You are the one that wrote a fallacy about the revolutionary war…
Keeps happening.
Why is a guy that has never even bought an iPhone the most prolific poster and judge, jury, and executioner on every single iPhone thread here. Notice I said bought since you won your first gen iPhone.
And now ad-homs. I guess my real failing is not having friends in high places, huh.
Aw. Poor TS. Got the feeling that you're misunderstood, nobody loves you ?
If you want to look for your real failing it's going to be a BIG JOB :-)
Try absolute lack of integrity
Try self-opinionated
Try full of sh*t
Try intellectually challenged
Maybe a start ? You may even begin to see yourself as many others see you.
I don't know if you are just slow, or don't understand the law, or have trouble reading the articles.
1. The data the NSA is gathering about American citizens is illegal, without a warrant. Nobody is arguing this, as the NSA has these FISC rubber-stamp warrants for the data.
2. The warrants say "we need this data for this purpose [war on terror]". That is what you can use the data for. To use it for other things is illegal.
3. The NSA perversely interpreted a judge telling them this as meaning "if the data is in one database, we can't give it to the FBI, but if the exact same data is in another database, we can".
4. The FBI has been using this information to find, identify, and prosecute criminals, and lying to them about the basis of the prosecutions.
5. The judge found out about it and stopped it in 2009 [well, there is no oversight, so nobody really knows if it has stopped or not]. Evidently, the only punishment the FISC judges are willing to hand out are stern talkings to, maybe a sternly worded letter.
6. Everyone involved [employee's of the NSA, the FISC judges, the FBI] know it's illegal, but they also know that only the attorney general's office can prosecute them and that they won't do so.
Now, prosecutions based on this evidence are starting to unravel [as the investigations are all based on evidence that has been illegally obtained].
And it annoys me that before Snowden started releasing this information, people like you would say, "oh, no, our gov't would never do that", and now it's "oh, that stuff only happened years ago, it's totally different now". It's not different today. And it won't be different tomorrow until people like you stop blindly cowtowing to your gov't.
The NSA metadata collection was placed under the supervision of the FISC in 2006. The FISC itself has never ruled that collecting metadata was in itself illegal. In fact, it's the FISC ruling that metadata collection was legal that was called into question by the recent PCLOB review of Section 215. However, this is not even close to being an issue that "nobody is arguing". Two federal judges have already ruled that they consider the practice under Section 215 of the Patriot Act to be generally legal. Another federal judge disagreed. In other words, like many legal or constitutional issues in our country, it's not really settled.
Also, the distribution of information to the FBI or CIA etc. by the NSA is not always illegal. Their are certain standards/procedures that the NSA is supposed to follow to legally share it. The situation that you're talking about happened between 2006 and 2009, and involved a procedural mistake by the NSA regarding the minimization of identifying data. The NSA had been following the correct minimization procedures for their own database, but failed to apply it to the separate database that the CIA and FBI etc. had access to. That activity was ended in 2009 by the FISC. It's a resolved issue.
I've always believed that it was possible for any organization, public or private, to break the law or violate constitutional rights. That just comes down to human nature. People are fallible and make mistakes, and some people are also unethical on top of that. However, as I've said before, there isn't any evidence that any of the NSA activity in question wasn't directed at counterterrorism efforts, and that is a KEY point. Why? Because Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald weren't just claiming that the NSA might have made mistakes with minimization procedures during terror investigations, they were claiming that the NSA activity wasn't really related to counterterrorism and suggested that it was part of a government conspiracy to turn the U.S. into an authoritarian surveillance state. And there is no evidence of that. None. So is their lack of evidence a fallibility issue or an ethical one? In my opinion, it's likely both.
You could have replied with a post that drew parallels between peace and wartime spying, particularly the big one in that act of spying is taking place. You didn’t, though. If we take your statement as being true (it wasn’t), then the situation becomes citizens spying on their government, not the other way around, so you’re still wrong.
Originally Posted by gwmac
In any event there has been spying during peacetime as well long before the FBI, CIA or NSA existed so you are still wrong.
I’ll say it again: Nowhere did I ever claim that the current bout of illegal spying on US citizens is the only instance thereof in the history of our government.
Would you agree that hostility exists between the U.S. government and terrorists that threaten U.S. citizens or U.S. government property, both domestically and on foreign soil? And that the possibility exists that those terrorists could have contacts within the boundaries of the United States?
Those are exactly the reasons that the NSA uses for surveillance activity that might include domestic data, which means, like the George Washington example, there's ample evidence that it's hostility related. Even the most recent PCLOB review that deemed the bulk collection of domestic telephone metadata as being illegal specifically noted that they judged the government's intent behind the collection to be in line with counterterrorism efforts. They saw no evidence that the government was motivated by anything other than national security concerns.
Does Apple’s secrecy harm anyone, legally or otherwise?
No however Apple is a big corporation so who are they fighting for? The people? The so-called "little guy"? Are they themselves worried that they're being listened to and that maybe their secrets are at risk and it affects their bottom line? Are they worried they might be breaking the law and don't want any secret conversations recorded?
I don't buy that Cook is doing this without an ulterior motive. Your move.
I don't support what the NSA is doing because I don't think at the end of the day it helps us as citizens however I see Edward Snowden as more of a hero than I do Tim Cook. Snowden knew what was being done was wrong and so he sacrificed a lot to stand up for what was right. I feel like Cook is getting involved with something he shouldn't be getting involved in. Just stick with keeping Apple a good company that makes good products.
I feel like Cook is getting involved with something he shouldn't be getting involved in. Just stick with keeping Apple a good company that makes good products.
We don’t differ there. I don’t see it wise to involve Apple in any argument against anything unrelated to their industry except in instances where it directly affects the company. If it’s just Tim Cook himself speaking only for himself, that’s another thing entirely.
We don’t differ there. I don’t see it wise to involve Apple in any argument against anything unrelated to their industry except in instances where it directly affects the company. If it’s just Tim Cook himself speaking only for himself, that’s another thing entirely.
Now that could be possible. Oh I just thought of something (and maybe it's because I'm still wearing my tinfoil hat), maybe with the 30th anniversary of the Macintosh, which was released in 1984, maybe someone drew the conclusion of how the NSA is similar to Orwell's 1984.
The interview was definitely not just a product focus though.
Oh I just thought of something (and maybe it's because I'm still wearing my tinfoil hat), maybe with the 30th anniversary of the Macintosh, which was released in 1984, maybe someone drew the conclusion of how the NSA is similar to Orwell's 1984.
Edward Snowden already beat you to that comparison, but it's a rather ridiculous one. It's the type of comparison that you might make if you had superficially skimmed through the 1984 Cliff Notes while in junior high.
Edward Snowden already beat you to that comparison, but it's a rather ridiculous one. It's the type of comparison that you might make if you had superficially skimmed through the 1984 Cliff Notes while in junior high.
Ah my bad, I mistakenly stated the obvious. I meant someone in the interview brought it up and mentioned it to Cook or maybe Cook mentioned it because it was topical.
Ah my bad, I mistakenly stated the obvious. I meant someone in the interview brought it up and mentioned it to Cook or maybe Cook mentioned it because it was topical.
Wouldn't be Cook bringing it up because he basically said that Snowden was full of it, but with more tactful wording.
You could have replied with a post that drew parallels between peace and wartime spying, particularly the big one in that act of spying is taking place. You didn’t, though. If we take your statement as being true (it wasn’t), then the situation becomes citizens spying on their government, not the other way around, so you’re still wrong.
I’ll say it again: Nowhere did I ever claim that the current bout of illegal spying on US citizens is the only instance thereof in the history of our government.
You backed yourself in a corner and got called out and now you are doing your best to wiggle out. There has been spying on U.S. citizens both during wartime and during peacetime since the country was founded and indeed in all countries and time periods throughout history using the technology of the time. We are all entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts.
By not talking about anything you’re claiming I talked about? I don’t really see how.
There has been spying on U.S. citizens both during wartime and during peacetime since the country was founded…
Could you perhaps quote where I said there wasn’t? Or how anything you’re saying has any relevance whatsoever to what I or anyone else is talking about in this thread?
Comments
I have been a member here since 2001.
Mhmm.
And yet more lying. It’s all you ever seem to do.
Keeps happening.
And now ad-homs. I guess my real failing is not having friends in high places, huh.
Aw. Poor TS. Got the feeling that you're misunderstood, nobody loves you ?
If you want to look for your real failing it's going to be a BIG JOB :-)
Try absolute lack of integrity
Try self-opinionated
Try full of sh*t
Try intellectually challenged
Maybe a start ? You may even begin to see yourself as many others see you.
I don't know if you are just slow, or don't understand the law, or have trouble reading the articles.
1. The data the NSA is gathering about American citizens is illegal, without a warrant. Nobody is arguing this, as the NSA has these FISC rubber-stamp warrants for the data.
2. The warrants say "we need this data for this purpose [war on terror]". That is what you can use the data for. To use it for other things is illegal.
3. The NSA perversely interpreted a judge telling them this as meaning "if the data is in one database, we can't give it to the FBI, but if the exact same data is in another database, we can".
4. The FBI has been using this information to find, identify, and prosecute criminals, and lying to them about the basis of the prosecutions.
5. The judge found out about it and stopped it in 2009 [well, there is no oversight, so nobody really knows if it has stopped or not]. Evidently, the only punishment the FISC judges are willing to hand out are stern talkings to, maybe a sternly worded letter.
6. Everyone involved [employee's of the NSA, the FISC judges, the FBI] know it's illegal, but they also know that only the attorney general's office can prosecute them and that they won't do so.
Now, prosecutions based on this evidence are starting to unravel [as the investigations are all based on evidence that has been illegally obtained].
And it annoys me that before Snowden started releasing this information, people like you would say, "oh, no, our gov't would never do that", and now it's "oh, that stuff only happened years ago, it's totally different now". It's not different today. And it won't be different tomorrow until people like you stop blindly cowtowing to your gov't.
The NSA metadata collection was placed under the supervision of the FISC in 2006. The FISC itself has never ruled that collecting metadata was in itself illegal. In fact, it's the FISC ruling that metadata collection was legal that was called into question by the recent PCLOB review of Section 215. However, this is not even close to being an issue that "nobody is arguing". Two federal judges have already ruled that they consider the practice under Section 215 of the Patriot Act to be generally legal. Another federal judge disagreed. In other words, like many legal or constitutional issues in our country, it's not really settled.
Also, the distribution of information to the FBI or CIA etc. by the NSA is not always illegal. Their are certain standards/procedures that the NSA is supposed to follow to legally share it. The situation that you're talking about happened between 2006 and 2009, and involved a procedural mistake by the NSA regarding the minimization of identifying data. The NSA had been following the correct minimization procedures for their own database, but failed to apply it to the separate database that the CIA and FBI etc. had access to. That activity was ended in 2009 by the FISC. It's a resolved issue.
I've always believed that it was possible for any organization, public or private, to break the law or violate constitutional rights. That just comes down to human nature. People are fallible and make mistakes, and some people are also unethical on top of that. However, as I've said before, there isn't any evidence that any of the NSA activity in question wasn't directed at counterterrorism efforts, and that is a KEY point. Why? Because Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald weren't just claiming that the NSA might have made mistakes with minimization procedures during terror investigations, they were claiming that the NSA activity wasn't really related to counterterrorism and suggested that it was part of a government conspiracy to turn the U.S. into an authoritarian surveillance state. And there is no evidence of that. None. So is their lack of evidence a fallibility issue or an ethical one? In my opinion, it's likely both.
You were wrong, but yeah, you “pointed it out”. Never mind that it’s completely unrelated to the point that is actually being made.
No, I’m explicitly replying to the subject. Here are links to the relevant posts:
The subject is the illegal spying upon of US citizens by their government.
A statement was made regarding spying done during the Revolutionary War between American and British forces.
I replied, pointing out that wartime spying between two hostile parties is in no way comparable to peacetime spying between a government and its people.
You could have replied with a post that drew parallels between peace and wartime spying, particularly the big one in that act of spying is taking place. You didn’t, though. If we take your statement as being true (it wasn’t), then the situation becomes citizens spying on their government, not the other way around, so you’re still wrong.
In any event there has been spying during peacetime as well long before the FBI, CIA or NSA existed so you are still wrong.
I’ll say it again: Nowhere did I ever claim that the current bout of illegal spying on US citizens is the only instance thereof in the history of our government.
I replied, pointing out that wartime spying between two hostile parties is in no way comparable to peacetime spying between a government and its people.
Would you agree that hostility exists between the U.S. government and terrorists that threaten U.S. citizens or U.S. government property, both domestically and on foreign soil? And that the possibility exists that those terrorists could have contacts within the boundaries of the United States?
Those are exactly the reasons that the NSA uses for surveillance activity that might include domestic data, which means, like the George Washington example, there's ample evidence that it's hostility related. Even the most recent PCLOB review that deemed the bulk collection of domestic telephone metadata as being illegal specifically noted that they judged the government's intent behind the collection to be in line with counterterrorism efforts. They saw no evidence that the government was motivated by anything other than national security concerns.
Does this mean Cook is for transparency about those famous off shore cash flows as well?
Like the breakdowns by region in Apple's quarterly reports which already exist.
Does Apple’s secrecy harm anyone, legally or otherwise?
No however Apple is a big corporation so who are they fighting for? The people? The so-called "little guy"? Are they themselves worried that they're being listened to and that maybe their secrets are at risk and it affects their bottom line? Are they worried they might be breaking the law and don't want any secret conversations recorded?
I don't buy that Cook is doing this without an ulterior motive. Your move.
Great products.
Well, yeah. Because that’s exactly what is happening.
No. They don’t want their IP stolen.
Good for you. Give us proof.
I put on my robe and wizard hat.
Now take off yours of tinfoil.
We don’t differ there. I don’t see it wise to involve Apple in any argument against anything unrelated to their industry except in instances where it directly affects the company. If it’s just Tim Cook himself speaking only for himself, that’s another thing entirely.
Now that could be possible. Oh I just thought of something (and maybe it's because I'm still wearing my tinfoil hat), maybe with the 30th anniversary of the Macintosh, which was released in 1984, maybe someone drew the conclusion of how the NSA is similar to Orwell's 1984.
The interview was definitely not just a product focus though.
Oh I just thought of something (and maybe it's because I'm still wearing my tinfoil hat), maybe with the 30th anniversary of the Macintosh, which was released in 1984, maybe someone drew the conclusion of how the NSA is similar to Orwell's 1984.
Edward Snowden already beat you to that comparison, but it's a rather ridiculous one. It's the type of comparison that you might make if you had superficially skimmed through the 1984 Cliff Notes while in junior high.
Ah my bad, I mistakenly stated the obvious. I meant someone in the interview brought it up and mentioned it to Cook or maybe Cook mentioned it because it was topical.
Ah my bad, I mistakenly stated the obvious. I meant someone in the interview brought it up and mentioned it to Cook or maybe Cook mentioned it because it was topical.
Wouldn't be Cook bringing it up because he basically said that Snowden was full of it, but with more tactful wording.
Okay now it all makes sense. Again, my mistake.
You were wrong, but yeah, you “pointed it out”. Never mind that it’s completely unrelated to the point that is actually being made.
No, I’m explicitly replying to the subject. Here are links to the relevant posts:
The subject is the illegal spying upon of US citizens by their government.
A statement was made regarding spying done during the Revolutionary War between American and British forces.
I replied, pointing out that wartime spying between two hostile parties is in no way comparable to peacetime spying between a government and its people.
You could have replied with a post that drew parallels between peace and wartime spying, particularly the big one in that act of spying is taking place. You didn’t, though. If we take your statement as being true (it wasn’t), then the situation becomes citizens spying on their government, not the other way around, so you’re still wrong.
I’ll say it again: Nowhere did I ever claim that the current bout of illegal spying on US citizens is the only instance thereof in the history of our government.
You backed yourself in a corner and got called out and now you are doing your best to wiggle out. There has been spying on U.S. citizens both during wartime and during peacetime since the country was founded and indeed in all countries and time periods throughout history using the technology of the time. We are all entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts.
You backed yourself in a corner…
By not talking about anything you’re claiming I talked about? I don’t really see how.
Could you perhaps quote where I said there wasn’t? Or how anything you’re saying has any relevance whatsoever to what I or anyone else is talking about in this thread?