More Spying Revealed: - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Botnst · #31 05-12-2006, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackE55

I'm moving to Mexico.

Applying for guest-worker status?

boneheaddoctor · #32 05-12-2006, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackE55

I'm moving to Mexico.

try it as an illegal and report back just how humaine they are towards illegals down there.

Botnst · #33 05-12-2006, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackE55

If knocking around little white balls, ....

Oh, meeting some brothers from San Francisco, are you?

boneheaddoctor · #34 05-12-2006, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackE55

Err... yeah. Rule of law is somewhat up to interpretation in Meh-eeco.

well the written laws on illegals are VERY harsh down there.....funny since their fool in charge seems to thing we are obligated to employ and support any of his people that wish to break our laws. And the fact they have reputation for such honorable and trustworthy law enforcement types there is legendary...

Botnst · #35 05-12-2006, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackE55

What happpend to Trotsky? Possibly the same should be done with that person in charge.

Lenin was picking on him.

Matt L · #36 05-12-2006, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

how about the fact we have people trying to defend the privacy of the criminal element? THats what makes me feel unsafe. What are these people trying to hide..are they in cohoots with this element?

If I keep responding to your posts, you might think I'm picking on you. I might too, but trust me, I'm not.

With this comment, you seem to have forgotten that there was plenty of nefarious spying targetting not criminals, but those who were politically opposed to the then-current adminstrations.

Clinton was accused of this, as was Nixon. It may have been true in both instances. This is exactly why this erosion of liberties is so important. You do have something to hide.

kbannister · #37 05-12-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GermanStar

This thread has been totally political from its inception, so there's no way you could do that.

I could be wrong, but wasn't this country forged on a principle that our freedoms and values are more important than our lives? Our government rolled over by eroding and compromising those freedoms through obscenities like the Patriot Act.

So how do we protect our freedoms and values if we are going tie the hands of any government charged with the protection of its citizens? I not talking about home searches or unauthorized wire tapping etc.

In 2000, I believe, a couple of rival motorcycle gangs got into it. You may have heard about some Hells Angels being shot in a casino in LV. Well it spread pretty much across the country. I do a lot of riding and like to get to some of the bigger rallys, Laconia, Sturgis etc. The following year a couple of shootings happened in Laconia, same gangs, later a rider was gunned down (a Grandfather out for a Sunday ride) and it went on. We went to Sturgis that year and were at a rest stop when some SD State Police came rolling in. They came over to us and asked the usual questions then got into "do you have any weapons?", "may we search your bike?". Well one of my buddies who is really the hard core type went ballistic. THEY ARE TRYING TO INVADE MY FREEDOM. I'm like Dude, go ahead and search me too if you want. They later told us they had a tip that there was going to me more trouble and they were attempting to stop it.

Again, all my buddy wanted to do was yell freedom, freedom. I'm saying if you need to search me and anybody else to protect my freedom of riding down the road and not being shot, go for it.

So if we tie their hands, do you think that maybe the terrorists of the world would be smart enough to figure that out and exploite it?

boneheaddoctor · #38 05-12-2006, 02:06 PM

Well phone records are not on the level of Filegate...The stuff they had NO legal right having and lied about as proven when they turned up in the White house residence. A place that is highly restricted for access and every person who stepped in there can be proven by date tiem adn duration as well.

Yet 9 months after the court order to turn them over they turn up gess where. And permember that NOTHING and I mean NOTHING was ever done about it.

Those ammounted to a dossier used for political purposes by people who had no legal right to have them under the law.

However it has been previously ruled by court case and therefore precident that you do NOT have an expected right to privacy of records about who you called, and therefore no court order is needed. My personal belief is ALL calls made to the middle east SHOULD be listened in on. Since it is that ethnic group who has been proven to be the most likely to be a terrorist or terrorism supporter.

THe right to privacy is not all encompassing. There are many things you do NOT have the right to privacy about. And you do not have the right to associate with the criminal element and plan crimes. Just as freedom of speech doesn't allow you to say anything anywhere at any time.

Botnst · #39 05-12-2006, 02:19 PM

I just heard Limbaugh offer a bit of info I hadn't heard before. Try this: Google the words phone records. You'll quickly see why this is a non-issue. If indeed, all the NSA is doing is logging phone records.

And that's why we need Congressional oversight, to make sure that the Exec stays within bounds.

mikemover · #40 05-12-2006, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

I think the only people worried about phone records are the people who were up to no good. Personally I have nothing to worry about because I was not making calls to people doing things I was not supposed to e doing.

That is entirely NOT the point. And that "well, it's OK because I'm not up to anything anyway" kind of thinking is exactly the mindset that allows them to slowly chip away at your civil liberties, one bit at a time.

By the time this nation of couch-potatoes look up from their nightly extra-cheese pizza and American Idol watching and notices that something is amiss.... it may be too late.

Mike

boneheaddoctor · #41 05-12-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikemover

That is entirely NOT the point. And that "well, it's OK because I'm not up to anything anyway" kind of thinking is exactly the mindset that allows them to slowly chip away at your civil liberties, one bit at a time.

By the time this nation of couch-potatoes look up from their nightly extra-cheese pizza and American Idol watching and notices that something is amiss.... it may be too late.

Mike

really, there is a legal case that proves phone records are not private. Why would someone be affraid of someone knowing who they have been calling? Perhaps people who are supporting the phone sex business? or those up to no good.

mikemover · #42 05-12-2006, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

really, there is a legal case that proves phone records are not private. Why would someone be affraid of someone knowing who they have been calling? Perhaps people who are supporting the phone sex business? or those up to no good.

Once again, you have missed the point entirely.

I'm not afraid of anyone knowing who I call.

I'm afraid of the mindset and the concept or allowing it in the first place.

Invasion of privacy. Erosion of civil liberties. It's another slippery slope, and we are standing at the top of far too many of those at present.

Also, I didn't say anything about the legality of the government acquiring phone records.

But now I will.....

In all likelihood, it will be proven to be legal under current laws and precedent.

But just because something is currently legal doesn't mean that it SHOULD be. And vice-versa.

Just keep listening to Rush Limbaugh and watching reruns of Survivor, and I'm sure everything will be fine.

Mike

boneheaddoctor · #43 05-12-2006, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikemover

Once again, you have missed the point entirely.

I'm not afraid of anyone knowing who I call.

I'm afraid of the mindset and the concept or allowing it in the first place.

Invasion of privacy. Erosion of civil liberties. It's another slippery slope, and we are standing at the top of far too many of those at present.

Also, I didn't say anything about the legality of the government acquiring phone records.

But now I will.....

In all likelihood, it will be proven to be legal under current laws and precedent.

But just because something is currently legal doesn't mean that it SHOULD be. And vice-versa.

Just keep listening to Rush Limbaugh and watching reruns of Survivor, and I'm sure everything will be fine.

Mike

The fact that the American Criminal Liberties Union has problems with it speaks volumes....they try to give rights to non-americans and pick the wrong side of nearly every argument.

Thats enough reason for me to believe its the right thing to be doing.

After all the feds have your income tax returns......a list of phone calls you make is totally benign in comparison.

mikemover · #44 05-12-2006, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

The fact that the American Criminal Liberties Union has problems with it speaks volumes....they try to give rights to non-americans and pick the wrong side of nearly every argument.

Thats enough reason for me to believe its the right thing to be doing.

After all the feds have your income tax returns......a list of phone calls you make is totally benign in comparison.

Yes, they do have my tax returns. I have a problem with that too, which is why I advocate the FairTax plan instead.

Your knee-jerk reaction to EVERYTHING is really quite tiresome... I don't know why I bother.

But here goes....

The ACLU is not the villainous organization that you and Rush like to pretend they are... Yes, they come down on the wrong side of certain issues, but then again.... so do YOU. They have also fought for the "good guys" in countless situations. If you'd bother to Google it and do a little homework you would learn this, and you would find at least as many reasons to like them as reasons to dislike them, if not more.

But I'm pretty confident that you're not interested in the FACTS, so.... Just keep up the distraction-tactics... It seems to be working for you.

Mike

raymr · #45 05-12-2006, 05:13 PM

In the distant past, smoke signals, use of semaphores, telegraph, and the early days of party line telephones involved participation of at least a third party and were wide open to interception. There was no such thing as a private communication channel except letter writing.

Only with the advent of automated phone equipment decades later was there even a hint of implied privacy. Whether we call it progress or just a by-product of technology, people have come to expect it as a given right, even though the concept of telephone privacy really represents a small time frame of history.

Looks like we are just coming full circle.