Search results

Well that's too fucking bad that you want to know, cause you don't get to. NEENER NEENER.

This is probably a decent conversation to have. Now, one of the problems you've cited is the secrecy of all this intelligence gathering. If everything is secret, how do you know that the government isn't really abusing their power ? But the problem of secrecy is also a thorn in the...

I'm not interested in what you think is immoral. Morality isn't a standard you can easily quantify and analyze. If you want to start talking about morality, good luck pinning down which set of morals to guide your decision making. If your only opposition to the law has nothing to do with...

You're right, the discussion isn't over. You can continue to discuss whatever you want. Roe v. Wade was decades ago and obviously people still discuss that. You don't run into any problems by discussing the law or advocating for changes to the law. But when you throw your hat into the ring...

Ok. I'm going to be really nice in trying to explain this shit to you, because I can admit that unlike idiots like Tad, you TRY to use facts and you TRY to understand. You keep trying to bring up shit like "well its obvious !" or "common sense interpretation" of the law to make this shit...

So let me get this straight. The Reuters article is what you cite to to get your "news." But if I cite to another Reuters article, you get to selectively discard segments of that Reuters article, because you don't trust their source. Then why the fuck do I need to listen to any of their...

Yea, I learned about the constitution in law school. That totally invalidates my opinion. Where'd you learn about the constitution, 4th grade history ?

You know, throw a cardigan on this douchebag and that's exactly how I imagine tad in my head, minus the tinfoil hat. And fyi, this moron doesn't even understand the news hes reporting. His statement, at 2:36 is: "Is the Reuters exclusive true that the NSA data is being shared with the IRS...

Make sure you wear your tin-foil hat. With the advances in technology, I'll bet the NSA is intercepting (what little) thought you have between those ears directly.

It's called 1) finals, and 2) studying for the bar, dipshit. The last day of the bar in Texas is 8/01/13 WHOA CONICIDENCE ?!

Outliers. In other words, nutbag extremists. Just ponder this, for a moment. When this entire shit blew up, DIANE FEINSTEIN thought that it wasn't a big deal, because you know, she actually chairs the intelligence committee and sees the intelligence. Marinate on that for a bit. Your...

Uh no. I jumped on this thread because I LOVE shitting on retarded idiots who overreact based on ignorance and misinformation. I've visited this site since the days of everquest. My registration never was cleared, and once rerolled spun off, I became a posting member. You would love for me...

WHAT ?! Facts I can't dispute ?! TROLLLLLLLLLLLLL

You're a fucking pussy. Go live in a real police state, then compare the differences there with the freedoms you currently enjoy. It's ironic, really. The fact that you can sit in your chair and post on a message board about how we live in a police state disproves your point. You freely...

Well, your Messiah Snowden has terabytes of top secret information on everything the NSA does. If he had the smoking gun, my gut tells me it would have been the first thing disclosed. And I readily agree that the potential for abuse is there. But our response and criticism must be measured by...

I'll help you out a bit. Re-read that article and you will notice that nowhere does it say anything about Snowden, phone record metadata, or PRISM. There are other ways for the FBI, NSA, DEA, etc., to gather intelligence, including normal everyday run-of-the-mill court ordered wiretaps. The...

They're really easily identifiable as separate issues. The first issue is whether or not a search (or even if it is a search) is a violation of your privacy rights. The second issue is whether assassinating an American citizen without procedural due process is constitutional. Even if the...

You're venturing into another area of the law all-together. The people raising a stink in this thread are crying their salty tears because of their precious privacy rights. If you want to start talking about drone strikes killing American citizens without due-process, then I'd actually agree...

The naivete here is hilarious. You don't trust THE MAN but you're ok with companies having your metadata because "they're not going to do anything with it." News flash bozo, they do. Google has been scanning the shit out of your emails for YEARS looking for key-words to send you targeted ads...

On further reflection, this movie is basically a hybrid of The Truman show . . . and Star Wars. Protagonist is Anakin/Truman. Neo is Palpatine/Ed Harris. They even use the force -_-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland That's the case that dealt with what you're talking about. Pen registers make a record of your telephone calls. They record who you call, but not the content of your call (ie. metadata). When you call mom, you know the phone company has a...

People say the same things about Roe v. Wade, Citizens United, and every other controversial SCOTUS decision that's come out in the last century. Great thing is that we can all have our opinions on the constitutionality of governmental actions. But at the end of the day, 9 old wrinkly pajama...

I refer you to your wiki link a few posts up. Unless you genuinely thought that I've never read the 4th amendment in my entire life, in which case I apologize. What's good for the goose right ?

Probably. But there isn't any authority that says that the NSA making a copy and sticking it in a corner of a server somewhere without reading it is illegal. The issue is unsettled because the precedent doesn't exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy You can find examples there. Basically, if you put information out to the public, then you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. That's why it's not unconstitutional or illegal if you and I have a conversation over dinner and I...

And one last thing before I head off to diner. One of the most important question that ANY court asks when they consider a 4th amendment issue is: whether the person being allegedly illegally searched had a "reasonable expectation of privacy." Regardless of whether you support the wiretapping...

It should be interesting to you that the last article you linked is the only one that actually bothered to cite caselaw as opposed to appealing to amorphous crap like "the letter and spirit" of federal law. Either way, regardless of what side you fall under, you should still come away from this...

Great. You have an opinion -- that's actually much better than most Americans. I just want you to realize that your opinion is shit and isn't the gospel truth.

The government flies over your farm with an airplane and sees you growing weed in your back yard. They arrest you. This was deemed constitutional. The government looks at your house with heat sensing equipment from across the street and sees you doing illegal shit in your house with their...

The point im trying to make is that you people who have already concluded the law is unconstitutional have jumped the gun. Admit it, you know the plain letter of the law but you don't know anything about how it has been applied. If this law was so obviously unconstitutional, it would have...

Uh, it's not a different burden of proof, its just that you shoulder the burden, not I. If you gonna try and sound smhart by throwing legal terminology around, then perhaps you should watch a few episodes of law and order and try to not look like a fucktard. And yes, you shoulder the burden...

Reasonable is flying unicorns shitting rainbows. My statement has as much legal weight as yours -- absolutely zero. Give me case law stating what reasonable is. Then apply that case law to what is going on here.

Has the government invaded your privacy ? Have they showed up at your door and told you "DO NOT POST NEGATIVELY AGAINST US ON REROLLED.ORG ANYMORE OR ELSE !" Where is this police state you keep whining about ? Show me facts and legal analysis, or, again, shut the fuck up. And no. I don't...

And a little FYI, I'll totally admit that I'm playing devil's advocate here. I don't know if these searches are constitutional or not, but if you've spent any amount of time studying constitutional law at all, you know that none of this shit is ever clear cut obvious. The people who scream and...

How quaint. Explain to me what "reasonable" means. Show me situations of searches that have been deemed reasonable and unreasonable and apply it to what's going on here. This is exactly the bullshit I'm talking about. You know you have rights, you just don't have a fucking clue what those...

/yawn. Explain to me why the capturing of information is illegal. What legal authority allows you to come to that conclusion ? This shit is funny, really. Everyone KNOWS they have rights but the internet warriors don't have a fucking clue what those rights are. So give me the step by step...

Kay, I'll take the bait. Finish this sentence: It's illegal because ______. And I don't want some regurgitated bullshit. Give me the legal constitutional analysis or get the fuck out.

I thought this movie was a Hollywood production. Turns out, the entire thing is in Cantonese, save for a few scenes here and there with Neo.

Fair point. They tried appeasing people with calming words, and when that didn't work, they're starting to make changes in how the system actually works. But I don't think it's fair to give them shit for trying to reform the system, when that's the natural result of the people's bitching in...

Speculation about the existence of evidence isn't evidence. And in Snowden's emo armchair-constitutional-lawyer mind, what he's already revealed proves what the administration is doing is illegal. If there was more incriminating shit to be released, it would have been released in the initial...