42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 11:36 am
Revellette said it best when she suggested that if it were the President of the United States saying our country had "accidentally" done this twice at different times with different people while they both were on official business on air planes...

...people like ci and Walter would be insisting that the president is lying.

They both seem to hold our country in contempt and scorn.

Hey, whatever makes them happy!
Moment-in-Time
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 11:44 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

We don't care what 'other countries' do with their spying.


What do you mean "we"?! I do care whether I am spied on by other countries; it's something that's been going on since the knowledge each country could do so and I don't think finding about such will change anything as it's a useful utility.

Quote:
The US has our Constitution that supposed to guarantee privacy for its citizens.


True! The U.S. Constitution established America's national government and fundamental laws, guaranteeing certain basic rights for its citizens. Ah, what a beautiful document! Unfortunately, not all humans strive to do what is right...Humans are imperfect animals. I'm more concerned regarding the repression of voters rights and the fact that many red states will not allow their ailing seniors, the poor, minorities to get the ACA. You're pulling your hair out because Snowden brought forth NSF wrong doing.....I wish that were the only thing wrong with our system; there is so much perversion of integrity within our political, culture society as well as global civilization that I would not waste too much time worrying about the NSF spying. Time itself will rectify this problem.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 11:52 am
@Moment-in-Time,
MiT...ci wrote:



Quote:
The US has our Constitution that supposed to guarantee privacy for its citizens.


To which you replied,

Quote:
True!


Is it???

Does the Constitution guarantee privacy for its citizens?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 11:57 am
@Moment-in-Time,
You wrote,
Quote:

What do you mean "we"?! I do care whether I am spied on by other countries; it's something that's been going on since the knowledge each country could do so and I don't think finding about such will change anything as it's a useful utility.


Yes, "we." What do you think you (we) can do about it? From my perspective, nothing. It's a matter of encryption from our end, and engineers are already working on that.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 12:08 pm
Anyone who suspected they are being monitored by the FBI, CIA, NSA or aliens from outer space can submit a request via the "Fredom of Information Act" to see what if anything has been collected regarding the personal lives of Americans.

From personal experience I can tell you that no request is ignored, despite the fact it is an enormous undertaking, requiring trained analysts to examine reams of information to see if anything ever has been picked up and retained. You will get an answer, it will take a great deal of time because it is tedious man intensive work. The analysts who do this work burn out quickly because it is so personally unrewarding. Analysts consider themselves successful when they can actually find something. The people who work intelligence are also Americans who are deeply invested in the protection of our country.

Regarding John Bamford, I bought his first book The Puzzle Palace, I got about a quarter of the way thru because it was total crap. His background research was based on copies of the Agency Newsletter which was issued monthly. The newsletter contained no intelligence information, but it did carry stories about various clubs agency personnel belonged, like the knitting, the painting, the clown club, bridge players, the tennis ladder and other hobbies or sports people engaged in. He interviewed Frank Raven, a retired executive who had dementia and was in his late 70's or early 80's. Bamford treated a sick old man as a rich resourse he could use to verify everything Bamford could cook up. He had no trouble ignoring Raven's faulty memory and frail condition to confirm anything he could dream up. Even newspapers are supposed to have info confirmed by several sources, not Bamford. He wanted to be the first outsider who claimed to have intimate knowledge of NSA as if he actually walked the halls. However,his book was successful and he is now the go-to-guy for his deep understanding of intell work. Personally, I wouldn't count on him for an accurate time.
0 Replies
 
Moment-in-Time
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 12:17 pm
@Frank Apisa,
MiT...ci wrote:
Quote:
The US has our Constitution that supposed to guarantee privacy for its citizens.[/quote]

Frank Apisa wrote:
Quote:
To which you replied,


Quote:M-I-T wrote:
Quote:
True!


Frank Apisa
Quote:
Is it???
Does the Constitution guarantee privacy for its citizens?


I answered in the affirmative that the Constitution guarantees Americans' basic rights. It does not guarantee specifically "privacy for its citizens." I really should not have answered so carelessly. Forgive me. You are correct.

No, the Constitution guarantees our basic rights, but individual privacy laws should be more of a local matter unless one wanted to amend the document in question.

Dear me, when I decided to post a couple of statements I certainly didn't intend to get into this type of dialogue.
_______
"First Amendment"
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 01:11 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
...people like ci and Walter would be insisting that the president is lying.
I don't know about c.i. and can't speak for him.

Where did I say that your president was lying let alone "insist" that he was lying?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 01:20 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Frank's imagination gets the best of him on many fronts; it's best to ignore his opinions that has no basis in fact or evidence.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Frank's imagination gets the best of him on many fronts; it's best to ignore his opinions that has no basis in fact or evidence.


Number agreement!

You simply cannot manage number agreement, can you, ci?

So...is English a second language with you?

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:06 pm
Quote:
The “custom payload” that Hacking Team uses to compromise YouTube injects malicious code into the video stream when a visitor clicks the play button. The user sees the “cute animal videos” he expects, according to Citizen Lab, but the malicious code exploits a flaw in Adobe’s Flash video player to take control of the computer.

Another attack, custom-built for use on Microsoft pages, uses Oracle’s Java technology, another common browser component, to insert a back door into a victim’s computer.[/unquote] http://wapo.st/1pD5nmo

The sort of crap going on in your computer and mine of which we would not know for a long time if ever if not for Snowden.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:07 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
...people like ci and Walter would be insisting that the president is lying.
I don't know about c.i. and can't speak for him.

Where did I say that your president was lying let alone "insist" that he was lying?


Actually, in the quoted comment...I never said you did say it.

I was speculating in a hypothetical...that if...

Right?
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:21 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Actually, in the quoted comment...I never said you did say it.

I was speculating in a hypothetical...that if...

Right?
Well, you must have a reason to write that I am one of those "people" who "would be insisting that the president is lying".

And this reason should be sourced by former examples of
a) that I said/wrote such,
b) that I said wrote such "insistingly".
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:27 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Actually, in the quoted comment...I never said you did say it.

I was speculating in a hypothetical...that if...

Right?
Well, you must have a reason to write that I am one of those "people" who "would be insisting that the president is lying".


Oh, I definitely do, Walter.

Quote:
And this reason should be sourced by former examples of
a) that I said/wrote such,
b) that I said wrote such "insistingly".


Really!

Well...I don't think it has to at all...and I think I will go with how I feel rather than how you feel.

If that is okay with you.

In fact, even if it is not okay with you...I will go with that.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:28 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Be careful of Frank.
Quote:
I was speculating in a hypothetical...that if...


Nobody knows when he's speculating in a hypothetical; only he does.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:35 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
FOURTH AMENDMENT

The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.


Quote:
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:36 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Be careful of Frank.
Quote:
I was speculating in a hypothetical...that if...


Nobody knows when he's speculating in a hypothetical; only he does.


Actually, anyone who understands the English language would know. It was pretty clear.

Quote:
Revellette said it best when she suggested that if it were the President of the United States saying our country had "accidentally" done this twice at different times with different people while they both were on official business on air planes...

...people like ci and Walter would be insisting that the president is lying.


But I guess people who have as much trouble with the English language as ci does...might have a problem with that.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  4  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:39 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
The “custom payload” that Hacking Team uses to compromise YouTube injects malicious code into the video stream when a visitor clicks the play button. The user sees the “cute animal videos” he expects, according to Citizen Lab, but the malicious code exploits a flaw in Adobe’s Flash video player to take control of the computer.

Another attack, custom-built for use on Microsoft pages, uses Oracle’s Java technology, another common browser component, to insert a back door into a victim’s computer.[/unquote] http://wapo.st/1pD5nmo

The sort of crap going on in your computer and mine of which we would not know for a long time if ever if not for Snowden.


I strongly suggest that anyone running windows run their browsers in the free version of sandboxie and set it to wiped the sandbox after closing the browsers.

A wonderful level of security.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 02:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:
FOURTH AMENDMENT

The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.


Quote:
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.


Interesting.

You are not telling us who is interpreting the Amendment in this stuff you are quoting without attribution.

Anyway...are you responding you my question by saying that the constitution does NOT guarantee privacy for its citizens?

(You can give up the pretense that you are ignoring me, ci. The only one you are fooling is yourself.)

http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/humour-blague/clown-jonglerie/clown.gif




cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 03:04 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I don't need to provide the source; it's the Constitution, the fourth amendment. Many law schools and Constitutional experts agree with this interpretation.

Not our problem you fail to understand the US Constitution.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 17 Aug, 2014 03:11 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Here, Mim and Frank, type into any search engine,
Quote:
the fourth amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures
.

If either of you disagree, please provide credible sources that challenges this fundamental rights to privacy.

The NSA's mass data collection of private communication is 'unreasonable.'
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 477
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 2.25 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 08:51:32