"We really need to do a better job of reducing the sense of self that libertarians have." "Socialization really needs to be taught over individualism in our schools,"
You think wd need to AD CX to strip people of their individuality and turn them into mindless cogs
When it comes to issues of civil liberties and government power, both parties are on the same page. They want to expand government power and systematically erode our civil liberties. After all, both parties believe that someday, they'll get their turn to run things.
"Why didn't our brilliant hero sysadmin publish the rest of the powerpoint slide deck independent of the newspapers?"
The fact that Snowden did not just upload a massive amount of raw data lends credibility to the fact that his primary motivation was to inform the public. He specifically asked Glenn Greenwald not to publish everything. He told the Guardian to release only what they, as journalists believed to be in the public interest.
Maybe if the government wasn't so busy spying on millions of Americans, they'd have time to pay attention to SPECIFIC intelligence.
e.g. Russian security services warning the government about the Boston bombers. Reports from an FBI field agent that men with Arab sounding names were taking flight lessons and weren't interested in the part of the curriculum that teaches you how to land.
Let's have all 50 states secede, close down the whole stinking, corrupt mess we call "the federal government" and start over with a new "United STATES of America"
The more time these anti-gun nitwits spend trying to close the barn door after the horses have escaped, the less time they'll have for doing real damage.
That was my experience during a terribly misguided stint at a liberal arts college.
Liberals LOVE free speech until the second you say something with which they disagree. If that "something" has the slightest HINT of racism/sexism, you are burned alive on the campus green.
I think you're probably right, but, could you download your mind into a younger, or "healthier" version of yourself and then still remember your experiences? Suppose you're 65 and you plan to get downloaded into a 30 year old body. If "you" (now in the younger body) remembered everything up to the point where they put you under anesthesia to start the operation, wouldn't that be the real "you"?
There would certainly be moral implications. I'm sure the 65 year old would also be "you". Could we accept the idea that the old body be euthanized in favor of the new?
That's not necessarily "religious thinking". You're describing "mind-brain identity theory". I happen to believe that too, but only in the sense that you don't have a "soul" which leaves your body upon death. However, aren't "you" just a software program that has been installed on some fancy biological hardware? If there is replacement hardware available, I'm not ready to dismiss the idea of a "download".
"Social networks are great for organizing events and gatherings."
Or "Anti-NSA protest outside Senator ______ 's Office"
I'd dump FB in a minute if it wasn't so damned useful for political activism and organizing social events. I assume that they have a full dossier on anyone that's dared to speak out against the establishment anyway. The only data they're going get from FB is where to conduct the next drone strike against political dissidents.
1) Sadly, too many people don't understand that a law which violates the Constitution is illegal. You can also file a lawsuit to challenge the Constitutionality of ANY law. How do you think courts are in a position to overturn laws if someone doesn't challenge the law by filing a lawsuit?
3) Maybe YOU accept it. I don't. It's the government, not the people, who want to keep the government's illegal activities "secret". As Snowden said, this is for The People to decide.
4) Why subject yourself to "justice" metered out by a government that is unjust? The traitors are in a position of power, but that doesn't mean they have legitimacy.
"We spent no where near 1 trillion dollars on stimulus. "
The federal government cranked up spending by 18% between 2008 and 2009. This was to "stimulate" the economy after the housing crash. This wasn't a one time thing where they immediately cut spending back to previous levels. That spending has continued year after year right up to the present. We've spent several trillion on "stimulus" and it hasn't worked.
No law supersedes the U.S. Constitution. They absolutely need a warrant and probably cause for this monitoring. It's clearly elaborated in the Fourth Amendment. The criminal government has been ducking this issue by refusing to allow lawsuits challenging this power to proceed, so there isn't even a court ruling on whether or not the Bush program was legal or illegal.
Sorry to pick on your terminology, but governments do not have "rights" they have "powers.
There are a lot of people in the Southwest that don't appreciate the massive influx of immigrants, legal and illegal, changing the demographics and political landscape of their states. Too bad that the free staters aren't a unique ethnic group so that I could call you a "racist". I'm genuinely sorry for the people who live there and prefer a big government and high taxes, but I feel even worse for the tiny minority of liberty-minded folks scattered across the country who have no voice in government apart from a meaningless vote. For NH residents who really like high taxes and big government, MA, VT and Canada aren't that far away and they have dozens of options around the nation. What options do liberty activists have?
"Did you think they werent doing this anyway? Where have you been the last 30 years?"
Anybody that has consistently tried to warn/inform people about this crap, from Echelon all the way up to the present, has been variously criticized as being a "conspiracy theorist" or "paranoid".
Now that the TRUTH comes out and demonstrates that these "paranoid" people were right all along, the reaction of the critics is:
"Collecting records is not the same as targeting specific individuals"
Collecting records without a warrant is CLEARLY prohibited by The U.S. Constitution, Amendment #4. You're suggesting that it's OK from them to copy all of your hard drives and scan every piece of paper in your home is OK as long as they promise not to look at it without a warrant. Nonsense. The collection IS the violation.
Every elected or appointed official that knew about this and every government employee who participated should be investigated and prosecuted for treason.
The government can have access... IF they have probable cause that you are involved in criminal activity AND they obtain a warrant precisely describing what information they want to seize.
They CANNOT just copy all of your personal data and save it for future use.
We fought a revolution partly because we didn't want the government to be able to arbitrarily spy on innocent people and the Fourth Amendment clearly elaborates this prohibitions on government.
Looking on the bright side of things, I believe that the opposition is far more angry than the supporters are enthusiastic. If there was massive protest against this, I find it hard to imagine a counter-demonstration supporting it.
The MSM is also doing their part to brainwash people into thinking it's all good. I don't watch TV, but I heard two stories on the radio this morning which were basically blowing the whole incident off and saying that public "might be" OK with this.
Well, as part of the minority, I'm at least going to be steadily e-mailing, calling and writing snail-mail to my elected asshats.
The story also suggested that certain members of Congress and the Senate were fully aware of this, but could not legally reveal the details. I'm trying to find out WHO exactly. Was it the entire intelligence committee in both houses? If your Rep or Senator was aware, maybe it's time for a recall? Or maybe have them arrested by the state police?
You're overlooking the fact that government wastes trillions of dollars of our wealth bombing and killing people in foreign countries. It is the centralization of power that enables such "externalities". The libertarian solution might have its issues, but starting wars of aggression and slaughtering people thousands of miles around the world would not be one of them.
The big government system has failed miserably. That doesn't mean that we need to immediately jump to the extreme of no government. We should definitely start moving in that direction however.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics April unemployment data, New Hampshire ranks #15 in states with the lowest unemployment rate at 5.5%. That's also well below the national unemployment rate.
Progressives and other statists like to point out all the problems that existed during the gilded age. They completely overlook the fact that the USA was a thriving industrial super-power. Agricultural and industrial output was growing rapidly. Per-capita income in the USA was growing much faster than that of Europe and eventually grew so that it was higher than in any country of Europe. The rail infrastructure was growing rapidly. Millions of immigrants came to the USA to seek economic opportunities that were not available to them in Europe.
There were major problems with working conditions in factories, but such abuses were also leading to huge growth in the union movement.
Cut to the present. Government has grown by 400% relative to GDP. I guess that means that ALL of our problems are solved and all of these social injustices have been overcome, right?
Real middle class wages have been stagnant for decades, wealth disparity is as bad as it has ever been, economic opportunities are diminishing, our economy is a hollow shell made of debt, we have the worlds largest prison population, millions of people can't afford basic medical services, 43 million people on food stamps, etc etc.
We have a progressive movement made up of people who are too myopic to see that government is the oppressor and not the savior.
If it violates specific provisions of The Constitution, isn't that against the law?
"... no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the... things to be seized"
"The order... requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems..."
IANAL, but I would argue that there is no possible way that the NSA has "probable cause" to obtain the phone records of all Verizon customers. Therefore, their actions directly violate the provisions of the Fourth Amendment.
Either that or you need intelligent human beings who are willing to use the more evolved portions of their minds to overcome whatever predatory and other primitive instincts they might have.
Slashdot Mirror
"We really need to do a better job of reducing the sense of self that libertarians have."
"Socialization really needs to be taught over individualism in our schools,"
You think wd need to AD CX to strip people of their individuality and turn them into mindless cogs
What "opposition party" would that be?
When it comes to issues of civil liberties and government power, both parties are on the same page. They want to expand government power and systematically erode our civil liberties. After all, both parties believe that someday, they'll get their turn to run things.
"Why didn't our brilliant hero sysadmin publish the rest of the powerpoint slide deck independent of the newspapers?"
The fact that Snowden did not just upload a massive amount of raw data lends credibility to the fact that his primary motivation was to inform the public. He specifically asked Glenn Greenwald not to publish everything. He told the Guardian to release only what they, as journalists believed to be in the public interest.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/10/on_a_slippery_slope_to_a
Maybe if the government wasn't so busy spying on millions of Americans, they'd have time to pay attention to SPECIFIC intelligence.
e.g. Russian security services warning the government about the Boston bombers. Reports from an FBI field agent that men with Arab sounding names were taking flight lessons and weren't interested in the part of the curriculum that teaches you how to land.
Let's have all 50 states secede, close down the whole stinking, corrupt mess we call "the federal government" and start over with a new "United STATES of America"
The SCOTUS and a federal appeals court have both ruled:
-You can't sue the government (A) because you don't have the evidence (B) to prove their actions affected you.
- The government does not have to reveal their actions which affected you, so you can't obtain the evidence.
Maybe not a Catch-22, but you're still F***ed and have no legal recourse.
The more time these anti-gun nitwits spend trying to close the barn door after the horses have escaped, the less time they'll have for doing real damage.
That was my experience during a terribly misguided stint at a liberal arts college.
Liberals LOVE free speech until the second you say something with which they disagree. If that "something" has the slightest HINT of racism/sexism, you are burned alive on the campus green.
I think you're probably right, but, could you download your mind into a younger, or "healthier" version of yourself and then still remember your experiences? Suppose you're 65 and you plan to get downloaded into a 30 year old body. If "you" (now in the younger body) remembered everything up to the point where they put you under anesthesia to start the operation, wouldn't that be the real "you"?
There would certainly be moral implications. I'm sure the 65 year old would also be "you". Could we accept the idea that the old body be euthanized in favor of the new?
That's not necessarily "religious thinking". You're describing "mind-brain identity theory". I happen to believe that too, but only in the sense that you don't have a "soul" which leaves your body upon death. However, aren't "you" just a software program that has been installed on some fancy biological hardware? If there is replacement hardware available, I'm not ready to dismiss the idea of a "download".
"Social networks are great for organizing events and gatherings."
Or "Anti-NSA protest outside Senator ______ 's Office"
I'd dump FB in a minute if it wasn't so damned useful for political activism and organizing social events. I assume that they have a full dossier on anyone that's dared to speak out against the establishment anyway. The only data they're going get from FB is where to conduct the next drone strike against political dissidents.
1) Sadly, too many people don't understand that a law which violates the Constitution is illegal. You can also file a lawsuit to challenge the Constitutionality of ANY law. How do you think courts are in a position to overturn laws if someone doesn't challenge the law by filing a lawsuit?
3) Maybe YOU accept it. I don't. It's the government, not the people, who want to keep the government's illegal activities "secret". As Snowden said, this is for The People to decide.
4) Why subject yourself to "justice" metered out by a government that is unjust? The traitors are in a position of power, but that doesn't mean they have legitimacy.
"We spent no where near 1 trillion dollars on stimulus. "
The federal government cranked up spending by 18% between 2008 and 2009. This was to "stimulate" the economy after the housing crash. This wasn't a one time thing where they immediately cut spending back to previous levels. That spending has continued year after year right up to the present. We've spent several trillion on "stimulus" and it hasn't worked.
No law supersedes the U.S. Constitution. They absolutely need a warrant and probably cause for this monitoring. It's clearly elaborated in the Fourth Amendment.
The criminal government has been ducking this issue by refusing to allow lawsuits challenging this power to proceed, so there isn't even a court ruling on whether or not the Bush program was legal or illegal.
Sorry to pick on your terminology, but governments do not have "rights" they have "powers.
There are a lot of people in the Southwest that don't appreciate the massive influx of immigrants, legal and illegal, changing the demographics and political landscape of their states. Too bad that the free staters aren't a unique ethnic group so that I could call you a "racist".
I'm genuinely sorry for the people who live there and prefer a big government and high taxes, but I feel even worse for the tiny minority of liberty-minded folks scattered across the country who have no voice in government apart from a meaningless vote.
For NH residents who really like high taxes and big government, MA, VT and Canada aren't that far away and they have dozens of options around the nation. What options do liberty activists have?
"Did you think they werent doing this anyway? Where have you been the last 30 years?"
Anybody that has consistently tried to warn/inform people about this crap, from Echelon all the way up to the present, has been variously criticized as being a "conspiracy theorist" or "paranoid".
Now that the TRUTH comes out and demonstrates that these "paranoid" people were right all along, the reaction of the critics is:
"Oh, we knew about that already."
"Collecting records is not the same as targeting specific individuals"
Collecting records without a warrant is CLEARLY prohibited by The U.S. Constitution, Amendment #4. You're suggesting that it's OK from them to copy all of your hard drives and scan every piece of paper in your home is OK as long as they promise not to look at it without a warrant. Nonsense. The collection IS the violation.
Every elected or appointed official that knew about this and every government employee who participated should be investigated and prosecuted for treason.
The government can have access ... IF they have probable cause that you are involved in criminal activity AND they obtain a warrant precisely describing what information they want to seize.
They CANNOT just copy all of your personal data and save it for future use.
We fought a revolution partly because we didn't want the government to be able to arbitrarily spy on innocent people and the Fourth Amendment clearly elaborates this prohibitions on government.
Looking on the bright side of things, I believe that the opposition is far more angry than the supporters are enthusiastic. If there was massive protest against this, I find it hard to imagine a counter-demonstration supporting it.
The MSM is also doing their part to brainwash people into thinking it's all good. I don't watch TV, but I heard two stories on the radio this morning which were basically blowing the whole incident off and saying that public "might be" OK with this.
Well, as part of the minority, I'm at least going to be steadily e-mailing, calling and writing snail-mail to my elected asshats.
The story also suggested that certain members of Congress and the Senate were fully aware of this, but could not legally reveal the details. I'm trying to find out WHO exactly. Was it the entire intelligence committee in both houses? If your Rep or Senator was aware, maybe it's time for a recall? Or maybe have them arrested by the state police?
You're overlooking the fact that government wastes trillions of dollars of our wealth bombing and killing people in foreign countries. It is the centralization of power that enables such "externalities". The libertarian solution might have its issues, but starting wars of aggression and slaughtering people thousands of miles around the world would not be one of them.
The big government system has failed miserably. That doesn't mean that we need to immediately jump to the extreme of no government. We should definitely start moving in that direction however.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics April unemployment data, New Hampshire ranks #15 in states with the lowest unemployment rate at 5.5%. That's also well below the national unemployment rate.
It not only "worked", it worked spectacularly!
Progressives and other statists like to point out all the problems that existed during the gilded age. They completely overlook the fact that the USA was a thriving industrial super-power. Agricultural and industrial output was growing rapidly. Per-capita income in the USA was growing much faster than that of Europe and eventually grew so that it was higher than in any country of Europe. The rail infrastructure was growing rapidly. Millions of immigrants came to the USA to seek economic opportunities that were not available to them in Europe.
There were major problems with working conditions in factories, but such abuses were also leading to huge growth in the union movement.
Cut to the present. Government has grown by 400% relative to GDP. I guess that means that ALL of our problems are solved and all of these social injustices have been overcome, right?
Real middle class wages have been stagnant for decades, wealth disparity is as bad as it has ever been, economic opportunities are diminishing, our economy is a hollow shell made of debt, we have the worlds largest prison population, millions of people can't afford basic medical services, 43 million people on food stamps, etc etc.
We have a progressive movement made up of people who are too myopic to see that government is the oppressor and not the savior.
Does the government typically extradite people for breach of contract?
If it violates specific provisions of The Constitution, isn't that against the law?
"... no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the ... things to be seized"
Excerpt from: "http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order"
"The order ... requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems..."
IANAL, but I would argue that there is no possible way that the NSA has "probable cause" to obtain the phone records of all Verizon customers. Therefore, their actions directly violate the provisions of the Fourth Amendment.
Either that or you need intelligent human beings who are willing to use the more evolved portions of their minds to overcome whatever predatory and other primitive instincts they might have.