So what in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20527970 en Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:09:16 EDT Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:09:16 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20544994 roc5955 :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

If you get bent over privacy so much, you better not deal with ANY bank, ANY telco, ANY credit reporting agency, ANY company as the vast majority sell far more important data than who you called.
Believe me when I say that if I didn't have to deal with some of these companies, I wouldn't. As it is, I only deal with my local credit union for banking, and they have assured me that they do not sell their information. As a matter of fact, it's one of their policies.
As far as the others are concerned, I do not have control over them, but if I could, I would sue them for every time I had to eat a cold dinner because one of their lackeys made a cold call.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20544994 Tue, 27 May 2008 10:09:53 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540138 JakCrow :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

Defenders of freedom? Braaaaahhhhh ha ha ha ha!

James Sokolove and John Edwards...the poster boys for why we need tort reform are defending freedom.

Too funny. These scumbag ambulance chasing extortionists are a waste of skin.
Can you give us a list of all the "ambulance chasing" cases that John Edwards "chased"? Thanks in advance.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540138 Mon, 26 May 2008 06:52:40 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540136 JakCrow :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

20 million.

Bush an his Amnesty cronies put the number at 12 million because they want to give amnesty to all of them. Illegals don't respond to census questionaires.

Independent studies by firms like Bear-Sterns »www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pd···ound.pdf put the number at 20 million and that was a few years ago. It's only gone up since then.
Sorry. The bearstern document says "may be as high as...". It does not state with any positive determination that it is so. You're simply using your own hysteria to fill in the numbers.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540136 Mon, 26 May 2008 06:51:42 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540133 JakCrow :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by JakCrow See Profile :

If [2511] gave Bush and the AG the right to authorize warrantless wiretapping, then there would have been no reason for Gonzolas to make the claim that HJR114 gave Bush all the authorization needed to wiretap without a warrant.
It's not amazing that the administration would use Joint Resolution 114 (authorizing the President to wage war on terror) as the source of their power *under existing law*. There's nothing in 2511 (or anywhere else, AFAIK) that defines when the AG can certify a warrant isn't necessary.

Mark
But neither is a good excuse. Bush broke the law by authorizing warrantless wiretapping, and all the excuses team players like you try to continue to use don't change the fact that he broke the law and violated the Constitution. I realize people, such as yourself, think that the team is more important than the good of the country, but still, that's not a good reason.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540133 Mon, 26 May 2008 06:49:02 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20537470 KrK :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

My mistake then. From what I read, this "immunity" was only protecting the telcos from civil liability and that it didn't grant actual immunity from criminal prosecution.
No, it only provides immunity from civil trials. They could be prosecuted by the Government... However.... since the Government is complicient in the wiretapping, they aren't going to prosecute themselves if you see what I am saying. You won't see the Justice Department investigating and embarrassing the administration for example.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20537470 Sun, 25 May 2008 13:38:55 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20533609 amigo_boy :
said by KrK See Profile :

If they are given immunity there never will be a criminal trial.
The proposed immunity is only against civil liability, not criminal:

»rpc.senate.gov/_files/L43S2248FI···07ML.pdf

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20533609 Sat, 24 May 2008 12:54:29 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20533582 Dogfather : My mistake then. From what I read, this "immunity" was only protecting the telcos from civil liability and that it didn't grant actual immunity from criminal prosecution.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20533582 Sat, 24 May 2008 12:46:52 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20533575 KrK :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

Let that come out in a criminal trial.
If they are given immunity there never will be a criminal trial. I've debated that argument before with people. Since the Government would have to file charges to bring a criminal case, no criminal trial will occur.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20533575 Sat, 24 May 2008 12:43:14 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532861 Dogfather : Let that come out in a criminal trial.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532861 Sat, 24 May 2008 08:12:58 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532858 Dogfather : Defenders of freedom? Braaaaahhhhh ha ha ha ha!

James Sokolove and John Edwards...the poster boys for why we need tort reform are defending freedom.

Too funny. These scumbag ambulance chasing extortionists are a waste of skin. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532858 Sat, 24 May 2008 08:12:39 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532856 Dogfather : 20 million.

Bush an his Amnesty cronies put the number at 12 million because they want to give amnesty to all of them. Illegals don't respond to census questionaires.

Independent studies by firms like Bear-Sterns »www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pd···ound.pdf put the number at 20 million and that was a few years ago. It's only gone up since then.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532856 Sat, 24 May 2008 08:12:02 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532488 KrK : It's not the money.

It's being able to use the Courts so that full details of what occurred come out to the light of day.

If they get immunity, we'll never know what went on and how far it went.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20532488 Sat, 24 May 2008 02:19:06 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531721 amigo_boy :
said by JakCrow See Profile :

If [2511] gave Bush and the AG the right to authorize warrantless wiretapping, then there would have been no reason for Gonzolas to make the claim that HJR114 gave Bush all the authorization needed to wiretap without a warrant.
It's not amazing that the administration would use Joint Resolution 114 (authorizing the President to wage war on terror) as the source of their power *under existing law*. There's nothing in 2511 (or anywhere else, AFAIK) that defines when the AG can certify a warrant isn't necessary.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531721 Fri, 23 May 2008 21:58:30 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531701 amigo_boy :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

All these exceptions is how we end up with 20 million illegals crushing our infrastructure.
OMG. You don't understand the immigration law. What I was referring to had nothing to do with 20 mil illegals (who are here largely due to reasons unrelated to immigration law). Immigration law can be extremely subjective for those who wait in line and try to follow the rules. And they don't have to prove that they're applying the law consistently (the reason I added "wink, wink, nudge, nudge.").

There appeared to lots of Muslims who had the law reapplied to them for the purpose of getting rid of them. Not Germans or Bolivians. Just Muslims.

So, it seemed a bit over the top to me that nobody suffered damages. If I were Muslim I'd feel damaged. (And, believe me, I'm not in love with Muslims.).

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531701 Fri, 23 May 2008 21:52:21 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531469 JakCrow :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

If some Muslim (or anyone else) broke an immigration law, I don't care if it's a technical violation. If the violation calls for deportation, they should be deported. There should be no exceptions to the law.

The problem is the gov't lets illegals get away with it for so long, it's de facto amnesty. All these exceptions is how we end up with 20 million illegals crushing our infrastructure. People wait in line for years and years and follow all the rules while jackasses are allow to just cross the border or over stay their Visas and nothing happens to them.

IMO, anyone violating any immigration law is a bad apple and should be deported. That is what would happen to an American if say I was illegally working in Mexico.
12 million]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531469 Fri, 23 May 2008 21:02:52 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531107 ross :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

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.
More valid, IMHO, than the so-called Regulatory Fee we pay already.

To cops, all lawyers are blood-sucking scum. To the rest of us, they are the defenders of freedom.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531107 Fri, 23 May 2008 19:44:43 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531027 Dogfather : If some Muslim (or anyone else) broke an immigration law, I don't care if it's a technical violation. If the violation calls for deportation, they should be deported. There should be no exceptions to the law.

The problem is the gov't lets illegals get away with it for so long, it's de facto amnesty. All these exceptions is how we end up with 20 million illegals crushing our infrastructure. People wait in line for years and years and follow all the rules while jackasses are allow to just cross the border or over stay their Visas and nothing happens to them.

IMO, anyone violating any immigration law is a bad apple and should be deported. That is what would happen to an American if say I was illegally working in Mexico. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20531027 Fri, 23 May 2008 19:21:05 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530975 JakCrow : Actually, you're correct. However, 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(a)(ii)(B) is irrelevant, and as already stated, yet another excuse that people, such as yourself, have tried to trot out while running interference for the administration. If this gave Bush and the AG the right to authorize warrantless wiretapping, then there would have been no reason for Gonzolas to make the claim that HJR114 gave Bush all the authorization needed to wiretap without a warrant. Of course, that also ignores all the other excuses used by both the admin and people, such as yourself, while scrambling to cover Bush's ass and try and justify violations of both the FISA law and the Constitution. Of course, the hypocrisy of it all is that if it weren't for the fact the president has an R next to his name, people, such as yourself, would be calling for the president's head on a pole.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530975 Fri, 23 May 2008 19:10:33 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530872 tiger72 :
said by lesopp See Profile :

Your assumption is that they are guilty, but what if the courts ultimately decide otherwise?
They wouldn't be pushing so strenuously for an immunity bill if they didn't fear liability. They've already admitted that they participated because the White House asked them to (contradicting the law). If they don't get immunity, it's guaranteed that they'll face $billions in law suits.
Bad publicity and dirty laundery won't see the light of day when national security is invoked.
It's already been invoked, yet fortunately our government is almost as inefficient at keeping anything secret as they are at wasting our tax money.

The telcos already got bad coverage last year with the small amount of evidence that was broadcast. Without immunity they can't stop the torrent of crap that they unleashed.
What if the president on his last day in office grants a pardon to all the telcos invloved.
He can't, hence the immunity request. If the president could pardon an entire company, they wouldn't be wasting their money lobbying and and trying to save their asses. They'd just stick to the president, sit this out, and wait for the pardon.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530872 Fri, 23 May 2008 18:43:21 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530415 amigo_boy :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

No one was damaged.
I'm not in favor of the EFF et. al. civil suits because I don't believe it's about damages, it's about using civil courts to accomplish what they can't through normal (criminal) channels.

But, your assertion seems excessive. IIRC, shortly after 9/11 Muslim men were required to go to immigration offices, be interviewed by the FBI, etc. Many Muslims were deported over technical violations of immigration law (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). I'm not particularly fond of Islam (backwards rednecks who get far more "diversity sensitivity" due to western norms than they deserve). But, if I were one of those affected Muslim, I'd feel I'd been damaged (assuming telcos were used during that process of weeding out the bad apples).

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530415 Fri, 23 May 2008 17:05:52 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530249 Dogfather : No one was damaged. There is nothing to be financially responsible for.

Civil and criminal penalties to be paid to the state for a violation of the law is a different matter than filling the pockets of a bunch of bloodsucking Sokolove ambulance chasing asswipes.

If you get bent over privacy so much, you better not deal with ANY bank, ANY telco, ANY credit reporting agency, ANY company as the vast majority sell far more important data than who you called.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530249 Fri, 23 May 2008 16:27:46 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530035 roc5955 :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

There are no damages if there was no damage.

Civil penalties for what? No one was damaged.

So then it comes to whether or not there were criminal acts. If there were, instead of giving millions to bloodsucking scum lawyers, those who signed off on it should go to jail.
So nobody should be held financially responsible for breaching your implied privacy within the confines of the teleco? No, you, as a customer, whose records were intended to be kept private, but were given to the government, under false pretenses were damaged. Unless your right to privacy is worth nothing to you. If it is, than perhaps you should move to a country where that is the norm, like China or Cuba.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20530035 Fri, 23 May 2008 15:50:14 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529990 vicorjh : I think that would be a good thing in regards to putting a chill on future requests.
In my humble opinion, the government should show that their actions are legal and above board if there are any question to the legality of an action. In conflicting instances, the government must legislate laws by and for the people through the regular legislative channels.
For expediency, there are mechanisms already that allow for checks and balances to remain in place while, at the same time, allowing for expedited action. In the interim, legislation may be started to make such actions temporary or permanent legal.
Now that things are "out in the open", the people's voices regarding this matter are being heard by the legislative bodies. This seems correct to me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529990 Fri, 23 May 2008 15:43:10 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529746 amigo_boy :
said by JakCrow See Profile :

»www.hstoday.us/index.php?option=···emid=149
Contrary to your assertion, I see no mention of 2511. Do you have an explanation?

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529746 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:56:12 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529709 JPL :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

So if they didn't get immunity what happens.

A few customers who weren't damaged get a worthless coupon.

Bloodsucking scumbag Sen Edwards types get millions.

Customer rates go up because corporations don't pay this, customers ultimately do.

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.
So what?! It's a big deal if they don't get it. First off, the telcos agreed to help out because they were assured that what they were doing is legal, and it was for purposes of national security. They were told that what they were doing was above-board.

Second, their service was totally voluntary. What happens the next time some administration goes to any company/industry for this type of assistance in the future? Well, if you're like any company, you probably say 'no'. Why would you open yourself up to ligitation like that? If this litigation is allowed to go forward, what kind of credibility would future administrations have when they go to a company and say 'help us out... don't worry it's totally legal'? If someone who VOTED to grant immunity now turns around, and for political expediency, now makes this kind of statement, why would any company ever take the government's word on this type of stuff in the future?

I find McCain's statement totally baffling here. He KNOWS this will put a chill on future requests for help from the Federal Government. THAT'S why this is a big deal.

Edit - I just reread your original post. I saw a question mark after the 'so what' that wasn't there. I thought you were making the point that this isn't a big deal. My apologies.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529709 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:50:08 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529706 JakCrow : »www.hstoday.us/index.php?option=···emid=149]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529706 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:49:15 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528559 S_engineer :
said by kapil See Profile :

said by S_engineer See Profile :

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?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528559 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:29:45 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529503 amigo_boy :
said by JakCrow See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529503 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:08:12 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529499 JakCrow :
said by roc5955 See Profile :

said by Dogfather See Profile :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529499 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:06:57 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529494 JakCrow : 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. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529494 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:05:28 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529490 amigo_boy :
said by JakCrow See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529490 Fri, 23 May 2008 14:04:51 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529458 amigo_boy :
said by JakCrow See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529458 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:56:40 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529456 JakCrow : 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. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529456 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:56:31 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529441 JakCrow :
said by S_engineer See Profile :

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. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529441 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:53:35 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529370 kapil :
said by lesopp See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529370 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:39:03 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529355 amigo_boy :
said by lesopp See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529355 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:34:47 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529335 amigo_boy :
said by S_engineer See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529335 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:31:29 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529306 lesopp : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529306 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:19 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529251 Dogfather : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529251 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:16:23 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529237 jhboricua :
said by S_engineer See Profile :

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 See Profile :

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 See Profile :

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. :uhh:
said by S_engineer See Profile :

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 See Profile :

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 *]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529237 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:12:41 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529221 amigo_boy :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529221 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:09:25 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529202 amigo_boy :
said by roc5955 See Profile :

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20529202 Fri, 23 May 2008 13:04:37 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528969 S_engineer :
said by jhboricua See Profile :

said by S_engineer See Profile :

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? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528969 Fri, 23 May 2008 12:24:48 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528874 jhboricua :
said by S_engineer See Profile :

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 *]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528874 Fri, 23 May 2008 12:08:10 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528769 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'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"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528769 Fri, 23 May 2008 11:50:18 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528716 jhboricua :
said by kapil See Profile :

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. :uhh:
--
"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 *]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528716 Fri, 23 May 2008 11:41:03 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528682 S_engineer :
said by kapil See Profile :

said by S_engineer See Profile :

So by your logic...Adolph Hitler was a hero with his actions after the Treaty of Versailles?
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
So you cite an ambulance chaser trying to establish political correctness rather than argue your own words on merit. The North side must be proud of you....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528682 Fri, 23 May 2008 11:34:21 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528664 jhboricua : ...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528664 Fri, 23 May 2008 11:31:04 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528621 kapil :
said by S_engineer See Profile :

So by your logic...Adolph Hitler was a hero with his actions after the Treaty of Versailles?
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
--
»www.DumbLogic.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528621 Fri, 23 May 2008 11:22:22 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528536 wifi4milez :
said by kapil See Profile :

said by wifi4milez See Profile :

If you have even a single example of this happening in this country please let us know.

That's the point, isn't it...if it were happening, we wouldn't know because the first rule of fight club is to never talk about fight club.
Ummmm, yeah. Taking the easy way out on this one I see. The main reason your "theory" is wrong is that (contrary to your stated beliefs) we do live in a free and open society. If people started mysteriously disappearing others would take notice. Unless of course you think all those alien abductions were actually perpetrated by the government! Oh wait, I have said too much....I think I hear a knock at my door....I wonder if its the little green men or the FBI coming to take me away for "knowing too much" or "speaking my mind"!
--
I urge you to beware the temptation of pride -- the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire
Still True Today; RR
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528536 Fri, 23 May 2008 11:03:59 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528473 kapil :
said by wifi4milez See Profile :

If you have even a single example of this happening in this country please let us know.

That's the point, isn't it...if it were happening, we wouldn't know because the first rule of fight club is to never talk about fight club.
--
»www.DumbLogic.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528473 Fri, 23 May 2008 10:54:41 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528463 kapil :
said by S_engineer See Profile :

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.
--
»www.DumbLogic.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528463 Fri, 23 May 2008 10:53:42 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528420 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!
--
"Anything worth having is worth cheating for." WC Fields]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528420 Fri, 23 May 2008 10:47:08 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528398 Jim Gurd :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

EDIT- Oh, and Ron Paul for President.
QFT. It's a shame that there are so many ignorant people in this country who couldn't see that he and his ideas are what we need to start fixing what's really wrong with this country.
--
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented worker is like calling a crack dealer an unlicensed pharmacist.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528398 Fri, 23 May 2008 10:42:59 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528309 wifi4milez :
said by kapil See Profile :

I will stand here and defend my country and try my damnedest to prevent it from turning into a place where the rich rule over the poor, where no one except the ruling elite has rights, where people are disappeared in the middle of the night and stuffed in a far away Gulags for speaking up and expressing free thought
If you have even a single example of this happening in this country please let us know. Hell, if you have some knowledge of this happening, I suggest you immediately hire and attorney and contact all the major news bureaus! Your story will likely be in such widespread, worldwide demand that I suspect you will be richer than Bill Gates by the end of next week. Imagine that, a forum regular on our hummble site is about to break the largest news story of the past 200 years! Just promise us one thing; that your new-found fame and fortune wont compromise your ethics and values lest you turn into what you adamently claim to despise.....
--
I urge you to beware the temptation of pride -- the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire
Still True Today; RR
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528309 Fri, 23 May 2008 10:25:37 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528230 ross :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

...You are wasting your breath to think that whining about it will change anything...


Yep, time to sue their butts off, and the ass-wipes who helped them.

The system is no doubt corrupt. It is time to start cleaning up the foul mess the Bush administration, and his rubber stamp Congress, have saddled us with. May as well start with the Telcos, since the elite, as you call them, will probably never go to jail as they ought. I don't mind seeing lawyer, or even a whole gaggle of lawyers, make a buck off the prosecution of these treasonous felons.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528230 Fri, 23 May 2008 10:08:22 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528118 Dogfather : There are no damages if there was no damage.

Civil penalties for what? No one was damaged.

So then it comes to whether or not there were criminal acts. If there were, instead of giving millions to bloodsucking scum lawyers, those who signed off on it should go to jail.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528118 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:42:35 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528093 Dogfather : The super rich like Sen. Edwards and hyper elites like Obama, Clinton and Bush already rule over the slave class they've created through oppressive taxation.

You are wasting your breath to think that whining about it will change anything. And if you think voting makes any difference think again. Our primary system is so corrupt that the people don't get their choice. It doesn't matter who gets the most votes, the elites of society manipulate the system through the media and making up rules as they go and ultimately make the final decision.

Hell you have asswipes like Limbag sending Republicans to screw with the Democratic primaries while dumbass Dean works hard to see that Michigan and Florida voters voices don't count (so much for making every vote count).

And even if they did, Dem elites (the super-dels) get the final say. It's bullsh!t.

You have corrupt politicians bribed on a daily basis and since those corrupt politicians make all the rules, the game is over. Like a virus, you have to format the drive and start over if you want to get it right.

EDIT- Oh, and Ron Paul for President.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528093 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:38:26 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528044 kapil :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

STFU
I will not.

I will stand here and defend my country and try my damnedest to prevent it from turning into a place where the rich rule over the poor, where no one except the ruling elite has rights, where people are disappeared in the middle of the night and stuffed in a far away Gulags for speaking up and expressing free thought without any recourse or right to a public trial.
--
»www.DumbLogic.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528044 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:26:38 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528025 kapil :
said by NOCMan See Profile :

Yeah but you're talking about people who wont go to jail.

Bush would just pardon them if that happened. They should of held off on Scooter Libby's sentencing until Bush was out of office.
Doesn't matter. Step 1 is always a full accounting of events. We can't get to punishment stage until the charges are read out loud in public and the traitors have an opportunity - regardless of the fact that they denied this to others - to mount a defense of their treasonous conduct.
--
»www.DumbLogic.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528025 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:22:52 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528019 roc5955 :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

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.
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528019 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:21:45 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528012 NOCMan : Yeah but you're talking about people who wont go to jail.

Bush would just pardon them if that happened. They should of held off on Scooter Libby's sentencing until Bush was out of office.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20528012 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:20:23 EDT Re: So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20527994 kapil :
said by Dogfather See Profile :

So if they didn't get immunity what happens.

A few customers who weren't damaged get a worthless coupon.

Bloodsucking scumbag Sen Edwards types get millions.

Customer rates go up because corporations don't pay this, customers ultimately do.

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.
The dirty laundry gets aired in public. Telcos get the bad publicity they have earned. The citizens, hopefully, learn that Democracy is not a spectator sport. There is some accountability for unprecedented, unconstitutional and illegal actions undertaken by the employees we sent to Washington to watch our house for us.
--
»www.DumbLogic.com]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20527994 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:16:48 EDT So what http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20527970 Dogfather : So if they didn't get immunity what happens.

A few customers who weren't damaged get a worthless coupon.

Bloodsucking scumbag Sen Edwards types get millions.

Customer rates go up because corporations don't pay this, customers ultimately do.

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20527970 Fri, 23 May 2008 09:11:04 EDT