We lose more privacy when we down-load Angry Birds

Hello again, tom:

Quote:

---

we lose more privacy when we down-load Angry Birds

---

Spoken like a fellow who SUPPORTS the government invasion of our privacy.

Some of us love the ENTIRE Bill of Rights. Others, pick.

Excon

If you saw what Angry Birds data mines you would reconsider .

Hello again, tom:

I don't know who angry birds are, and I don't care. In any case, it's up to ME to guard my privacy against anybody BUT the government... Supposedly we have a CONSTITUTION for that.

But, you AGAIN, seem to be perfectly COMFORTABLE with THAT violation of your rights.. I mean, if angry birds can do it, why shouldn't the NSA?

Your logic escapes me... Ok, NO it doesn't... I know who you are. ANY violation of our rights that the COP side of government does, is just hunky dory. But violate a right you LIKE, and Obama is trying to be king.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yeah Carter made a mistake. He should've completely ignored them like Obama did this week.

---

Or Reagan did in Lebanon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

I don't know who angry birds are, and I don't care. In any case, it's up to ME to guard my privacy against anybody BUT the government... Supposedly we have a CONSTITUTION for that.

But, you AGAIN, seem to be perfectly COMFORTABLE with THAT violation of your rights.. I mean, if angry birds can do it, why shouldn't the NSA?

Your logic escapes me... Ok, NO it doesn't... I know who you are. ANY violation of our rights that the COP side of government does, is just hunky dory. But violate a right you LIKE, and Obama is trying to be king.

excon

---

I think you are spot on Ex I think paleface talk out of the left side of his mouth

Just so we understand... the eavesdropping happens to jihadists inside the country ;and yes I support it . I would also support the concept that jihadists in the country should not have second amendment rights either .

Hello again, tom:

Quote:

---

just so we understand... the eavesdropping happens to jihadists inside the country ;and yes I support it .

---

So, you TRUST the government. That's not very right wing of you... Oh, yeah.. This is the COP side of government.. These government workers ARE to be trusted, as opposed to ANY other government worker.

Bwa, ha ha ha ha... He he he he... Ha ha ha.

Excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

just so we understand ... the eavesdropping happens to jihadists inside the country ;and yes I support it . I would also support the concept that jihadists in the country should not have second amendment rights either .

---

Jihadists "in the country" where do you find these people? Tom, I know in mosques. So now you are saying you can have those who are protected by the constitution and those who are not. There seems to be a strange resemblance in your policies of late to those of the third reich.

Tom, just so we are on the same page here. I don't believe any convicted criminal should have the right to possess weapons but when you come to profiling you are moving a long way to the right

I don't profile .There were strict guidelines for the application .

For the record... the exact wording in the 4th Amendment related to this is as follows :
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,

I say eaves dropping on jihadists qualifies as a reasonable thing to do.

Yes Tom but you are speaking of listening in on people who have not yet committed a crime, to identify these people you have to profile them, they might pop up and say I'm a jihadist, but if not.. . These people might consider what you are doing a violation of their rights. Courts might consider this a violalion of their rights and you will have achieved nothing.This is the problem with rights, they either exist or they don't. You need due process and that means evidence gathered by legal means..

I say listening in on right wing extremists is a reasonable thing to do, how do I find them, I could start with owners of certain weapons

Hello again, clete:

I'd say the guy who screams and yells about tyranny has NO clue that the power to SEARCH is the most tyrannical power there is..

I AGAIN suggest that the government is NOT to be trusted... That TOM does, is amazing.

excon

Yes it seems he blows in the wind on a number of issues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, clete:

I'd say the guy who screams and yells about tyranny has NO clue that the power to SEARCH is the most tyrannical power there is..

I AGAIN suggest that the government is NOT to be trusted... That TOM does, is amazing.

excon

---

If they have a warrant then they have a right to it. Anything gathered before a warrant or acted upon is inappropriate. There are more intrusions and ways for abuse coming as technology marches on.

Atlanta police get new mobile fingerprint scanners

The thing that seems to be forgotten here is that those who have committed no crime, who don't intend to commit a crime have nothing to fear

Hello again,

Quote:

---

If they have a warrant then they have a right to it.

---

At least you're consistent. To right wingers, the COP side of government can do no wrong. Personally, I don't like ANY side of government.. But, that's just me.

Look. If you want to EXCUSE what they do because you're afraid of Al Quaida, then SAY so... But, to IGNORE that they BASTARDIZED the 4th Amendment, and TOOK YOUR RIGHTS AWAY in order to do it, is unconscionable.

In this great land of ours, it USED to take a warrant BEFORE they search... Now, they scan our email and listen to our phone calls, WITHOUT probable cause, which is (or USED to be) the basis for a warrant...

Why you EXCUSE the government for this is BEYOND me... Didn't one of our founders say something like, those, who are willing to give up their rights in exchange for security, deserve NEITHER?? Do you not understand that YOU are the people who he directed that comment at?

Excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

I AGAIN suggest that the government is NOT to be trusted... That TOM does, is amazing.

excon

---

And yet you fight for more government power over our lives...

Hello again, tom:

I get lost as to what argument is where too, so I don't know where it was that we were talking about the filibuster... In any case, you got a VICTORY yesterday. The filibuster REMAINS. You guys can CONTINUE to block, and block, and then block some more. In fact, you'll be so good at blocking, you should try out for the NFL.

excon

Another victory today... the Circuit Court in DC said Obama violated the constitution by making recess appointments while the Senate was in session.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

another victory today ... the Circuit Court in DC said Obama violated the constitution by making recess appointments while the Senate was in session.

---

Yes sir, and it was unanimous. One shameless power grab rebuked.