Perhaps I should apply for a data entry position, job security I tell ya

5/12/2006 12:23:19 PM

who cares if people think its ok

its fucking illegal

5/12/2006 12:44:26 PM

And who's going to enforce the law in this case?

5/12/2006 12:46:39 PM

Quote :

"its fucking illegal"

well....no its not....it still sucks...im just not convinved that its illegal....our credit card companies have more information on us than the government ever will anyway...

5/12/2006 12:47:52 PM

1. How is this not a warrantless search?
2. The credit companies collect information with our permission.

5/12/2006 12:58:08 PM

thats the key difference, we knowingly allow the credit cards to have that much info on us.

5/12/2006 1:15:31 PM

Quote :

"Jesus christ, no one is going to take away our god damn weapons. I got tired of a bunch of ignorant fucks at my high school saying "Im not going to (or would, depending on age) vote for Gore (in 2000) Kerry (in 2004); because he's going to take away our guns!" I just wanted to scream at them " YOU IGNORANT FUCKS! THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS AWAY UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME RPGs OR A HOWITZER IN YOUR BACK YARD!!!!!!""

good point

i realized this in highschool

5/12/2006 1:16:55 PM

FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS YAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

fucking retards

5/12/2006 1:44:05 PM

Quote :

"no its not."

case closed folks

ureasonable search means you need to AT LEAST have a reason, or youre breaking the law.

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 1:46 PM. Reason : 6]

5/12/2006 1:44:37 PM

dangit people...i dont like this anymore than you do...but the fact that we dont like it doesnt mean that its illegal...there are alot of people who say it is...and alot of people who say its not...thats for the courts to decide i guess....personally im on the fence...

5/12/2006 1:53:18 PM

YEA thinking for yourself is soooo overrated

5/12/2006 1:56:57 PM

^Well its not for the justice department to decide.

CNN:

Quote :

"The Justice Department has been denied security clearances for access to information, which prompted it to drop an investigation into the program. (Full story) The Democrats' No. 2 member of the Senate, Sen. Richard Durbin, called the development "evidence of a coverup." "The fact ... that the Department of Justice has abandoned their own investigation of this administration's wrongdoing because there's been a refusal to give investigators security clearances is clear evidence of a coverup within the administration."

5/12/2006 1:57:29 PM

they are afraid to let people investigate.....clearly they have nothing to hide

5/12/2006 1:58:41 PM

^^^^

it's a fundamental breach of privacy

it doesn't even matter if it's "legal" or not in the standard US Code

it certainly is NOT constitutional

it is asinine that people are even debating this

5/12/2006 2:00:42 PM

ha...your a freaker arent you??

are you worried about the black helicoptors, salisburyboy??

if you think its illegal and are so pissed off then go do something about it...

OMG IMPEACH!!!

Quote :

"it certainly is NOT constitutional"

you dont know that

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:01 PM. Reason : asdf]

5/12/2006 2:01:14 PM

AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

The Bill of Rights

(The first ten Amendments were ratified Dec. 15, 1791, and form what is known as the Bill of Rights.)

...

Amendment 4

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.

5/12/2006 2:03:37 PM

^^how does that qualify as argument?


"you dont know that"

thats youre defense?

cereal

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:04 PM. Reason : =-g]

5/12/2006 2:03:54 PM

whose argueing anything??...you sure arent....and i never said i was...

all im saying is...dont be one of the pathetic paranoid "bush is hitler" people and think everything he does is against the law...

all im saying is that i dont know if its illegal or not...i dont know if it qualifies as a search or not (i suspect it doesnt)...i dont know if its unconstitutional or not??

guess what??...neither do you??


and i know what the bill of rights says...thanks anyway

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:07 PM. Reason : asdf]

5/12/2006 2:05:54 PM

I'm showing you that it is unconstitutional

and, even if it wasn't written down on some piece of paper

it should be offensive to your innate sense of liberty

5/12/2006 2:07:20 PM

clearly he drinks more FLAVOR-AID than most.

he can't be reasoned with

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:16 PM. Reason : SORRY NASTOUTE ]

5/12/2006 2:09:09 PM

i know what the constitution says....you havent shown me that its unconstitutional....

are you going to call me unpatriotic now since im not deeply offended by this??

i do think its a cause for concern....but dont go flipping out on me like you did on that dude yesterday and start calling me unamerican

5/12/2006 2:09:19 PM

IT IS NOT FUCKING KOOL-AID

jesus

5/12/2006 2:09:50 PM

Quote :

"whose argueing anything??...you sure arent....and i never said i was... all im saying is...dont be one of the pathetic paranoid "bush is hitler" people and think everything he does is against the law... all im saying is that i dont know if its illegal or not...i dont know if it qualifies as a search or not (i suspect it doesnt)...i dont know if its unconstitutional or not?? guess what??...neither do you?? and i know what the bill of rights says...thanks anyway"

This collection of words is just too stupid to merit a response relevant to the subject.

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:11 PM. Reason : 6]

5/12/2006 2:10:59 PM

^^^

ahahhahahaha

did i make that much of an impression?

i didn't know i had it in me

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:11 PM. Reason : .]

5/12/2006 2:11:15 PM

ha..thanks...anything else??

5/12/2006 2:11:55 PM

ben94gt

Quote :

" " President Bush need to start watching his ass he's starting to tread on impeachable territory " or assasination territory "

by the way

you really can't say that

just trying to help...

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:20 PM. Reason : .]

5/12/2006 2:19:08 PM

^Dude, when I read the first post about impeachable territory, the first thing that popped into my mind was the A-word.

When that guy actually came out and said it, I was like .

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 2:22 PM. Reason : sss]

5/12/2006 2:21:52 PM

yeah

you're REALLY not supposed to do that

even in jest

you just might get a little visit by dudes in black suits

5/12/2006 2:24:29 PM

Quote :

"Cavuto: "[C]ollecting our phone records" is better than "collecting our remains""

http://mediamatters.org/items/200605120007

without the NSA, we'd all be in peices, folks.

5/12/2006 2:33:16 PM

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin

5/12/2006 2:37:20 PM

you folks do realize that they're buying this information from the phone companies right?

5/12/2006 2:49:24 PM

^Yes, I think that's why the lawsuit against the phone companies was so inevitable.

5/12/2006 3:01:05 PM

i'm just saying
everyone is talking about how unconstitutional this is

and how upset we should be at our gov't

(and i guess i even said stuff like that)

but of the 4 baby bells, Qwest proved you can turn them down

so while i'm no fan of what the NSA has done
i honestly think att bellsouth and verizon are the ones really at fault here

5/12/2006 3:03:28 PM

^I dunno, dude. Corporations are in the money-making business after all.

5/12/2006 3:24:53 PM

Yeah, who cares how they do it?

5/12/2006 3:26:24 PM

certain government departments are in the threat-assessment business

doesn't excuse either action now does it

5/12/2006 3:27:03 PM

^^That's pretty much the rule. I don't like it, but it's the way things work, right?

^Over my head, dude. I'm not as smart as you. Explain?

5/12/2006 3:29:02 PM

you cannot excuse the phone companies for doing their job and then criticize the NSA for doing its job

you say the phone company has a responsibility to make money, they chose this time to trade phone records for contracts and possibly cash (and possibly less regulation)

at the same time the NSA, which is tasked with threat assesment and protection, chose to trade contracts for phone records, in order to build this large call network

if verizon, att, and bellsouth were just doing their job, so was the NSA

but of course instead of letting one off the hook and therefore having to let the other off
i'd rather just keep condemning them both

but it is not fair to ignore the phone companies when addressing this situation

5/12/2006 3:33:42 PM

People are pissed off at the phone companies, but I like to place the majority of the blame on the NSA because I highly doubt that the phone companies would sell phone records to just anybody.

5/12/2006 3:45:39 PM

Just like companies who worked with the Nazis, right?

5/12/2006 3:50:09 PM

Dudes, I totally agree with you.

Both the corporations and the government were complicit in this egregious act against our rights.

But you can't make it out like AT&T took out a Classifieds ad, saying, "PHONE RECORDS FOR SALE. COME AND GET EM."

5/12/2006 3:55:08 PM

^show me where i said anything along those lines
i said you cannot blame one without blaming the other

listen there is one phone company that did not sell out
proving that in the end, the other three put money before customers

if there was a way to

i would totally switch to qwest

then again i don't have a "home phone", so it doesn't really matter to me

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 3:59 PM. Reason : `]

5/12/2006 3:58:31 PM

Okay, LOL, we agree. I'm just less rational than you.

5/12/2006 4:01:48 PM

you bet the phone companies fucked up, they should have demanded verification from the FISA courts.


they're gonna get sued.

5/12/2006 4:07:58 PM

thats what Qwest did

and when the NSA was like "helllls no"

Qwest was like "fuck off you donkey raping shiteaters"

and then Ike was like "dawkey wapeen sheheyhers"

and i was laughing my ass off

5/12/2006 4:19:24 PM

josh83....in all seriousness....find out if your number is one that the phone company gave out....and if it is....sue the heck out of them...

i dont know how you would find out if your number was one that was given out but....still..you should do it...

5/12/2006 4:58:21 PM

if i am part of everyone, then they would have it

5/12/2006 5:02:22 PM

They've already been sued, dudes. By a former employee, I believe.

5/12/2006 5:07:48 PM

Even if it were illegal, who's going to enforce the law? The executive branch? They would be the ones who are breaking it.

Or has this already been established?

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 5:31 PM. Reason : ?]

5/12/2006 5:24:20 PM

it's funny how some of you faggots are selective over which rights the government can and cannot infringe upon


personally I don't think they should fuck with ANY of our rights

5/12/2006 5:59:53 PM