930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: azaghal1981 on June 22, 2013, 06:06:49 pm
-
Man or Astro-man? - (Classified)
Man or Astro-Man? - Calling Hong Kong
The Clash - I Fought the Law
Superchunk - Sprung a Leak
Lungfish - Reveal Me
-
awesome, long time no playlist ;D
Men At Work - Who Can It Be Now? ("who can it be, knocking at my door?...")
Black Sabbath - Paranoid
-
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
-
dead kennedys
i spy
i fought the law
where do you draw the line
-
more dead kennedys
weve got a bigger problem now
this could be anywhere
stars and stripes of corruption
anarchy for sale
-
just realize . . . dead kennedys are the answer everytime
-
I am inclined to believe you. Well done.
-
In light of recent events
Belle & Sebastian - White Collar Boy
Chainsaw Masochist - Somewhere Else
-
I'm thinking a little salsa is in his future...
-
Snowden - Happy Christmas (War is Over)
Snowden - No One In Control
-
That appears to be true.
-
Hahahahaha I forgot about the band.
Snowden - Happy Christmas (War is Over)
Snowden - No One In Control
-
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
because of releasing the information about the surveillance program, or because he ran out on his GF?
(serious question, i don't get why he's an a-hole...)
-
Speaking for myself (and maybe my wife to some extent) from reading the long personal bio in the Post, he seems like a bit of a narcissistic, attention seeking dick more than someone out to do any great deeds for humanity (ok, go ahead and cue the comments about that sounding like a James Ford description, I can probably name the people who are racing to type that). But who knows...
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
because of releasing the information about the surveillance program, or because he ran out on his GF?
(serious question, i don't get why he's an a-hole...)
-
Speaking for myself (and maybe my wife to some extent) from reading the long personal bio in the Post, he seems like a bit of a narcissistic, attention seeking dick more than someone out to do any great deeds for humanity (ok, go ahead and cue the comments about that sounding like a James Ford description, I can probably name the people who are racing to type that). But who knows...
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
because of releasing the information about the surveillance program, or because he ran out on his GF?
(serious question, i don't get why he's an a-hole...)
not even you can be such a moron to think the media is giving you unbiased coverage of US government public enemy #1....
-
did you read the article I'm referring to?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/tracking-edward-snowden-from-a-maryland-classroom-to-a-hong-kong-hotel/2013/06/15/420aedd8-d44d-11e2-b05f-3ea3f0e7bb5a_story.html
Speaking for myself (and maybe my wife to some extent) from reading the long personal bio in the Post, he seems like a bit of a narcissistic, attention seeking dick more than someone out to do any great deeds for humanity (ok, go ahead and cue the comments about that sounding like a James Ford description, I can probably name the people who are racing to type that). But who knows...
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
because of releasing the information about the surveillance program, or because he ran out on his GF?
(serious question, i don't get why he's an a-hole...)
not even you can be such a moron to think the media is giving you unbiased coverage of US government public enemy #1....
-
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrgpZ0fUixs
-
did you read the article I'm referring to?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/tracking-edward-snowden-from-a-maryland-classroom-to-a-hong-kong-hotel/2013/06/15/420aedd8-d44d-11e2-b05f-3ea3f0e7bb5a_story.html
Speaking for myself (and maybe my wife to some extent) from reading the long personal bio in the Post, he seems like a bit of a narcissistic, attention seeking dick more than someone out to do any great deeds for humanity (ok, go ahead and cue the comments about that sounding like a James Ford description, I can probably name the people who are racing to type that). But who knows...
My wife wanted to know if there's a song called "I'm Such an Asshole".
because of releasing the information about the surveillance program, or because he ran out on his GF?
(serious question, i don't get why he's an a-hole...)
not even you can be such a moron to think the media is giving you unbiased coverage of US government public enemy #1....
yeah yeah... rule number one: discredit the messenger ..focus on that..forget about the message...forget about what he is saying.... THAT is not important...... I guess it works for the Kardashian world the sheeple live in... after all its what is interesting to you about the whole thing? the fact that the guy is an asshole..THAT is what interests you... what he is saying? who cares man.
the NSA has had to admit, after lying, that what this guy- whether he is unsavory or not I haven't a clue or much interest- says happens to be correct.. if people don't find it troubling that their phone calls are being listened to without so much as a warrant or that their internet activity, etc. is being kept track of.... well, then what the fuck can one say? its like Iraq all over again...people being lied to, made afraid (if we don't spy on you- legally of course (ha ha)) in order for the government to do what it wants and the law and constitution be damned...
China is having a good laugh as is much of the world about America's hypocrisy.. and the US has the nerve to tell China to hand him over.... they're still fucking laughing over there and in Russia....
if someone told us China was secretly recording everything and listening to everyone we'd be like "OH well they don't have freedom there.. what do you fucking expect?" but when it happens over here...
-
Snow - Informer
youtube.com/watch?v=Byh5k-m2SqI (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Byh5k-m2SqI)
A Licky boom-boom down.
-
Oh duh.
There was even a parody (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnMPQmIPibE) of this done about him.
Snow - Informer
youtube.com/watch?v=Byh5k-m2SqI (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Byh5k-m2SqI)
A Licky boom-boom down.
And Hutch, while I am totally with you on this, I did call this the "Snowden Playlist Thread" in Rhett's defense.
But at least he could have put forth the effort to find a song to add.
He could have gone the painfully obvious Leary route as displayed above or he could have used this classic Beck track. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNRB99tWz7c)
-
China is having a good laugh as is much of the world about America's hypocrisy.. and the US has the nerve to tell China to hand him over.... they're still fucking laughing over there and in Russia....
if someone told us China was secretly recording everything and listening to everyone we'd be like "OH well they don't have freedom there.. what do you fucking expect?" but when it happens over here...
not to mention this came out during xi jingping's first visit to US to meet with Barry
-
I'll admit, I didn't put much thought into posting my wife's off the cuff response to the title of this thread. i'll also admit, I didn't sit around and think deeply about what song titles I should pick to post in this thread, to make sure they agree with Ahmad's opinions and focus on the aspects that Hutch deems appropriate.
I would think that our freedom of speech (and lack of mention in the forum rules) would allow us to post an off the cuff comment like that without having to fear the retribution of namecalling and condescending lecturing. But I guess I thought wrong.
-
While I agree with you name calling is rampant on this forum, all of us need to look in the mirror on the issue. Of course hm just hope you recognize the reflection as you never know with the NSA these days.
-
beatles- back in the USSR
-
The Sweet Vandals - Our Leaders Are Liars
-
Paul McCartney - Spies Like Us
-
Eddie Money- Two Tickets to Paradise
-
I would think that our freedom of speech (and lack of mention in the forum rules) would allow us to post an off the cuff comment like that without having to fear the retribution of namecalling and condescending lecturing. But I guess I thought wrong.
uh, freedom of speech has nothing to do with freedom from name-calling. in fact, it's freedom of speech that ensures the right to name-call ;D
-
Journey-Escape
Journey-Separate Ways
Journey- Open Arms
-
Journey-Escape
Journey-Separate Ways
Journey- Open Arms
oh jeebus for a second there i thought this was the just announced thread.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail. I think 3 or 4 years would be appropiate punishment. Whether he agreed with a government policy is irrelevant as he agreed to keep the details secret when he got his clearance. Everyone should know that the government is recording calls after 9/11.
I don't know why people are defending the guy. Like I said this is why you don't hire guys who didn't graduate high school.
-
I don't think anyone disagrees that he broke the law. It is called civil disobedience. But charging him with espionage is absurd and was done specifically to send a message to any possible future whistleblowers. Same with Manning.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
-
If I was black, I'd punch you in the face for that comment.
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
-
I think there is a good chance he is a sociopath. why grant all those interviews? very strange for a whistleblower. Claims he did it so the NSA wouldn't off him....not so sure that is the real reason.
I'm conflicted...on one hand we need to know about stuff like this...but on the other hand....could have been handled better.
I also think its very strange that he talks about freedom, yet goes to 2 of the most restrictive countries ever when it comes to free speech.
I will say that it appears he did a much better job than Manning...who probably deserves everything he has coming to him.
-
it makes good television
end of story
-
His choice was to either go to a country that restricts free speech/would not extradite him or go to a freer country that would. I would go with the former in his position, too.
And what law that protects national security did he violate again? Any idiot could realize that the espionage charges are bullshit.
-
And creates a distration for the real issue at hand and gives blowhards like Graham a soapbox to stand on. There is a reason we have pesky things called courts...
-
it will make a great movie
this thread aint down with opp (original posters product)
-
It started so well too.
-
Forgot to address this earlier. He did one interview with Greenwald/Poitras and one AMA with the Guardian. What about that makes him a sociopath? Is he not entitled to say his piece at all?
And yeah, if he did not out himself, he probably would have disappeared forever already.
Edit: I guess there were a couple others. Still, that does not change the fact that he has a right to say his piece.
I think there is a good chance he is a sociopath. why grant all those interviews?
-
NSA featuring RuPaul - Computer Love
-
here azag, let us get this ship of shit back out of shallow seas
prince - america
kiss - get away
phish - final flight
flaming lips - the ego's last stand
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
-
Forgot to address this earlier. He did one interview with Greenwald/Poitras and one AMA with the Guardian. What about that makes him a sociopath? Is he not entitled to say his piece at all?
And yeah, if he did not out himself, he probably would have disappeared forever already.
Edit: I guess there were a couple others. Still, that does not change the fact that he has a right to say his piece.
I think there is a good chance he is a sociopath. why grant all those interviews?
Say his piece and then stay in the country and let a jury decide whether he deserves to serve jail time or not. Hiding in other countries? Come on.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
What if SCOTUS had upheld the law? Would you have been okay with that?
-
this thread is stupid - the other ones here
-
this thread is stupid - the other ones here
Yeah, pretty soon we'll be talking about our favorite airports. I wonder which one Snowden will land in?
Paul Pena - Jet Airliner
-
Well only two American Civilians have ever been executed for spying. So if Snowden is indeed tried and convicted as a spy, he should rot away at Club Fed like Edward Ames, a spy that caused real damage.
Rockwell - Somebody Is Watching Me.
The Kinks -Paranoia
-
Wrong song title
The Kinks - Destroyer
-
I need a fact checker due to old age - Aldrich Ames
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
What if SCOTUS had upheld the law? Would you have been okay with that?
What is the deal with your obsession with Rosa Parks. Rosa Parks did not get arrested and then go to Moscow. I think you are thinking of Lee Harvey Oswald.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
What if SCOTUS had upheld the law? Would you have been okay with that?
What is the deal with your obsession with Rosa Parks. Rosa Parks did not get arrested and then go to Moscow. I think you are thinking of Lee Harvey Oswald.
You said "He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail." Therefore, it follows that you believe that anybody that breaks a law deserves punishment. Rosa Parks broke a law. Did she deserve to be punished for it? Going by your assertion about breaking laws and punishment, it follows that you would also believe that she deserved punishment. But I don't think you actually believe that. Somewhere, you believe that there is a difference between breaking just laws and unjust laws, and that you have your own opinion as to what laws are just and unjust, i.e. you don't simply follow what SCOTUS determines to be constitutional or not. You don't really believe that we live in a this-or-that world and you are capable of nuance. Or am I wrong about you?
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
and you think PRISM is constitutional?
same same.
-
I guess people here would want Harriet Tubman behind bars too..
-
new week, new person telling tommyfresh he's stupid.
-
I guess people here would want Harriet Tubman behind bars too..
Pssst. Harriet Tubman is underground.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
and you think PRISM is constitutional?
same same.
If it is unconstitutional he should stay in the USA and fight the charges. He has no desire to do that and is trying to go to countries that do much worse things than our PRISM program. So he is a hypocrit as well. I hope they catch him and I hope he does hard time.
As for you guys I don't know why you were so against the Obama programs. You voted for him. I told you he was too conservative and I did not vote for him. You should be the ones supporting the programs.
-
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
FACT: Rosa Parks did NOT break the law!!!
Please know the facts before you use her as a (very bad) example!
"According to the law, no passenger would be required to move or give up his seat and stand if the bus was crowded and no other seats were available."
"The police charged her with violating the part of the Montgomery City code that dealt with segregation law, even though she had not technically violated the law. The ironic part of her arrest was that as the officer was taking her away she asked him why the police would take part in such wrong behavior. His answer amazed her when he said, "I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
http://www.rosaparksfacts.com/rosa-parks-civil-rights-movement.php#rosa-parks-arrest (http://www.rosaparksfacts.com/rosa-parks-civil-rights-movement.php#rosa-parks-arrest)
-
During World War II Supreme Court declared the internment of Americans of Japanese descent constitutional.....
-
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
FACT: Rosa Parks did NOT break the law!!!
Please know the facts before you use her as a (very bad) example!
"According to the law, no passenger would be required to move or give up his seat and stand if the bus was crowded and no other seats were available."
"The police charged her with violating the part of the Montgomery City code that dealt with segregation law, even though she had not technically violated the law. The ironic part of her arrest was that as the officer was taking her away she asked him why the police would take part in such wrong behavior. His answer amazed her when he said, "I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
http://www.rosaparksfacts.com/rosa-parks-civil-rights-movement.php#rosa-parks-arrest (http://www.rosaparksfacts.com/rosa-parks-civil-rights-movement.php#rosa-parks-arrest)
Thank you for the correction but I wouldn't go so far as to cite it as a "very bad" example. It's widely believed that Parks was arrested because she broke the law at the time. And the cop quote further illustrates to the stupidity of "the law's the law" cliché.
-
During World War II Supreme Court declared the internment of Americans of Japanese descent constitutional.....
What does any of this have to do with the current case. Laws regarding secret documents are valid laws. My mother used to do that for a living and had a top secret clearance. She couldn't even discuss anything about them with me. What is so hard about that law? If you don't like the law don't get a job working for the NSA. If you find something that you think needs to be released to the nation than you shouldn't be leaving the country with the secret documents. You need to stay here and face the consequences. Realize he wanted to release more documents in the paper but they declined. Realize this guy is a traitor not a hero. I don't think he should be executed but a few years in a tough federal prison should do the trick.
Stop comparing him to people he is nothing like. He is like Lee Harvey Oswald. He left the country to go to our enemies.
-
He broke the law so he deserves to go to jail.
So you would have thrown Rosa Parks in jail? Even high school dropouts know that's wrong.
So you believe laws protecting national security are wrong and are comparable to racism in the US South in the 1960's?
My question wasn't about national security. It was about whether or not all law breaking should be punished. Rosa Parks broke the law. Should she have been punished?
Well do you think serial killers should be punished? If we don't prosecute people who divulge national security secrets than we should get rid of the whole NSA and CIA and save a lot of money.
Again, avoiding the question. Should Rosa Parks have been punished for breaking the law?
She sat on the wrong seat on the bus. Sure they can prosecute her all they want if that is the law. The problem is the law was unconstitutional. Prosecute her and then lose in the supreme court that works for me.
and you think PRISM is constitutional?
same same.
If it is unconstitutional he should stay in the USA and fight the charges. He has no desire to do that and is trying to go to countries that do much worse things than our PRISM program. So he is a hypocrit as well. I hope they catch him and I hope he does hard time.
As for you guys I don't know why you were so against the Obama programs. You voted for him. I told you he was too conservative and I did not vote for him. You should be the ones supporting the programs.
Not all of us voted for Obama in '12. And if you think he would have received a fair trial here given the way this DOJ has dealt with whistleblowers, you are delusional. It would definitely throw you from troll level into batshit crazy territory.
-
During World War II Supreme Court declared the internment of Americans of Japanese descent constitutional.....
What does any of this have to do with the current case. Laws regarding secret documents are valid laws. My mother used to do that for a living and had a top secret clearance. She couldn't even discuss anything about them with me. What is so hard about that law? If you don't like the law don't get a job working for the NSA. If you find something that you think needs to be released to the nation than you shouldn't be leaving the country with the secret documents. You need to stay here and face the consequences. Realize he wanted to release more documents in the paper but they declined. Realize this guy is a traitor not a hero. I don't think he should be executed but a few years in a tough federal prison should do the trick.
Stop comparing him to people he is nothing like. He is like Lee Harvey Oswald. He left the country to go to our enemies.
So did you think Dan Ellsberg deserved to go to prison, too? He did pretty much the same.
-
During World War II Supreme Court declared the internment of Americans of Japanese descent constitutional.....
What does any of this have to do with the current case. Laws regarding secret documents are valid laws. My mother used to do that for a living and had a top secret clearance. She couldn't even discuss anything about them with me. What is so hard about that law? If you don't like the law don't get a job working for the NSA. If you find something that you think needs to be released to the nation than you shouldn't be leaving the country with the secret documents. You need to stay here and face the consequences. Realize he wanted to release more documents in the paper but they declined. Realize this guy is a traitor not a hero. I don't think he should be executed but a few years in a tough federal prison should do the trick.
Stop comparing him to people he is nothing like. He is like Lee Harvey Oswald. He left the country to go to our enemies.
please point me to the law that says the government can record all my conversations/track all my internet activity and listen in on my calls without a warrant.
seriously. please do.
but even if this law you claim exists does exist (which I do not accept unless you can show me to the contrary) then the law must be changed.
-
During World War II Supreme Court declared the internment of Americans of Japanese descent constitutional.....
What does any of this have to do with the current case. Laws regarding secret documents are valid laws. My mother used to do that for a living and had a top secret clearance. She couldn't even discuss anything about them with me. What is so hard about that law? If you don't like the law don't get a job working for the NSA. If you find something that you think needs to be released to the nation than you shouldn't be leaving the country with the secret documents. You need to stay here and face the consequences. Realize he wanted to release more documents in the paper but they declined. Realize this guy is a traitor not a hero. I don't think he should be executed but a few years in a tough federal prison should do the trick.
Stop comparing him to people he is nothing like. He is like Lee Harvey Oswald. He left the country to go to our enemies.
please point me to the law that says the government can record all my conversations/track all my internet activity and listen in on my calls without a warrant.
seriously. please do.
but even if this law you claim exists does exist (which I do not accept unless you can show me to the contrary) then the law must be changed.
The government can listen to the calls but they can't use them against you in court unless they get a warrant. I assume. Did you think what you did on the Internet was private?
-
and you think PRISM is constitutional?
same same.
If it is unconstitutional he should stay in the USA and fight the charges. He has no desire to do that and is trying to go to countries that do much worse things than our PRISM program. So he is a hypocrit as well. I hope they catch him and I hope he does hard time.
As for you guys I don't know why you were so against the Obama programs. You voted for him. I told you he was too conservative and I did not vote for him. You should be the ones supporting the programs.
thanks to the patriot act and executive orders, the constitution is now a secondary concern. it's also why he was charged with espionage and not breach of contract. his court case can now be behind closed doors because of "national security concerns".
and newsflash: PRISM is a Bush-era program, it started in 2007 (AKA before Obama was elected). it is disgusting that Obama hasn't rescinded it, but to call them "Obama programs" is disingenuous.
The government can listen to the calls but they can't use them against you in court unless they get a warrant. I assume.
you've proven yourself to be misinformed on a lot of things, so you'll forgive me for not trusting what you assume.
one of the concepts of our legal system is "innocent until proven guilty". the government can't listen to whatever it wants, "just in case", and then retroactively get a warrant to use stuff it wasn't allowed to collect in the first place. the innocent should not have to give up their rights to catch the guilty.
-
Thank you for the correction but I wouldn't go so far as to cite it as a "very bad" example. It's widely believed that Parks was arrested because she broke the law at the time. And the cop quote further illustrates to the stupidity of "the law's the law" cliché.
It IS a very bad example because it's not true. She didn't break a law.
A fallacy cannot be used as an example of fact.
Stupid clichés remain until they are ended confronted with the facts. Just because you think 'it's widely believed' doesn't make it fit into the realm of reality.
-
During World War II Supreme Court declared the internment of Americans of Japanese descent constitutional.....
What does any of this have to do with the current case. Laws regarding secret documents are valid laws. My mother used to do that for a living and had a top secret clearance. She couldn't even discuss anything about them with me. What is so hard about that law? If you don't like the law don't get a job working for the NSA. If you find something that you think needs to be released to the nation than you shouldn't be leaving the country with the secret documents. You need to stay here and face the consequences. Realize he wanted to release more documents in the paper but they declined. Realize this guy is a traitor not a hero. I don't think he should be executed but a few years in a tough federal prison should do the trick.
Stop comparing him to people he is nothing like. He is like Lee Harvey Oswald. He left the country to go to our enemies.
please point me to the law that says the government can record all my conversations/track all my internet activity and listen in on my calls without a warrant.
seriously. please do.
but even if this law you claim exists does exist (which I do not accept unless you can show me to the contrary) then the law must be changed.
The government can listen to the calls but they can't use them against you in court unless they get a warrant. I assume. Did you think what you did on the Internet was private?
you're just talking out of your ass ... point me to the law that gives the US federal government the authority- and also point me to the Supreme Court decision that upholds the law as constitutional- to record all calls, track all internet activity, etc etc and have people listen in on my calls without a warrant.
I seriously want you to do that otherwise I'll conclude you don't know what you're talking about.
-
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
-
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
But doesn't all of that fall into the category of a warrantless search? It's not like they suspect you. They're just searching you in case you're doing something wrong - or in case you ever do.
-
you're just talking out of your ass ... point me to the law that gives the US federal government the authority- and also point me to the Supreme Court decision that upholds the law as constitutional- to record all calls, track all internet activity, etc etc and have people listen in on my calls without a warrant.
I seriously want you to do that otherwise I'll conclude you don't know what you're talking about.
Not defending him but I think he's talking about the whole NSA intelligence industrial complex and not specific laws ...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/23/nsa-intelligence-industrial-complex-abuse (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/23/nsa-intelligence-industrial-complex-abuse)
-
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
This is just a variation on the "well, if you're doing nothing wrong... you should have nothing to worry about, right?"
-
I just said I don't have a problem with it. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not commenting on the legality of it.
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
But doesn't all of that fall into the category of a warrantless search? It's not like they suspect you. They're just searching you in case you're doing something wrong - or in case you ever do.
-
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
i get what you're saying, my emails and phone conversations aren't that interesting either. however, it says a lot about a society and how its government regards its citizens. this is a variation on the "if you've got nothing to hide you'll have nothing to fear" argument, which has been torn to shreds by many:
- http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/
- http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110524/00084614407/privacy-is-not-secrecy-debunking-if-youve-got-nothing-to-hide-argument.shtml
- http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/02/debunking-a-myth-if-you-have-n.html
- http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
- http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/19/debunking-the-dangerous-nothing-to-hide-nothing-to-fear/
etc...
-
the next step to the if you've done nothing wrong is the "well he must have done something.."
it really is a slippery slope...
-
Kind of a shame there's a few bad apples who have to go and "spoil" it for us all. So how do you propose they stop the bad apples from doing bad things, like blowing shit up?
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
i get what you're saying, my emails and phone conversations aren't that interesting either. however, it says a lot about a society and how its government regards its citizens. this is a variation on the "if you've got nothing to hide you'll have nothing to fear" argument, which has been torn to shreds by many:
- http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/
- http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110524/00084614407/privacy-is-not-secrecy-debunking-if-youve-got-nothing-to-hide-argument.shtml
- http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/02/debunking-a-myth-if-you-have-n.html
- http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
- http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/19/debunking-the-dangerous-nothing-to-hide-nothing-to-fear/
etc...
-
Kind of a shame there's a few bad apples who have to go and "spoil" it for us all. So how do you propose they stop the bad apples from doing bad things, like blowing shit up?
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
i get what you're saying, my emails and phone conversations aren't that interesting either. however, it says a lot about a society and how its government regards its citizens. this is a variation on the "if you've got nothing to hide you'll have nothing to fear" argument, which has been torn to shreds by many:
- http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/
- http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110524/00084614407/privacy-is-not-secrecy-debunking-if-youve-got-nothing-to-hide-argument.shtml
- http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/02/debunking-a-myth-if-you-have-n.html
- http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
- http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/19/debunking-the-dangerous-nothing-to-hide-nothing-to-fear/
etc...
ah the assumption that this is really preventing stuff from being blown up.. why? because the head of the National Spy Agency told you so?
I seem to recall all the blacklists of "communists" in the 50s, all the ruines innocent lives, were also to protect our national security..
protect me as best as you can while respecting my rights...once you trample on them what exactly are you protecting? My right to live an unfree life freely???
-
I'd rather them know what beer my brother is drinking than have someone blow up the government building I'm working in.
Kind of a shame there's a few bad apples who have to go and "spoil" it for us all. So how do you propose they stop the bad apples from doing bad things, like blowing shit up?
I actually don't have a problem with the government monitoring my phone and internet conversations. Why would they even care about a conversation I had with my brother about beer, or about what my mom said when she was blathering on about American Idol? It's not like they are sitting there listening to every word anyway. Their ears would only perk up if someone uttered some kind of terrorist bullshit keywords. Which doesn't happen.
i get what you're saying, my emails and phone conversations aren't that interesting either. however, it says a lot about a society and how its government regards its citizens. this is a variation on the "if you've got nothing to hide you'll have nothing to fear" argument, which has been torn to shreds by many:
- http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/
- http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110524/00084614407/privacy-is-not-secrecy-debunking-if-youve-got-nothing-to-hide-argument.shtml
- http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/02/debunking-a-myth-if-you-have-n.html
- http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
- http://falkvinge.net/2012/07/19/debunking-the-dangerous-nothing-to-hide-nothing-to-fear/
etc...
ah the assumption that this is really preventing stuff from being blown up.. why? because the head of the National Spy Agency told you so?
I seem to recall all the blacklists of "communists" in the 50s, all the ruines innocent lives, were also to protect our national security..
protect me as best as you can while respecting my rights...once you trample on them what exactly are you protecting? My right to live an unfree life freely???
-
I'd rather them know what beer my brother is drinking than have someone blow up the government building I'm working in.
you think them knowing what beer your brother is drinking is going to prevent your building from being blown up?
;D
-
It is really amazing how afraid people are.. they will give up their rights because they fear death... they have no problem having others die for them though...others dying to protect those same rights they willing give up.....
I don't mind dying as long as I'm living free. The Government has no business knowing what I talk bout or what I do on the internet.. not unless they can show probable cause..... And lets get this straight: spying on ME is somehow going to prevent some Saudi terrorist from blowing ME up? The whole thing is laughable and I am sorry for people that buy this false choice "rationale"... that you can only be safe if you give up your rights or something.....
-
I'd rather them know what beer my brother is drinking than have someone blow up the government building I'm working in.
you think them knowing what beer your brother is drinking is going to prevent your building from being blown up?
;D
Only communists drink [insert brand] beer! /McCarthy hearing/
-
Must suck living a life in which you think there are boogiemen wishing to blow you up lurking around every corner. "They have already won" (as they say) if you go around with that fear and are willing to compromise basic civil liberties because of it.
-
Might suck for you, but as I have already said, I'm perfectly happy with the arrangement. As long as nobody in my family gets blown up, the government can know what kind of beers my brother drinks and what my mom thinks of American Idol.
Must suck living a life in which you think there are boogiemen wishing to blow you up lurking around every corner. "They have already won" (as they say) if you go around with that fear and are willing to compromise basic civil liberties because of it.
-
So you are happy to give up basic civil liberties in return for a false sense of security. Got it.
-
I have to go through an x-ray machine every time I enter my workplace. I'm willing to do that to keep somebody out who may have a bomb strapped to them. What's the difference?
So you are happy to give up basic civil liberties in return for a false sense of security. Got it.
-
the kicker is that while the government doesn't tell you all the ways they will illegally violate your rights many of the things they really could be doing to prevent terrorism they will not do..
because the way to prevent terrorism is not to move towards creating a police state (which is where this pretty much is right now)..its like, you know, stop buying oil from the Saudis to prop up that piece of shit "government" or, you know, stop being Israel's bitch... it may not seem to you you are Israel's bitch but you are Israel's bitch and, you know, the world gets it.. you may not get it over here where you can't walk three blocks without seeing some Israeli propaganda about the next war we should get into, you know, over there, you know, really far from over here, you know, cause they can't do it with, you know, the money and technology, you know, we give them.. so yeah, is Iran the bad guy or is it Syria this week, who the fuck knows anymore, well, you know, whoever's botherin', you know, Israel but, you know, the rest of the world gets that but over here we're spying on our own people cause, yeah, that is the way to prevent terrorism.. well whatever helps you sleep at night mate... basically the American people seem like a bunch of cowed pussies on this one and the government very cleverly will continue to play the fear card scaring and lying and telling you- hey its either you let us violate your rights or they'll blow up your government building...
-
the kicker is that while the government doesn't tell you all the ways they will illegally violate your rights many of the things they really could be doing to prevent terrorism they will not do..
because the way to prevent terrorism is not to move towards creating a police state (which is where this pretty much is right now)..its like, you know, stop buying oil from the Saudis to prop up that piece of shit "government" or, you know, stop being Israel's bitch... it may not seem to you you are Israel's bitch but you are Israel's bitch and, you know, the world gets it.. you may not get it over here where you can't walk three blocks without seeing some Israeli propaganda about the next war we should get into, you know, over there, you know, really far from over here, you know, cause they can't do it with, you know, the money and technology, you know, we give them.. so yeah, is Iran the bad guy or is it Syria this week, who the fuck knows anymore, well, you know, whoever's botherin', you know, Israel but, you know, the rest of the world gets that but over here we're spying on our own people cause, yeah, that is the way to prevent terrorism.. well whatever helps you sleep at night mate... basically the American people seem like a bunch of cowed pussies on this one and the government very cleverly will continue to play the fear card scaring and lying and telling you- hey its either you let us violate your rights or they'll blow up your government building...
Strange coming from someone who voted for Obama twice. Should have voted Green Party with me.
-
the kicker is that while the government doesn't tell you all the ways they will illegally violate your rights many of the things they really could be doing to prevent terrorism they will not do..
because the way to prevent terrorism is not to move towards creating a police state (which is where this pretty much is right now)..its like, you know, stop buying oil from the Saudis to prop up that piece of shit "government" or, you know, stop being Israel's bitch... it may not seem to you you are Israel's bitch but you are Israel's bitch and, you know, the world gets it.. you may not get it over here where you can't walk three blocks without seeing some Israeli propaganda about the next war we should get into, you know, over there, you know, really far from over here, you know, cause they can't do it with, you know, the money and technology, you know, we give them.. so yeah, is Iran the bad guy or is it Syria this week, who the fuck knows anymore, well, you know, whoever's botherin', you know, Israel but, you know, the rest of the world gets that but over here we're spying on our own people cause, yeah, that is the way to prevent terrorism.. well whatever helps you sleep at night mate... basically the American people seem like a bunch of cowed pussies on this one and the government very cleverly will continue to play the fear card scaring and lying and telling you- hey its either you let us violate your rights or they'll blow up your government building...
Strange coming from someone who voted for Obama twice. Should have voted Green Party with me.
yeah, how did your Green Party do man? I only remember blue and red on election night?
-
James Ford must have clocked out of his government job cause he hasn't commented in, oh, you know, 20 minutes.... it is past 4.
-
the american people are so blind to the luxuries, yes full on flat out fucking luxuries, that you have everyday. your home, your bed, your running water bathrooms, your jobs, your cars, your toys, your food, your fun, your life, your roads, your hospitals, your vacations, your concerts, your clothes, your water, your electricity, your freedom of speech and expression, your freedom to invent and to create, your freedom to explore and be who you are, your freedom to type on a computer and have your voice heard, your freedom to not like this or love that, your freedom to be with who you want, the freedom to non conform . . . .
you cannot have everything in freedom, or freedom would not work. nothing exists with one side to only answer to, for with every evil there is an every good, every con with every pro, every yang to every ying. it is how it works, so accept it and be lucky you live in a country where you have the freedom to openly question it, to make those everys a better thing.
the end
-
the american people are so blind to the luxuries, yes full on flat out fucking luxuries, that you have everyday. your home, your bed, your running water bathrooms, your jobs, your cars, your toys, your food, your fun, your life, your roads, your hospitals, your vacations, your concerts, your clothes, your water, your electricity, your freedom of speech and expression, your freedom to invent and to create, your freedom to explore and be who you are, your freedom to type on a computer and have your voice heard, your freedom to not like this or love that, your freedom to be with who you want, the freedom to non conform . . . .
you cannot have everything in freedom, or freedom would not work. nothing exists with one side to only answer to, for with every evil there is an every good, every con with every pro, every yang to every ying. it is how it works, so accept it and be lucky you live in a country where you have the freedom to openly question it, to make those everys a better thing.
the end
freedom isn't free!
so we can't really be free.. we must be partially free?
i am confused... i thought they hated us cause of our freedom or something? but we don't have freedom cause of the ying yang pro con?
but America is still the best right..right.. RIGHT?
NUMBER ONE BABY!
-
yes . . . america is still the best, but arent we all a little biased when it comes to such statements. im sure people throwing another koala on the barbie will claim the land down under to be the best. and yes, freedom has never been free, and taxes prove that.
-
well that's a relief..
-
the kicker is that while the government doesn't tell you all the ways they will illegally violate your rights many of the things they really could be doing to prevent terrorism they will not do..
because the way to prevent terrorism is not to move towards creating a police state (which is where this pretty much is right now)..its like, you know, stop buying oil from the Saudis to prop up that piece of shit "government" or, you know, stop being Israel's bitch... it may not seem to you you are Israel's bitch but you are Israel's bitch and, you know, the world gets it.. you may not get it over here where you can't walk three blocks without seeing some Israeli propaganda about the next war we should get into, you know, over there, you know, really far from over here, you know, cause they can't do it with, you know, the money and technology, you know, we give them.. so yeah, is Iran the bad guy or is it Syria this week, who the fuck knows anymore, well, you know, whoever's botherin', you know, Israel but, you know, the rest of the world gets that but over here we're spying on our own people cause, yeah, that is the way to prevent terrorism.. well whatever helps you sleep at night mate... basically the American people seem like a bunch of cowed pussies on this one and the government very cleverly will continue to play the fear card scaring and lying and telling you- hey its either you let us violate your rights or they'll blow up your government building...
Strange coming from someone who voted for Obama twice. Should have voted Green Party with me.
yeah, how did your Green Party do man? I only remember blue and red on election night?
They came in third because people like you deserted us to vote in candidates that had zero in common with you politically because you thought a win was more important than doing what was right.,
-
There is also the sending flying robots to bomb impoverished villages thing.
If anything, that breeds many more terrorists than it stamps out and that shoe has yet to drop.
the kicker is that while the government doesn't tell you all the ways they will illegally violate your rights many of the things they really could be doing to prevent terrorism they will not do..
because the way to prevent terrorism is not to move towards creating a police state (which is where this pretty much is right now)..its like, you know, stop buying oil from the Saudis to prop up that piece of shit "government" or, you know, stop being Israel's bitch... it may not seem to you you are Israel's bitch but you are Israel's bitch and, you know, the world gets it.. you may not get it over here where you can't walk three blocks without seeing some Israeli propaganda about the next war we should get into, you know, over there, you know, really far from over here, you know, cause they can't do it with, you know, the money and technology, you know, we give them.. so yeah, is Iran the bad guy or is it Syria this week, who the fuck knows anymore, well, you know, whoever's botherin', you know, Israel but, you know, the rest of the world gets that but over here we're spying on our own people cause, yeah, that is the way to prevent terrorism.. well whatever helps you sleep at night mate... basically the American people seem like a bunch of cowed pussies on this one and the government very cleverly will continue to play the fear card scaring and lying and telling you- hey its either you let us violate your rights or they'll blow up your government building...
-
You got it right. 7:30-4:15, when I clock out to go pick up my daughter and take her home and cook our dinners. Except on Friday, when I stay late. Got it straight?
James Ford must have clocked out of his government job cause he hasn't commented in, oh, you know, 20 minutes.... it is past 4.
-
You got it right. 7:30-4:15, when I clock out to go pick up my daughter and take her home and cook our dinners. Except on Friday, when I stay late. Got it straight?
James Ford must have clocked out of his government job cause he hasn't commented in, oh, you know, 20 minutes.... it is past 4.
You are at work an hour before I wake up. No wonder youre so angry.
-
Cool.. Now I know when to wander over to JF's desk, so I can cover it in tin foil
-
You got it right. 7:30-4:15, when I clock out to go pick up my daughter and take her home and cook our dinners. Except on Friday, when I stay late. Got it straight?
James Ford must have clocked out of his government job cause he hasn't commented in, oh, you know, 20 minutes.... it is past 4.
so you spend your days posting your stupidities on this board on the taxpayer's dime. nice work if you can get it.
-
Something tells me i'm not the only one. And yet, I still get an impressive amount of work done. At least I'm not spending my work time posting on this board, AND buying concert tickets online.
;D
You got it right. 7:30-4:15, when I clock out to go pick up my daughter and take her home and cook our dinners. Except on Friday, when I stay late. Got it straight?
James Ford must have clocked out of his government job cause he hasn't commented in, oh, you know, 20 minutes.... it is past 4.
so you spend your days posting your stupidities on this board on the taxpayer's dime. nice work if you can get it.
-
Something tells me i'm not the only one. And yet, I still get an impressive amount of work done. At least I'm not spending my work time posting on this board, AND buying concert tickets online.
;D
You got it right. 7:30-4:15, when I clock out to go pick up my daughter and take her home and cook our dinners. Except on Friday, when I stay late. Got it straight?
James Ford must have clocked out of his government job cause he hasn't commented in, oh, you know, 20 minutes.... it is past 4.
so you spend your days posting your stupidities on this board on the taxpayer's dime. nice work if you can get it.
Does the government have ticketfly's website blocked? Oh well time to go home.
-
Actually upon further thought I will use Plastic Wrap for JF's desk since he has nothing to hide
-
You are at work an hour before I wake up. No wonder youre so angry.
You have no idea what Rhett was like when he was angry....
-
Really, was I that bad?
You haven't seen angry until you've seen my wife in action! yowza.
You are at work an hour before I wake up. No wonder youre so angry.
You have no idea what Rhett was like when he was angry....