<![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks - Gizmodo Comments]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @zenpoet: The inherent rights are simple, universal, and should be obvious: everyone has the right to do whatever they please, so long as their actions do not impede the exercise of others' equal rights to the same. For rights to have any meaning whatsoever, this premise must be accepted. From there, any disagreements stem from different interpretations of universality.

What's asinine is the argument that rights are granted by a document explicitly contradicting such claims.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @gibson042: and what exactly are these "inherent rights" that you speak of, and whence do they come? The rights that many geographically defined citizens of western civilizations would have are completely different "inherent rights" than those of eastern cultures.

Again, rights of people within a system are only given those rights by the system that they exist in. For any document to say that those same said rights are inaliable or inherent only does so to make sure that those rights are enumerated. By not enumerating them, they would likely not continue to be considered "inherent" as time is long and memory fleeting.

Do you honestly think that freedom of expression or freedom of religion would still be debated today had they not been set by the documents always associated with our rights (I am speaking only to Americans at this point). Take a look at the poem Ozymandious as a better exmaple of what I speak.

Do you think the rights you believe to be inherant are the same rights that plainsmen of the midwest thought were absolute? Do you think your rights are the same as eastern bloc comunists of the 50s? I doubt it. The rights of U.S. citizens are granted by the Constitution, the Bill of rights, and the laws of the land, be they State or Federal. To say there is a set of rights agreed upon by all humans is asinine and unarguable.

zenpoet

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @zenpoet: Your claim that rights are a function of government is patently absurd. If people do not have rights individually, then there is no conceivable way for them to be granted collectively.¹ Certainly humans have more force at their disposal in groups than they do alone, but an appeal to that fact is nothing more than a restatement of "might makes right". At which point all talk of "government" is mere pretense.

Also, I refuse to accept moving goalposts for the definition of "best available" system. I already pointed out a clear flaw in your nomination—implied assent of everyone in a geographic region—with the obvious conclusion that correction of the flaw results in an improvement upon it. You want an example? Home insurance. AAA collects only the money that I explicitly agreed to pay them, they respect all of my rights, they provide compensation when I suffer loss, and I'm not forced to move if I decide to discontinue doing business with them.

________
¹ Documentation of your "best available" government is on my side here.
A. The Bill of Rights, written "in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of [Constitutionally granted federal] powers", explicitly specifies that
  1. "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" and
  2. "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".
  Both amendments, like the preamble, are meaningful only if rights precede government.
B. The Declaration of Independence used even stronger language, noting that "Governments are instituted among Men" to secure "unalienable Rights" that are inherent in everyone.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Your pedantry is rather dull, as opposed to pointed. The only rights that humans have are birth and death. All other rights are a function of government and the laws that establish them. And while the Constitution may or may not explicitly grant rights in the sense that it says "this is your right," the case law used to interpret the Constitution has explicitly established/defined the rights as given by the U.S. constitution.
And yes, our rights as granted by the government are only rights as related to the governments actions towards us, and not a protection from other citizens, corporations, or interest groups. So, though this is long past the time that anyone will likely look at this post, I still felt it important to through out there.
And as for my statement that I believe our form of government is the best available, I would simply ask you to give an example of a form of government that you believe to be better. Not some hypothetical ivory tower government, but a real, working government that you think can function better than the U.S.



zenpoet

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @strider_mt2k: Come on man, I'll admit this has been a particularly stupid and dangerous admin, but in my LIFETIME I've yet to see an admin do more good than harm to my once great country. You think Mccain or Obama will do any better? You may THINK they can't do worse, but people'll surprise you, mark my words. Mark my muthaf$#@ing words man.

banmojo

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Bush is a moron. All these politicians want to use fear of terrorism as an excuse to invade our privacy.

Warghost

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @zenpoet:

I do not believe it correct or proper to take away my Constitutionally granted rights

Point of pedantry: there are no Constitutionally granted rights. The Constitution explicitly prohibits its established government from ever infringing on certain rights (even under the threat of terror/organized crime/the boogey man), but it did not create them.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @zenpoet:

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." -R. McCloskey.

Likewise. It's not clear what you mean when you say that the United States' idea/concept/system is the best available, but if you include the implied assent of everyone in a geographic region—vulnerable to humanity's ability to cock things up—then my original statement stands.

The rest of my post was a warning to anyone tolerating such abuses of power. Children are often willing to get what they want by harming others, and so are people under great emotional stress. We can empathize with both groups, but we must not condone their means. Put most simply, two wrongs don't make a right.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> I would have no problem with the government doing whatever sort of wiretapping and spying on its citizens it liked, provided we had some sort of promise from them that they would not abuse this power. It's not that I don't trust their intentions, I just think we need something written down and very specific to make sure that everyone agrees as to exactly what constitutes "abuse" and exactly what things they are going to do.

Our country already has a mechanism for the government to make such a promise. We call it "the rule of law".

It doesn't mater if what they did is "for our own good": what they did is *illegal* How can you insist that we should trust the government to do the right thing when this very act is an act of *breaking the law*. It's insane to say "The government doesn't need to keep its promises because the government is trustworthy"

rraszews

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @gibson042: "I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." -R. McCloskey.

Again, I do believe that the idea/concept/system we have is the best available, just that at this current time, its not being implemented to its fullest. The beauty of our system is that it allows for self correction. Enough people, like you and me, that are unhappy with the status quo, can change it. Other forms of government are even slower to change than ours.

As to the remainder of your post, again you completely missed the point. I do not agree that the our rights SHOULD be taken, and would happily, completely, and competently defend any person's rights that had been violated by the current administration. What you are misunderstanding is that I can see the other side, and can empathize. To be able to truly defend your own position, you need to understand the opposition. To argue blindly that you are right and all others are wrong is to miss that what many might consider valid points are being made, and you just look like a tool for ignoring them.

My point was this: "As a sit here now, I do not believe it correct or proper to take away my Constitutionally granted rights, but understand that should terror/organized crime/the boogey man somehow encroach upon my life, I cannot say that I would not re-examine my thought process. That is not to say that it would change, or that it would even be a possibility for my view point to change, but I am not so naive to believe that I would not honestly question my beliefs."

It is much the same way that I tell myself that I would run into a burning building to save a stranger. I do honestly believe that I would, as I value life, and think that I would be selfless enough to attempt it. But I cannot SAY, with absolute certainty that I could do it if I was ever actually in the situation. Until you know, you just don't know.

And so we are perfectly clear, I am not attacking your system of belief, just clarifying mine. Good day.

zenpoet

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Never mind the question of how one knows the identity of a terrorist while lacking probable cause to get a search and/or seizure warrant.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @zenpoet: I'm sorry you feel that the United States have the best system of government. And I don't know how to respond to your points about emotion, other than the same way parents do to their children. When something is wrong, even really really wanting to do it isn't justification enough. You can't solve a problem by institutionalizing it. Hurting others doesn't heal you. Two wrongs don't make a right. Et cetera.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @gibson042: I agree that my beliefs do give me the ability to take aways others rights. Thats the beauty of it. I am a very strong believer that our system may be flawed, but its the best available. Humans are flawed, and therefore any system that doesn't take into account humanity's ability to cock things up would also be unusable.

Our current system does take into account that people are completely capable of doing horrible and imperfect things, so we, as a culture, have to plan for the lowest common denominator. My problem is this. I completely and 100% realize that I do not exist in an ivory tower, where only thoughts, arguments, and ideas hold sway.

I understand that I can hold a very strong belief that rights must be protected at all costs, but that is only because I have not personally had to pay anything. I didn't have any friends or loved ones on the planes or in the buildings.

Because of schooling, and my employment, I am forced to see both sides of every argument, and be able to speak intelligently for either side, depending on what side I land that day. What that means is that, even though I truly do believe that our constitutional rights be protected, even if that means we are in more danger, that I can see the side of those people who have a more emotional attachment to the opposing side.

Thats what I like about our system though. The laws of the land shouldn't be able to be swayed by short term emotions, but should be weighed by long term logic. I agree that the government should not have wire tapped, and certianly should not be thanked for it, but I have to wonder how I would truly feel if I found out that my wife's life was saved because they stopped a bomber from getting on the flight she just had because they snuck a listen to Jonny Terrorists phone call. Thats all I am saying.

zenpoet

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @itwasthedog: We're sorry, but living off the grid is only something a terrorist would do, so I'm afraid we're going to have to arrest you now.

What? You live out in the middle of no-where and there is no grid? You've been begging for a grid for years but no one will install it? Technically, that's not our fault... and we're still going to have to arrest you.

cad3

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @gibson042: I couldn't agree with you more. Now hand over those incandescent light bulbs before I snitch to the authorities. :)

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @5h17h34d: Would YOU want Cheney to be obviously in charge?

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @knappoleon:
@Raziel66:

It's not about freedom, it's about security. This makes us *less* secure, not more. I can't imagine why Gizmodo readers, people who are interested in technology, would be so willing to drink the kool-aid on this one. You're right that the federal government doesn't care about my personal secrets or stealing my credit card number or what my girlfriend is wearing -- but that makes it *worse*: They don't care about that information ,so what possible reason would they have to protect it? I bet terrorists are *overjoyed* at warrantless wiretapping --they know it won't do a DAMNED THING to stop *them*, but it (a) means that america is running scared, and it means a big, juicy, poorly-protected target for them to use against us. It used to be hard for them to get all the information they needed to plot their evil acts. Now, they just have to send one of their sleeper agents to get a job at the phone company,and there's a big convenient "plug in here to listen to the conversations of any random american so you can steal his credit card information or overhear information you can use to choose your targets".

Giving up your freedom *doesn't* make you more secure. I think it's kind of ironic that those of you who think the government should be allowed to wiretap people without a warrant are probasly the same people who would go stark raving mad if the government said "Oh, and we'we need to track all your guns too, so that we can protect you from terrorists".

rraszews

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @mtopper:

I haven't given that nearly as much thought, but my first reaction to that question would be that an imminent suicide should be prevented when possible, counceling given; and then if the person is still determined to go through with it... a humane manner should be offered.

robinandtami

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @robinandtami:

agree 100% - a woman should be allowed to make the choice in all cases.

just curious, does this line of reasoning (choice)extend to suicide?

mtopper

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @zenpoet: Wow. Two points:

1. Your belief that suspension of liberties can be worthwhile does not give you the right to overrule people who disagree.

2. All kinds of crimes can be prevented by ignoring others' rights. Why stop at torture and disregard for habeas corpus, when we can just convict people without trials? For that matter, why not give everyone GPS ankle bracelets or do nightly house searches? Because those violations are THEMSELVES criminal. And you don't solve a problem by institutionalizing it.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @5h17h34d: Because if anyone offed W, Dick Cheney would be president, which is the ONE thing worse than W.

Curves

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> How did Bush make it so long without getting assassinated?

5h17h34d

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Siouxperman: Uh, I hope you've stopped sharing your opinion about anything unless you have found a brain, tough guy. But, I do find it hilarious to watch everyone rip your pathetic comments to pieces, so keep posting. Maybe you'll learn to appreciate your rights someday and find out what it means to be a true American.

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Uh, so we're all supposed to go into our respective corners now and fling shit at one another for being a (insert label here ie: conservative, liberal, dem, publican)

Just forget about the problem with the government, YOU WORRY TOO MUCH! :D
NOW FLING MORE SHIT! >:O

Smooth1nfernal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @skulldriveshaft: Uh huh. People seem to readily forget that up until Sept 11th, the largest and deadliest terrorist attack on American soil was carried out by a couple of disenchanted god fearing white boys.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @johnnyabnormal: actually, I don't even know what you are talking about with regards to nutbastard. I normally get bored with all of the standard liberal talking points that are fed to you guys by MoveOn, DailyKos, and Huffington Post.

BTW, I hope you have stopped sharing your opinions about the war unless you have enlisted. Otherwise, STFU!

Siouxperman

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @ARP:
Funny that everytime Bill Clinton had a scandal, such as... well we all remember how many there were, he lauched a tomahawk missle attack, invaded some third world country, or flat out blamed the vast right wing conspiracy for having to get a bj in the oval office.


joew48

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Bush looks like he's saying, "Heeeeeey I didn't mean to do it, but I had too. I'm saaawry." Tn a way only the Fonz would say it.

Also, if AT&T agreed to do this with the NSA, then they should of had enough respect for there customers to let them know.

Trowble (XBL/PSN)

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Xavoc: What's wrong with that? atleast we won't have to worry about being attacked anymore.

skulldriveshaft

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @szrimaging: if you think a puppet can read

skulldriveshaft

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @JaXs: Every comment or post deserves it's space, but come on... that was just a fucktarded thing to say.

webbehr

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Raziel66: Retro-active warrants fella. They could have tapped the line and gotten the warrant after the fact. The problem is that they didn't. This administration and several others prior(dem and rep), have pushed the tolerances of the people, when it comes to the whittling away of our constitutional rights. We say 'aww, it's okay', and allow actions to go without recourse, and there goes another civil liberty. Before you know it, we have relinquished all rights and live in a society that no longer refers to the constitution as a guide, but to the whim of man and any administration that may be in power.

webbehr

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @yoshi: There in-lies the problem... the 'government' didn't say it was 'ok'. The administration said it was ok. The administration is not the government and not the end all be all. This administration has taken liberties and made decisions without the support of our government(and most others for that matter).

webbehr

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @soulman: The unlimited wiretapping used by this administration has been abused. They could easily enough focus on specific targets and obtain the proper paperwork to tap certain lines for a show of cause, but to just tap in on a whim is crossing the line, and the telco's should have required all the taps be above-board. You should really think about the bigger picture. Absolute power corrupts absolutely!

webbehr

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @knappoleon: WOW! That's inane! The NSA, CIA, FBI and any other government agency can and will spy on the American people. Even if they were 'listening in on you asking your girlfriend what she is wearing', it's illegal. What's even worse is that the telco's are making money off the government and assisting them in the tapping. The government doesn't need the telco's help. They could just access use the telco networks if they wanted to, but the telco's are just making it easier, by assisting. The telco's just had way to much to gain in assisting in the illegal wiretapping.

webbehr

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @johnnyabnormal: Don't you mean Obama Hussein? The love child of Bin laden and Saddam?

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @robinandtami: People tend to support freedom of speech until they hear something they really don't like or agree with. At that point said people should be deported, or shot, or should/will/can burn in hell.

I'm a social moderate and fiscal conservative. People just get too wrapped up in voting for/against candidates based on personal emotional triggers rather than who can/will do a better job of actually running the country.

I hate the war in Iraq and the liberties given up by our representatives due to the war on terror. I understand that some changes are/might be required to further legitimate law enforcement, but not enough was done to prevent abuse. IE: who watches the watchers.

It irritates me when candidates and people say, "Why are we the world's police?" When the obvious answer is, because we're really about the only true democracy that can afford to. WWII is why we started policing the planet. Social isolationism works about as well as hiding your head in the sand. Whether we like it or not, or agree with it, we as a country should feel some responsibility to hand Iraq back to its people in better shape than we found it. No matter how long that takes.

For the most part it actually looks as if we're staying out of Iraq's political allies and negotiations. If they're frienly to us when we leave, great, if not, great. That means we gave them the choice that we ourselves have every day.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Xavoc: "Eh, the stupidity and inaction goes on and on. It includes Clinton's decision to not grab Osama when he was offered up to the US on a silver platter."

Clinton IS going after Obama! I mean...uh....oh, nevermind.

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Xavoc:

I look forward to the day when the current trend of social conservatism dies out. I've never understood social conservatism.

Fiscal conservatism? YES!

Conervatism fighting an ever growing governmental beast? YES! I get that!

Social conservatism? Ummmmm no... to me it is merely selfishness disguised in political ideology. To me a social conservative is someone that says "my personal religious beliefs prohibit that.... so I don't want ANYONE to be able to do that whether they share my personal religious beliefs or not."

robinandtami

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> What is it w/ Giz eating groups of comments for 20 minutes at a time lately?

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: Or that only the rights specifically listed and detailed in their application would be rights.

There's a reason I fear Roe V Wade being overturned, and it has NOTHING to do with abortion and everything to do with the government recognizing a person's right to PRIVACY.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: Yes, thank you for the correction. It recognizes those rights as inalienable.

@robinandtami: Yes, the law violated did enable the government to act first, and get permission second. However they just never quite bothered with that get permission part...

The problem with our "open" society is that it is rife with holes for those who wish to harm us to exploit. However these holes are the very thing that makes this country what it is.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Xavoc:
Many founding fathers fought vehemently against listing those rights in the Constitution, fearing that subsequent generations would construe such a list as the thing that grants the rights. It appears their fears were well founded.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @aec007:
Did the Italians tap OUR phones? NO!

Do I have a problem with OUR government tapping foreign phones? NO!

@Xavoc:

"with rights granted to us by the constitution."

Wrong. The Constitution does NOT grant rights - it only recognizes in passing the God Given rights of ALL people, and makes provisions stating that those rights will not be violated. Burn, Edit, or Deface the Constitution, and your rights remain the same.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Siouxperman:

Actually, the law did not require them to wait. They could have done whatever snooping they felt neccessary to protect the country and THEN gotten a warrant. The law does allow that. The thing is that Bush' admin apparently thinks they are above the law they were elected to uphold. Laziness? Arrogance? Ignorance? You decide.

And come on..... bringing abortion into this? Really? All you pro-lifers need a reality check. One day science will be able to determine the exact moment of gestation when brain activity occurs, but that hasn't happened yet. This whole abortion is murder crap is getting tired. Until the embryo has brain function, it is just a mass of genetic material with the potential to become a person. The belief that that genetic material has a "soul" is a religious belief and should have no bearing on a living, breathing citizen's legal rights. I don't think anyone advocates abortion as a primary method of birth control, but if someone finds themselves in a position where they think abortion is the best choice for them, who are you to say they shouldn't? It's fine to say that YOU think it's wrong so YOU shouldn't do it, but noone else needs you to make their choices for them.

robinandtami

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @aec007: Considering you have more rights here, even as a non-citizen, than you do in Italy? You should be grateful.

The constitution makes no mention of citizenship being necessary to hold rights in this country.

Comparing our government's behavior to Italy's isn't valid. We're not italians. We're americans, with rights granted to us by the constitution.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard:
Fuuuuunnnnnny!....

After reading the first lines of your first link: [www.cooperativeresearch.org] all you can read is how the italians WIRETAP the shit out of the terrorists to learn about the plot.

FUCKING WIRETAPPING !...Who would've though?

But hey!... We got to respect and give liverty to everyone in America.
Even terrorist....

How IRONIC isn't it?



aec007

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: And you are right at the forefront, getting it close!

As with anything, I am of two minds when it comes to this sort of action. I do actually believe that there are times that some of our liberties should be suspended for the greater good, but I am not so naive as to believe that once that occurs, its hard to get the government to restore what has been lost.

I fear that the government expects the public to get used to the idea that they have lost some of their rights, and that it is "no big deal." Much in the way that I get excited to see gas at $2.79 now, where as two years ago I was ready to fire bomb the gas station when it cost $2.39.

My big problem is this: how would I feel if I knew something horrific could have been prevented, but that someones right against self-incrimination or right to remain silent prevented its stop? As an attorney I can certainly say that those constitutional rights should be upheld no matter what, but as a human, how would I feel if my whole family, my neighbors family, and the immigrant family across the street, all died because we couldn't get an answer out of them in time to save those lives.

Its easy to live in a black and white world when the shades of gray don't touch us.

zenpoet

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: Eh, the stupidity and inaction goes on and on. It includes Clinton's decision to not grab Osama when he was offered up to the US on a silver platter. It includes pulling troops out of Somalia.

Hell, it even goes back to GHWB working for the CIA.

This government's top brass has a history of repeatedly not acting when it could have.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Dude27: Oh dear god, please don't start that tinfoil hat crap up. If there was no plane, where did it go, and where are all the people that died on that flight? It wasn't an empty plane.

Oh, I know, maybe the British turned the plane invisible!

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> There was no plane in the Pentagone...

Dude27

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> "August 2001: Russia Warns US of Suicide Pilots

Russian President Vladimir Putin warns the US that suicide pilots are training for attacks on US targets. [Fox News, 5/17/2002] The head of Russian intelligence Nikolai Patrushev also later states, "We had clearly warned them" on several occasions, but they "did not pay the necessary attention." [Agence France-Presse, 9/16/2001] A Russian newspaper on September 12, 2001, will claim, "Russian Intelligence agents know the organizers and executors of these terrorist attacks. More than that, Moscow warned Washington about preparation to these actions a couple of weeks before they happened.""

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @aec007:
"The fact IS that if they were able to do this years ago, nearly 7000 people would be alive today and NY city skyline would be unchanged."

How about this:

Bullshit.

They had intelligence far ahead of time detailing exactly what was going to happen. Don't believe me? NORAD was running drills of the 9/11 scenario ON SEPTEMBER 11th.

Ahem:

[www.cooperativeresearch.org]

AND

[georgewashington.blogspot.com]

I WILL tell that to anyone who lost a loved one on september 11th. I WILL tell them how our government ignored REPEATED SPECIFIC WARNINGS.

Cheney upheld an order to stand down on the Flight headed towards the Pentagon, starting when it was still 60 miles away.

You really think tapping more phones would have given them more warning?

THEY RECEIVED NO LESS THAN 40 WARNINGS WHICH INCREASED IN FREQUENCY AND SPECIFIC DETAILS RIGHT UP UNTIL IT HAPPENED.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Dude27: How about the fact that we've effectively destabalized country with our actions (for better or worse), and because of that we have a responsibility to the people of that country to help them re-stablish government and order?

I don't like that we're over there, and I have a close friend on his 3rd Iraq tour (out of 4 total including one to a 'stan') that I worry about daily.

I love how people justify pulling troops out by stating "Well I didn't vote to send troops over there based on a lie." No, neither did I. I just have a sense of responsibility for my country's actions, whether or not I approve of them.

Xavoc

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> How about the 4000 GIs (without even counting the numberless victims of the war in Iraq) who loose their live on a lie (Fake UN report)...

Dude27

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> How easily we forget.
How could the government let 9/11 happen?
Didn't they track terrorists before, tap phone coversations, etc?
Yes... with court orders, paperwork, etc... and lose millions of opportunities of actually catching the bad guys due to...?
"Paperwork".

The fact IS that if they were able to do this years ago, nearly 7000 people would be alive today and NY city skyline would be unchanged.

Don't think for a minute that the families of those 7000 dead civilians in the WTC will give anything to have them back. Wire tapping? They could care less if that would have prevented it.

Where will they strike next? Your home town? LA, SF, WA, MIA ?
And when your loved ones die because the CIA, FBI and NSA just could not get enough information and their wire tapping requests where pending in courts etc...
Who are you going to blame next?

Do you really care if they tap your gramma taking about rissotto and casserole?

Don't give me the rethoric of giving freedom away. 99% change you haven't loss anybody close. Talk is cheap. Life and the means to protect it are not.

Go tell that to the 7000 families of the WTC.







aec007

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> [www.dailymotion.com]

Dude27

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> George Orwell knew all too well about the dangers of Big Brother.

Vagabum

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> I thought that they always had records.
I'm not gonna say the only people who are pissed are doing something illegal, but it isn't a HUGE deal. I thought that there was an out-of-the-country place that had some sort of machine go through calls and look for things like "bomb" followed by "president" and stuff like that.

mferrari

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> I find this very interesting that you all have such a problem with things that do not effect you in the slightest. i was born in this country raised all over the world and i think that somethings just aren't necessary to bitch and complain about, so what a few people that the gov had eveadence agenst were wiretapped without a warrant, big deal. what are you so worried about? bush will be out of office in a number of months. so why bitch, really? whats the point. and then why do you start on topics like gun control, i love my guns it saves me a huge amount each year on the meet i eat, but i guess now all of the people who beleave that killing animals is wrong are going to jump on my back. o well don't you see at this point in time no matter what you say or do you are pissing off someone, common now quit causing problems and just accept the face that people are different and think and beleave in different ideas, just let others be and let them do as they please as long as its not affecting you directly there is not a reason to worry about it. o and one last thought FUCK Hillery she can die.

sorry about the spelling

Shadoo

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Curves:
Not to mention that, could we also get back the functionality of clicking on a comment reply link name and have it ACTUALLY take us to that comment as apposed to taking you back to the start of the whole thread?


Out2gtcha

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Hey is this moveon.org or gizmodo?

knappoleon

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @TheCyberBob:

Pros: Everyone gets the same education regardless of race creed or colour! YAY!

Cons: It is mostly an education in obedience and propaganda, and costs several times more than the superior alternatives provided by free markets.

gibson042

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: So much for checking back in a few hours, I see.

Munch the BanNail

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @slumlord:
voip or email, if the latter it could be encoded with an unbreakable one-time cipher. email the cipher key embedded in one email to another, then use a completely different set of email addresses for actual messages. do it in arabic and it's even harder to decode. Do it with arabic metaphor and idiom and ("the eagle has landed") it's nigh impossible. wiretapping IS a sham, and according to multiple experts, not one terrorist incident has ever been stopped by its use. Im sure it's possible that some good has come of it, and we just dont hear about it, but i'm doubtful.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> um. voip anyone? theyre not listening for terrorist because any organization w/half a sense for actually pulling some real shit off would voip. I WOULD VOIP. so.. wtf are they really tapping for? your whole terrorist reasoning is blown.

slumlord

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Excited_Utterance:

Thank you

goalcreas

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Picture = priceless

hanswurst0815

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> The phone Companies cooperated with the government with the wiretapping because the government pays them to do it. Wasn't there news that AT&T stopping the wiretapping because the FBI had unpaid bills?

[arstechnica.com]

So actually, the phone companies cooperated not because they feel patriotic but because they're greedy and getting paid. That's right - the US gov't is using our tax money to spy on us.

Rocketman_o_war

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @OneMHz:
i very much enjoyed this as well.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard:

work? you mean some Giz readers are employed???? holy s---!!!!

mtopper

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard:

there's a word for that NB............

its called

(wait for it)

revolution

mtopper

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: But I've still got 4 move and a saving throw (or something... I never played, but it seemed like it'd be funny).

Thanks for the spirited debate!

OneMHz

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @N@tedog:
Coming onto a thread to criticize the post itself is trolling - it adds nothing constructive to the discussion. You don't like it, don't participate. When you are chief editor of gizmodo, then you will be entitled to an opinion regarding the content of the posts. Until then ix-nay on the itching-bay, or go read engadget.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> If it's all on the up and up, they have probable cause and whatnot, why can't they get a warrant and make it legit?

Marcus

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Is this Gizmodo or MSNBC? Give us a break and go back to reviewing plastic cell phone cases.

embeddedprogrammer

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: I was referring to Adam's second paragraph ranting about GWB's policy. I'm not refuting or condoning it. It just doesn't belong here. And enough with the name calling. You lose credibility.

N@tedog

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> First of all, this administration isn't Republican, its fascist. Second, if you keep allowing people to take away your constitutional rights and freedoms, you are going to be surprised when you wake up to the black jack-booted thugs breaking down your door in the dead of night to arrest you and your whole family, seize your property, sell it, and throw you into a deep, dark cell without a trial, a voice, or any hope just because you downloaded porn or an mp3 to your computer. Wake the fuck up! It is NOT ok for the government to spy on you. It is NOT ok for the government to arrest people without due process. It is NOT right to be accused of being a terrorist or a threat because you voice your opinion, your use of freedom of speech to speak out against an illegal act.

Laugh while you can and turn your head away because 'it can't happen to me'. That's how people like Adolf Hitler come to power.

Blinded-Eye-Illuminati

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Munch420s:
thanks bro. ok im done. i think everyone left. ill check back in a few hours - i need to get some work done.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: Seeing as there were no rules as to how we got to 200, you haven't broken any. You've also been fairly entertaining, you mental midget, you :-p

Munch the BanNail

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Curves:
yeah its a bitch waiting for the whole page to load and then scroll down just to jump to the next page

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Technical request: On these long threads, can you number the comments and give us a "Jump to comment #X" or "Go to next page", (or whatever you can come up with), so we can skip the work in getting to the last comment we read? (Yes, I actually read this crap). Thank you in advance.

Curves

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @TheCyberBob:
well, i have to admit it was a self fulfilling prophesy. when i meant was, "i'm staying in this thread til it tops 200 comments"
: )

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Raziel66:

Getting a warrant can be done retroactively. They can wiretap first, ask for permission later.

This is a simple case of the administration and telcos breaking the law. They are in no way impeded in their investigations when they follow the law.

Namtillaku

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: Agreed. Diversity and choice are good things. Countries should have to compete for citizens in the same way that corporations have to compete for customers. They would all have to be better if they didn't actively impede voting with your feet. I must point out that we're starting to have problems with healthcare here, too though. "Universal" is not, unfortunately, the same as "fantastic" or "world class".

Mandatory_Field

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Raziel66: You ignorant fuck. Do you know what the FISC is? Do you know that they can wiretap anyone they want, and retroactively obtain a warrant from a secret panel of judges up to three days after the end of the surveillance? Do you know that the program in question that the telco companies participated in, the companies that Bush, Republicans, and other surveillance-state advocates now want immunity for, was so patently illegal and overreaching that the entire top level of the FBI threatened to resign if the program continued?

No, of course you don't. You don't talk to terrrrists so you don't have to worry your empty mind with the intricacies of the law and civil liberties.

@"There have been no attacks since 9-11 because of wiretapping": And I haven't gotten cancer since I started wearing my magical hat.

But actually you're wrong, there were anthrax attacks in 2002, and various plots that were either broken up without the aid of warrantless wiretapping or were FBI sting operations.

And its not like they need to score any more domestic hits on us, we've sent more of our citizens to their grave in Iraq and Afghanistan than have died on 9/11 with one hundred times that amount seriously injured, and we will continue to do so for years to come. All of which, I would add, is predicated on the lies that a shaky dictator with a dilapidated army had nuclear weapons that could be launched at England in 45 minutes, and mobile bioweapons labs that could scurry about the countryside making any battle zone a biohazard.

@All you hitler huggin, mussolini lovin, stalin reach-around-giving idiots complaining about "liberal bias" and other mindless bullshit, remember your lack of outrage over this for when President Hillary Clinton expands the program and pushes for total information awareness.

bvicarious

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Congrats Nutbastard your prediction came true about this post and it's comments ;)

I still think I'm goina do what I've been planning for years. Buy an island, figure out how to separate it from it's current country and make my own. :P

TheCyberBob

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @OneMHz:
yeah but we've already tried your way - i want a turn!

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> "...many people who value their privacy got pretty pissed when they found out that companies such as AT&T were illegally tapping their phones for the NSA..."

Many people? Show me five people who actually had their phones tapped and I'll show you five people who are talking to terrorists. Tap away, NSA.

JustaPilot

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Excited_Utterance:
Clearly no mental giant?

I don't normally brag, but I do have a 142 IQ and I've been employed as an electromechanical engineer since age 21 with no college degree. I graduated High School 1.5 years early. You really have no idea what the fuck you're talking about, troll.

What we are discussing are relevant tangents. It's called a conversation. Intelligent people have them.

And I can't stand Ayn Rand. What a windbag.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Excited_Utterance:

Nut Bastard... has unfortunately hijacked the thread to be about (what he wanted it to be about)
Good thing you're not trying to do the same thing. Hey, wait...

Munch the BanNail

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Can we bring back chocloate penis helmet please....

BigViper

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: You seem to have as much faith in government being able to improve as I have in business doing any better. ;)

OneMHz

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> "The No Child Left Behind thing was the most godawful thing to happen to public schools in the US. It enforced stratification and reduced funding where more was needed. Worse, it didn't even bother to fully fund its own initiatives."

This is a good example of what one can typically expect when ones government is in charge. Half assed, expensive solutions that never manifest and that wouldn't fix a damn thing even if they did. Things like No Child FEEL good - the ideas pull at peoples heart strings, but by emotion is no way to run a society. Throw more money at it, and more money disappears, and nothing gets fixed.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Nut Bastard, clearly no mental giant, has unfortunately hijacked the thread to be about his understanding of 2 books by Ayn Rand and his rejection of social engineering (except the engineering of his choice, natch), but public schools, free markets, taxation, etc. are not the issue here. This is about the executive's abuse of power and not being able to put the toothpaste back in the tube. But fuck it, it's the internet after all, where Paultards lurk.

Excited_Utterance

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @bitfactory: Sure, but that would be far less funny.

homerjay

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> The US is circling the drain and a good percentage of the population is just enjoying the ride. Good. Lord.

DestroyerMTL

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @szrimaging: Come on, GW can't actually read.

DestroyerMTL

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: It's all around us...

Mar 5th, 2008 | DENVER -- Travelers using Denver International Airport's free Wi-Fi service cannot visit Internet sites that airport officials consider provocative.

A report in The Denver Post says the airport is blocking Vanity Fair magazine's Web site, the hipster site boingboing.net and others.

Airport spokesman Chuck Cannon says officials decided to block access to potentially racy sites when the airport made its wireless internet service free in November.

Cannon says the airport would rather deal with infrequent complaints about access than handle angry parents whose children might see pornography.

Critics say the airport is using the same technology used by repressive regimes in Sudan and Kuwait.

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> "I didn't say they were, only they should."

i agree, but theres no use in defending a system that does not, and cannot function as it "should".

Tax parents less and theres more than enough money to fund the schools, and you skip the drain the bureaucracy puts on the coffer. Then it will be the actual parents of those specific children who have control of their child's education. Parents of a school would be like a board of directors. And if they simply didnt like it they could take their business elsewhere.

did you know a parent can be prosecuted for trying to change their childs school by fudging addresses and such? That it is illegal to put your kid in any other public school than the one designated for their area?

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @mfaerber: You hit the nail on the head with that comment. Obviously they wouldnt be asking for immunity if they perhaps, maybe, knew thay had something to be worried about?

smitherssocal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: I didn't say they were, only they should. They aren't because of No Child Left Behind, underfunding, arguments against teaching some topics (like in FL about teaching ID as a "scientific theory" HA!). Too many people worried about what the schools are teaching and not enough worried about what they're NOT teaching. All I'm saying is that every kid deserves a GOOD education, regardless of their parents' incomes. Good educations reduce crime and violence. Better educations for those in poorer areas would pay for itself in reduced crime rates, less need for police, etc (no I didn't do an economic study... so this may be metaphorical... forgive me).

OneMHz

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Dude27: They peed on your fucking rug, dude. It really tied the room together, did it not?

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @OneMHz:
They would be the same schools, dude. No one would tear down the existing schools.

"public schools should be there for every kid in the country to get a GOOD education."

yeah let me know when that actually starts occurring - i'd be less adamant about the issue if our schools were actually succeeding in providing internationally competitive education.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> I'd like to put forth this request: Will all the 2-term Bush voters please identify themselves? It's not like you have anything to hide... Please? Pretty please? It would be like a who's who of "I'm stupid and ignorant!"

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Dude27: Amen.

FredTheGreat

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Wow Guys 182 (+1) comment so far... I've red most of them and cant seem to find out why you guy dont see the solution to all this? Just read more about the candidates and you will see some things about Ron Paul that youll like ;o)

MagikCTO

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: "People NEEDING services guarantees those services will be there. Free markets ALWAYS fill vacuums."

In all, I only truly disagree with you about schools. I think that schools are one of the most important needs in society. I also think that a school closing down and spreading students out over a handful of other schools would be detrimental to the children. Guaranteeing that the exact service (school) they were using stays there is important. The No Child Left Behind thing was the most godawful thing to happen to public schools in the US. It enforced stratification and reduced funding where more was needed. Worse, it didn't even bother to fully fund its own initiatives. Take away some of the standardized tests, which are unfair and innacurate, and fully fund the schools and I think that private schools will be less necessary. Private schools are there for people who want a more specific ideal taught, and public schools should be there for every kid in the country to get a GOOD education.

OneMHz

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> >> Seriously, who gives a rats ... if NSA wants to look at phone records or anything else for that matter. Its not like they're listening in on you asking your girlfriend what she is wearing.

we call this communism. a freedom should NEVER be sacrificed for any reason.

tgwaste

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Mandatory_Field:
I wasn't insulting canada, (although i do make fun of you all but it's harmless) i was pointing out that full health care and schools and everything is available in canada already. I dont care what canada does. that's your business. I merely wish people would vote with their feet a bit more. i think having diverse systems of government is a good thing, it allows people to accommodate their wishes with like minded individuals without imposing those wishes on those of us who want otherwise simply by transporting themselves there.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Siouxperman: Hey, I was curious... Since you don't know how to read or learn, how do you write? I also wanted to know... Is it difficult to perform day to day tasks since nutbastard tore you that new asshole the last time this topic came up?

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: "What you want is Socialism - I suggest you move to Canada. America is about the Individual." You were doing great, right up to that point: Surely as a rugged individual you can do better than follow that same tired knee-jerk crap about Canada being a socialist (Kanukistan) regime. Sure, we may be a bit more left-leaning than the US, but we're as full as rugged individuals as our neighbors to the south. We mostly have the same social values and ethics -- one reason that there are so many of us working in the states. Just look at your music and movie industries where we are so visible, for a start, and then extrapolate that to lesser visible industries. Our current Prime Minister is even a Bush clone (shudder), just not nearly as stupid. Please don't stoop to insulting us: That's what your politicians do to take the heat off themselves....

"Canada: Land of the free-er, home of the braver"....

Mandatory_Field

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: So when did you want to coordinate and take to the street?

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> "Many of the congress members that signed onto that did so under false information."

no, ALL of those who signed onto that did it without reading the fucking thing at all.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @d_saum: "Giz... I am deleting my account."

Sweet! Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

johnnyabnormal

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @OneMHz:

"but some kind of guarantee that the services will be there is something that private business can't give"

wrong, man.

People NEEDING services guarantees those services will be there. Free markets ALWAYS fill vacuums.

"but you do live in the society, why shouldn't you have to contribute something?"

Im not against contributing something to society. I'm against contributing complete financial support to those who make foolish decisions. I think roads, police, food banks (NOT food stamps) and defense should be publicly funded.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard:
Actually, I must make a clarification to that statement.
Many of the congress members that signed onto that did so under false information.
Those that wrote it with the intention of misleading congress and the American People are in fact Terrorists of the worst kind, the kind that do terror against their own people / country.

Yes, they belong in Jail. Fed Prison as traitors.

goalcreas

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: By the way, by "f you Americans let this happen" I meant wiretapping or any other measure derived from the Patrioc Act for that matter.

MACPollo

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard:

"The main objective of terrorists is to destroy western freedom and way of life"

Does that make all the Congressmen that signed the Patriot Act terrorists?

YES, PUT THEM IN JAIL AND DESTROY THE KEYS

goalcreas

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> I think it's amazing that there are assholes, who are also able to read, who would defend or more so support this sort of activity.

Disgusting.

Voyou_Charmant

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @Cellenin: excellent point! I honestly dont understand why so many people are unwilling to take steps to protect ourselves. They are so quick to talk about "rights" and "freedoms" but want more government control and more entitlement programs like socialized healthcare. You libs are so weak on defense, it scares me. I'm all for wiretapping, secure borders, and waterboarding if it saves even one life.

Giz... I am deleting my account. I came here for tech info, not your bias bullshit. Fuck you very much and have a shitty day. There are MANY alternatives out there so... Who needs ya?

d_saum

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: well, maybe not terrorists. But surely does not show much democratic spirit.

MACPollo

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: "There need to be consequences for stupid decisions or else people just keep making stupid decisions!"

I can definitely agree with you on that.

OneMHz

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> "The main objective of terrorists is to destroy western freedom and way of life"

Does that make all the Congressmen that signed the Patriot Act terrorists?

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: No, you're absolutely right. Businesses always do what's in the best interest of the customer. And competition NEVER hurts the customer. Nor does a business failing and closing up shop because of bad decisions of board members or lying executives or any of that.

I'm not saying government programs are the most efficient or perfect, but some kind of guarantee that the services will be there is something that private business can't give. Nor a guarantee that Jim-Bob making 12k a year trying to support his family (I don't think he should have kids if he can't support them financially, but it happens) will be able to send his kids to school.

And to answer your earlier question, you're more selfish for saying you refuse to contribute to the society you live in for the sake of others. Maybe you resist more because it's compulsory, but you do live in the society, why shouldn't you have to contribute something? Spending money at the stores doesn't count here either. Businesses keep as much of their profits as they can. They aren't paying the gas station attendant for filling up your tank that much quicker.

OneMHz

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> I lost one member of my family in a terrorist attack.

I would never agree with such kind of thing happening in my home country. The main objective of terrorists is to destroy western freedom and way of life (i.e., democracy).

If you Americans let this happen, they will be one step closer to get it.

MACPollo

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> Unless you create an environment that fosters personal responsibility, people will be irresponsible.

Bailing out sub-prime borrowers is a good example of this. How long til those people jump into another shitty loan they can't afford, knowing that if it goes bad they'll be bailed out?

There need to be consequences for stupid decisions or else people just keep making stupid decisions!

PLEASE STOP FOSTERING A SET OF POLICIES THAT ENABLE PEOPLE TO BE IRRESPONSIBLE.

nutbastard

]]> <![CDATA[President Bush: You Should Thank Telcos For Spying On You, You Terrorist-Loving Jerks]]> @nutbastard: Ya. Privatization of services has it's ups and downs. I for one like the