dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2420
share rss forum feed
« Huh?Change »
page: 1 · 2 · next


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

Good

Private industries that can provide assist the government in national security matters need some kind of cover from lawsuits or else they won't be bothered to cooperate with the government when their help is needed.

Has the EFF or anyone actually proved that our rights were abused or are they still just blowing smoke?
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

2 recommendations

said by pnh102:

Private industries that can provide assist the government in national security matters need some kind of cover from lawsuits or else they won't be bothered to cooperate with the government when their help is needed.

No harm was done to any US citizens. The EFF & ACLU are on a witch hunt and are just looking to punish monetarily AT&T & Verizon in order to earn fees for their organizations. Call it the "Full employment for class action lawyers" lawsuit.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

cafields

join:2003-12-17
Muncie, IN

1 edit
reply to pnh102
no ones, as you say, blowing smoke. I decided not to vote for obama, after hillary dropped out, then obama voted to give full immunity to the telecoms for illegal wiretapping, before that at two or more of his BS speeches, he said he would never give immunity to the telecoms for illegal wiretapping.


woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA
reply to FFH5
Name change, but still the same
--
BlooMe

mlundin

join:2001-03-27
Lawrence, KS
reply to FFH5
said by FFH5:

No harm was done to any US citizens.
BULLSHIT. Harm is done to EVERY US citizen EVERY time a right is violated. How many rights are you willing to give away before you don't have any left? My answer is none, and so I have been harmed.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by mlundin:

Harm is done to EVERY US citizen EVERY time a right is violated.
How has harm been done to you personally?
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by pnh102:

How has harm been done to you personally?
are you actually curious about how he was personally harmed, or do you just not care about the constitution?


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

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

Has the EFF or anyone actually proved that our rights were abused or are they still just blowing smoke?
Congress voted for telecom immunity BECAUSE IT HAPPENED. There would be no need for telecom immunity if EFF just made it up.

EFF is 100% right here. The US Gov't exceeded its rights under the Constitution, infringing on the rights of the people guaranteed in the Constitution. To provide immunity, the government can't simply make unconstitutional law and call it "good," it has to change the constitution itself.

Was I harmed individually? No, but since when is that a criteria? We The People were harmed, collectively, by a government which exceeded its bounds.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL

lesopp

join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL

1 recommendation

reply to mlundin
Would that apply to the rights of 401k holders whose 401k's included bonds with GM & Chrysler? Savings and investment plans further decimated by Obama contrary to standing US law, essentially denying due process and equal protection to the evil investors in order to payback the UAW.

Clearly a violation of their due process and equal protection rights.

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


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

are you actually curious about how he was personally harmed, or do you just not care about the constitution?
Yes. That is why I asked the question.

You can't credibly claim your rights were violated without them actually being violated.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!


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

EFF is 100% right here. The US Gov't exceeded its rights under the Constitution, infringing on the rights of the people guaranteed in the Constitution. To provide immunity, the government can't simply make unconstitutional law and call it "good," it has to change the constitution itself.
That's all fine and dandy, but again, can you provide any evidence that the US government broadly and systematically violated the rights of the American people with regard to telephone call log monitoring?
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·KCH Cable
reply to FFH5
"No harm was done to any US citizens."

Who knows. After all, who watches the watchers? ...Or have you never considered that

I was not the least bit surprised when Obama "flip flopped" on this issue. When he first said he was against it, he was either completely ignorant of what was really going on, or didn't care and just made an empty promise anyway.

As far as those organizations being on a "witch hunt" - that's a nice way to prop up your obvious dislike for them, which should not be the issue here. Regardless of your opinion of these organizations, there is a very valid point being made. If you disagree, then let's hear some debate of substance instead of conceited opinion.


badtrip
I heart the East Bay
Premium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

That's all fine and dandy, but again, can you provide any evidence that the US government broadly and systematically violated the rights of the American people with regard to telephone call log monitoring?
I believe that's exactly what these court cases are all about. Remember that courts not only decide punishment for individuals who commit crimes, they also decide whether a crime was committed in the first place.

The Bush/Obama administrations are trying to subvert the second of the two court functions I mentioned above.

nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

Private industries that can provide assist the government in national security matters need some kind of cover from lawsuits or else they won't be bothered to cooperate with the government when their help is needed.

....
they already have cover from lawsuits - it's called "following the law". Qwest declined to illegally wiretap their customers at the request of the government and they aren't being sued. They followed the law.

My understanding is that some amount of surveillance could have been done within the law, but the administration at the time didn't want to be bothered with those pesky laws (and that rag, the constitution). They were found out and the companies that didn't follow the law are being sued.

the only reason the lawsuits were thrown out is because congress retroactively changed the law to make the previous unlawful behaviour lawful.

Isn't it great when private industries own congress?


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

said by nasadude:

are you actually curious about how he was personally harmed, or do you just not care about the constitution?
Yes. That is why I asked the question.

You can't credibly claim your rights were violated without them actually being violated.
It's a baited question, any answer would be related to telecommunications or internet or similar. Those things are all priviledges...

Nice try at the set and spike by you two.
--
~~This is not The Greatest Sig in the World without annoying urls, no. This is just a tribute.~~


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to amungus
said by amungus:

"No harm was done to any US citizens."

Who knows. After all, who watches the watchers? ...Or have you never considered that
Those that are in support of these claims and lawsuits being dismissed will fall back on legal answers that essentially make any national spying method or program not exist. You're suppose to be a good sheep and pretend you don't know that there are pieces of hardware that exist that make this claimed activity pretty simple.

Then when the argument changes direction it will be pointed out only criminals and terrorists have anything to hide so get over yourself.

What you probably won't see them pointing out right now is the fact that these things are being dismissed because there is a law on the books that negates their case. It's easier to wave their hatred soaked political flag that points out they know more than you do. The perpetual troll that sees too much as being real but likes new names.
--
~~This is not The Greatest Sig in the World without annoying urls, no. This is just a tribute.~~


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

Private industries that can provide assist the government in national security matters need some kind of cover from lawsuits or else they won't be bothered to cooperate with the government when their help is needed.
So it's lawsuits and money and not the rule of law that will make them cooperate. They'll willingly break the law and not help the government?

If the government is following the law when wanting information from a business they are not asking for this info, they are telling them what they are going to have handed over to them.

So shall we go back to the spring and early summer of the year 2001 and reveal what was going on or has that time in history been given magical immunity? You're arguing against something as if it didn't exist because you're holding it in your hands behind your back where nobody can see it...
--
~~This is not The Greatest Sig in the World without annoying urls, no. This is just a tribute.~~

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
reply to funchords
said by funchords:

Congress voted for telecom immunity BECAUSE IT HAPPENED. There would be no need for telecom immunity if EFF just made it up.
I'm sorry, we must inject some reality here.

The EFF, ACLU, and the like have lawyers who will file lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit, and will appeal and appeal and appeal and appeal, until hell freezes over, on this issue and ones like it.

It DOES NOT MATTER what really happened.

What matters is that these businesses are being significantly harmed by the actions in the courts, whether or not they eventually "lose" or "win".

Congress, the Bush administration, and now the Obama administration, have all concluded that this is not in their or our best interest.

Thus the so-called "immunity" legislation.


ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to FFH5
Exactly right... Perhaps some physical harm would have come to you or I or our families had these wiretaps not been done. I would find it very hard to believe that NO terrorist plots were not uncovered and dealt with.

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
reply to MyDogHsFleas
One other reality check:

No laws were broken by the telcom companies' actions. Stop making things up by continuing to bleat "Laws were broken!" They weren't.

The lawsuits are civil lawsuits claimng harm to individuals or groups of individuals. There has never been a hint of criminal prosecutions from the Justice Department of either administration, or anyone else with the power to bring a criminal action.

jauman

join:2001-12-06
Kent, WA
We don't know if laws were or were not broken.

With the passing of the aforementioned law granting retroactive immunity, and the federal governments assertion of privilege over releasing info, gathering said evidence would be hard.

In the absence of more concrete evidence than the telecom room bits , criminal charges by the Justice Department (or any other prosecuting body) would be thinly-based at best.

So, in the absence of true knowledge about what's going on, how should we proceed? Should we abdicate all critical inspection of our government's activities and "just trust them?"

We each draw that line based on our personal comfort level with the topic in question, and clearly for some this issue is no longer behind that line. They hope for more inspection of what's going on.

Asking my government to tell me what's going on is far from absurd. I don't know that something bad went on here or not, but asking my government to rule transparently is absolutely my right. It is *my* government after all.


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

they already have cover from lawsuits - it's called "following the law". Qwest declined to illegally wiretap their customers at the request of the government and they aren't being sued. They followed the law.
Which is exactly why the other lawsuits against Verizon and AT&T were dismissed. They too followed the law.
said by nasadude:

They were found out and the companies that didn't follow the law are being sued.
Last I checked the EFF is not a law enforcement agency. It, like anyone else, can sue any entity for any reason. Even in the lopsided civil "justice" system in the USA that favors the plaintiff over the defendant, the EFF failed to prove anything, and had its case dismissed as a result.

The EFF should be made to cover Verizon and AT&T's legal costs.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to lesopp
Well you gotta figure since all these bailouts pretty much run afoul of the Constitution anyway what is a little more icing on the cake?
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

That's all fine and dandy, but again, can you provide any evidence that the US government broadly and systematically violated the rights of the American people with regard to telephone call log monitoring?
Not just telephone call logs,

»www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co···_pf.html
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL


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

'm sorry, we must inject some reality here.

The EFF, ACLU, and the like have lawyers who will file lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit, and will appeal and appeal and appeal and appeal, until hell freezes over, on this issue and ones like it.
For a post that started as yours did, that's not reality at all, it's beside the point.

If EFF would lose in court, then there is simply no need for immunity. The court would simply dismiss with prejudice and the case is closed, forever.

It's not like EFF's "victims" (the telcos) were being abused by the process, nor is it like EFF's comparatively very meager budget can afford to file a string of non-sense lawsuits against these very monied telecoms.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL

nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to pnh102
I give up, you're right - they didn't break the law because the president said so.

Then, even though the president told them to do it (so it's not illegal), congress felt compelled to make sure the DFHs got the point that it wasn't illegal by passing a law saying even if they broke the law previously (which they didn't of course, because the president told them to do it) they forgive them because they were protecting us from the mean brown people.

no wonder our country is so f'd up.

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
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

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

1 recommendation

reply to funchords
said by funchords:

If EFF would lose in court, then there is simply no need for immunity. The court would simply dismiss with prejudice and the case is closed, forever.
You completely miss my point. Please reread my post.

Stop and think for a minute. This is not a TV show. This is actual reality.

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.

Both Democratic and Republican-controlled Congress, and both Bush and Obama administrations, decided to shield the telcos from this lawsuit abuse, for the good of the country.

That is the reality.

It's not like EFF's "victims" (the telcos) were being abused by the process, nor is it like EFF's comparatively very meager budget can afford to file a string of non-sense lawsuits against these very monied telecoms.
Please take a trip to the real world and look at how many huge companies, even industries, have been crippled and sometimes literally put out of business by lawyers filing class action lawsuits and pursuing them.

Why do you think that half the ads on daytime TV are trying to get people to call 800 numbers and get added to class action lawsuits?

The money involved is IMMENSE.

Now, I don't think EFF/ACLU are doing it for the money. But they will gladly take it if they win and use it to fund even more lawsuit driven policy making.


Jim Kirk
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Westerville, OH
reply to ITALIAN926
OH NOES! If you're willing to give up your rights so easily, I hear North Korea is nice this time of year.


Jim Kirk
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Westerville, OH
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.