Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants   (news.cnet.com) divider line 775
    More: Obvious, NSA, United States, phone calls, FISA Amendments Act, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Legal liability, Internet Archive  
•       •       •

11329 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jun 2013 at 9:41 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



775 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-16 10:12:26 PM  

Halli: OgreMagi: ZipSplat: OgreMagi:
Ah, another sock puppet.  You need to stop trying.  We have enough information in hand.  And given the fact that the NSA has basically admitted to everything, your denying it makes you look the fool.

What information do you have?  Be specific.

Seriously?  You are asking for specifics in a thread discussing the NSA admitting to wrong doing with a link to the actual article?  I've seen people try very hard to avoid the facts, but you might possibly be setting a new standard.

You might be interested in knowing that this article has already been debunked multiple times in this thread.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/06/jerrold-nadler-does- no t-thinks-nsa-can-listen-us-phone-calls/66278/

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42141_CNET_Updates_Article_C on tinues_to_Make_False_Claims


Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog  and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet.
 
2013-06-16 10:31:42 PM  
This is he part of he thread where the actual pail of crap being addressed is eclipsed by everybody trying to out witty each other.
 
2013-06-16 10:31:56 PM  

italie: Halli: OgreMagi: ZipSplat: OgreMagi:
Ah, another sock puppet.  You need to stop trying.  We have enough information in hand.  And given the fact that the NSA has basically admitted to everything, your denying it makes you look the fool.

What information do you have?  Be specific.

Seriously?  You are asking for specifics in a thread discussing the NSA admitting to wrong doing with a link to the actual article?  I've seen people try very hard to avoid the facts, but you might possibly be setting a new standard.

You might be interested in knowing that this article has already been debunked multiple times in this thread.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/06/jerrold-nadler-does- no t-thinks-nsa-can-listen-us-phone-calls/66278/

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42141_CNET_Updates_Article_C on tinues_to_Make_False_Claims

Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog  and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet.


The article itself has now been discretely updated at the bottom by the author, and the title has been changed.  Does that work for you?
 
2013-06-16 10:36:47 PM  

GeneralJim: Teach me the art of insult, Sensei...


Well, first you never post anything except snotty remarks that are pertinent to nothing that the thread's topic addresses, then you.. oh, wait.  Never mind, Jim.
 
2013-06-16 10:52:43 PM  

bunner: GeneralJim: Teach me the art of insult, Sensei...

Well, first you never post anything except snotty remarks that are pertinent to nothing that the thread's topic addresses, then you.. oh, wait.  Never mind, Jim.


He needs a good stint in the Total Perspective Vortex.
 
2013-06-16 10:54:34 PM  

italie: Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet


Uh huh. There were even quotes from the congressman. You guys are farking nuts.
 
2013-06-16 10:55:54 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Vlad_the_Inaner: tenpoundsofcheese: The only reason Tina Fey was able to use that as a joke is only because the left doesn't like strong woman.

especially farkers, get me a sandwich, sharp knees, I'd hit that, etc.
they just couldn't bring themselves to nominate Hillary

ftfy.

Wait.  Strong women?   I thought we were talking about Sarah "Half term? I quit!" Palin.

How many full terms did Obama complete in the US Senate?


I don't remember Obama quitting to make money of gullible idiots.
 
2013-06-16 10:58:31 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Vlad_the_Inaner: tenpoundsofcheese: The only reason Tina Fey was able to use that as a joke is only because the left doesn't like strong woman.

especially farkers, get me a sandwich, sharp knees, I'd hit that, etc.
they just couldn't bring themselves to nominate Hillary

ftfy.

Wait.  Strong women?   I thought we were talking about Sarah "Half term? I quit!" Palin.

How many full terms did Obama complete in the US Senate?


There's a difference between quitting and getting a promotion.
 
2013-06-17 12:05:58 AM  
Ironically, the real winner might be the US Post Office. They can start their ad campaign, "We deliver private messages for you."
 
2013-06-17 12:08:23 AM  

Halli: italie: Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet

Uh huh. There were even quotes from the congressman. You guys are farking nuts.



You are completely missing the point. You are referencing websites / blogs with known agendas...to debunk a claim made by a website founded by people with known agendas.

The only thing nuts about this is that people are still arguing points that may or may not have merit. Who is being quoted accurately? What is potentially coming across out of context? What of it is actually fact?

If you want to prove a point cite something substantial, something tangible, something verified.
 
2013-06-17 12:10:06 AM  

italie: Halli: italie: Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet

Uh huh. There were even quotes from the congressman. You guys are farking nuts.


You are completely missing the point. You are referencing websites / blogs with known agendas...to debunk a claim made by a website founded by people with known agendas.

The only thing nuts about this is that people are still arguing points that may or may not have merit. Who is being quoted accurately? What is potentially coming across out of context? What of it is actually fact?

If you want to prove a point cite something substantial, something tangible, something verified.


They are quoting the congressman who started this whole bs. Are you retarded?
 
2013-06-17 12:31:15 AM  

Halli: italie: Halli: italie: Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet

Uh huh. There were even quotes from the congressman. You guys are farking nuts.


You are completely missing the point. You are referencing websites / blogs with known agendas...to debunk a claim made by a website founded by people with known agendas.

The only thing nuts about this is that people are still arguing points that may or may not have merit. Who is being quoted accurately? What is potentially coming across out of context? What of it is actually fact?

If you want to prove a point cite something substantial, something tangible, something verified.

They are quoting the congressman who started this whole bs. Are you retarded?

AGAIN..."They"..who the hell are "They". What are "They" quoting. Are "They" quoting the congressmen in context? Do "They" have the journalistic integrity to be trusted in doing so?

For that matter, do the bevy of Congressmen quoted even know what they are talking about?

My point is, you people are arguing "facts" back and forth, that may or may not be fact. THAT is retarded.

You don't know. Until we have something more substantial, everything is speculation to draw a conclusion from.

 
2013-06-17 12:34:17 AM  

italie: Halli: italie: Halli: italie: Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet

Uh huh. There were even quotes from the congressman. You guys are farking nuts.


You are completely missing the point. You are referencing websites / blogs with known agendas...to debunk a claim made by a website founded by people with known agendas.

The only thing nuts about this is that people are still arguing points that may or may not have merit. Who is being quoted accurately? What is potentially coming across out of context? What of it is actually fact?

If you want to prove a point cite something substantial, something tangible, something verified.

They are quoting the congressman who started this whole bs. Are you retarded?

AGAIN..."They"..who the hell are "They". What are "They" quoting. Are "They" quoting the congressmen in context? Do "They" have the journalistic integrity to be trusted in doing so?

For that matter, do the bevy of Congressmen quoted even know what they are talking about?

My point is, you people are arguing "facts" back and forth, that may or may not be fact. THAT is retarded.

You don't know. Until we have something more substantial, everything is speculation to draw a conclusion from.


Wow, just wow.
 
2013-06-17 12:45:07 AM  

italie: Halli: italie: Debunking a story you find questionable with links to a weblog and a news aggregate isn't really helping your cause.

//Cause everything on the internet is true
///Read that on the internet

Uh huh. There were even quotes from the congressman. You guys are farking nuts.


You are completely missing the point. You are referencing websites / blogs with known agendas...to debunk a claim made by a website founded by people with known agendas.

The only thing nuts about this is that people are still arguing points that may or may not have merit. Who is being quoted accurately? What is potentially coming across out of context? What of it is actually fact?

If you want to prove a point cite something substantial, something tangible, something verified.


This is why I don't believe Europe exists.

I've never been there, and everyone who tells me about it has an agenda.

Nobody can ever really know anything.
 
2013-06-17 12:47:30 AM  
I'm not even sure Obama is real. I've never met him, news has agendas. I might be in a truman show. Or Bush is still president and its all a conspiracy. Obama is just cgi. Thats why he is called 0bama.
 
2013-06-17 01:08:15 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Vlad_the_Inaner: tenpoundsofcheese: The only reason Tina Fey was able to use that as a joke is only because the left doesn't like strong woman.

especially farkers, get me a sandwich, sharp knees, I'd hit that, etc.
they just couldn't bring themselves to nominate Hillary

ftfy.

Wait.  Strong women?   I thought we were talking about Sarah "Half term? I quit!" Palin.

How many full terms did Obama complete in the US Senate?


What superior federal executive office was Sarah about to assume when she bailed?
 
2013-06-17 01:13:35 AM  

Halli: tenpoundsofcheese: Vlad_the_Inaner: tenpoundsofcheese: The only reason Tina Fey was able to use that as a joke is only because the left doesn't like strong woman.

especially farkers, get me a sandwich, sharp knees, I'd hit that, etc.
they just couldn't bring themselves to nominate Hillary

ftfy.

Wait.  Strong women?   I thought we were talking about Sarah "Half term? I quit!" Palin.

How many full terms did Obama complete in the US Senate?

I don't remember Obama quitting to make money of gullible idiots.


You must have a shiatty memory then ... because he's spending more money now than he ever could prior to 2008.  I'd outline it for you but I'm too busy reading his $60 million Africa trip itinerary; it's a good thing the nation's not in an economic tailspin!
 
2013-06-17 01:22:52 AM  

The First Four Black Sabbath Albums: It's scary that the USA is considered the moral leaders of the world.


Actually, only here.  We watched that title erode into the rusted waters of lake ambiguous between Nam and The Greed Years©
 
2013-06-17 01:26:21 AM  
Actually, we are globally viewed, atm, much as is that fat, bald, snarling guy at the end of he bar with all the tattoos and the knife in his belt, sucking down beer after beer and daring anybody to look at him.
 
2013-06-17 02:32:34 AM  

Mrtraveler01:

cptjeff: GeneralJim: Tried to close Gitmo.

Failed to close Gitmo? -- and only had to sign a paper, don't forget. Let's go with "Chose not to close Gitmo."

Didn't even bother to read most of your responses, but this one alone tells me you're not worth listening to.

Congress prohibited him from closing Gitmo. You know, the people who make the laws and allocate money? The President is not a dictator.

That one told you that he wasn't worth listening to?

This one was the one that sealed that deal for me:

GeneralJim: Ended Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Oh, great... a chance for homosexual sexual harassment in the military

Cool.  Another area in which you are ignorant.   If ignorance were a martial art, you'd be 10th Dan.

Now, clearly, the media and the President don't want this out because it hurts their pro-gay agendas, but homosexual sexual harassment has blossomed in the military. You might know this if you ever stepped out of your echo chamber. "Don't ask, don't tell" was repealed at the end of September, 2011, and sexual harassment jumped by more than a third in 2012. Here's the breakdown:

f05cff0b8dde4b14dcbb-39ae6c0e90f9ab066a65187af475ed6d.r73.cf2.rackcdn.com


Article to read...
 
2013-06-17 02:39:36 AM  
GeneralJim:
Article to read...

Jebus Farking Christ, here we go again with the sources...


//You know what, fark it. I'm going back to the caturday thread.
 
2013-06-17 02:55:26 AM  

bunner:

This is he part of he thread where the actual pail of crap being addressed is eclipsed by everybody trying to out witty each other.

You're half right...
 
2013-06-17 02:57:55 AM  

bunner:

GeneralJim: Teach me the art of insult, Sensei...

Well, first you never post anything except snotty remarks that are pertinent to nothing that the thread's topic addresses, then you.. oh, wait.  Never mind, Jim.

Ha!   Good first lesson.
 
2013-06-17 07:55:56 AM  

SunsetLament: Halli: tenpoundsofcheese: Vlad_the_Inaner: tenpoundsofcheese: The only reason Tina Fey was able to use that as a joke is only because the left doesn't like strong woman.

especially farkers, get me a sandwich, sharp knees, I'd hit that, etc.
they just couldn't bring themselves to nominate Hillary

ftfy.

Wait.  Strong women?   I thought we were talking about Sarah "Half term? I quit!" Palin.

How many full terms did Obama complete in the US Senate?

I don't remember Obama quitting to make money of gullible idiots.

You must have a shiatty memory then ... because he's spending more money now than he ever could prior to 2008.  I'd outline it for you but I'm too busy reading his $60 million Africa trip itinerary; it's a good thing the nation's not in an economic tailspin!


Hmm ranting about Obama taking presidential trips and how they cost money. A teabagging derper retard would only do that.
 
2013-06-17 08:40:06 AM  

GeneralJim: Mrtraveler01: cptjeff: GeneralJim: Tried to close Gitmo.

Failed to close Gitmo? -- and only had to sign a paper, don't forget. Let's go with "Chose not to close Gitmo."

Didn't even bother to read most of your responses, but this one alone tells me you're not worth listening to.

Congress prohibited him from closing Gitmo. You know, the people who make the laws and allocate money? The President is not a dictator.

That one told you that he wasn't worth listening to?

This one was the one that sealed that deal for me:

GeneralJim: Ended Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Oh, great... a chance for homosexual sexual harassment in the military
Cool.  Another area in which you are ignorant.   If ignorance were a martial art, you'd be 10th Dan.

Now, clearly, the media and the President don't want this out because it hurts their pro-gay agendas, but homosexual sexual harassment has blossomed in the military. You might know this if you ever stepped out of your echo chamber. "Don't ask, don't tell" was repealed at the end of September, 2011, and sexual harassment jumped by more than a third in 2012. Here's the breakdown:

[f05cff0b8dde4b14dcbb-39ae6c0e90f9ab066a65187af475ed6d.r73.cf2.rackcd n .com image 220x390]

Article to read...


And 100% of the rapes in prison, amirite?
 
Displayed 25 of 775 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report