Text 11810, 257 rader
Skriven 2006-06-27 08:53:26 av Robert Comer (1:379/45)
  Kommentar till text 11803 av Mark (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: AT&T - we own your records sucker!!!
================================================
From: "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com>

> This enemy has been plotting the overthrow of the ideals of our nation for
> hundreds of years prior to our formation, they are not going to give up.
> If you're successful in hog tying our government in their efforts to
> prevent that goal, then you are opting for kneeling or dying. I'll never
> kneel, and am not willing to die prematurely because of some liberal
> mind-set that refuses to acknowledge the reality of our world.

And you're playing right along and giving the ideals of our nation away, just
like they want you to do.

> Now suddenly our government is our enemy? I don't think so.

No, they aren't the enemy (yet), but they sure as heck are not doing what they
should be doing.

> What is so different about the government searching for Islamic terrorists
> online in this day and age and taking them out, or the government, in 1886
> finding an errant brochure advertising a KKK lynching over at "Podunk
> Hollow" on Saturday night, then staking out the bridal paths that lead to
> that hollow and arresting riders on those paths a few hours before the
> lynching?

First question I'd have of the above, did they have a court order to stake out
the path?  If not, they were wrong.  Aside from the above, they're not just
spying on a few people now, it's everyone -- that's quite a bit different.

> You seem to be saying that you should have absolute privacy to be able to
> ride that bridal path unimpeded regardless of the overwhelming
> circumstances that lead the government to monitor same.

No, not absolute privacy, just privacy protected by, and abridged by, valid
law, not the whims of megalomaniacs afraid of a few nutters.

> Additionally, back then, I'd have expected the government to break down
> the door of every printing press within a 100 miles and try to match up
> the typeface on the found brochure with the type at that printer and upon
> finding a match, frog marching the SOB off to jail.

I wouldn't expect that, and if it happened, it was done illegally, even back
then.

> You seem to be saying that the government should let them lynch someone,
> then try to make a case after the fact, the old favored law enforcement
> after the poor soul is dead model -- we tried that in 1993 after the first
> WTC attack, and many seem hell bent to go back to that model -- no
> frigging thanks, we don't need another 3,000 dead in the streets of our
> cities while we play games with ourselves.

Nope, not saying that, but I certainly don't support arresting and spying on
everyone just because something might happen.  If something is suspect like
that, work within the law to stop it, otherwise the laws are just mouth service
and we should just give up being Americans.

--
Bob Comer





"Mark" <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:44a09b54@w3.nls.net...
> This enemy has been plotting the overthrow of the ideals of our nation for
> hundreds of years prior to our formation, they are not going to give up.
> If you're successful in hog tying our government in their efforts to
> prevent that goal, then you are opting for kneeling or dying. I'll never
> kneel, and am not willing to die prematurely because of some liberal
> mind-set that refuses to acknowledge the reality of our world.
>
> When Patrick Henry said, "Give me Liberty or Give me Death" the object of
> his derision was England and he said it as, essentially, a member of our
> government. We won that war, and we got liberty of, by and for the people.
> Now suddenly our government is our enemy? I don't think so.
>
> What is so different about the government searching for Islamic terrorists
> online in this day and age and taking them out, or the government, in 1886
> finding an errant brochure advertising a KKK lynching over at "Podunk
> Hollow" on Saturday night, then staking out the bridal paths that lead to
> that hollow and arresting riders on those paths a few hours before the
> lynching?
>
> Sure, some hapless soul might coincidentally be on that path at that
> particular time and be falsely accused, then released later, but most of
> them would have been latter day terrorists that refused to accept reality.
> You seem to be saying that you should have absolute privacy to be able to
> ride that bridal path unimpeded regardless of the overwhelming
> circumstances that lead the government to monitor same.
>
> Additionally, back then, I'd have expected the government to break down
> the door of every printing press within a 100 miles and try to match up
> the typeface on the found brochure with the type at that printer and upon
> finding a match, frog marching the SOB off to jail. Most printers wouldn't
> need a battering ram at the door, they'd volunteer, thus narrowing down
> the search considerably to those that wouldn't.
>
> You seem to be saying that the government should let them lynch someone,
> then try to make a case after the fact, the old favored law enforcement
> after the poor soul is dead model -- we tried that in 1993 after the first
> WTC attack, and many seem hell bent to go back to that model -- no
> frigging thanks, we don't need another 3,000 dead in the streets of our
> cities while we play games with ourselves.
>
>
> "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:449e7bde$1@w3.nls.net...
>>> Bob, The way I see it, you're worried that the government will
>>> inadvertently, while mining for terrorists, find out that you like
>>> sardine and cream cheese sandwiches on pumpernickel bread, and surely
>>> that information would be extremely embarrassing <g>
>>
>> So privacy isn't important to you, well, that's not the way I feel and
>> it's certainly not the way our country was set up -- the individual is
>> supposed to count.  It's true I have nothing to hide, and nothing to be
>> embarrassed about, but it's the principle of the thing.  You give them
>> this much they'll take more...
>>
>>> I worry that your, and your cohorts, efforts to prevent the government
>>> from finding out that embarrassing information inadvertently, thus
>>> preventing their efficient gathering of intelligence against the enemies
>>> as well, will get you and me both killed on our way down to the deli to
>>> buy same sandwich. i.e. I don't give a flying fig if the government
>>> finds out I like weird food by accident, and I welcome their laughing at
>>> those choices if they so choose, but in return for their amusement, I
>>> also expect them to make sure I can get to that deli and buy what I want
>>> without dying en route.
>>
>> Then the terrorists have beaten you -- you're afraid of them enough to
>> give up everything.
>>
>>> I'm sure you don't agree, as it appears your "privacy" is more important
>>> than life,
>>
>> Give me liberty or give me death.
>>
>>>You may see it my way in your own evolution, or not, but there's not any
>>>argument in present time that will change your, or my, mind.
>>
>> Yep, one has decide what to give up, or not.
>>
>> --
>> Bob Comer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Mark" <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:449e0ccb@w3.nls.net...
>>> Bob, The way I see it, you're worried that the government will
>>> inadvertently, while mining for terrorists, find out that you like
>>> sardine and cream cheese sandwiches on pumpernickel bread, and surely
>>> that information would be extremely embarrassing <g>
>>>
>>> I worry that your, and your cohorts, efforts to prevent the government
>>> from finding out that embarrassing information inadvertently, thus
>>> preventing their efficient gathering of intelligence against the enemies
>>> as well, will get you and me both killed on our way down to the deli to
>>> buy same sandwich. i.e. I don't give a flying fig if the government
>>> finds out I like weird food by accident, and I welcome their laughing at
>>> those choices if they so choose, but in return for their amusement, I
>>> also expect them to make sure I can get to that deli and buy what I want
>>> without dying en route.
>>>
>>> I'm sure you don't agree, as it appears your "privacy" is more important
>>> than life, and I understand your point of view, I used to share it. You
>>> may see it my way in your own evolution, or not, but there's not any
>>> argument in present time that will change your, or my, mind.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> news:449d2f65@w3.nls.net...
>>>>> I'm pretty sure I'm missing something, direction/context or something
>>>>> in your post Bob. By "he" do you mean me or John?
>>>>
>>>> You.  I don't understand why you're so afraid of the terrorists that
>>>> you are willing to give up what this country stands for so willingly.
>>>>
>>>>> What I'm afraid of is having to barricade myself in down the road,
>>>>> after every single frigging effort the government attempts to use to
>>>>> nail the bastards, while there's still time to save our way of life as
>>>>> we know it, is leaked by moles inside the government and published by
>>>>> the NYTs, thus placing us all (troops first, for now) at greater risk
>>>>> of loss of life.
>>>>
>>>> That's just it, it appears you want to give up our way of life to stop
>>>> the terrorists, that's just not understandable to me.  The chances of
>>>> them doing just that is so vanishingly small that I don't want to give
>>>> up anything to protect against them.
>>>>
>>>> And as for our government, they're the ones pissing the Arabs off --
>>>> and more of a cause of terrorism than probably anything else.  Karzai
>>>> said it yesterday, us fighting terrorism like this is not the way to
>>>> go, we have to get to the root of the problem and fix that, not just
>>>> senselessly killing each other.
>>>>
>>>>> All because too many (well, yes "too many" but the polls showed that
>>>>> an overwhelming majority had no problem with the NSA program, and an
>>>>> even higher percentage will find favor with the latest leaked
>>>>> program -- now rendered useless) ...
>>>>
>>>> I could care less what the sheeple say they like, what the government
>>>> is doing *wrong* and very un-American.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bob Comer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mark" <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:449cb146@w3.nls.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:449caa0b$1@w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>I think I said that because I've questioned him on the same concept
>>>>>>and not in much nicer words either. <associative guilt I guess>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I really don't know why he's so afraid of terrorists.  Sorry Mark,
>>>>>> but I *really* don't understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm pretty sure I'm missing something, direction/context or something
>>>>> in your post Bob. By "he" do you mean me or John?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you mean me, not at all, no fear whatsoever. My original point was
>>>>> that AT&T doesn't want to get hit with a bunch of frivolous lawsuits
>>>>> (like Verizon et al. did when the NYTs undermined our national
>>>>> security with their leak prior to this latest one) because they let
>>>>> the government look at communications by terrorists, or allowed a look
>>>>> to chase down a potential terrorist, so they're changing their privacy
>>>>> policy to try and avoid a few billion dollars in lawyer fees, they'll
>>>>> still have to spend millions regardless and all of our phone bills
>>>>> will go up because of it, just not as much.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I'm afraid of is having to barricade myself in down the road,
>>>>> after every single frigging effort the government attempts to use to
>>>>> nail the bastards, while there's still time to save our way of life as
>>>>> we know it, is leaked by moles inside the government and published by
>>>>> the NYTs, thus placing us all (troops first, for now) at greater risk
>>>>> of loss of life.
>>>>>
>>>>> All because too many (well, yes "too many" but the polls showed that
>>>>> an overwhelming majority had no problem with the NSA program, and an
>>>>> even higher percentage will find favor with the latest leaked
>>>>> program -- now rendered useless) of us everyday law abiding citizens
>>>>> are worried that "Bush" will find out we like "Noritake" china, or
>>>>> shopping "Blue Light" specials at Kmart. They already know that stuff
>>>>> anyway, and they don't care, nor should we -- this our government
>>>>> working to protect us, not indict us for nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)