2015 01:21 PM (xkSSa)
137
I agree with Ace about the whole national divorce thing.
Wanna bet my lawyer and my judges win the alimony and custody battles?
Bitch , I outlawed 'hate'!
See ya in court, toots .
Wanna bet my lawyer and my judges win the alimony and custody battles?
Bitch , I outlawed 'hate'!
See ya in court, toots .
Posted by: The U.S. Federal Government with it's hot new SJW fascist girlfriend at May 07, 2015 01:21 PM (NUCTk)
138
This program has saved jobs!!
Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at May 07, 2015 01:21 PM (oDCMR)
139
How do you know what its stopped? There seems to be a lot of people who get read in on this program and suddenly become supporters.
I do not care what it has stopped. It is an unconstitutional breech of my Liberty and must be ended. Period.
Let me and mine worry about me and mine. Yes, bad things might (probably will) happen to us. But I'd rather that than have Big Brother watching me.
I do not care what it has stopped. It is an unconstitutional breech of my Liberty and must be ended. Period.
Let me and mine worry about me and mine. Yes, bad things might (probably will) happen to us. But I'd rather that than have Big Brother watching me.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (kff5f)
140
Sure Gov is there to prevent things. That is the whole point of a robust Military
--
We don't prevent wars, we fight them. I agree that fighting them in someone else's country prevents civilian death and injury here, but we don't go in and stop a dictator until he has already started killing.
Sure Gov is there to prevent things. That is the whole point of a robust Military
--
We don't prevent wars, we fight them. I agree that fighting them in someone else's country prevents civilian death and injury here, but we don't go in and stop a dictator until he has already started killing.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (eW+UG)
141
Actually I think we have the where with all to deal with most of them. What we don't have is the will to act.
Well, it depends on what action you choose to take. If we were to simply put them all on a BOLO list and eject all of them when found, sure.
But I mean more along the lines of the policing model where you let them live as if they're not Jihadis until you have proof of criminal acts. Then scoop them up before they go splodey.
Well, it depends on what action you choose to take. If we were to simply put them all on a BOLO list and eject all of them when found, sure.
But I mean more along the lines of the policing model where you let them live as if they're not Jihadis until you have proof of criminal acts. Then scoop them up before they go splodey.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (jhqr1)
142
We can't take ONE DAY out of our lives to march on Washington??
----
Well... we did that once..... on the Washington mall. We even picked up our own trash.
For those efforts we were demonized in the media and the left as violent, dangerous, racists, homophobic, unhinged, destabilized and isidious.
Some on the right demonized it as stupid, time wasting, empty geturing that only alienated the imaginery fucking middle.
So.... yes..... Im not going to take another day. 7/8ths of the frickin country pisses on your head.
Let it burn.
----
Well... we did that once..... on the Washington mall. We even picked up our own trash.
For those efforts we were demonized in the media and the left as violent, dangerous, racists, homophobic, unhinged, destabilized and isidious.
Some on the right demonized it as stupid, time wasting, empty geturing that only alienated the imaginery fucking middle.
So.... yes..... Im not going to take another day. 7/8ths of the frickin country pisses on your head.
Let it burn.
Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (8XRCm)
143
I think a "three judge appeals panel in NY" won't be the last word on this. Nor should it be.
I look forward to John Yoo dismantling the opinion in an Op Ed soon.
I look forward to John Yoo dismantling the opinion in an Op Ed soon.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (GGCsk)
144
"127
Why haven't we rounded up all the clowns that were indistinguishable from the Geller attacker?
Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (kff5f)"
Isn't that what RICO is for?
Why haven't we rounded up all the clowns that were indistinguishable from the Geller attacker?
Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (kff5f)"
Isn't that what RICO is for?
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (KDbAT)
145
8 Untraceable to the user pay-as-you-go phones.
They're not just for drug dealers anymore.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (7ObY1)
I'm actually considering this for the whole family: Virgin Mobile Paygo phones all around, cash every month to top off your minutes.
They're not just for drug dealers anymore.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 12:58 PM (7ObY1)
I'm actually considering this for the whole family: Virgin Mobile Paygo phones all around, cash every month to top off your minutes.
Posted by: joncelli, Boned like You at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (RD7QR)
146
Facebook Enforcing Sharia Law, Removes Mohammed Cartoonist Bosch Fawstin, Winner Of The Garland Contest
Weasel Zippers
Facebook sucks
Weasel Zippers
Facebook sucks
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (rDqRv)
147
133 Posted by: t-bird at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (FcR7P)
Rome...fucking Rome had more secure borders and stricter Citizenship requirements than we do.
You had to understand the civic system to be a citizen unless one by birth.
The United States is not a nation, it is an insurance, retirement, and poverty relief ponzi scheme with paranoia and nuclear weapons.
Rome...fucking Rome had more secure borders and stricter Citizenship requirements than we do.
You had to understand the civic system to be a citizen unless one by birth.
The United States is not a nation, it is an insurance, retirement, and poverty relief ponzi scheme with paranoia and nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (/4AZU)
148
I would rather have my civil liberties than this form of protection from the Feds.
More people have died post-9/11 slipping on their bathroom floor than from a domestic terrorist.
Do you really think terrorists are going to have their run of the place if the Feds can no longer collect every American's phone records?
You're a lot more likely to be killed going into a "blue" urban area by a member of the Free Shit Army than a foreign terrorist killing you.
More people have died post-9/11 slipping on their bathroom floor than from a domestic terrorist.
Do you really think terrorists are going to have their run of the place if the Feds can no longer collect every American's phone records?
You're a lot more likely to be killed going into a "blue" urban area by a member of the Free Shit Army than a foreign terrorist killing you.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (yiX3f)
149
People who say "We shouldn't provoke the Muslims" say this as if the danger of such "provocation" could exist without us allowing scum like the Tsarnaevs to emigrate here and do nothing about them.
Posted by: Barack Obama at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (xkSSa)
150
139
I'm not so sure that it has stopped anything.
I'm not so sure that it has stopped anything.
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (kQBSd)
151
They're all known, but not being actively tracked.
So then who is being actively tracked?
Brazzers. Jizzhut.
So then who is being actively tracked?
Brazzers. Jizzhut.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (/YYtw)
152
i have yet to see that they are at all successful state side against future or past acts of terrorism. yet i have witnessed their using their power and agencies against political opponents.
im willing to be convinced otherwise.
and really when they seemingly can't even point at Real Terrorist against America or its people
What's the fkn point.
im willing to be convinced otherwise.
and really when they seemingly can't even point at Real Terrorist against America or its people
What's the fkn point.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (nqBYe)
153
If you don't stop, we shall say "Stop" again.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (cCGjf)
155
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (AkOaV)
Why, yes, yes we probably should mention that.
Why, yes, yes we probably should mention that.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (kff5f)
156
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (/4AZU)
Yeah, I think http://tinyurl.com/nxbwnto bears reposting in case any one here has not seen it, especially the "fusion center" part at the bottom.
Yeah, I think http://tinyurl.com/nxbwnto bears reposting in case any one here has not seen it, especially the "fusion center" part at the bottom.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (AkOaV)
157
"Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?"
Making threats is a crime, but like that Clam Chowder guy in the previous thread, or street protesters, they don't quite reach the level of actionable threat.
Or the gangster selfies, the guys with convictions, posting selfies on facebook holding a gun looking all badass with piles of drug money. Not quite enough for the police to go arrest them. Apparently.
Making threats is a crime, but like that Clam Chowder guy in the previous thread, or street protesters, they don't quite reach the level of actionable threat.
Or the gangster selfies, the guys with convictions, posting selfies on facebook holding a gun looking all badass with piles of drug money. Not quite enough for the police to go arrest them. Apparently.
Posted by: Hondo Phrestrae at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (lkXeQ)
158
142 Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (8XRCm)
We did it twice, Obama laughed at us b/c we didn't burn the town down.
We did it twice, Obama laughed at us b/c we didn't burn the town down.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (/4AZU)
159
"Oh, Juan? I have your McTaco riiiiiiight here."
Posted by: Sir Edmund Pantsuit, pointing at her moose-knuckle at May 07, 2015 01:24 PM (5buP8)
160
/sock
Posted by: Yo! at May 07, 2015 01:24 PM (W6iIX)
161
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:19 PM (/4AZU)
I'm guessing you're on the list more than twice.
Scary that "opponents of open border policies" are listed.
What's not surprising are the dates noted.
I'm guessing you're on the list more than twice.
Scary that "opponents of open border policies" are listed.
What's not surprising are the dates noted.
Posted by: Golfman at May 07, 2015 01:24 PM (fQAkR)
162
We don't prevent wars, we fight them. I agree that fighting them in someone else's country prevents civilian death and injury here, but we don't go in and stop a dictator until he has already started killing.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (eW+UG)
NO that is dead wrong. Fighting wars is tremendoulsy expensive and destructive even for the wining side. The whole point of overwhelming MIlitary Might is to make your enemy afraid to attack you. The cold war might have been expensive but it was a hell of a lot cheaper than WW3.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (eW+UG)
NO that is dead wrong. Fighting wars is tremendoulsy expensive and destructive even for the wining side. The whole point of overwhelming MIlitary Might is to make your enemy afraid to attack you. The cold war might have been expensive but it was a hell of a lot cheaper than WW3.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:25 PM (rDqRv)
163
>>
"Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?"
Funny, neither had True the Vote, but the got visits from all sorts of federal agencies as well as an IRS audit.
Seems there are some threats they take more seriously than jihadis.
"Because they haven't committed actual crimes yet?"
Funny, neither had True the Vote, but the got visits from all sorts of federal agencies as well as an IRS audit.
Seems there are some threats they take more seriously than jihadis.
Posted by: Lizzy at May 07, 2015 01:25 PM (2TN4k)
164
I do not care what it has stopped. It is an unconstitutional breech of my Liberty and must be ended. Period.
Let me and mine worry about me and mine. Yes, bad things might (probably will) happen to us. But I'd rather that than have Big Brother watching me.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (kff5f)
^This. I'd rather we spend our time and effort killing the shit out of terrorists than torching the Constitution and establishing a surveillance state.
Let me and mine worry about me and mine. Yes, bad things might (probably will) happen to us. But I'd rather that than have Big Brother watching me.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (kff5f)
^This. I'd rather we spend our time and effort killing the shit out of terrorists than torching the Constitution and establishing a surveillance state.
Posted by: Insomniac at May 07, 2015 01:25 PM (2Ojst)
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:25 PM (cCGjf)
166
Virgin Mobile Paygo phones all around, cash every month to top off your minutes.
My phone minutes would last 6 years.
My data minutes would last 6 minutes.
My phone minutes would last 6 years.
My data minutes would last 6 minutes.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (/YYtw)
167
they don't have the ability to even call Islam a threat. but have no problem saying average Joe with His question a threat .
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (nqBYe)
168
My phone minutes would last 6 years.
My data minutes would last 6 minutes.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (/YYtw)
Quit using your burner phone for pr0n!
My phone minutes would last 6 years.
My data minutes would last 6 minutes.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (/YYtw)
Quit using your burner phone for pr0n!
Posted by: Insomniac at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (2Ojst)
169
161 Posted by: Golfman at May 07, 2015 01:24 PM (fQAkR)
The democrats in the FBI had that list waiting for a democrat PotUS...
they started unleashing it the MINUTE Giggles got sworn in.
The left has not made a secret of their plans in power since 2003...
you can't convince the GOP "main body" the guys across the table want them jailed or dead.
The democrats in the FBI had that list waiting for a democrat PotUS...
they started unleashing it the MINUTE Giggles got sworn in.
The left has not made a secret of their plans in power since 2003...
you can't convince the GOP "main body" the guys across the table want them jailed or dead.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (/4AZU)
170
Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (rDqRv)
171
Protect us from terror attacks?
How about we kill a thousand terrorists a day and destroy their sanctuaries?
If that doesn't work, after trying it for 50 years, maybe we can try spying on Americans.
How about we kill a thousand terrorists a day and destroy their sanctuaries?
If that doesn't work, after trying it for 50 years, maybe we can try spying on Americans.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (MQEz6)
172
It looks to me like The Constitution allows Obama to house his national police force in your house.
The Constitution, read it bitches.
The Constitution, read it bitches.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (TV9BR)
173
fucking Rome had more secure borders and stricter Citizenship requirements than we do.
I understand and agree with your point, but I'd like to slow the cancer.
I understand and agree with your point, but I'd like to slow the cancer.
Posted by: t-bird at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (FcR7P)
174
>>Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:22 PM (kff5f)
<<
Scan my phone calls to see of key words come up and then get a court order to further peruse them and potentially record me.
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate, Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I could care less.
I think a lot of this is people creating bogeymen.
I can't be everywhere armed and following my family around. I was there one September 11th and lucky to be breathing. I've seen first hand what these people could do.
I've also seen how the CIA and NSA have protected us and in some cases given their lives to do so.
I am not going to dump on those people. Ever.
<<
Scan my phone calls to see of key words come up and then get a court order to further peruse them and potentially record me.
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate, Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I could care less.
I think a lot of this is people creating bogeymen.
I can't be everywhere armed and following my family around. I was there one September 11th and lucky to be breathing. I've seen first hand what these people could do.
I've also seen how the CIA and NSA have protected us and in some cases given their lives to do so.
I am not going to dump on those people. Ever.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (GGCsk)
175
Isn't that what RICO is for?
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (KDbAT)
Nope. RICO is for racketeering (organized crime)- in order to get at crime bosses who keep their hands clean (on paper, anyway).
Domestic wanna-be Terrorists are a whole 'nother kettle of fish. They're not (generally) committing any crimes until such time as they actually attempt to commit whatever act of terrorism.
They go to work (or collect welfare, in many cases). They don't steal (generally). Most are relatively sober. And it goes on.
And I don't *want* a world where I can be found guilty of a crime which I have not even attempted to commit. That... would be very bad.
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at May 07, 2015 01:23 PM (KDbAT)
Nope. RICO is for racketeering (organized crime)- in order to get at crime bosses who keep their hands clean (on paper, anyway).
Domestic wanna-be Terrorists are a whole 'nother kettle of fish. They're not (generally) committing any crimes until such time as they actually attempt to commit whatever act of terrorism.
They go to work (or collect welfare, in many cases). They don't steal (generally). Most are relatively sober. And it goes on.
And I don't *want* a world where I can be found guilty of a crime which I have not even attempted to commit. That... would be very bad.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (kff5f)
176
>>obama's NSA sure did a bang up job preventing the Garland TX shooting.
And the Boston Marathon bombing.
And the Boston Marathon bombing.
Posted by: Lizzy at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (2TN4k)
177
Enough of this tell the public everything crap. THAT is the way to national suicide
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (rDqRv)
First off, I doubt the program has stopped any terrorist attacks.
but even if it has, who cares? You know what else could conceivably stop terrorist attacks? Lining up people and shooting them before they've had a chance to jihad.
But it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL and illegal to do so. Even if it were effective, I don't think many of us would be in favor of *that*, right?
So I think its bullshit to say, "well, we have to take the governments word that throwing out our due process rights and our right to be secure in our blah blah blah against unreasonable searches and seizures has saved lives by thwarting terrorists"
First off, fuck you government for even thinking that way
and second off, of COURSE I have the right to know what my government is doing, and they do NOT get to keep this kind of thing secret.
I'm not saying post troop movements during times of war on the dod webpage, but I am saying that we have a right to know what our dishonest corrupt government is doing.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:20 PM (rDqRv)
First off, I doubt the program has stopped any terrorist attacks.
but even if it has, who cares? You know what else could conceivably stop terrorist attacks? Lining up people and shooting them before they've had a chance to jihad.
But it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL and illegal to do so. Even if it were effective, I don't think many of us would be in favor of *that*, right?
So I think its bullshit to say, "well, we have to take the governments word that throwing out our due process rights and our right to be secure in our blah blah blah against unreasonable searches and seizures has saved lives by thwarting terrorists"
First off, fuck you government for even thinking that way
and second off, of COURSE I have the right to know what my government is doing, and they do NOT get to keep this kind of thing secret.
I'm not saying post troop movements during times of war on the dod webpage, but I am saying that we have a right to know what our dishonest corrupt government is doing.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (AkOaV)
178
You all are presuming this Data collection has not prevented a terror attack? I am not sure how you come to that conclusion.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
1. The rather obvious case that if the program was working, the defenders of it would be citing fer-instances left and right.
2. If the program was providing important information, people being brought to trial would have it in their court record in some fashion, even if cloaked as "sensitive government actions" or something.
You all are presuming this Data collection has not prevented a terror attack? I am not sure how you come to that conclusion.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
1. The rather obvious case that if the program was working, the defenders of it would be citing fer-instances left and right.
2. If the program was providing important information, people being brought to trial would have it in their court record in some fashion, even if cloaked as "sensitive government actions" or something.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (kdS6q)
179
Do you know the real reason why the Left immediately attacked Pam Geller?
To distract everyone from people maybe asking hey wtf is obama doing let ISIS run rampant (with guns) in the good ol' USA??
Do you know the real reason why the Left immediately attacked Pam Geller?
To distract everyone from people maybe asking hey wtf is obama doing let ISIS run rampant (with guns) in the good ol' USA??
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (cCGjf)
180
they don't even aknowledge Iran as a threat , yet see fellow citizens or conservatives behind every couch .
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (nqBYe)
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:28 PM (kQBSd)
182
obama's NSA sure did a bang up job preventing the Garland TX shooting.
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:25 PM (cCGjf)
It's NOT the NSA's job to prevent anything but to collect data and pass that on. How it is used or if it is used at all is an whole other ball game, part of which involves the political will to actually put up a fight
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:25 PM (cCGjf)
It's NOT the NSA's job to prevent anything but to collect data and pass that on. How it is used or if it is used at all is an whole other ball game, part of which involves the political will to actually put up a fight
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:28 PM (rDqRv)
183
you can't convince the GOP "main body" the guys across the table want them jailed or dead.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (/4AZU)
Only slightly different than the lefties that defend radical islam.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:26 PM (/4AZU)
Only slightly different than the lefties that defend radical islam.
Posted by: Golfman at May 07, 2015 01:28 PM (fQAkR)
184
Domestically, I -and not the government- should be responsible for my own safety and should be empowered to secure that safety myself. It should not *matter* that when seconds count the cops are minutes away- I should be responsible for my own safety.
Would this be perfect? No. But it would limit the ability of government to get up to mischief.
Under most circumstances, I agree. But look at what's going on in Mexico. When the Cartel feels like it, 50 guys roll up on a ranch and take the place over. They kill the men, rape and kill the women, then use the place as their clubhouse until they choose to move on.
Intelligence services here in the US, whether as part of a gang unit, or some federal program, watch the communications and movements of groups like this, preventing that sort of shit from going down.
For all their failures, which are numerous and embarrassing, intelligence services really do some good.
Now the caveat: I don't believe in this Total Information Awareness crap. I think it's beyond illegal and well into Fascism.
Would this be perfect? No. But it would limit the ability of government to get up to mischief.
Under most circumstances, I agree. But look at what's going on in Mexico. When the Cartel feels like it, 50 guys roll up on a ranch and take the place over. They kill the men, rape and kill the women, then use the place as their clubhouse until they choose to move on.
Intelligence services here in the US, whether as part of a gang unit, or some federal program, watch the communications and movements of groups like this, preventing that sort of shit from going down.
For all their failures, which are numerous and embarrassing, intelligence services really do some good.
Now the caveat: I don't believe in this Total Information Awareness crap. I think it's beyond illegal and well into Fascism.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (jhqr1)
185
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate,
Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I
could care less.
I think this is part of the problem.
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate,
Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I
could care less.
I think this is part of the problem.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (/Ho8c)
186
Why don't we just put the phone files on Hillary's server? Totes legal and she's not using it anymore - so I'm told.
Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (oDCMR)
187
I am not going to dump on those people. Ever.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (GGCsk)
Okay, well you keep on fucking that chicken.
If you want the NSA recording and scanning all of your calls, fine.
I, on the other hand, prefer to live in a constitutional republic and to not ignore the 4th amendment and to not blindly trust my government.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (GGCsk)
Okay, well you keep on fucking that chicken.
If you want the NSA recording and scanning all of your calls, fine.
I, on the other hand, prefer to live in a constitutional republic and to not ignore the 4th amendment and to not blindly trust my government.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (AkOaV)
188
The rather obvious case that if the program was working, the defenders of it would be citing fer-instances left and right.
NO it is not. Only a fucking idiot would broadcast their successes so the enemy knows what not to do next time. Unfortunetaly we have done that all to often
NO it is not. Only a fucking idiot would broadcast their successes so the enemy knows what not to do next time. Unfortunetaly we have done that all to often
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (rDqRv)
189
170 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (rDqRv)
NGU my God...
Fucking FSB tells the FBI and INS...hey Tflashbang and Tspeedbump are trained fucking Jihadists and they "slipped through the cracks"....
The Garland Twins were known to the FBI and allowed to "slip through the cracks" despite trying to go get their Somali Jihad on b/c "well there's just too many of them"...
THE GODDAMNED PROGRAM IS A NEO-COINTELPRO for the left instead of aimed at them it is NOT a Counter-Force Datamining Operation.
NGU my God...
Fucking FSB tells the FBI and INS...hey Tflashbang and Tspeedbump are trained fucking Jihadists and they "slipped through the cracks"....
The Garland Twins were known to the FBI and allowed to "slip through the cracks" despite trying to go get their Somali Jihad on b/c "well there's just too many of them"...
THE GODDAMNED PROGRAM IS A NEO-COINTELPRO for the left instead of aimed at them it is NOT a Counter-Force Datamining Operation.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (/4AZU)
190
170 Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
*cough*cough*
*cough*cough*
Posted by: Cheryl Atkkisson's Job at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (5buP8)
191
Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
Specific Incident: As soon as they admitted to bulk collection.
Specific Damage: They violated my right to privacy.
Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
Specific Incident: As soon as they admitted to bulk collection.
Specific Damage: They violated my right to privacy.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (ODxAs)
192
Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
--
I think you have it backwards. Somebody needs to show me specifics about why the congress has the right to abrogate a natural right of man.
Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
--
I think you have it backwards. Somebody needs to show me specifics about why the congress has the right to abrogate a natural right of man.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (eW+UG)
193
they didn't even see the risks and fall of eastern countries or Russias recommitting to re gathering its old block countries under its thumb.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (nqBYe)
194
You know this data is handed over on a regular basis to some friendly Google team to see if they can match people up, whether its for politics or profit.
Google's CEO Schmidt was basically a member of Obama's cabinet. You really think there's a wall of separation with this data they collect?
Google's CEO Schmidt was basically a member of Obama's cabinet. You really think there's a wall of separation with this data they collect?
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (yiX3f)
195
1. The rather obvious case that if the program was working, the defenders of it would be citing fer-instances left and right.
It stopped the shoe bomber.
It stopped the underwear bomber.
Oh, wait......
It stopped the shoe bomber.
It stopped the underwear bomber.
Oh, wait......
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (/YYtw)
196
Specific Damage: They violated my right to privacy.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (ODxAs)
What damage? They hurt your feelings?
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (ODxAs)
What damage? They hurt your feelings?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
197
Scan my phone calls to see of key words come up and then get a court order to further peruse them and potentially record me.
On what authority?
Should the government be able to open random pieces of your mail "to see if key words come up?" No. 4th Amendment, do you speak it?
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate, Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I could care less.
Yes. Many people don't care about the Constitution. The problem is that it is unconstitutional. Period. There is no way for it to be "overseen by the courts in a legitimate, Constitutional manner" because it is unconstitutional.
I can't be everywhere armed and following my family around. I was there one September 11th and lucky to be breathing. I've seen first hand what these people could do.
And I'm very sorry about that. I cannot imagine being there that day. It's even harder to imagine losing someone I loved in those towers, the Pentagon, or that Pennsylvania field.
None of that is a reason to abridge my Constitutional protections. Life is risk. When you seek to remove risk, you a) fail and b) empower someone to rule over you.
On what authority?
Should the government be able to open random pieces of your mail "to see if key words come up?" No. 4th Amendment, do you speak it?
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate, Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I could care less.
Yes. Many people don't care about the Constitution. The problem is that it is unconstitutional. Period. There is no way for it to be "overseen by the courts in a legitimate, Constitutional manner" because it is unconstitutional.
I can't be everywhere armed and following my family around. I was there one September 11th and lucky to be breathing. I've seen first hand what these people could do.
And I'm very sorry about that. I cannot imagine being there that day. It's even harder to imagine losing someone I loved in those towers, the Pentagon, or that Pennsylvania field.
None of that is a reason to abridge my Constitutional protections. Life is risk. When you seek to remove risk, you a) fail and b) empower someone to rule over you.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (kff5f)
198
Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (rDqRv)
Yes, my cell phone records have been and continuously are illegally accessed without a warrant while the government illegally and without probable cause (much less a warrant) builds profiles on me and everyone else in the country.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (rDqRv)
Yes, my cell phone records have been and continuously are illegally accessed without a warrant while the government illegally and without probable cause (much less a warrant) builds profiles on me and everyone else in the country.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (AkOaV)
199
"Treadstone was a testing platform that just didn't work out so we've disbanded it. Now Blackbriar is ...."
Posted by: Bigby's Pointy Finger at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (3ZtZW)
200
Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
The incident is the damage. "You shouldn't care if you have nothing to hide" appears nowhere in the Bill of Rights.
The incident is the damage. "You shouldn't care if you have nothing to hide" appears nowhere in the Bill of Rights.
Posted by: t-bird at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (FcR7P)
201
ntelligence services here in the US, whether as part of a gang unit, or some federal program, watch the communications and movements of groups like this, preventing that sort of shit from going down.
For all their failures, which are numerous and embarrassing, intelligence services really do some good.
Now the caveat: I don't believe in this Total Information Awareness crap. I think it's beyond illegal and well into Fascism.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (jhqr1)
and do what??
arm the cartels and throw our borders open while shrieking endlessly about THEIR rights to our society?
For all their failures, which are numerous and embarrassing, intelligence services really do some good.
Now the caveat: I don't believe in this Total Information Awareness crap. I think it's beyond illegal and well into Fascism.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (jhqr1)
and do what??
arm the cartels and throw our borders open while shrieking endlessly about THEIR rights to our society?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (nqBYe)
202
Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
By the time you can, it's too late.
By the time you can, it's too late.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (/YYtw)
203
>>Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (AkOaV)
<<
I don't blindly trust anyone. I am just well informed. As opposed to the hyperbole, speculation and unsubstantiated rumor regarding the program.
<<
I don't blindly trust anyone. I am just well informed. As opposed to the hyperbole, speculation and unsubstantiated rumor regarding the program.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (GGCsk)
204
btw, do you know what obama's FBI said about why they completely missed the Garland jihadists?
obama's FBI said they hear so much radical islamic chatter that they don't know where to start. In other words, it's now commonplace to hear radical islamic chatter in the U.S. and law enforcement can't round them all up so they do nothing.
I shit you not.
btw, do you know what obama's FBI said about why they completely missed the Garland jihadists?
obama's FBI said they hear so much radical islamic chatter that they don't know where to start. In other words, it's now commonplace to hear radical islamic chatter in the U.S. and law enforcement can't round them all up so they do nothing.
I shit you not.
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (cCGjf)
205
I think you have it backwards. Somebody needs to show me specifics about why the congress has the right to abrogate a natural right of man.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (eW+UG)
????
Sounds nice, but I have no idea what your talking about
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (eW+UG)
????
Sounds nice, but I have no idea what your talking about
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (rDqRv)
206
I think you have it backwards. Somebody needs to show me specifics about why the congress has the right to abrogate a natural right of man.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (eW+UG)
????
Sounds nice, but I have no idea what your talking about
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (eW+UG)
????
Sounds nice, but I have no idea what your talking about
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (rDqRv)
207
182 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:28 PM (rDqRv)
Yes, so we abrogate our Constitutional right to privacy so Bronko Bama's DoJ and DHS can shrug at the Jihadist #1 who was on their radar ignoring the metadata if we assume NSA even sent the fucking thing.
Forgive me for telling NSA to go back to watching pron and stalking ex-girlfriends we can let "terrorists slip through the cracks" without their "help."
Yes, so we abrogate our Constitutional right to privacy so Bronko Bama's DoJ and DHS can shrug at the Jihadist #1 who was on their radar ignoring the metadata if we assume NSA even sent the fucking thing.
Forgive me for telling NSA to go back to watching pron and stalking ex-girlfriends we can let "terrorists slip through the cracks" without their "help."
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (/4AZU)
208
So are we now living in a monarchy, where the president-king does what he wants?
Or is it more of a communist thing, where the Party does what they want?
Confused.
/and screwed either way.
Or is it more of a communist thing, where the Party does what they want?
Confused.
/and screwed either way.
Posted by: shibumi who is awash in existential dread at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (1uKzc)
209
196 Specific Damage: They violated my right to privacy.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (ODxAs)
What damage? They hurt your feelings?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
I dunno, did the founders get it wrong or are you just a better thinker?
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:30 PM (ODxAs)
What damage? They hurt your feelings?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
I dunno, did the founders get it wrong or are you just a better thinker?
Posted by: Jefferson at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (wkuqO)
210
I would normally, instinctively, side with the NSA, which is comprised of patriotic and dedicated citizens of our country, but when I see an Obama anywhere near anything, I get this massive twinge of paranoia. So, shut it down. Let the terrorists run amok because we didn't scrape some useful data. I would rather have explosions at an intersection, under a school bus, than give Obama a paragraph of leverage data that might change our country in order of magnitude ways.
Posted by: goon at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (gy5kE)
211
The NSA's mass collection of phone data isn't what's protecting us. Nun patdowns by our crack team of TSA agents is what's protecting us.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (8ZskC)
212
188 The rather obvious case that if the program was working, the defenders of it would be citing fer-instances left and right.
NO it is not. Only a fucking idiot would broadcast their successes so the enemy knows what not to do next time. Unfortunetaly we have done that all to often
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (rDqRv)
Then we are left with having faith in the folks who collect and use this data.
I have no faith in them.
It is the wrong approach in the first place.
188 The rather obvious case that if the program was working, the defenders of it would be citing fer-instances left and right.
NO it is not. Only a fucking idiot would broadcast their successes so the enemy knows what not to do next time. Unfortunetaly we have done that all to often
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (rDqRv)
Then we are left with having faith in the folks who collect and use this data.
I have no faith in them.
It is the wrong approach in the first place.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (MQEz6)
213
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (kff5f)
I grew up in a suburb of NYC. Both my parents work in the city. I was still in school when 9/11 happened and had multiple classmates who lost a parent / aunt / uncle whatever.
My moms best friend was working on one of the top floors of WTC 1 on 9/10 and was supposed to go back on 9/12. Just due to luck, her agency had someone else there on 9/11 and she was sent to midtown.
None of that means I think the government should be able to violate my rights.
I grew up in a suburb of NYC. Both my parents work in the city. I was still in school when 9/11 happened and had multiple classmates who lost a parent / aunt / uncle whatever.
My moms best friend was working on one of the top floors of WTC 1 on 9/10 and was supposed to go back on 9/12. Just due to luck, her agency had someone else there on 9/11 and she was sent to midtown.
None of that means I think the government should be able to violate my rights.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:34 PM (AkOaV)
214
The Constitution says that the only privacy you can have is to have an abortion.
Read it bitches!
Read it bitches!
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:34 PM (TV9BR)
215
NO it is not. Only a fucking idiot would broadcast their successes so the enemy knows what not to do next time. Unfortunetaly we have done that all to often
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Now run that statement thru the reality filter. How much information on the events and processes of -- say -- the Bin Ladin raid were revealed by the government, actively or passively by allowing it's release by others? All sensitive, critical information on our methods and capabilities?
Give ya a hint. Ooodles.
NO it is not. Only a fucking idiot would broadcast their successes so the enemy knows what not to do next time. Unfortunetaly we have done that all to often
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Now run that statement thru the reality filter. How much information on the events and processes of -- say -- the Bin Ladin raid were revealed by the government, actively or passively by allowing it's release by others? All sensitive, critical information on our methods and capabilities?
Give ya a hint. Ooodles.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:34 PM (kdS6q)
216
105
Yes, exactly. And I admit my failure: I was all like, Patriot Act warrantless phone taps are to catch terrorists, and I'm not a terrorist, so why worry?
Got that one completely wrong.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (/Ho8c)
Yep. It all depends on who gets to define "terrorist".
Yes, exactly. And I admit my failure: I was all like, Patriot Act warrantless phone taps are to catch terrorists, and I'm not a terrorist, so why worry?
Got that one completely wrong.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (/Ho8c)
Yep. It all depends on who gets to define "terrorist".
Posted by: rickl at May 07, 2015 01:34 PM (zoehZ)
217
Every arm of government is now subject to being used as a political weapon against Americans who won't get with the program.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at May 07, 2015 01:34 PM (8ZskC)
218
Then we are left with having faith in the folks who collect and use this data.
I have no faith in them.
It is the wrong approach in the first place.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (MQEz6)
So elect other folks, but what is the alternative to ask our enemies "Pretty Please"?
I have no faith in them.
It is the wrong approach in the first place.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (MQEz6)
So elect other folks, but what is the alternative to ask our enemies "Pretty Please"?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (rDqRv)
219
Lots of stuff is illegal.
But there's nothing we can do about it. Sorry peons.
However YOU can contribute to our re-election fund!
But there's nothing we can do about it. Sorry peons.
However YOU can contribute to our re-election fund!
Posted by: Your Elected Officials at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (1uKzc)
220
Yeah NGU b/c if there is ONE THING BARACK OBAMA HAS SHOWN it is his humility and refusal to take credit for "successes" real and imagined...
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (/4AZU)
221
At the risk of sounding cliche(no accent, FY Pixy); What difference does it make!?!!?!? If the Second branch of government will do nothing, why should the Third? All these checks and balances thingys are hard work.
I'm getting really fatalistic: I kinda wish they'd just quit fiddle-fucking around and move on to the dictatorship part. This slow roll into the depths is boring as hell. We know there's no stopping it, so we might as well hit the gas and move along.
I'm getting really fatalistic: I kinda wish they'd just quit fiddle-fucking around and move on to the dictatorship part. This slow roll into the depths is boring as hell. We know there's no stopping it, so we might as well hit the gas and move along.
Posted by: chiefjaybob at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (cgH9o)
222
Here's the deal, if the NSA can produce all of Hillary's State Department emails (and I think they can) then I'm totes okay with them scanning my phone. Oh, and I want NSA to scare the shit out of telemarketers - especially Senate Termites.
Posted by: Super Creepy Eric Hoteham at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (oDCMR)
223
Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
----
Cheryl Atkins
Dan Rosen
Gibson Guitar
Franklin Graham
Christine O'Donnell
Ben Carson
National Organization for Marriage
Crossroads GPS
Maggi Gallagher
..... just off the top of my head....
----
Cheryl Atkins
Dan Rosen
Gibson Guitar
Franklin Graham
Christine O'Donnell
Ben Carson
National Organization for Marriage
Crossroads GPS
Maggi Gallagher
..... just off the top of my head....
Posted by: fixerupper at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (8XRCm)
224
What damage? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My Right to Privacy. That Damage. Its not hard.
You have it backwards, its supposed to be an inconvenience to the state, not me, if they want to investigate me they should go to court on me specifically.
What damage? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My Right to Privacy. That Damage. Its not hard.
You have it backwards, its supposed to be an inconvenience to the state, not me, if they want to investigate me they should go to court on me specifically.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (ODxAs)
225
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:32 PM (GGCsk)
I think all of us posting here would be considered "well informed" and possible due to my tech background I seem to understand the implications of the Snowden document dump more than others, especially others who are older and tech illiterate.
And then it all comes down to trust. Do you trust the bureaucrats in DC to "do the right thing"?
I think all of us posting here would be considered "well informed" and possible due to my tech background I seem to understand the implications of the Snowden document dump more than others, especially others who are older and tech illiterate.
And then it all comes down to trust. Do you trust the bureaucrats in DC to "do the right thing"?
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:36 PM (AkOaV)
226
Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
The Bill of Rights, bitchez, you should read it. Right at the top: No Harm, No Foule!
The Bill of Rights, bitchez, you should read it. Right at the top: No Harm, No Foule!
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:36 PM (FcR7P)
227
^This. It's also why I don't like the idea of cops being able to roust people just because. Some people rationalize by saying "well, they only do it to thugs, and I'm not a thug!" but when they turn your sights on you, well...
Exactly.
Exactly.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 01:37 PM (7ObY1)
228
185
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate,
Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I
could care less.
I think this is part of the problem.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (/Ho8c)
In this very case, the Courts saw something illegal and did NOT shut it down...
ergo...
Provided the process is overseen by the courts in a legitimate,
Constitutional manner according to the way it was outlined to function, I
could care less.
I think this is part of the problem.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 01:29 PM (/Ho8c)
In this very case, the Courts saw something illegal and did NOT shut it down...
ergo...
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:37 PM (qh617)
229
So elect other folks, but what is the alternative to ask our enemies "Pretty Please"?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (rDqRv)
You're presenting what I believe is a false choice: unconstitutional blanket surveillance of the entire population or the terrorists will win. Have you considered that there might be measures that could be taken which DON'T shit all over the 4th Amendment rights of American citizens?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (rDqRv)
You're presenting what I believe is a false choice: unconstitutional blanket surveillance of the entire population or the terrorists will win. Have you considered that there might be measures that could be taken which DON'T shit all over the 4th Amendment rights of American citizens?
Posted by: Insomniac at May 07, 2015 01:37 PM (2Ojst)
230
Corrupt top to bottom inside to out and some of us like it that way.
Posted by: just saying at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (wkuqO)
231
Under most circumstances, I agree. But look at what's going on in Mexico. When the Cartel feels like it, 50 guys roll up on a ranch and take the place over. They kill the men, rape and kill the women, then use the place as their clubhouse until they choose to move on.
Apples and chunks of coal.
In Mexico, the citizenry are not allowed to arm themselves. Even possession of bullets is a crime.
While we don't know what would happen if the Mexicans had ready and legal access to weapons, we can take a lesson from Africa: when warlords come up against armed villages, the villages can often defend themselves.
Intelligence services here in the US, whether as part of a gang unit, or some federal program, watch the communications and movements of groups like this, preventing that sort of shit from going down.
We have Drug Cartels that are using paramilitary action to take over ranches in the US? Because I hadn't even heard of any attempts along those lines.
Also, I pointed out that protecting the citizenry from international threats (which international drug cartels would be) *is* within the purview of the State. So feel free to monitor their movements and communications. Insofar as they are communicating with legal residents of the United States (citizen or otherwise), get warrants to tap those communications.
Apples and chunks of coal.
In Mexico, the citizenry are not allowed to arm themselves. Even possession of bullets is a crime.
While we don't know what would happen if the Mexicans had ready and legal access to weapons, we can take a lesson from Africa: when warlords come up against armed villages, the villages can often defend themselves.
Intelligence services here in the US, whether as part of a gang unit, or some federal program, watch the communications and movements of groups like this, preventing that sort of shit from going down.
We have Drug Cartels that are using paramilitary action to take over ranches in the US? Because I hadn't even heard of any attempts along those lines.
Also, I pointed out that protecting the citizenry from international threats (which international drug cartels would be) *is* within the purview of the State. So feel free to monitor their movements and communications. Insofar as they are communicating with legal residents of the United States (citizen or otherwise), get warrants to tap those communications.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (nqBYe)
233
Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
Posted by: Nevergiveup
That's the reasoning of statists, one completely reverse of what is supposed to be required for Federal police powers.
Our Constitution demands that the government demonstrate a specific need before it appropriates wide-reaching police powers.
Show me why such a infinitely broad power is necessary. Show us in great and demonstrable detail why a power that will engender corruption, secrecy, and abuse is absolutely needed in our Republic.
Cut to the chase - you can't and the Feds haven't either.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
That's the reasoning of statists, one completely reverse of what is supposed to be required for Federal police powers.
Our Constitution demands that the government demonstrate a specific need before it appropriates wide-reaching police powers.
Show me why such a infinitely broad power is necessary. Show us in great and demonstrable detail why a power that will engender corruption, secrecy, and abuse is absolutely needed in our Republic.
Cut to the chase - you can't and the Feds haven't either.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (K7krX)
234
I told my wife to put in a job application at the NSA. That woman can pick up more dirt with her cell phone in half an hour than she can in a month with a vacuum cleaner.
pa dum....
I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
pa dum....
I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
Posted by: The Walking Dude at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (cCxiu)
235
What damage? They hurt your feelings?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
Here's the damage: You run for office sometime in the future or become a prominent public spokesperson for some cause. How do you think that will work out for you when those in power can review your "file" at the NSA -- what websites you visited, where you drove, who you called, what you bought, etc., and leak it to a cooperative press?
That information is power that can be deployed against "enemies" for illicit political ends. That's enough of a reason to oppose its collection.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
Here's the damage: You run for office sometime in the future or become a prominent public spokesperson for some cause. How do you think that will work out for you when those in power can review your "file" at the NSA -- what websites you visited, where you drove, who you called, what you bought, etc., and leak it to a cooperative press?
That information is power that can be deployed against "enemies" for illicit political ends. That's enough of a reason to oppose its collection.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at May 07, 2015 01:39 PM (8ZskC)
236
218 Then we are left with having faith in the folks who collect and use this data.
I have no faith in them.
It is the wrong approach in the first place.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (MQEz6)
So elect other folks, but what is the alternative to ask our enemies "Pretty Please"?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (rDqRv)
Kill them outside the US, day and night without a break. Destroy their bases and logistical support.
Stop lying to us about "workplace violence and diversity".
218 Then we are left with having faith in the folks who collect and use this data.
I have no faith in them.
It is the wrong approach in the first place.
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:33 PM (MQEz6)
So elect other folks, but what is the alternative to ask our enemies "Pretty Please"?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:35 PM (rDqRv)
Kill them outside the US, day and night without a break. Destroy their bases and logistical support.
Stop lying to us about "workplace violence and diversity".
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:39 PM (MQEz6)
237
170 Everyone is complaining about their privacy and constitutional rights being violated? Can someone point out a specific incident and a specific damage?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (rDqRv)
***
Heh, do you mind if I rifle through all the personal belongings in your home, as long as I don't remove anything? After all, no damage is done.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:27 PM (rDqRv)
***
Heh, do you mind if I rifle through all the personal belongings in your home, as long as I don't remove anything? After all, no damage is done.
Posted by: Barack Obama at May 07, 2015 01:39 PM (xkSSa)
238
What damage? They hurt your feelings?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
Love this tactic.
You have no standing...until you do and then it's too late. A weaponized IRS, a lawless executive, people who claim to see "nuance" in bedrock constitutional rights,boundless searches of any thing in the ether, and ever-more powerful technology should give pause. Instead we see this kind of goddamned nonsense.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:31 PM (rDqRv)
Love this tactic.
You have no standing...until you do and then it's too late. A weaponized IRS, a lawless executive, people who claim to see "nuance" in bedrock constitutional rights,boundless searches of any thing in the ether, and ever-more powerful technology should give pause. Instead we see this kind of goddamned nonsense.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 07, 2015 01:39 PM (659DL)
239
This. It's also why I don't like the idea of cops being able to roust people just because. Some people rationalize by saying "well, they only do it to thugs, and I'm not a thug!" but when they turn your sights on you, well...
Exactly.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 01:37 PM (7ObY1)
clearly said.
Exactly.
Posted by: Citizen X at May 07, 2015 01:37 PM (7ObY1)
clearly said.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:39 PM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Garrett at May 07, 2015 01:40 PM (wwBdj)
241
get warrants to tap those communications.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (kff5f)
And real warrants from real courts, not fucking kangaroo courts that make a mockery of our justice system where you have a prosecutor presenting a report thats 90% "redacted" to some 90 year old tech illiterate rubber stamp machine in a robe and no adversarial process with someone arguing on behalf of the accused.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (kff5f)
And real warrants from real courts, not fucking kangaroo courts that make a mockery of our justice system where you have a prosecutor presenting a report thats 90% "redacted" to some 90 year old tech illiterate rubber stamp machine in a robe and no adversarial process with someone arguing on behalf of the accused.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:40 PM (AkOaV)
242
If I never see Snowdon's name or face again it will be too soon. Unless it's that time when they unzip the body bag to double check that we got the right traitor.
Posted by: goon at May 07, 2015 01:40 PM (gy5kE)
243
Gotta keep an eye on all those grannies praying in front of abortion clinics. They are known wolves.
Posted by: Barack Obama at May 07, 2015 01:40 PM (xkSSa)
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (kQBSd)
245
>>None of that is a reason to abridge my Constitutional protections. Life
is risk. When you seek to remove risk, you a) fail and b) empower
someone to rule over you.<<
Exactly what part of the process, specifically, abrogates your Constitutional Rights. They cannot search or peruse your records without a warrant. Have you ever seen how the process works and the NSA explained it in the declassed briefing?
Not the Snowden version and hype, the real deal.
is risk. When you seek to remove risk, you a) fail and b) empower
someone to rule over you.<<
Exactly what part of the process, specifically, abrogates your Constitutional Rights. They cannot search or peruse your records without a warrant. Have you ever seen how the process works and the NSA explained it in the declassed briefing?
Not the Snowden version and hype, the real deal.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (GGCsk)
246
Reminder: If it can be abused, it will be abused.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (659DL)
247
There may only be two approaches to militant Islam, at extremes like the Patriot Act envisions.
One is to adjust, to try to accommodate them. Inevitably that means we limit speech like Gellers (or ours here), and we allow a national police force like the NSA.
The second one is...well...
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all.
One is to adjust, to try to accommodate them. Inevitably that means we limit speech like Gellers (or ours here), and we allow a national police force like the NSA.
The second one is...well...
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all.
Posted by: MTF at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (FCsIb)
248
Posted by: weft cut-loop at May 07, 2015 01:38 PM (K7krX)
No, our constitution has this to say on the subject:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] 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.
No, our constitution has this to say on the subject:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] 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.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (AkOaV)
249
Huzzah for the circular firing squad! See you all on the next post!
Posted by: lurkngestlurker at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (k8xvx)
250
We have Drug Cartels that are using paramilitary action to take over ranches in the US? Because I hadn't even heard of any attempts along those lines.
Bing "cartels taking over ranches".
Los Zetas in Laredo. Among others.
Bing "cartels taking over ranches".
Los Zetas in Laredo. Among others.
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (/YYtw)
251
They
can't do a damn thing with the data. Guy makes all sorts of posts
about Jihad and the Koran on social media and has phone records with
other suspicious characters? He MIGHT get put on a list along with a
million other people.
We're not even
allowed to give extra scrutiny to an airline passenger coming from a
nation that's a state sponsor of terrorism. that's profiling, remember?
can't do a damn thing with the data. Guy makes all sorts of posts
about Jihad and the Koran on social media and has phone records with
other suspicious characters? He MIGHT get put on a list along with a
million other people.
We're not even
allowed to give extra scrutiny to an airline passenger coming from a
nation that's a state sponsor of terrorism. that's profiling, remember?
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:43 PM (yiX3f)
252
so how many threats do the american people see on the News (Progressive arm )?
they see republicans as a threat.
do they see actual terrorists ?
and when they get a glimpse, like tsarnovs and texas shooters, they are told shut up they aren't the real problem Conservatives or returning vets, or tea partiers, or right to life people are.
they see republicans as a threat.
do they see actual terrorists ?
and when they get a glimpse, like tsarnovs and texas shooters, they are told shut up they aren't the real problem Conservatives or returning vets, or tea partiers, or right to life people are.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:43 PM (nqBYe)
Posted by: eman at May 07, 2015 01:43 PM (MQEz6)
254
Now run that statement thru the reality filter. How much information on the events and processes of -- say -- the Bin Ladin raid were revealed by the government, actively or passively by allowing it's release by others? All sensitive, critical information on our methods and capabilities?
Give ya a hint. Ooodles.
Good point, but I think that situation's exceptional. Ever since 9/11 the left's chant was that Bin Laden was the only guy we needed to get in response. That Bush's biggest failure was going to war with the wrong country and failing to get Bin Laden. Obama comes along and the apparatus Bush set up finds Bin Laden. Obama doesn't really want to go in and kill him, but it gets done anyway (thanks Hillary and Panetta). So Obama blows all operational security for two reasons:
1. It aligns with his meme that he's fixing Bush's mistakes.
2. He goes on to ax the intelligence gathering from this op because it proves al Qaida isn't on the run. Mouthing off gives the enemy a chance to hide and destroys the usability of the intel.
Give ya a hint. Ooodles.
Good point, but I think that situation's exceptional. Ever since 9/11 the left's chant was that Bin Laden was the only guy we needed to get in response. That Bush's biggest failure was going to war with the wrong country and failing to get Bin Laden. Obama comes along and the apparatus Bush set up finds Bin Laden. Obama doesn't really want to go in and kill him, but it gets done anyway (thanks Hillary and Panetta). So Obama blows all operational security for two reasons:
1. It aligns with his meme that he's fixing Bush's mistakes.
2. He goes on to ax the intelligence gathering from this op because it proves al Qaida isn't on the run. Mouthing off gives the enemy a chance to hide and destroys the usability of the intel.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:43 PM (jhqr1)
255
They cannot search or peruse your records without a warrant.
These are weasel words that would make a Clinton blush.
These are weasel words that would make a Clinton blush.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 07, 2015 01:43 PM (659DL)
256
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Love this tactic. You have no standing...until you do and then it's too late. A weaponized IRS, a lawless executive, people who claim to see "nuance" in bedrock constitutional rights,boundless searches of any thing in the ether, and ever-more powerful technology should give pause. Instead we see this kind of goddamned nonsense. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)
Person that complains about other people's instance on preserving their right to privacy, while he posts anonymously using a nom de web.
Tres amuse.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Love this tactic. You have no standing...until you do and then it's too late. A weaponized IRS, a lawless executive, people who claim to see "nuance" in bedrock constitutional rights,boundless searches of any thing in the ether, and ever-more powerful technology should give pause. Instead we see this kind of goddamned nonsense. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)
Person that complains about other people's instance on preserving their right to privacy, while he posts anonymously using a nom de web.
Tres amuse.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (kdS6q)
257
Is there some way to tease out of the data where are the Jews in America are? Get back to me.
Posted by: Obama to NSA at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (wkuqO)
Posted by: Garrett at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (wwBdj)
259
They cannot search or peruse your records without a warrant. Have you ever seen how the process works and the NSA explained it in the declassed briefing?
Not the Snowden version and hype, the real deal.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (GGCsk)
They can, and do record all of our internet activity and phone activity at a data center in LA (being moved to a bigger facility in UT) and go in front of a kangaroo rubber stamp secret court to get "general warrants" against all phone company customers.
Not the Snowden version and hype, the real deal.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (GGCsk)
They can, and do record all of our internet activity and phone activity at a data center in LA (being moved to a bigger facility in UT) and go in front of a kangaroo rubber stamp secret court to get "general warrants" against all phone company customers.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (AkOaV)
260
Look I told you all I have mixed feelings about the whole thing. I just don't think it's as simple as you all think. It's not black and white to me, most hings aren't. And neither you or me still to this day really knows what they have been collecting. And I have not seen any dramatic consistent examples of people having actual damage done to them. And don't throw Fredo and his bunch of crooks at me. THEY should all be in jail. Sure there have been some specific example of people in this admin misusing data and some of the agencies. Go after those people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (rDqRv)
261
They cannot search or peruse your records without a warrant.
-----
Well..... Im sooooooooo fucking glad to hear you say that.
-----
Well..... Im sooooooooo fucking glad to hear you say that.
Posted by: Joe the Ex Fucking Plumber at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (8XRCm)
262
Exactly what part of the process, specifically, abrogates your Constitutional Rights.
The tapping and collection of the fucking calls and data. Without a specific warrant. On everybody. Like the USSR did to their people. Satisfied?
Exactly what part of the process, specifically, abrogates your Constitutional Rights.
The tapping and collection of the fucking calls and data. Without a specific warrant. On everybody. Like the USSR did to their people. Satisfied?
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (ODxAs)
263
Which is the real deal.
Snowden gave us NSA documents. I didn't have to listen to him, I read through (skimmed for a lot of it) the thousands of pages of disclosures.
the NSA has hacked the back end of Google, Apple, Facebook, and a bunch of smaller tech companies, and also vacuums up all of that (unencrypted) data to go in to your "folder" in their data systems.
They literally know everything there is to know about you
Snowden gave us NSA documents. I didn't have to listen to him, I read through (skimmed for a lot of it) the thousands of pages of disclosures.
the NSA has hacked the back end of Google, Apple, Facebook, and a bunch of smaller tech companies, and also vacuums up all of that (unencrypted) data to go in to your "folder" in their data systems.
They literally know everything there is to know about you
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (AkOaV)
264
Is there some way to tease out of the data where are the Jews in America are? Get back to me.
Posted by: Obama to NSA at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (wkuqO)
-----
psssssst....... Hollywood.....
Go get em killer
Posted by: Obama to NSA at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (wkuqO)
-----
psssssst....... Hollywood.....
Go get em killer
Posted by: Joe the Ex Fucking Plumber at May 07, 2015 01:46 PM (8XRCm)
265
nevergiveup what about wisconsin? and walker and his supporters?
what about judges that give blanket warrants for this conduct?
what about judges that give blanket warrants for this conduct?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:46 PM (nqBYe)
266
Exactly what part of the process, specifically, abrogates your Constitutional Rights
Are you illiterate?
Amendment IV:
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.
Emphasis mine. My "papers and effects" include my electronic communications- phone conversations, emails, tweets, texts, and the rest. The Government is specifically forbidden from taking or tracking them (the right of the people to be secure ... shall not be violated).
*IF* the government wants my papers and effects, they must demonstrate probable cause, and then "particularly [describe] the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Are you illiterate?
Amendment IV:
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.
Emphasis mine. My "papers and effects" include my electronic communications- phone conversations, emails, tweets, texts, and the rest. The Government is specifically forbidden from taking or tracking them (the right of the people to be secure ... shall not be violated).
*IF* the government wants my papers and effects, they must demonstrate probable cause, and then "particularly [describe] the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:46 PM (kff5f)
267
I just knew that Obama was a Jooo, all along! It explains everything!
Posted by: goon at May 07, 2015 01:46 PM (gy5kE)
268
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (rDqRv)
Read the Snowden documents. That will give you a pretty good idea of what they're collecting... Namely everything.
From license plate scanners across the country tracking your car, to EZPass records, to phone records, to email records, to... everything.
They know more about you then your own spouse does.
Think about what that information could be used for in the wrong hands.
Read the Snowden documents. That will give you a pretty good idea of what they're collecting... Namely everything.
From license plate scanners across the country tracking your car, to EZPass records, to phone records, to email records, to... everything.
They know more about you then your own spouse does.
Think about what that information could be used for in the wrong hands.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:47 PM (AkOaV)
269
245 Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:42 PM (GGCsk)
Yeah Marcus, and Joe the Plumber's records can't be searched because some asshole civil servant didn't like his making Obama look like a fucking idiot...
and IRS can't go on partisan witchhunts while giving MIRROR IMAGE groups on the left a pass....
THE CIVIL SERVICE CANNOT BE TRUSTED THEY ARE IMMUNE TO PUNISHMENT.
Yeah Marcus, and Joe the Plumber's records can't be searched because some asshole civil servant didn't like his making Obama look like a fucking idiot...
and IRS can't go on partisan witchhunts while giving MIRROR IMAGE groups on the left a pass....
THE CIVIL SERVICE CANNOT BE TRUSTED THEY ARE IMMUNE TO PUNISHMENT.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:47 PM (/4AZU)
270
Sure there have been some specific example of people in this admin misusing data and some of the agencies. Go after those people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (rDqRv)
who puts the agencies heads in?
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (rDqRv)
who puts the agencies heads in?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (nqBYe)
271
Love this tactic. You have no standing...until you do and then it's too late. A weaponized IRS, a lawless executive, people who claim to see "nuance" in bedrock constitutional rights,boundless searches of any thing in the ether, and ever-more powerful technology should give pause. Instead we see this kind of goddamned nonsense. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)
Person that complains about other people's instance on preserving their right to privacy, while he posts anonymously using a nom de web.
Tres amuse.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (kdS6q)
We're talking about the NSA and collection of data, not the IRS and the criminal fucks in this Admin. And don't tell me to I should be ashamed because I have an opinion. I am allowed to, or have the events of the last week been suspended all fo a sudden. I recognize the danger of an unchecked government but I am balancing that against National Security and Defense. You don't have to agree with me, but I am NOT ashamed to think about that.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)
Person that complains about other people's instance on preserving their right to privacy, while he posts anonymously using a nom de web.
Tres amuse.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 07, 2015 01:44 PM (kdS6q)
We're talking about the NSA and collection of data, not the IRS and the criminal fucks in this Admin. And don't tell me to I should be ashamed because I have an opinion. I am allowed to, or have the events of the last week been suspended all fo a sudden. I recognize the danger of an unchecked government but I am balancing that against National Security and Defense. You don't have to agree with me, but I am NOT ashamed to think about that.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (rDqRv)
272
They cannot search or peruse your records without a warrant.
To follow up. The 4th Amendment says they can't even *collect* them without a warrant. I don't care about "search or peruse." (Which, btw, they *do* "peruse" without a warrant. What do you think "looking for keywords" is?)
To follow up. The 4th Amendment says they can't even *collect* them without a warrant. I don't care about "search or peruse." (Which, btw, they *do* "peruse" without a warrant. What do you think "looking for keywords" is?)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: General Patraeus at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (ODxAs)
274
Wow! It's just like that movie, "The Lives of Others." Life imitating government imitating art or something. Or maybe it was the other way around. It's just so hard to tell these days.
Posted by: PPs43 at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (gs8t9)
275
NGU, even I think you are on the wrong side of this.
Posted by: Chris Cuomo at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (TV9BR)
276
265 Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:46 PM (nqBYe)
Look the govt (in THIS CASE the fucking judiciary itself) cannot misuse data or go on fishing expeditions w/out warrants...
Oh you mean the asshole democrat judges issued warrants?
Look the govt (in THIS CASE the fucking judiciary itself) cannot misuse data or go on fishing expeditions w/out warrants...
Oh you mean the asshole democrat judges issued warrants?
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (/4AZU)
277
Go after those people.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (rDqRv)
-----
My Man!!!
*fistbump*
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:45 PM (rDqRv)
-----
My Man!!!
*fistbump*
Posted by: Lois Lerner at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (8XRCm)
278
The point is really moot anyway. Congress won't renew section 215 anyway. The hand writing is on the wall. I just don't want to hear all the screaming and hand-wringing when the next attack comes that it "should have been prevented".
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (GGCsk)
279
In Mexico, the citizenry are not allowed to arm themselves. Even possession of bullets is a crime.
While we don't know what would happen if the Mexicans had ready and legal access to weapons, we can take a lesson from Africa: when warlords come up against armed villages, the villages can often defend themselves.
I'm talking about ranches, not villages. Unless you get some warning, it's you and your family against 50 guys with automatic weapons. You're not going to win.
We have Drug Cartels that are using paramilitary action to take over ranches in the US? Because I hadn't even heard of any attempts along those lines.
No, in part because when they mass like that, police departments get tipoffs from intel services letting them know something's happening.
If you've ever been in a police briefing, you'd hear info on interesting people to watch out for, gang movements, stuff like that.
While we don't know what would happen if the Mexicans had ready and legal access to weapons, we can take a lesson from Africa: when warlords come up against armed villages, the villages can often defend themselves.
I'm talking about ranches, not villages. Unless you get some warning, it's you and your family against 50 guys with automatic weapons. You're not going to win.
We have Drug Cartels that are using paramilitary action to take over ranches in the US? Because I hadn't even heard of any attempts along those lines.
No, in part because when they mass like that, police departments get tipoffs from intel services letting them know something's happening.
If you've ever been in a police briefing, you'd hear info on interesting people to watch out for, gang movements, stuff like that.
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:49 PM (jhqr1)
280
who puts the agencies heads in?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (nqBYe)
So go after Fredo. You know I hate him and everyone associated with him. The NSA program was in place before Fredo took Office
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (nqBYe)
So go after Fredo. You know I hate him and everyone associated with him. The NSA program was in place before Fredo took Office
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:49 PM (rDqRv)
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (cCGjf)
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (kQBSd)
283
So it comes down to: Those that give up liberty for security deserve neither.
I agree with that, a few don't.
So it comes down to: Those that give up liberty for security deserve neither.
I agree with that, a few don't.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (ODxAs)
284
They do all the time.
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (kQBSd)
-----
Oh.... dont be silly.....
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (kQBSd)
-----
Oh.... dont be silly.....
Posted by: Rush Limbaugh at May 07, 2015 01:51 PM (8XRCm)
285
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:43 PM (nqBYe)
Right.
When conservatives hear "terrorist" then think Muslims.
When liberals and the government hear "terrorist" they think "right wing extremists."
DHS and DOJ have BOTH SAID that "right wing extremists" (and going by the lefts definition of right wing extremists, that means *US*) are the biggest threat to our country, and no one in government will even say the word "islam"
And even when the FSB (formerly known as KGB) says "hey, America, these two guys are going to do some jihadin" the FBI says "nah, nah, they're good kids. It would be islamophobic to look in to this at all anyways." Then, boom boston marathon blows up.
And what do the statist say in response to that?
WE NEED MOAR SURVEILLANCE! MORE CAMERAS, MORE TRACKING, MORE META DATA!
why?
Right.
When conservatives hear "terrorist" then think Muslims.
When liberals and the government hear "terrorist" they think "right wing extremists."
DHS and DOJ have BOTH SAID that "right wing extremists" (and going by the lefts definition of right wing extremists, that means *US*) are the biggest threat to our country, and no one in government will even say the word "islam"
And even when the FSB (formerly known as KGB) says "hey, America, these two guys are going to do some jihadin" the FBI says "nah, nah, they're good kids. It would be islamophobic to look in to this at all anyways." Then, boom boston marathon blows up.
And what do the statist say in response to that?
WE NEED MOAR SURVEILLANCE! MORE CAMERAS, MORE TRACKING, MORE META DATA!
why?
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:51 PM (AkOaV)
286
101
83
I'm sorry, but does anyone think something as silly as a court decision
at any level will stop anything this administration wants to do?
Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains
It's
better than a rubber stamp and it does make a difference because the
programs will have difficulty being funded if they are deemed illegal.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (yiX3f)
You forgot the sarcasm tag.
83
I'm sorry, but does anyone think something as silly as a court decision
at any level will stop anything this administration wants to do?
Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains
It's
better than a rubber stamp and it does make a difference because the
programs will have difficulty being funded if they are deemed illegal.
Posted by: McAdams at May 07, 2015 01:14 PM (yiX3f)
You forgot the sarcasm tag.
Posted by: Jordan at May 07, 2015 01:51 PM (jsYc/)
287
I think we can be certain the obama is not using his NSA to spy on muslims.
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (cCGjf)
It's NOT his NSA, it's ours, and if the people in charge there and at other agencies had any dignity and honor, things might be different.
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:50 PM (cCGjf)
It's NOT his NSA, it's ours, and if the people in charge there and at other agencies had any dignity and honor, things might be different.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:51 PM (rDqRv)
288
btw, nobody but nobody, is saying don't monitor terrorists or don't monitor those chatting with terrorists. Just get a fucking specific warrant.
btw, nobody but nobody, is saying don't monitor terrorists or don't monitor those chatting with terrorists. Just get a fucking specific warrant.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 07, 2015 01:52 PM (ODxAs)
289
I'm hoping those NSA guys have a good sense of humor and chuckle at the clever and witty things we say, even when we JOKINGLY say things about the NSA that could be MISCONSTRUED as RUDE towards them, we totally love the NSA. So, so much.
Posted by: Turd Ferguson at May 07, 2015 01:52 PM (VAsIq)
290
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:47 PM (AkOaV)
Facial recognition is the next scary one...
Pictures taken by public cameras in public places are legal... and can be fed into the system...
Where they can then identify you by using facial recognition software... all legal... and track your movements better than having someone tail you.
Facial recognition is the next scary one...
Pictures taken by public cameras in public places are legal... and can be fed into the system...
Where they can then identify you by using facial recognition software... all legal... and track your movements better than having someone tail you.
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:52 PM (qh617)
291
Nevergiveup, i'm really not trying to argue with you, I was as trusting of the idea of security as you.
I have seen all the agencies being used as political tools the last years.
and they allowed themselves to be
if they had honor , i have missed it . and would wish it return.
as for Obama, we cannot unelect the guy.
we will have another and another, in the meantime we have Agencies that are being used for Political purpose openly.
so ?
I have seen all the agencies being used as political tools the last years.
and they allowed themselves to be
if they had honor , i have missed it . and would wish it return.
as for Obama, we cannot unelect the guy.
we will have another and another, in the meantime we have Agencies that are being used for Political purpose openly.
so ?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:53 PM (nqBYe)
292
Pithing sayings, while they sound nice, don't protect this Country from the very real enemies out there
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:53 PM (rDqRv)
293
278 Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (GGCsk)
Why would *we* complain Marcus?
We have the capacity to map out the terrorists' networks in a heartbeat likely globally.
We DO NOT DO SO.
ie
The govt is not really in the "stop goatfcukers Biz" it is the "tyranny when needed for donk gains" biz...
Message received.
Why would *we* complain Marcus?
We have the capacity to map out the terrorists' networks in a heartbeat likely globally.
We DO NOT DO SO.
ie
The govt is not really in the "stop goatfcukers Biz" it is the "tyranny when needed for donk gains" biz...
Message received.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:53 PM (/4AZU)
294
I keep reading "Apple's Court" instead of appeals court.
Someday there will be and Apple's Court.
Corporate-sponsored courts coming soon...
I keep reading "Apple's Court" instead of appeals court.
Someday there will be and Apple's Court.
Corporate-sponsored courts coming soon...
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:53 PM (cCGjf)
295
look at what they are doing in the military itself.
what they see As all important.
like being more sensitive, being more gentle.
is that the reason Military exists?
what they see As all important.
like being more sensitive, being more gentle.
is that the reason Military exists?
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (nqBYe)
296
No, in part because when they mass like that, police departments get tipoffs from intel services letting them know something's happening.
Fail.
http://binged.it/1cbpKnc
Fail.
http://binged.it/1cbpKnc
Posted by: rickb223 Straight, Conservative Clinger at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (/YYtw)
297
So go after Fredo. You know I hate him and everyone associated with him. The NSA program was in place before Fredo took Office
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:49 PM (rDqRv)
so, as long as Bush did it first, its Constitutional and all right???
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:49 PM (rDqRv)
so, as long as Bush did it first, its Constitutional and all right???
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (qh617)
298
>>To follow up. The 4th Amendment says they can't even *collect* them
without a warrant. I don't care about "search or peruse." (Which, btw,
they *do* "peruse" without a warrant. What do you think "looking for
keywords" is?)<<
The phone companies and internet providers already do this today. For example, your internet company knows your IP address(es) and can link them to emails (or multiples of either). Much of this data is actual sold in targeting advertising. They do that without your "permission" because it is part of the subscribers agreement. Same with telephone records.
If you believe private companies don't have similar metadata programs for commercial use, think again. They not only have that, but there are quants working overtime on statistics, relationship, likely outcomes (like purchases) and complete personality profiles. They do that because you consented to it.
But the government doing the same thing to attempt to catch terrorists is a bad thing.
It just seems a bit of a dichotomy to me IMHO.
without a warrant. I don't care about "search or peruse." (Which, btw,
they *do* "peruse" without a warrant. What do you think "looking for
keywords" is?)<<
The phone companies and internet providers already do this today. For example, your internet company knows your IP address(es) and can link them to emails (or multiples of either). Much of this data is actual sold in targeting advertising. They do that without your "permission" because it is part of the subscribers agreement. Same with telephone records.
If you believe private companies don't have similar metadata programs for commercial use, think again. They not only have that, but there are quants working overtime on statistics, relationship, likely outcomes (like purchases) and complete personality profiles. They do that because you consented to it.
But the government doing the same thing to attempt to catch terrorists is a bad thing.
It just seems a bit of a dichotomy to me IMHO.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (GGCsk)
299
292 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:53 PM (rDqRv)
Right...that'd be Obama, the FBI, DoJ, and CIA/NSA...you know like Boston, Garland, the shoe bomber etc etc
Right...that'd be Obama, the FBI, DoJ, and CIA/NSA...you know like Boston, Garland, the shoe bomber etc etc
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (/4AZU)
300
I have seen all the agencies being used as political tools the last years.
Yes and we have to put a stop to that ASAP and some people should go to Jail
Yes and we have to put a stop to that ASAP and some people should go to Jail
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (rDqRv)
301
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:48 PM (rDqRv)
Again, the NSA is not looking to stop Muslims.
Muslims are not the primary target of this surveillance.
More terrorist attacks have happened on US soil since the Patriot Act went in to effect then before it.
There has not been a single attack (that we know of, but I'm sure we'd know if there had been) thwarted by the NSA.
Just like there hasn't been one thwarted by the TSA.
And if you think NSA agents are not the same bureaucrats as IRS agents... I don't know what to tell you
Again, the NSA is not looking to stop Muslims.
Muslims are not the primary target of this surveillance.
More terrorist attacks have happened on US soil since the Patriot Act went in to effect then before it.
There has not been a single attack (that we know of, but I'm sure we'd know if there had been) thwarted by the NSA.
Just like there hasn't been one thwarted by the TSA.
And if you think NSA agents are not the same bureaucrats as IRS agents... I don't know what to tell you
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Bob at the NSA at May 07, 2015 01:55 PM (ODxAs)
303
I, for one, welcome our new NSA overseers...
Posted by: Didgiveup at May 07, 2015 01:55 PM (qh617)
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 07, 2015 01:56 PM (cCGjf)
305
so, as long as Bush did it first, its Constitutional and all right???
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (qh617)
Don't put words in my mouth. that is not what I was saying.
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (qh617)
Don't put words in my mouth. that is not what I was saying.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:56 PM (rDqRv)
306
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (GGCsk)
My ISP only knows my IP address because they assign it to me.
They cannot search my email or anything else I do on the internet because I do not use their email servers or their search engines. I also use a lot of proxies, so they can't see what webpages i visited even if they wanted to.
But I have way less of a problem with Comcast or Google tracking my perusing at Amazon to anonymously advertise socks to me then I do with the government illegally and unconstitutionally tracking my every move.
My ISP only knows my IP address because they assign it to me.
They cannot search my email or anything else I do on the internet because I do not use their email servers or their search engines. I also use a lot of proxies, so they can't see what webpages i visited even if they wanted to.
But I have way less of a problem with Comcast or Google tracking my perusing at Amazon to anonymously advertise socks to me then I do with the government illegally and unconstitutionally tracking my every move.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (AkOaV)
307
they have politicized every damnd thing including judicial and govt agencies .
we cannot help that.
we can only try defending the rights legally we were alotted.
or hope judges, agency leaders, stand tough. and i haven't been seeing a lot of thaT.
we cannot help that.
we can only try defending the rights legally we were alotted.
or hope judges, agency leaders, stand tough. and i haven't been seeing a lot of thaT.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (nqBYe)
308
Again, the NSA is not looking to stop Muslims.
Muslims are not the primary target of this surveillance.
More terrorist attacks have happened on US soil since the Patriot Act went in to effect then before it.
There has not been a single attack (that we know of, but I'm sure we'd know if there had been) thwarted by the NSA.
Just like there hasn't been one thwarted by the TSA.
And if you think NSA agents are not the same bureaucrats as IRS agents... I don't know what to tell you
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (AkOaV)
yeah I think most of what you said is way off.
Muslims are not the primary target of this surveillance.
More terrorist attacks have happened on US soil since the Patriot Act went in to effect then before it.
There has not been a single attack (that we know of, but I'm sure we'd know if there had been) thwarted by the NSA.
Just like there hasn't been one thwarted by the TSA.
And if you think NSA agents are not the same bureaucrats as IRS agents... I don't know what to tell you
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (AkOaV)
yeah I think most of what you said is way off.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (rDqRv)
309
I know of a way to stop the terror attacks from muslims. If we have another one we take out a big muslim city in the 8-10 million person range. If we have another one after that we take out several big muslim cities in the 50-70 million person range. They will stop that shit right away. I guarantee we won't have to do it a third time.
Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (TV9BR)
310
Look at it this way you actions and movements are recorded and tracked from the time you get up to the time you go to bed. The water company know when you shit/shower/shave. Cable company/sat company knows what tv shows you watch. Cell company knows your location at ANY given time. If you live in a city your photographed dozens of times by CCTV. You are monitor every waking moment.
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (kQBSd)
311
Posted by: Bob at the NSA at May 07, 2015 01:55 PM (ODxAs)
nope, bob, same old same old.
We did put on pants for this thread though.
nope, bob, same old same old.
We did put on pants for this thread though.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (AkOaV)
312
The phone companies and internet providers already do this today.
<<<<<<<<
They are NOT the govt. with police and prosecution power!
________________
For
example, your internet company knows your IP address(es) and can link
them to emails (or multiples of either). Much of this data is actual
sold in targeting advertising. They do that without your "permission"
because it is part of the subscribers agreement <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Permission and Agreement are kind of synonyms.
<<<<<<<<
They are NOT the govt. with police and prosecution power!
________________
For
example, your internet company knows your IP address(es) and can link
them to emails (or multiples of either). Much of this data is actual
sold in targeting advertising. They do that without your "permission"
because it is part of the subscribers agreement <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Permission and Agreement are kind of synonyms.
Posted by: Bob at the NSA at May 07, 2015 01:58 PM (ODxAs)
Posted by: bonhomme at May 07, 2015 01:58 PM (jhqr1)
314
anyways im just getting worked up here, im moving over to the nood
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:58 PM (AkOaV)
315
>>We DO NOT DO SO.<<
Don;t be so sure about that. We have pretty good intel on global linkages and occurrences.
I don't disagree there is a danger of abuse, especially politically. When an administration yields the IRS like a weapon, as Mr. Obama has, people should be concerned. In my opinion, that's an impeachable offense which he just smirks off because Republicans think the politics of it are bad. That's because they are cowards.
In that environment, people will and do push the envelope. That's criminal.
Don;t be so sure about that. We have pretty good intel on global linkages and occurrences.
I don't disagree there is a danger of abuse, especially politically. When an administration yields the IRS like a weapon, as Mr. Obama has, people should be concerned. In my opinion, that's an impeachable offense which he just smirks off because Republicans think the politics of it are bad. That's because they are cowards.
In that environment, people will and do push the envelope. That's criminal.
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:58 PM (GGCsk)
316
Yes and we have to put a stop to that ASAP and some people should go to Jail
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (rDqRv)
THAT WOULD BUILD TRUST.
but i don't see it .
i do hope fo rit however, as i'm very sorry to not admire the country i grew up in as i had formerly.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (rDqRv)
THAT WOULD BUILD TRUST.
but i don't see it .
i do hope fo rit however, as i'm very sorry to not admire the country i grew up in as i had formerly.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 01:58 PM (nqBYe)
317
305 so, as long as Bush did it first, its Constitutional and all right???
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (qh617)
Don't put words in my mouth. that is not what I was saying.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:56 PM (rDqRv)
Very simple concept.... which history will verify....
ANY Government power will eventually be abused.
Eventually you will get an asshole in charge... eventually that power WILL be used for unintended things...
Its happened throughout history... it may take time... but it WILL happen.
305 so, as long as Bush did it first, its Constitutional and all right???
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (qh617)
Don't put words in my mouth. that is not what I was saying.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:56 PM (rDqRv)
Very simple concept.... which history will verify....
ANY Government power will eventually be abused.
Eventually you will get an asshole in charge... eventually that power WILL be used for unintended things...
Its happened throughout history... it may take time... but it WILL happen.
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:59 PM (qh617)
318
anyway nevergiveup, i do understand your position and feel no hard feelings.
i don't enjoy feeling afraid for thee future of the country as i do now.
i don't enjoy feeling afraid for thee future of the country as i do now.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 02:00 PM (nqBYe)
319
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (kQBSd)
Right, and all separated its not a huge problem.
But if you have a DOD agency who isnt (by charter and by law) allowed to operate on US soil collated all of that information in to profiles on every "US Person"... well, that a different story, right?
Right, and all separated its not a huge problem.
But if you have a DOD agency who isnt (by charter and by law) allowed to operate on US soil collated all of that information in to profiles on every "US Person"... well, that a different story, right?
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:00 PM (AkOaV)
320
I have mixed feelings about it, too, which is why I was a full-on supporter of Patriot Act when first proposed. I want The Good Guys to keep Murica safe from the baddies. Truth, Justice, the American Way, apple pie, last best hope, all that stuff---I believe it, even now, to some degree.
The problem is that this policy flies fully in the face of the 4th Amendment, which was put in place to try to restrain an ever-hungry monster and keep it under control. I doubt we can say the policy is useless and that it hasn't stopped a single attack or crime. I also doubt that there is widespread abuse that has resulted in false imprisonment or the like...yet. But the potential is there and it is a substantial risk. The 4th Amendment was carefully thought out and intended to limit lawfare on the citizenry. We've allowed many other agencies to bypass this (civil forfeiture, anyone?), but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.
There has to be a better solution than just tapping, collecting (and storing) everybody's comms in order to "prevent another 9/11." The failure of 9/11 wasn't that intel didn't exist on the attackers.
The problem is that this policy flies fully in the face of the 4th Amendment, which was put in place to try to restrain an ever-hungry monster and keep it under control. I doubt we can say the policy is useless and that it hasn't stopped a single attack or crime. I also doubt that there is widespread abuse that has resulted in false imprisonment or the like...yet. But the potential is there and it is a substantial risk. The 4th Amendment was carefully thought out and intended to limit lawfare on the citizenry. We've allowed many other agencies to bypass this (civil forfeiture, anyone?), but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.
There has to be a better solution than just tapping, collecting (and storing) everybody's comms in order to "prevent another 9/11." The failure of 9/11 wasn't that intel didn't exist on the attackers.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 02:00 PM (/Ho8c)
321
Let me put it this way, if any of the tyrannical governments of the past had access to these kinds of tools, the gulags would have been a lot more full and there would have been a lot less unrest.
And of course the British would have stomped out the American revolution before it even started.
And of course the British would have stomped out the American revolution before it even started.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:01 PM (AkOaV)
322
i hope you are not angry at me. and i tried to argued in good faith.
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 02:01 PM (nqBYe)
323
-d
Posted by: comrade willow at May 07, 2015 02:02 PM (nqBYe)
324
308 Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (rDqRv)
Right, based on the Intel community not you know perjuring itself to the GOP Congress and all...
Look we get it, you look at the Hall of Mirrors, the Puzzle palace, and the Farm and see Ian Fleming's Connery era Bond operations...
I see something different.
Right, based on the Intel community not you know perjuring itself to the GOP Congress and all...
Look we get it, you look at the Hall of Mirrors, the Puzzle palace, and the Farm and see Ian Fleming's Connery era Bond operations...
I see something different.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 02:02 PM (/4AZU)
325
There has to be a better solution than just tapping, collecting (and storing) everybody's comms in order to "prevent another 9/11." The failure of 9/11 wasn't that intel didn't exist on the attackers.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 02:00 PM (/Ho8c)
That failure goes back to the Clinton administration telling the Jordanian intelligence service they were just a bunch of backwater raghead hicks who didn't know nothing, when they warned the Clinton administration about bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 02:00 PM (/Ho8c)
That failure goes back to the Clinton administration telling the Jordanian intelligence service they were just a bunch of backwater raghead hicks who didn't know nothing, when they warned the Clinton administration about bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Posted by: Insomniac at May 07, 2015 02:02 PM (2Ojst)
326
yeah I think most of what you said is way off.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (rDqRv)
Okay, fine. You can disagree with my conclusions, but the facts are all in the Snowden doc dumps and in publicly released DHS memos.
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (rDqRv)
Okay, fine. You can disagree with my conclusions, but the facts are all in the Snowden doc dumps and in publicly released DHS memos.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:03 PM (AkOaV)
327
when they warned the Clinton administration about bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Posted by: Insomniac
Oh, so they were on the JV squad then, right? ;-)
Posted by: Insomniac
Oh, so they were on the JV squad then, right? ;-)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 02:03 PM (/Ho8c)
328
"But the government doing the same thing to attempt to catch terrorists is a bad thing."
Because the private companies can't take away my possessions and freedom.
Think about it a little.
Because the private companies can't take away my possessions and freedom.
Think about it a little.
Posted by: Jukin, Former Republican at May 07, 2015 02:03 PM (TV9BR)
329
>>Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 01:57 PM (AkOaV)
<<
To be clear, I'm not defending it. Just pointing out the dichotomy.
Search engines, et al also have a TOS. They are tracking your activity vis a vis the IP address. Your ISP also knows every IP you hit. They keep that history. Firms like Google have become masters at building profiles when people use mulitple IP addresses (say at work) and home. Plus the use of multiple email addresses. Even bill pay services and people who accept internet payments get into it.
It all ends in a pretty comprehensive profile of who you are, what you buy, what sites you visit, etc.
That's just in private hands with no Fourth Amendment protections because you've agreed to it. Plus you've often agreed they can "sell" it to other firms and consumers (including the US government).
<<
To be clear, I'm not defending it. Just pointing out the dichotomy.
Search engines, et al also have a TOS. They are tracking your activity vis a vis the IP address. Your ISP also knows every IP you hit. They keep that history. Firms like Google have become masters at building profiles when people use mulitple IP addresses (say at work) and home. Plus the use of multiple email addresses. Even bill pay services and people who accept internet payments get into it.
It all ends in a pretty comprehensive profile of who you are, what you buy, what sites you visit, etc.
That's just in private hands with no Fourth Amendment protections because you've agreed to it. Plus you've often agreed they can "sell" it to other firms and consumers (including the US government).
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 02:04 PM (GGCsk)
330
327 when they warned the Clinton administration about bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Posted by: Insomniac
Oh, so they were on the JV squad then, right? ;-)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 02:03 PM (/Ho8c)
Yeah, something like that.
Posted by: Insomniac
Oh, so they were on the JV squad then, right? ;-)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at May 07, 2015 02:03 PM (/Ho8c)
Yeah, something like that.
Posted by: Insomniac at May 07, 2015 02:05 PM (2Ojst)
331
damn it who is messing with willow?
Posted by: River Guide at May 07, 2015 02:05 PM (RJMhd)
332
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 07, 2015 01:52 PM (qh617)
Yeah, that technology already exists (in its infancy) and is used by the NYPD and others.
Give it 10 years, I'm sure it will get much more accurate.
Yeah, that technology already exists (in its infancy) and is used by the NYPD and others.
Give it 10 years, I'm sure it will get much more accurate.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:05 PM (AkOaV)
333
As I said far upthread: the government should not be in the business of preventing bad things from happening, they should arrest, prosecute, and condemn the people who do bad things.
I don't have a problem taking the chance of being killed by a terrorist, or a simple thug either. I trust that the murderer will eventually get justice. I do have a problem giving up my God-given rights, legally or illegally, so that the government can pretend they are going to stop the murder before it happens.
As I said far upthread: the government should not be in the business of preventing bad things from happening, they should arrest, prosecute, and condemn the people who do bad things.
I don't have a problem taking the chance of being killed by a terrorist, or a simple thug either. I trust that the murderer will eventually get justice. I do have a problem giving up my God-given rights, legally or illegally, so that the government can pretend they are going to stop the murder before it happens.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at May 07, 2015 02:07 PM (eW+UG)
334
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:00 PM (AkOaV)
My point is that all this information current collected by companies is accessed by the govt. CA for instead is going to start fining water wasters. Where is the state govt getting the data? From the water company. CCTV monitored by the local police. Google et. al. are on record supplying NSA with data. Every move we make in our day to day life is watched over by big brother. The big fight in VA right now is license plate tracking and how long the govt can keep the data.
My point is that all this information current collected by companies is accessed by the govt. CA for instead is going to start fining water wasters. Where is the state govt getting the data? From the water company. CCTV monitored by the local police. Google et. al. are on record supplying NSA with data. Every move we make in our day to day life is watched over by big brother. The big fight in VA right now is license plate tracking and how long the govt can keep the data.
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 02:07 PM (kQBSd)
335
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 01:54 PM (GGCsk)
Private companies have terms of service to which I agree. Yes, part of those terms of service include them monitoring my usage, and at least potentially keeping records which might include recordings of phone calls, copies of emails, and metadata about internet traffic.
If I really wanted, I could avoid all of those- by not having internet access, by not having a "real" phone (instead using a pre-paid phone) etc.
The 4th Amendment does not affect private companies or contract law. It is a limit on the government.
Tell me this- if it were feasible, would you object to having the US government opening and scanning copies of all the paper mail sent in the United States "just in case we need it?" or "Just to look for patterns?" Why or why not?
Yes, it is absolutely a bad thing with the US Government violates the US Constitution, no matter what "higher purpose" they're claiming to serve.
Private companies have terms of service to which I agree. Yes, part of those terms of service include them monitoring my usage, and at least potentially keeping records which might include recordings of phone calls, copies of emails, and metadata about internet traffic.
If I really wanted, I could avoid all of those- by not having internet access, by not having a "real" phone (instead using a pre-paid phone) etc.
The 4th Amendment does not affect private companies or contract law. It is a limit on the government.
Tell me this- if it were feasible, would you object to having the US government opening and scanning copies of all the paper mail sent in the United States "just in case we need it?" or "Just to look for patterns?" Why or why not?
Yes, it is absolutely a bad thing with the US Government violates the US Constitution, no matter what "higher purpose" they're claiming to serve.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at May 07, 2015 02:07 PM (kff5f)
336
Posted by: Marcus T at May 07, 2015 02:04 PM (GGCsk)
Building advertising profiles if very different than building surveillance profiles.
And I think you're giving google and others too much credit.
Yes, when you're logged in to google+ they can track you. Otherwise they can't. If you disable cookies, that cuts down a lot of other tracking as well.
And no, my ISP doesn't track IP's I hit, because like I said it would all point to only 2 or 3 IPs, since I use proxy servers.
But even if I didn't, there is no financial reason for my ISP to hold on to those IP addresses for any length of time, and they don't. Because knowing I visited amazon.com doesn't help them much.
Building advertising profiles if very different than building surveillance profiles.
And I think you're giving google and others too much credit.
Yes, when you're logged in to google+ they can track you. Otherwise they can't. If you disable cookies, that cuts down a lot of other tracking as well.
And no, my ISP doesn't track IP's I hit, because like I said it would all point to only 2 or 3 IPs, since I use proxy servers.
But even if I didn't, there is no financial reason for my ISP to hold on to those IP addresses for any length of time, and they don't. Because knowing I visited amazon.com doesn't help them much.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:08 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: River Guide at May 07, 2015 02:09 PM (RJMhd)
338
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 02:07 PM (kQBSd)
Right. The NSA collates the information.
And from the Snowden docs, the tech companies mostly pushed back against the NSA. So the NSA put them under gag orders, made them give up the information, THEN HACKED in to googles supposedly state of the art totally secure back end. (the private network connecting googles servers world wide, where the data is broken up in to multiple locations -- on the other side of the encryption --) so that they could have full access to everything.
Right. The NSA collates the information.
And from the Snowden docs, the tech companies mostly pushed back against the NSA. So the NSA put them under gag orders, made them give up the information, THEN HACKED in to googles supposedly state of the art totally secure back end. (the private network connecting googles servers world wide, where the data is broken up in to multiple locations -- on the other side of the encryption --) so that they could have full access to everything.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:10 PM (AkOaV)
339
Nevergiveup is one of my faves, he and I get heated on this topic.
I respect his service and am glad he is a hordeling in good standing.
I will NEVER trust the Federal Government again not b/c of the misbehavior of the head asshole...that is to be expected and Clinton warned us...
I am enraged at the actions of the Civil Servants themselves who go unpunished.
I will NEVER trust the feds with "unlimited power" again.
Just cannot do it.
I respect his service and am glad he is a hordeling in good standing.
I will NEVER trust the Federal Government again not b/c of the misbehavior of the head asshole...that is to be expected and Clinton warned us...
I am enraged at the actions of the Civil Servants themselves who go unpunished.
I will NEVER trust the feds with "unlimited power" again.
Just cannot do it.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at May 07, 2015 02:11 PM (/4AZU)
340
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:10 PM (AkOaV)
I don't think so much hacked as was given a backdoor. But I agree that the Patriot Act has morfed well be on it's stated mandate.
I don't think so much hacked as was given a backdoor. But I agree that the Patriot Act has morfed well be on it's stated mandate.
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 02:14 PM (kQBSd)
341
Fuck them.
Posted by: Skree at May 07, 2015 02:20 PM (LbDLN)
342
Posted by: wrg500 at May 07, 2015 02:14 PM (kQBSd)
Well, google swears they had no idea about it, and from the powerpoint slides from Snowden, it seems to infer that google didn't know.
And google would not purposely build a back door in to their secure back end network, because if they did, any enterprising hackers would be able to get in.
Well, google swears they had no idea about it, and from the powerpoint slides from Snowden, it seems to infer that google didn't know.
And google would not purposely build a back door in to their secure back end network, because if they did, any enterprising hackers would be able to get in.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:26 PM (AkOaV)
343
This is what happens when the libdouche cartel takes over education and renders otherwise useful people into democrat voting idiots.
Posted by: model_1066 at May 07, 2015 02:34 PM (WEvvb)
344
I just don't want to hear all the screaming and hand-wringing when the next attack comes that it "should have been prevented".
Posted by: Marcus T
Don't know where you've been.
They're NOT preventing attacks now. They didn't stop the Tsaarnev brothers after Putin's Russia directly reported them.
Is there proof that this hoovering of domestic traffic is preventing attacks?
Proof that it helps reduce damage?
Or that it helps secure convictions?
Posted by: Marcus T
Don't know where you've been.
They're NOT preventing attacks now. They didn't stop the Tsaarnev brothers after Putin's Russia directly reported them.
Is there proof that this hoovering of domestic traffic is preventing attacks?
Proof that it helps reduce damage?
Or that it helps secure convictions?
Posted by: Papist Bograt at May 07, 2015 02:44 PM (Spluw)
345
But the government doing the same thing to attempt fail and not have a warrant to catch terrorists is a bad thing.
Can you hear me now?
Can you hear me now?
Posted by: DaveA at May 07, 2015 03:13 PM (DL2i+)
346
I know of a way to stop the terror attacks from muslims.
Bzzt - deterrence doesn't work on apocalyptic death cults without central authorities.
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/
2003/09/three-conjectures-
pew-poll-finds-40-of.html
Bzzt - deterrence doesn't work on apocalyptic death cults without central authorities.
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/
2003/09/three-conjectures-
pew-poll-finds-40-of.html
Posted by: DaveA at May 07, 2015 03:16 PM (DL2i+)
347
Not sure if someone mentioned this before but judges are supposed to avoid reaching constitutional questions of they can. Making pronouncements on constitutionality is supposed to be a last resort, especially if you can comfortably, as the ruling goes, invalidate the action based on the statute.
Posted by: Bill at May 07, 2015 05:21 PM (1WcK9)
Posted by: BB Wolf at May 24, 2015 09:35 PM (qh617)
349
So its illegal.... but the Government can keep doing it...
/facepalm
Yeah.... that's that series of checks and balances the Founders envisioned...
/facepalm
Yeah.... that's that series of checks and balances the Founders envisioned...
Posted by: BB Wolf at June 04, 2015 03:46 PM (qh617)
350
And google would not purposely build a back door in to their secure back end network, because if they did, any enterprising hackers would be able to get in.
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:26 PM (AkOaV)
Horseshit.... the hackers would both have to know the back door existed... AND be able to break through the security on said back door...
We place back doors into systems all the damn time... and the hackers do not attack them for the above reasons...
(IT guy... 35 years....)
Posted by: mynewhandle at May 07, 2015 02:26 PM (AkOaV)
Horseshit.... the hackers would both have to know the back door existed... AND be able to break through the security on said back door...
We place back doors into systems all the damn time... and the hackers do not attack them for the above reasons...
(IT guy... 35 years....)
Posted by: BB Wolf at June 04, 2015 03:49 PM (qh617)
Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0465 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.014 seconds, 359 records returned.
Page size 203 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Primary Document: The Audio
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Top Top Tens
Democratic Forays into Erotica
New Shows On Gore's DNC/MTV Network
Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes
Star Wars Euphemisms for Self-Abuse
Signs You're at an Iraqi "Wedding Party"
Signs Your Clown Has Gone Bad
Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up
Signs of Hip-Hop Influence on John Kerry
NYT Headlines Spinning Bush's Jobs Boom
Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' Mind
All-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd
Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran
Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care Anymore
Examples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery
Signs Andy Rooney Is Going Senile
Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance
Collective Names for Groups of People
John Kerry's Other Vietnam Super-Pets
Cool Things About the XM8 Assault Rifle
Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat Spy
Changes to Make Christianity More "Inclusive"
Secret John Kerry Senatorial Accomplishments
John Edwards Campaign Excuses
John Kerry Pick-Up Lines
Changes Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney
Torments in Dog-Hell
Greatest Hitjobs
The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat