dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2009-06-04 08:57:20: Given Obama's support for telecom company immunity for handing over consumer data wholesale to the NSA without a warrant, it wasn't particularly surprising to see the administration perpetuate the Bush Administration's positions on domestic wiretappi.. ..

prev page · 1 · 2 · 3


jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
reply to Matt3

Re: Health care socialist?

said by Matt3:

You're right. Clearly the solution is to let them fail, force hundreds of thousands to become unemployed, and further burden the system.
Ah, it's all about "the system" isn't it? I thought the Democrats were all about the individual and standing up the little guy? Central planning takes care of that nicely (at least until it's actually tried outside of a textbook or manifesto.)


TKJunkMail
Premium
join:2005-12-09
reply to ITALIAN926

Re: Good

OH NOES! If you're willing to give up your rights so easily, I hear North Korea is nice this time of year.


TKJunkMail
Premium
join:2005-12-09
reply to MyDogHsFleas
Our legal system allows a group like the EFF or ACLU to cause immense damage to a company by filing broad-brush lawsuit after lawsuit. It doesn't matter what the eventual outcome is. The harm is already done.
Please enlighten us by providing the names of said companies or industries.


TKJunkMail
Premium
join:2005-12-09
reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:

said by nasadude:

I give up, you're right - they didn't break the law because the president said so.
They didn't break the law because 18 USC 2511(2)(a)(ii)(B)[1] carves out an ill-defined recognition of the Executive Branch's power to conduct surveillance.

The so-called immunity deal simply referred to 2511 and said telcos are immune from legal action if they complied with 2511.

That's hardly "immunity" to say that if the existing law applies, then it applies. What they really did was short-circuit the judicial process of determining whether 2511 applied.

But, it doesn't matter because those who are unhappy with the surveillance have never been able to admit that 2511 applies. It would spoil all their "criminals, law-breakers,..." etc. rhetoric.

[1] »www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html···00-.html

[2] »www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/F···_xml.pdf (Page 88, sect. 802 (a) (2)).

Mark
LOL Do you know anything about anything other than 2511?


TKJunkMail
Premium
join:2005-12-09
reply to lesopp

Re: Let me understand the legal ruling here.

All except Qwest


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to nasadude

Re: Good

Again, please show me where the was widespread, systematic abuse of Americans by the government that was the direct result of this surveillance.

And where is the evidence that directly supports the EFF's claims?

Even in a civil lawsuit, the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he/she did no wrong, and the defendant is presumed liable unless the defendant can prove otherwise. If a judge dismisses a civil case, it pretty much can guarantee the defendant is NOT liable for any wrongdoing.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
reply to jester121

Re: Change

said by jester121:

It's nothing new and it's not a (R) or (D) issue. It's just wrong.
Its the 2 party system issue. Either way one of the 2 win, and if you bribe both.....

republic != democracy

the US republic is a monarchy of lords who elect their puppet king

remember a true federal republic usually turns into a low level civil war as members of the federation take their states rights to the limit, thats the closest you can get to a democracy in a federal republic


RSN404

@cox.net
reply to amungus

Re: Good

"Who will guard the guards?"
-Digital Fortress


RSN404

@cox.net
reply to pnh102
The EFF proved something here. Are you suggesting that we let the government have a copy of everything that you do on the internet or say on the phone? If you would take a look at the documents (Which I doubt you did) you will see affidavit after affidavit from people working in the buildings where the black rooms were built. Dimensions of the rooms, specific equipment inside, all given in an affidavit in a court of law. Citizens have rights- intercepting your digital exchanges is just like a police officer entering your house through an open window and making a copy of every sheet of paper in your house- every CD and every flash drive. Should the "Patriot act" mean that the US government can do whatever they want, with no regard to peoples' rights? Rights are being violated, and I recently donated close to a thousand dollars to the EFF because they act on behalf of every concerned citizen of the United States of America.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
reply to amigo_boy

Re: Health care socialist?

said by amigo_boy:

said by sirwoogie:

• Encouraging (in fact threatening... "we don't get it passed this year, it'll never pass") a completely socialistic health care program.
We already have socialized health care. Public law sets quality standards for goods and services higher than a truly "free market" would produce. The result is that those who can't afford this artificially (socially) created market are threatened with prison if they attempt to purchase lessor medical services from someone who isn't duly licensed by *the* medical association. Or, tries to purchase lessor products (like medicine) from a neighbor who makes it in their bathtub.

I'm not necessarily saying we should have a truly "lassez faire," market-driven health care system. But, it's creative to say that what we have now isn't socialized.

IMO, what we have to today is incredibly perverse. We limit health care choices for the poor. We deny them the opportunity to purchase inferior goods and services if that's all they can afford. We do this so everyone else's "market-based" choices will be easier. (Their "market" outcomes more predictable than if they had to perform their own due diligence in a wild, raw, "free" market of willing buyers and willing sellers.). And then, when it's suggested that this is essentially a *wealth transfer* from the poor (denying them a market of willing buyers and sellers which would exist in a free market), we're told that anyone who would suggest this is a *socialist.*

Mark
Yep, free market doesn't exist. Capitalism turns everything into a natural monopoly with the military/police/courts to enforce the monopoly.

Other examples, zoning code where anything other than an empty lot in the municipal limit requires a zoning code waiver which is at the board's personal vaguely following a master plan that changes every 5 years.

Unions that bribe the feds and state govts to legislatively enforce closed shops.

In my experience, and the comments of my cynical doctor relatives, all of medicine follows a flow chart enforced by malpractice lawsuits, NIH (read federal govt) studies, and personality cult supporting peer review journal articles. The flow charts almost always say treat symptoms, the cause is irrelevant until you fall down unconscious Prozac and Oxycontin and Adderal fix all, or spend $50K per incident in xray/ct/mri/dye tracing for a stubbed toe since it might be toe cancer, or the paper cut might be infected. Violating the flowchart is instantly wining a malpractice lawsuit. 90% of the health care, outside of surgery, can be done by a McDonalds worker following the flow chart, with the same salary, nurses and doctors are just pork jobs. Nurse assistants sort of are an implementation of the McDonalds worker concept.

Another problem is treatments that work 5% over placebo, yet costs $1000s, but by "ethics" and malpractice lawsuits you have to do. Cancer treatment is filled with them. Your going to die, face it, spending more $ than you will earn in your lifetime on your treatment is insane.

Its funny when you read these studies on drugs that have a 40% placebo cure rate and the drug has a %45 drug cure rate (looking at an antacid). Maybe its time to just prescribe Supernull 45mg.

50 years ago cholesterol levels were irrelevant, because there were no drugs for them. Now with cooked studies, drug companies make a fortune off old fat asses that stuff their face with burgers and fries and wonder why they have heart attacks and are so fat (no your 60 inch waist line and your motorized wheelchair means your "healthy" and not going to die of tuberculosis). Loose the ****ing weight, no drugs and no insurance for you. You have a desk job, your not in a cotton field or a coal mine from dawn to dusk, an 8000 calorie diet was for your ancestors, not you. Its like giving a lung transplant to a smoker.

The lack of co-payments in medicare/medicaid and medicare/supplementary medicare insurance people makes them run to the doc every time for a paper cut wasting $100s if not $1000s.

Also research for a cure is not allowed in the USA. If you propose a cure, you will never get funding, and your university director will shut you down for being psuedoscience, and establishment will bad mouth you if you go looking for private investors/donations. A cure never made any doctor or company money. NIH/university/drug company system will NEVER EVER find a cure for AIDS or Cancer, its financial suicide. Only the treatments that promise to be the most expensive ever get R&Ded. So your Medicare style socialized medicine system for all will skyrocket like a hockeystick from 5% of the US GDP to maybe 50% or higher, this country's economy will just exist on giving healthcare, we will be like Saudia Arabia, but with healthcare instead of oil.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
reply to Matt3
said by Matt3:

You're right. Clearly the solution is to let them fail, force hundreds of thousands to become unemployed, and further burden the system.
Taking them over is just the end step in corporate welfare, why worry about cranky stockholders, we promise we wont complain, but we do want 100% of your dividends as income tax. The scheme is that they are now/will be a great source of tax revenue, 100% tax, its delicious. Plus all those jobs create tax revenue (FICA/etc). That bailout money, unless there is typical corporate graft, will become wages with a 35% cut into taxes, or higher (sales, property, etc), so the govt is just giving itself $ using the car company as a front.

reply to pnh102

Re: Good

The NSA found out about my child porn studio because of their mass surveillance and therefore violated my civil rights.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
reply to jay_rm

Re: SIlly Liberals...

said by jay_rm:

Pathetic. ANOTHER reason to 'remember the change (not)' when the next congressional election rolls around in 2010.
politicians are never held to anything they say, haven't you learned?


SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA
reply to sirwoogie

Re: Change

There was a change option on the table, but very few voted for him. Nader only got like 3% of the vote despite being the only viable candidate that stood for the rights of citizens against corporations and corrupted gov't.
I guess "we" get what we vote for...
...ooops, I'm stuck with what *you* voted for!


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to jester121
said by jester121:

None of the trillions in spending is going to do anything to "fix" the mess; it's going to drastically increase the size of the government and its debt, and saddle future generations with it. It's nothing new and it's not a (R) or (D) issue. It's just wrong.
Actually, I think the staved off a disaster with this spending. Yes, I know it's a disaster we had to do this, but I believe had they NOT done this, out entire economy would have collapsed and we'd be living under marshal law right now.

You may find this video interesting. Listen to the angry caller at first, and then the reply. But the important part comes about 2:20 or so into the video. Listen to what he says about a global run on our banks.

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMu1mFao3w

--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

boble88

join:2001-12-20
Somerville, MA

Wiretap

Will everyone just shut up, please. Bush this, Bush that and "My freedom is gone, Bush stole my freedom". A parrot makes more sense. Half the morons in this country think they were being "wiretapped". It's all over people, Bush is gone and a new era has begun. Just let it go.

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5

1 recommendation

reply to TKJunkMail

Re: Good

said by TKJunkMail:

Our legal system allows a group like the EFF or ACLU to cause immense damage to a company by filing broad-brush lawsuit after lawsuit. It doesn't matter what the eventual outcome is. The harm is already done.
Please enlighten us by providing the names of said companies or industries.
If you read a business newspaper like the Wall Street Journal or Investor's Daily you see examples every day. It is routine that whenever a company's stock goes down a bunch, a drug or product has a new test that reports negatively, or a consumer company's bills, promotions, or terms and conditions are slightly confusing to someone, that a slew of class action lawsuits are filed. And the companies involved usually simply settle because it's much cheaper than going through the legal process. Then the costs are passed on to you, and that company becomes less competitive globally.

Why do you think that every time you get on an airplane they tell you how to fasten your seat belt?

Why do you think that every time you buy an extension cord it has big stickers all over it?

Why do you think that every instruction manual for every kitchen gadget starts off with multiple densely typed pages of "safety instructions"?

Why do you think that a good portion of the ads on daytime TV are for you to call an 800 number if you think you may have been affected by some drug/product/company's practices?

It's a huge business.

take a look here for some examples

»www.facesoflawsuitabuse.org/stor···?s=49878

»www.heartland.org/publications/l···_82.html


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
reply to MyDogHsFleas
Your (non-)argument seems to be, "because frivolous lawsuits exist, then this must be one also," and, "anyone who doesn't agree with me is not in 'actual reality'."

If you don't think that the EFF hasn't had massive positive influence on our digital rights, then you don't know the history of the EFF.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
said by funchords:

If you don't think that the EFF hasn't had massive positive influence on our digital rights, then you don't know the history of the EFF.
Muckraking can have positive influence. But, it's still muckraking.

The EFF appeared to be like many other advocacy groups when it did nothing to repeal 18 USC 2511, nor explain to its members the legitimate reason 2511 exists (a congressional recognition of the constitutional authority of the Executive branch to conduct surveillance). Just "law breaking, committed a crime..."

The result was that Congress reaffirmed the meaning of 2511 by basing so-called immunity on that existing law.

How did that help anyone? EFF supporters were as ignorant as they were before all this started. The law is still on the books. And, it will be virtually impossible to challenge the meaning of 2511 now that Congress has reaffirmed its Congressional intent.

The only thing I saw was EFF doing what advocacy groups do all the time: Whip the membership into a frenzy so they'll donate more money.

Mark


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
said by amigo_boy:

The EFF appeared to be like many other advocacy groups when it did nothing to repeal 18 USC 2511, nor explain to its members the legitimate reason 2511 exists (a congressional recognition of the constitutional authority of the Executive branch to conduct surveillance). Just "law breaking, committed a crime..."
Ummm, no. That's piling on a lot of garbage that just isn't part of the case here. My short answer to you on this is that we all know why wiretapping is authorized and unauthorized and these provisions in 2511 are non-controversial. Taking someone to task for not trying to repeal the Wiretap Act is not making an argument, it's throwing fodder.

said by amigo_boy:

The result was that Congress reaffirmed the meaning of 2511 by basing so-called immunity on that existing law.
This isn't due process of law, it's avoiding due process of law. It's allowing a current congress to place down an interpretation of the acts of an earlier congress -- a move that is extra-Constitutional in itself.

said by amigo_boy:

The only thing I saw was EFF doing what advocacy groups do all the time: Whip the membership into a frenzy so they'll donate more money.
I think you're choosing what to see. What actually happened, though? EFF got nearly a universal chorus of articles pointing out how futile their effort was. That's not a particularly smart fund-raising technique. It is, however, an example of taking a principled stand.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL


Noah Vail
Son made my Avatar
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Bright House
reply to expert007

Re: Change

said by expert007:

Check your instant messages Spanky, I don't take kindly to others "translating" my posts. Have a nice day.
Like everyone, I'm totally blown away by the force of...
...whatever it is you have.

NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture.

FileShackOrg

join:2005-01-26
Lincoln Park, MI
reply to boble88

Re: Wiretap

its all over? Isn't this story all about how Obama is upholding the "SAME" wiretapping concepts as President George W. Bush decreed?

Just let it go?
Why should I or anyone else?

I thought Obama was going to change this nonsense into something right(I really never thought this). I thought Hussein stood for freedom and independence(because of his crafty logo during the campaign). I thought Barrack stood for more than just a change in tone of skin(never believed this either). I thought I was going to get free gas(

www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
).

Oh well I guess being my house isn't being paid for I'll just let it go.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Huh?

"immunity for handing over consumer data ... without a warrant"

Um, yeah. That's not wiretapping.

expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY
reply to Noah Vail

Re: Change

Um.....yeah.

Because anyone who doesn't think like you is quite obviously a .......(insert whatever adjective you like).

There is simply no other way. Thank you for showing me the light.

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
reply to funchords

Re: Good

said by funchords:

said by amigo_boy:

The EFF appeared to be like many other advocacy groups when it did nothing to repeal 18 USC 2511, nor explain to its members the legitimate reason 2511 exists (a congressional recognition of the constitutional authority of the Executive branch to conduct surveillance). Just "law breaking, committed a crime..."
Ummm, no. That's piling on a lot of garbage that just isn't part of the case here. My short answer to you on this is that we all know why wiretapping is authorized and unauthorized and these provisions in 2511 are non-controversial. Taking someone to task for not trying to repeal the Wiretap Act is not making an argument, it's throwing fodder.
I was only pointing out that the EFF never mentioned 18 USC 2511 to its membership, or acted proactively to repeal the law instead of waiting for a crisis.

It's my position that advocacy groups have an incentive to let crises happy (or depict everything as a crisis) to generate donations. A benighted membership is more likely to succumb to Group Think, write checks, etc.

said by funchords:

said by amigo_boy:The result was that Congress reaffirmed the meaning of 2511 by basing so-called immunity on that existing law.
This isn't due process of law, it's avoiding due process of law. It's allowing a current congress to place down an interpretation of the acts of an earlier congress -- a move that is extra-Constitutional in itself.
When the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of a law, it is common for them to consider the Congressional intent of that law. In the case of 18 USC 2511, members of the original Congress which passed the law indicated it was an acknowledgment of the Executive Branch's historic power to conduct surveillance. It was their way to avoid constitutional problems with the rest of the law they passed at that time.

The Congress which passed so-called "immunity" essentially affirmed that intent. They applied immunity if 2511 had been adhered to (the Executive branch "certified" no warrant was necessary).

You may be correct that the so-called "immunity" law is unconstitutional in the way it removed 2511's judicial review from the normal judicial process. But, that doesn't affect the fact that Congress added to the congressional intent which the Supreme Court would consider if the constitutionality of 2511 is ever challenged.

We can thank the EFF for that. They probably think it's worth it if they got a lot of donations due to their bombastic rants to their membership about "broken laws" and "criminal eavesdropping."

Mark

expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY
reply to patcat88

Re: Health care socialist?

All this ranting is impressive, but no one seems to want to acknowledge that the Federal Gov't actually has an exit strategy for GM, and it's less than 5 years. MUCH less than 5 years.

Sorry to rain on your right wing parade.


Noah Vail
Son made my Avatar
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Bright House
reply to expert007

Re: Change

said by expert007:

Um.....yeah.
That's Yea BABY! to you.

said by expert007:

Because anyone who doesn't think like you is quite obviously a .......(insert whatever adjective you like).
A competent re-examination would reveal that it is the LACK of thinking that merits the bulk of my concern.

The exception being
when I outline the points
that prove how certain lines of thinking
are undeniably delusional.

At that point, I'm not offering an opinion of the delusion, just exposing it to the searing light of reason.

Once folks understand the delusion for what it is, they can formulate their own opinions.

said by expert007:

There is simply no other way. Thank you for showing me the light.
Hey, no problem. I am the living embodiment of Public Service.
I'd be remiss if I let may God-given gifts go to waste.

NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture.

cyclone_z

join:2006-06-19
Ames, IA

we don't need no stinkin warrants to tap your phones!

J. Edgar Hoover would be proud!