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.

(Digital Spy)   Noted investigative journalist Alec Baldwin wants to interview rude, disgusting little traitor Edward Snowden   (digitalspy.com) divider line 50
    More: Silly, Alec Baldwin, WNYC, things  
•       •       •

897 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 04 Jul 2013 at 10:44 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-07-04 10:46:26 AM  
"Snowden" in headline...DRINK!

Four greenlights a day, all Snowden, all the time
 
2013-07-04 10:50:31 AM  
Can someone please just launch Alec Baldwin into the sun?
 
2013-07-04 10:51:25 AM  
Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.
 
2013-07-04 10:53:10 AM  
Sure. Why not.
The MSM isn't doing its job.
 
2013-07-04 10:53:51 AM  

aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.


Got to put the blame on that escaping goat, know what I mean?
 
2013-07-04 10:58:33 AM  

aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.


It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.
 
2013-07-04 11:04:15 AM  

MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.


No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..
 
2013-07-04 11:06:05 AM  
to clarify, if they started shooting all people named George tomorrow and said that it was allowed under the patriot act, would that make it legal?
 
2013-07-04 11:06:23 AM  

Disgruntled Goat: "Snowden" in headline...DRINK!

i149.photobucket.com

On it, my friend.
 
2013-07-04 11:06:51 AM  

I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..


THIS!
 
2013-07-04 11:17:02 AM  

I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..


Show me the case law. Simple request. Show me the successful lawsuits.
 
2013-07-04 11:18:04 AM  

I sound fat: to clarify, if they started shooting all people named George tomorrow and said that it was allowed under the patriot act, would that make it legal?


No, but there is a process in place to establish that. Whining on the internet is not part of that process.
 
2013-07-04 11:19:49 AM  

I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.   The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..


Really? What Constitution is that? You could try to make an argument for the 4th, but that would be a long haul from "expressly". The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network. I wouldn't count on the SCOTUS to get rid of this program. It will have to be an act of Congress. Or, I guess that Executive branch could just kill it if it gets to be a real problem for them.
 
2013-07-04 11:24:21 AM  
damn man, between Snowden, Paula Deen, and Alec baldwin I am running out of popcorn over their antics.

Perhaps we should have all three of them get into a Pay-per-view wrestling match and have the profits go to feeding the hungry?

Just a thought...
 
2013-07-04 11:36:18 AM  
Snowden: The Good Nazi.

Baldwin: The Bad-Tempered Dad.


/that is all.
 
2013-07-04 11:42:26 AM  
He has as much journalist ability as any shaved chimp parading around on tv. Journalism is a great profession, too bad no one currently values it.
 
2013-07-04 12:09:14 PM  
FIRST QUESTION:  "What made you decide that the United States was your biggest enemy, and that Russia and China would be your greatest allies, in your quest to protect personal privacy?"
 
2013-07-04 12:41:03 PM  
Edward Snowden and George Zimmerman should totally hook up.
 
2013-07-04 12:47:39 PM  

I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..


LOL WTF are you talking about? Congress, the courts, and the executive have okayed these programs. Snowden is subverting the democratic process. Just because Snowden didn't like the result of the democratic process, it doesn't give him the right to undermine the process and then hide like a little biatch. I don't trust a 29-year old with zero sophistication in our laws making this decision instead of going through the proper channels like finding a sympathetic Congressman, no matter how remote that possibility was. Snowden deserves to deal with the consequences for what he's done.

I'm so tired of the Internet hivemind trying to turn this deadbeat into some folk hero.
 
2013-07-04 12:49:04 PM  

aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.


Glancing at phone records to fight terrorists. The horror.

Snowden's not only a traitor, but a moral hypocrite and coward for running to support China and Russia.
 
2013-07-04 12:53:59 PM  

velvet_fog: I'm so tired of the Internet hivemind trying to turn this deadbeat into some folk hero.


I'm kind of fascinated by that, actually. Example: I was just on a Young Turks video on YouTube which was about Snowden. I mentioned that I didn't support him and cited a poll that showed most Americans wanted him arrested. This was quickly followed by someone calling me a "Jew traitor" and that quasi-insult becoming one of the Top Comments within minutes.
 
2013-07-04 01:00:49 PM  

Disgruntled Goat: "Snowden" in headline...DRINK!

Four greenlights a day, all Snowden, all the time



One picture!
 
2013-07-04 01:02:05 PM  

I sound fat: to clarify, if they started shooting all people named George tomorrow and said that it was allowed under the patriot act, would that make it legal?


Yes.
 
2013-07-04 02:03:47 PM  
Baldwin: "Thank you for meeting with us today, Mr. Snowden.  My first question is What is in your Wallet? Question two, are you aware how much cash back you would have received have you used your Venture Card to flee from America's clutches?

/Baldwin is a whore.
//Capital One is a pimp that has helped bankrupt America.
///Who is the real traitor?
 
2013-07-04 02:07:05 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: I sound fat: to clarify, if they started shooting all people named George tomorrow and said that it was allowed under the patriot act, would that make it legal?

Yes.


Obama and the Courts are Lawful Evil.
 
2013-07-04 02:08:38 PM  

Nemo's Brother: StoPPeRmobile: I sound fat: to clarify, if they started shooting all people named George tomorrow and said that it was allowed under the patriot act, would that make it legal?

Yes.

Obama and the Courts are Lawful Evil.




The best kind of evil.
 
2013-07-04 02:39:25 PM  
I'm waiting for Alec Baldwin's recent slurs to get as much attention as Paula Deen's.
 
2013-07-04 03:28:37 PM  

I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..


Dear United States lawmakers.  The rules of law are not the same as the rules of Magic: The Gathering in which if a card is stated to somehow break a core rule judgement defers to the card.  The Constitution overrides crappy laws, not the other way around.

Although 52 card pickup seems more their speed than M:TG.  Well, more like "52 card hire my brother in law's contracting firm to pick them up" .
 
2013-07-04 03:37:54 PM  
Uhm, I quite enjoy Alec Baldwin's "Here's the Thing" podcast (it might be on the radio, too). When he gets a serious guest on, the interview goes deep. The show he did with NYC's former commissioner of corrections and probation was incredibly insightful. Interestingly, Thom Yorke came off sounding as intelligent as Nigel Tufnel.
 
2013-07-04 04:01:50 PM  

I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..


Technically, the 4th amendment only protects the search and seizure of your home and personal papers. Depending on the text of the user agreement you clicked through when you signed up for your cell phone or your email service, you may have explicitly said that you understand that the information you share on their service can be seen by others. For example, this is in the Comcast user agreement:

b. Eavesdropping. The public Internet is used by numerous persons or entities including, without limitation, other subscribers to HSI. As is the case with all shared networks like the public Internet, there is a risk that you could be subject to "eavesdropping." This means that other persons or entities may be able to access and/or monitor your use of HSI. If you post, store, transmit, or disseminate any sensitive or confidential information, you do so at your sole risk. NEITHER COMCAST NOR ITS AFFILIATES, SUPPLIERS, OR AGENTS SHALL HAVE ANY LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FOR ANY CLAIMS, LOSSES, ACTIONS, DAMAGES, SUITS, OR PROCEEDINGS ARISING OUT OF OR OTHERWISE RELATING TO SUCH ACTIONS BY YOU. You acknowledge that software programs are commercially available that claim to be capable of encryption or anonymization. We make no representation or warranty regarding the effectiveness of these programs.

When you sign in the dotted line you are basically saying that you understand that unless you take measures to encrypt your information, everything you do can be seen by others on the network. I haven't researched the specifics, but there is likely all kinds of similar clauses in cell phone and other agreements where you are signing away your expectation of privacy when using those services.
 
2013-07-04 04:15:56 PM  

mafiageek1980: damn man, between Snowden, Paula Deen, and Alec baldwin I am running out of popcorn over their antics.

Perhaps we should have all three of them get into a Pay-per-view wrestling match and have the profits go to feeding the hungry?

Just a thought...


Look over there, isn't that Lindsay Lohan getting out of rehab?
 
2013-07-04 04:23:29 PM  
Why all the Alec hate? Of all his clan, he's the capital one.
 
2013-07-04 04:23:55 PM  

MFAWG: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Show me the case law. Simple request. Show me the successful lawsuits.


Just the kind of pointless argument that makes govt. bureaucrats smile
 
2013-07-04 04:38:21 PM  

MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.


It's "legal".  Claiming it's legal without the sarcasm quotes means you're a blithering idiot or a member of the last couple presidential administrations.  Or both, I suppose.

Yes, statutory law (maaaaaybe) allows it and the USSC has to this point not gone out of their way to strike down these kinds of practices, but amendment 4 is fairly clear on being secure in your person and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures, and that secret warrants aren't really legit is something that I think wasn't specified mostly because that's incredibly farking obvious.

It's only barely even in the gray area, honestly.

//The government doing things that are illegal by our own laws isn't unheard of or even terribly unusual, shiat like internment camps, the tuskegee experiments, and so on were all legal in the same sense of "hadn't been stuck down explicitly at the time because it never occurred to the people writing the law that anyone would ignore it that blatantly."
 
2013-07-04 04:43:04 PM  

GameSprocket: The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network.


Do you genuinely believe that in the late 1700s humans were cave-men that didn't use a form of communication that couldn't be copied by someone intercepting the message in the middle, or are you going for some kind of equivalent of "internet-published articles and flyers can be censored because the first amendment only mentions presses, and those aren't used to make internet articles or flyers"?
 
2013-07-04 04:54:36 PM  

Jim_Callahan: GameSprocket: The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network.

Do you genuinely believe that in the late 1700s humans were cave-men that didn't use a form of communication that couldn't be copied by someone intercepting the message in the middle, or are you going for some kind of equivalent of "internet-published articles and flyers can be censored because the first amendment only mentions presses, and those aren't used to make internet articles or flyers"?


Oh, so now you're going to quote Justice Scalia to make your point.
 
2013-07-04 05:24:41 PM  

Jim_Callahan: GameSprocket: The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network.

Do you genuinely believe that in the late 1700s humans were cave-men that didn't use a form of communication that couldn't be copied by someone intercepting the message in the middle, or are you going for some kind of equivalent of "internet-published articles and flyers can be censored because the first amendment only mentions presses, and those aren't used to make internet articles or flyers"?


The thing is that non-encrypted internet communications are the equivalent of sending a postcard instead of a sealed letter because of the way the internet works, so it can be argued that the expectation of privacy does not exist unless you take efforts to secure your communications. It is similar to how the 4th amendment protects your privacy on your own property, but you don't have the same expectation of privacy when you are in a mall or on a public road. On your cell phone provider's network or the public internet, it can be argued that you similarly do not have an expectation of privacy without using encryption.

/Just playing devil's advocate here
 
2013-07-04 05:29:32 PM  

Mad_Radhu: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Technically, the 4th amendment only protects the search and seizure of your home and personal papers. Depending on the text of the user agreement you clicked through when you signed up for your cell phone or your email service, you may have explicitly said that you understand that the information you share on their service can be seen by others. For example, this is in the Comcast user agreement:

b. Eavesdropping. The public Internet is used by numerous persons or entities including, without limitation, other subscribers to HSI. As is the case with all shared networks like the public Internet, there is a risk that you could be subject to "eavesdropping." This means that other persons or entities may be able to access and/or monitor your use of HSI. If you post, store, transmit, or disseminate any sensitive or confidential information, you do so at your sole risk. NEITHER COMCAST NOR ITS AFFILIATES, SUPPLIERS, OR AGENTS SHALL HAVE ANY LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FOR ANY CLAIMS, LOSSES, ACTIONS, DAMAGES, SUITS, OR PROCEEDINGS ARISING OUT OF OR OTHERWISE RELATING TO SUCH ACTIONS BY YOU. You acknowledge that software programs are commercially available that claim to be capable of encryption or anonymization. We make no representation or warranty regarding the effectiveness of these programs.

When you sign in the dotted line you are basically saying that you understand that unless you take measures to e ...




Yet I can't get my slavery contracts to be enforced.
 
2013-07-04 05:42:49 PM  

GameSprocket: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.   The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Really? What Constitution is that? You could try to make an argument for the 4th, but that would be a long haul from "expressly". The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network. I wouldn't count on the SCOTUS to get rid of this program. It will have to be an act of Congress. Or, I guess that Executive branch could just kill it if it gets to be a real problem for them.


Are you stupid, read the fourth amendment.  if this does not qualify as unwarranted search, nothing in history ever has.
 
2013-07-04 05:49:02 PM  

Zarquon's Flat Tire: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Dear United States lawmakers.  The rules of law are not the same as the rules of Magic: The Gathering in which if a card is stated to somehow break a core rule judgement defers to the card.  The Constitution overrides crappy laws, not the other way around.

Although 52 card pickup seems more their speed than M:TG.  Well, more like "52 card hire my brother in law's contracting firm to pick them up" .


Ma

Mad_Radhu: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Technically, the 4th amendment only protects the search and seizure of your home and personal papers. Depending on the text of the user agreement you clicked through when you signed up for your cell phone or your email service, you may have explicitly said that you understand that the information you share on their service can be seen by others. For example, this is in the Comcast user agreement:

b. Eavesdropping. The public Internet is used by numerous persons or entities including, without limitation, other subscribers to HSI. As is the case with all shared networks like the public Internet, there is a risk that you could be subject to "eavesdropping." This means that other persons or entities may be able to access and/or monitor your use of HSI. If you post, store, transmit, or disseminate any sensitive or confidential information, you do so at your sole risk. NEITHER COMCAST NOR ITS AFFILIATES, SUPPLIERS, OR AGENTS SHALL HAVE ANY LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FOR ANY CLAIMS, LOSSES, ACTIONS, DAMAGES, SUITS, OR PROCEEDINGS ARISING OUT OF OR OTHERWISE RELATING TO SUCH ACTIONS BY YOU. You acknowledge that software programs are commercially available that claim to be capable of encryption or anonymization. We make no representation or warranty regarding the effectiveness of these programs.

When you sign in the dotted line you are basically saying that you understand that unless you take measures to e ...


That means that you cant sue THEM for being eavesdropped on.  It does not make it okay for anyone at all, much less the government to eavesdrop on you.
 
2013-07-04 06:51:15 PM  

I sound fat: GameSprocket: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.   The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Really? What Constitution is that? You could try to make an argument for the 4th, but that would be a long haul from "expressly". The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network. I wouldn't count on the SCOTUS to get rid of this program. It will have to be an act of Congress. Or, I guess that Executive branch could just kill it if it gets to be a real problem for them.

Are you stupid, read the fourth amendment.  if this does not qualify as unwarranted search, nothing in history ever has.




If we can save, just one child, it's all worth it.
 
2013-07-04 11:10:07 PM  
History would like a word. So would a few children...oh, wait, they're dead. Never mind.
 
2013-07-05 01:17:18 AM  

velvet_fog: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.  The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

LOL WTF are you talking about? Congress, the courts, and the executive have okayed these programs. Snowden is subverting the democratic process. Just because Snowden didn't like the result of the democratic process, it doesn't give him the right to undermine the process and then hide like a little biatch. I don't trust a 29-year old with zero sophistication in our laws making this decision instead of going through the proper channels like finding a sympathetic Congressman, no matter how remote that possibility was. Snowden deserves to deal with the consequences for what he's done.

I'm so tired of the Internet hivemind trying to turn this deadbeat into some folk hero.


LOL WTF are YOU talking about? Subvert the democratic process? Here's what does that. The NSA is checked by no one and nothing. A secret court that only one side argues to and whose rulings are all classified, that doesn't look at individual cases but just signs off on guidelines that the NSA, in cooperation with the FBI, CIA, and the rest of the alphabet, then supposedly enforces upon itself because no one gets to watch what they're doing. Congressional oversight that's crippled by the indisputable fact that the director of national intelligence tells bald-faced lies to them (No sir, we do not collect any kind of data on Americans = PROVEN LIE). The Supreme Court? Good luck getting them to ever rule on the constitutionality of what the NSA is doing, because (a) state secrets and (b) you can't show standing to sue because you can't prove the government is violating your rights when it's classified.
 
2013-07-05 08:43:06 AM  
I'd say the traitors are the people in Congress and our President whose oath of office is to protect the Constitution.

They are absolutely traitors to that oath.
 
2013-07-05 11:11:35 AM  
Hey look, another celebrity fascist on the boycott list.
 
2013-07-05 11:15:23 AM  
Weird.  If anyone would be sympathetic to having their private calls recorded and then shared with others without your consent you would think it would be this guy.
 
2013-07-05 05:33:12 PM  

MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.


Thank you. This is way too important to let the poorly informed hipster douchebags infesting protest groups etc. to let them control the conversation.
/burnt out on political activism after dealing with people in OWS biatching about "Marshall Law" being declared
 
2013-07-05 05:35:56 PM  

GameSprocket: I sound fat: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

No sir, it is NOT legal, *THAT* is the point.  You seem to be arguing that because the government DOES it, it makes it legal.  Nothing allows them to do this legally.  They just do it.  The patriot act does NOT allow this.   The constitution expressly forbids it.  NOTHING on the books makes this remotely legal..

Really? What Constitution is that? You could try to make an argument for the 4th, but that would be a long haul from "expressly". The Constitution doesn't really cover making perfect duplicates of digital media being transmitted across a network. I wouldn't count on the SCOTUS to get rid of this program. It will have to be an act of Congress. Or, I guess that Executive branch could just kill it if it gets to be a real problem for them.


... and then Congress swoops in and impeaches the President for not enforcing a law passed by both the House and the Senate. Brilliant!

The President hasn't done much to stop this because he really  can't in this environment.
 
2013-07-05 09:55:34 PM  

Crotchrocket Slim: The President hasn't done much to stop this because he really can't in this environment.


He hasn't done anything to stop it, true.

He's done plenty to make sure it continues and expands, though.

The Obama administration told a federal court Tuesday that the public has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in cellphone location data, and hence the authorities may obtain documents detailing a person's movements from wireless carriers without a probable-cause warrant.

Let's turn everyone's cell phone into a 24/7 tracking device. Because that's the sure way to stop this, said no one ever.
 
2013-07-05 10:12:43 PM  

Crotchrocket Slim: MFAWG: aaronx: Yeah, it is totally Snowden's fault that my stupid country illegally spies on everybody. F*cking Snowden.

It's not illegal. Characterizing as such completely misses the point, which is that it's legal but should not be.

So please stop it.

Thank you. This is way too important to let the poorly informed hipster douchebags infesting protest groups etc. to let them control the conversation.
/burnt out on political activism after dealing with people in OWS biatching about "Marshall Law" being declared


Um, no.

Spying on Americans without a warrant is not legal. It's just that (as with bank fraud) those who would be in charge of prosecuting the crime refuse to do so.

Hell, remember baseball player, Roger Clemens, being prosecuted for lying to Congress under oath about steroid use?

Obama's head of the spying program lied under oath to Congress about these spying programs and has admitted to doing so publicly.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

Yet he's not being prosecuted for behavior that is absolutely a felony.
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments

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