jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
| reply to kapil
Re: So what
said by kapil  :So by your logic...Adolph Hitler was a hero with his actions after the Treaty of Versailles? As much as our nation's founding fathers were traitors and terrorist.... by your logic. 
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
 ·Comcast
| I didn't call Hitler a hero....Kapil did when he said "And speaking out for your beliefs, in the face of all sorts of odds, makes you a hero not a traitor."
I'm sure he also feels Ho Chi Mihn, Pol Pot, The Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini, and Fidel Castro were all heros too when the "faced the odds" |
|
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
| said by S_engineer :I didn't call Hitler a hero....Kapil did when he said "And speaking out for your beliefs, in the face of all sorts of odds, makes you a hero not a traitor." I didn't call the founding fathers traitors and terrorist either... You did when you implied Kapil's statement = Hitler is a hero.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| said by jhboricua :said by S_engineer :I didn't call Hitler a hero....Kapil did when he said "And speaking out for your beliefs, in the face of all sorts of odds, makes you a hero not a traitor." I didn't call the founding fathers traitors and terrorist either... You did when you implied Kapil's statement = Hitler is a hero. Your missing the context of the analogy. His blanket statement "And speaking out for your beliefs, in the face of all sorts of odds, makes you a hero not a traitor" has serious outcomes. By calling this clown Klein a hero after he breached national security shows where his allegiance is. The damage that Klein did was irrevocable on several different fronts, and the fact that he has not been charged treason speaks volumes about the impact that media carries on our national policies.
I took an oath to the constitution as did all of you, I'm sure. My question is, are you trying to defend it or subvert it? |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to roc5955
said by roc5955 :If a telco broke the law, the person who authorized them to break the law should go to jail. Civil penalties could be levied, whether or not someone was personally damaged, if intent could be proven. If this goes to the top of the administration, than let's find out. I am tired of this administration literally getting away with murder. That's a sensible position. If McCain's now opposed to immunity, maybe he should be asked if he supports congressional hearings to find out whether the current administration broke the law. Or, will appoint a special prosecutor if elected.
McCain's a huge fake. In the 90s a friend of mine wrote him complaining about his vote for the Omnibus Crime Bill (which banned so-called "assault weapons."). McCain replied saying he voted against inclusion of that ban in the bill. My friend's mother wrote McCain complaining about his opposition to the ban. McCain replied saying he voted for the crime bill. He's been in Washington too long.
Mark |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather :There are no damages if there was no damage. Civil penalties for what? No one was damaged. The law prohibiting telcos from handing over data provides for statutory damages. Anyone who feels their terms of service (with a participating telco) were invalidated could claim damages equal to what they paid for the service.
Not that I agree with civil suits. But, there is a basis for them.
Mark |
|
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
1 edit | reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer :Your missing the context of the analogy. You assume I'm missing the context of the analogy. I'm merely making a point to the fallacy of your initial response to kapil.said by S_engineer :His blanket statement "And speaking out for your beliefs, in the face of all sorts of odds, makes you a hero not a traitor" has serious outcomes. No more than your blanket statement about Klein being a traitor for exposing an illegal spying program.said by S_engineer :By calling this clown Klein a hero after he breached national security shows where his allegiance is. Right, because you're either with the Administration or you're a terrorist and traitor. said by S_engineer :The damage that Klein did was irrevocable on several different fronts, and the fact that he has not been charged treason speaks volumes about the impact that media carries on our national policies. The fact that he hasn't been charged with treason, and that the phone companies are spending billions on lobbying to get immunity speaks even louder about how right his actions were.said by S_engineer :I took an oath to the constitution as did all of you, I'm sure. My question is, are you trying to defend it or subvert it? Does turning a blind eye when the constitution gets bypassed qualifies now as defending it? My, how far we've become.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
1 edit | reply to ross
Problem is the bucks the bloodsucking lawyers steal comes at the expense of the customers who were supposedly wronged. Corporations never pay for this crap...they just pass it on.
We would look forward to a Bloodsucking Lawyer Payoff Recovery Fee. |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| reply to kapil
Your assumption is that they are guilty, but what if the courts ultimately decide otherwise?
Bad publicity and dirty laundery won't see the light of day when national security is invoked.
What if the president on his last day in office grants a pardon to all the telcos invloved. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer :By calling this clown Klein a hero after he breached national security shows where his allegiance is. What I find amusing is that Klein more clearly broke the law than the telcos did(!). Under the same law which grants an exemption for when the AG certifies a warrant isn't necessary (2 a ii B), it says that an employee of the telco who reveals the presence of a wiretap is guilty of the same civil damages that a telco is for releasing data without abiding by the law:
No provider of wire or electronic communication service, officer, employee, or agent thereof, or landlord, custodian, or other specified person shall disclose the existence of any interception or surveillance or the device used to accomplish the interception or surveillance .... Any such disclosure, shall render such person liable for the civil damages provided for in section 2520.
»www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html···00-.html I guess screaming about "illegal" and "broke the law" is situational for self-styled freedom fighters.
Mark |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to lesopp
said by lesopp :What if the president on his last day in office grants a pardon to all the telcos invloved. Presidential pardons don't extend to civil liability. (It's not clear whether a President could pardon a corporation, but it is clear that they can't pardon anyone from civil liability.).
Mark |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| reply to lesopp
said by lesopp :What if the president on his last day in office grants a pardon to all the telcos invloved. The telcos involved are seeking immunity because they are worried about their liability. There is no danger of a criminal complaint being brought against the traitors while the current thugs are in power.
Besides, you can't really pardon a corporation, just like you can't throw a corporation in jail.
The closest thing to that would be if an officer of the company were to be found guilty if criminal charges were ever pursued, and then the President could pardon the convict....but that's not likely to happen. The prosecution, that is....the pardon is a certainty I'd say if things ever got that far.
But again, the telcos aren't worried about criminal, just the checks they would have to write if customer started sing them for breach of privacy and a whole host of things.
--
»www.DumbLogic.com |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
1 edit | reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer :Who are the traitors here? The companies that complyed with a request from their gov't during a time of national crisis, or the s***bags that want to further the mayhem by limiting our governments 1 true obligation to the constitution--- our defense! And why oh why hasn't Klein been charged, theres the true traitor! The telcos were not presented with warrants. If there were no warrants issued within 72 hours of the request for wiretaps, the wiretaps should have ceased. The requests were illegal without warrants. The current wiretapping laws were sufficient for dealing with the "time of national crisis".
Bush admitted on camera that he authorized these warrrantless wiretaps, which is illegal, violating both the FISA law and the Constitution. It was an admission of guilt. This alone was enough to impeach him, but unfortunately, the republicans in congress were more interested in covering the ass of their team captain than doing their Constitutional duty to uphold the law and keep the administration in check, and the democrats haven't had the balls to do the same since they took control. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to amigo_boy
Sorry. Exposing an illegal wiretapping program is not breaking the law. The illegal wiretapping program is breaking the law. Your opinion on the matter, while amusing, is simply wrong. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to JakCrow
said by JakCrow :The telcos were not presented with warrants. If there were no warrants issued within 72 hours of the request for wiretaps, the wiretaps should have ceased. The requests were illegal without warrants. Wrong. See »Re: Ya Gotta be Kidding Me
Mark |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to JakCrow
said by JakCrow :Sorry. Exposing an illegal wiretapping program is not breaking the law. How would a landlord or employee know whether a warrant wasn't used? Or, that the AG hadn't certified it?
By definition, Klein broke the law simply because he wasn't privy to the details.
Mark |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| reply to amigo_boy
The Department of Justice conceded that the NSA program was not authorized by any of the provisions in 18 U.S.C. 2511. Using 18 U.S.C. 2511 is something like the 6th excuse for breaking the law with warrantless wiretaps. You guys need to pick one and stick with it. For once. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| reply to roc5955
said by roc5955 :said by Dogfather :If the telco broke the law, put those who signed off on it in jail. Otherwise STFU unless you can PROVE some individual was personally damaged by their actions. No! If a telco broke the law, the person who authorized them to break the law should go to jail. Civil penalties could be levied, whether or not someone was personally damaged, if intent could be proven. If this goes to the top of the administration, than let's find out. I am tired of this administration literally getting away with murder. The officers of those companies should also be punished as accessories to a crime. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to JakCrow
said by JakCrow :The Department of Justice conceded that the NSA program was not authorized by any of the provisions in 18 U.S.C. 2511. Reference please.
Mark |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to kapil
said by kapil :said by S_engineer :Who are the traitors here? The companies that complyed with a request from their gov't during a time of national crisis, or the s***bags that want to further the mayhem by limiting our governments 1 true obligation to the constitution--- our defense! And why oh why hasn't Klein been charged, theres the true traitor! There is no "crisis". I'd say that the constitution is a little bit more complex than just "defense". And speaking out for your beliefs, in the face of all sorts of odds, makes you a hero not a traitor. So by your logic...Adolph Hitler was a hero with his actions after the Treaty of Versailles? |
|
