42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 01:21 pm
@BillRM,
That would make some profilers in the police forces jobless .... but creat a lot of new jobs at the secret services ... and counter-spying agencies as well ... and would crate a new kind of "yellow press" ... and ... would make Frank finally feel safe.
BillRM
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 01:32 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Frank would not feel safe at all if he would get his wish as far too large a percent on the population would then feel it time to overthrown that government for a more sane one at whatever cost that would be needed.

Millions of honorable men of the Snowdons type in and out of the government would take actions under the following ...............

Quote:
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.[/size]
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 02:21 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Right...they should limit themselves to monitoring people


No they should monitor everyone who are living on the damn planet and the few that are off the planet for that matter.

Tell you what if you got your wish you would indeed need to monitor everyone as you would had created a far far greater threat to the state then a few terrorists you started with.


Actually, Bill...if I got my wish...they would monitor whomever, in their professional opinions as career intelligence agents, they consider worth monitoring.

The alternative, of course, would be to ask you who they should and who they should not monitor...an alternative I do not find even remotely attractive.

So...obviously you are in favor of them only monitoring people they are fairly sure have intentions to harm us...and to leave everyone else alone!!!!!

Brilliant...just brilliant!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 02:22 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

That would make some profilers in the police forces jobless .... but creat a lot of new jobs at the secret services ... and counter-spying agencies as well ... and would crate a new kind of "yellow press" ... and ... would make Frank finally feel safe.


So, Walter...you agree with Bill that the intelligence community should just monitor people who intend to harm us...and to leave everyone else alone?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 02:23 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Frank would not feel safe at all if he would get his wish as far too large a percent on the population would then feel it time to overthrown that government for a more sane one at whatever cost that would be needed.

Millions of honorable men of the Snowdons type in and out of the government would take actions under the following ...............

Quote:
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.[/size]



I feel safe enough to use my real name here on the Internet...and not some phony initials stuff, BillRM!
BillRM
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 02:32 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I feel safe enough to use my real name here on the Internet...and not some phony initials stuff, BillRM!


Sure you do Frank as you are planning on being a supporter of the upcoming police state instead of the defender of the constitution.....LOL

Not that with all the information I had posted concerning myself on this website I could not be located and ID for a few thousands dollars of government resources.

They just could not just find me by demanding the IP addresses I had access this site from by any secret order to Robert.

Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 02:51 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
I feel safe enough to use my real name here on the Internet...and not some phony initials stuff, BillRM!


Sure you do Frank as you are planning on being a supporter of the upcoming police state instead of the defender of the constitution.....LOL

Not that with all the information I had posted concerning myself on this website I could not be located and ID for a few thousands dollars of government resources.

They just could not just find me by demanding the IP addresses I had access this site from by any secret order to Robert.


Once again we play, "WHAT WAS BILL TRYING TO SAY."

I am willing to acknowledge that I do not know for sure. Wink


Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:03 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Bill has read Robert's Rules of Order?
BillRM
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:12 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I am saying you are happy to be a traitor to any oath you had taken in your life to defend the constitution Frank and therefore have no fear of any future police state government knowing who you are.

Is that clear enough?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:16 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Bill has read Robert's Rules of Order?


I seriously doubt that.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:18 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I'm not a native English speaker. And when reading what another wrote, I sometimes get it wrong. My bad Wink
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:19 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

I am saying you are happy to be a traitor to any oath you had taken in your life to defend the constitution Frank and therefore have no fear of any future police state government knowing who you are.


I am not a traitor...I simply have a different opinion from you on this contentious issue.

I have no idea of why you have to call me a traitor because of that difference, but if it help get you though your day...by all means, do it.

Quote:

Is that clear enough?


Well, that was a lot more clear than your last post...although this one, although clear, makes as little sense as that other one.

And that one made almost no sense at all.

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:20 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

I'm not a native English speaker. And when reading what another wrote, I sometimes get it wrong. My bad Wink


I think Bill was referring to Craven.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:23 pm
@Frank Apisa,
So do I. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:24 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I am not a traitor...I simply have a different opinion from you on this contentious issue.


Sure you are as you are supporting the government not following the constitution with special note of the bill of rights.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:27 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
I am not a traitor...I simply have a different opinion from you on this contentious issue.


Sure you are as you supporting the government not following the constitution with special note of the bill of rights.



You do not determine what is and what is not Constitutional, Bill. Neither does Snowden. That job is left to the SCOTUS (albeit, not by the Constitution.)

There is nothing in the Constitution that requires me to have the same opinion as you on this issue...and the fact that I have a polar differing opinion does not make me a traitor.

Grow up.
BillRM
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 03:59 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You do not determine what is and what is not Constitutional, Bill. Neither does Snowden. That job is left to the SCOTUS (albeit, not by the Constitution.)


The federal courts however does and even the secret court had rule that some of the actions of the NSA was unconstitutional and now that the open Federal courts are getting involved thanks to Snowdon more rulings are coming down to that effect.

There is no real question what this means......and you had openly supported the intelligence community not obeying this part of the constitution.

Quote:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[1]
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 04:10 pm
@BillRM,
this is not the old Church where the priests are the only ones who decide what the bible says, we all have a say in what the Constitution says and means, it is not left to SCOTUS to decide for us. SCOTUS decides what the governments final word on that document is, but if we the people decide otherwise then our decision is the one that should stand.
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 04:11 pm
Quote:
Technology is not something humankind can control. It is an event that has befallen the world.


Professor John Gray. London School of Economics. A liberal stronghold.
BillRM
 
  1  
Wed 25 Dec, 2013 04:30 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Quote:
Technology is not something humankind can control. It is an event that has befallen the world.


Professor John Gray. London School of Economics. A liberal stronghold.


Technology always had been a two edge sword that does not mean that we need to cut our own throats with it.

The same technology that did allowed NSA to tapped into google private cables also allowed google to encrypted that traffic beyond the power of NSA to unencrpted that traffic.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 210
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/14/2025 at 02:35:30