JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 567 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 300 of 455
  1. #251
    Slut ArseYouLikeIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Old Blighty
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    251

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Ecuador appears to be the destination of choice for any "whistleblower" demanding that others accept responsibility for their actions, whilst refusing to do so themselves. Better to take off, do a runner, find some 3rd rate banana republic with a woeful record on democratic rights, there you can spend the rest of your life dodging the flies, dodging the military coups, trapped in the knowledge that you can never leave for fear of arrest and extradition....in some ways, this is a just punishment in itself.

  2. #252
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by ArseYouLikeIt View Post
    Ecuador appears to be the destination of choice for any "whistleblower" demanding that others accept responsibility for their actions, whilst refusing to do so themselves. Better to take off, do a runner, find some 3rd rate banana republic with a woeful record on democratic rights, there you can spend the rest of your life dodging the flies, dodging the military coups, trapped in the knowledge that you can never leave for fear of arrest and extradition....in some ways, this is a just punishment in itself.

    The final chapter of this saga has not been written...with the further thought that speculation serves no useful purpose ...other than to add to the sense of mystery that fuels this spy story worthy of John Le Carre at his very best.

  3. #253
    Slut ArseYouLikeIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Old Blighty
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    251

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    The final chapter of this saga has not been written...with the further thought that speculation serves no useful purpose ...other than to add to the sense of mystery that fuels this spy story worthy of John Le Carre at his very best.
    Oh but I like John Le Carre

  4. #254
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by ArseYouLikeIt View Post
    Oh but I like John Le Carre
    Snap..........

  5. #255
    JubberClubber White Eagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Widower
    Posts
    10,834

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    I have to thank palbert for these links. I didn't read the Prism thread, therefore my problem in not figuring out what it is about. OH, BTW, I mentioned getting emails about protecting Snowden. I wasn't saying that I believed the emails. It's just who do you believe? The Congresscritters, generally GOP, whom I won't believe. Cheney? Right! It just adds to the confusion.
    kallipolis and Kulindar and Sausy each bring up points to consider. Kulindar, whom I've had many PMs with about a lot of different subjects, I would trust his points. Sausy and I differ on some things, but I'm with him on this subject. kallipolis is someone else I trust. I see Kulindahr brought up the police state once in these links. It seems you are indifferent about what is being done with NSA. You, it seems, are the type that will be surprised when the police state becomes a fact. I have looked into these "police actions" from Calif to NYC. There are many instances of police wrongdoing. Someone HAS to step up and confront why this happens. A lot of these "police actions" are allowed to happen.
    So, yes, I am taking into consideration what these jubbers are saying. Altho I am not letting this make my decisions. It's just the people who think Snowden is the traitor are the ones that I have trouble believing.
    BEWARE! Harassing the Indian may result in sudden and severe hair loss.

  6. #256
    Slut ArseYouLikeIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Old Blighty
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    251

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    ^ If you`re so concerned about "Police states" why don't you appear to care that first Assange and now Snowden are seeking refuge in Ecuador?

  7. #257
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by ArseYouLikeIt View Post
    ^ If you`re so concerned about "Police states" why don't you appear to care that first Assange and now Snowden are seeking refuge in Ecuador?
    According to information provided by the CIA Ecuador is a democratic state but, I am happy to be corrected if some one has information that indicates otherwise.

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/ec.html

  8. #258
    JUB Addict Lostlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    10,286

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post


    Not irrelevant at all. You provide no proof of a loss of any rights or liberties yet you complain constantly about it. It's because you don't know what losing rights and liberties is because you've never experienced it. Try going to a friendly middle east country (Qatar for instance.) Try being gay there. Try saying what you think about the government there. Try having a muscle magazine on you when you enter the country. And this is one of the more westernized countries out there. So what I'm actually saying is that you need to get a perspective on what it is you're complaining about before you actually start complaining because it's very possible you're complaint isn't really valid.

    And what are you talking about with courts and police lying to you?
    Ain't that the truth. Kuli, what will you do to support Snowden besides just offering words on the internet? You're talking about liberties but still can't bring yourself to stop using Google, who is complicit in this all because they gave your private information to the government.

    You can't have your Google and bitch about liberty too.

    You're no different than a lady I used to work with. She complained about her husband taking the family money and using it for things he shouldn't. When people brought up the idea that she should move out and give him an ultimatum, she shot back that that "wasn't the right thing to do."

    Moving out was the right thing to do. She just likes having conflict and being the lady with the screwed up home life: one to pity. That's part of her identity. As long as she gets sympathy at work, she's fine. It's no different with you and your cause of "liberty and freedom." Just like this lady, when it comes to stopping the problem (for you ceasing to use Google, Microsoft, and Apple), you refuse to do it, because if you did, you'd no longer have a cause celebre. And you also like Google too damn much to match your words with actions.
    Last edited by Lostlover; June 24th, 2013 at 01:32 PM.
    "Rarely do we find men who willingly engage in hard solid thinking. There is an almost universal quest for easy answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to think.'' - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

  9. #259
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    I trust you to make the judgment you think right - no matter what your decision is.

    If you will look at the excerpts from the secret Memorandum I posted at #206 in the Prism Thread

    and the measured response from tigerfan in the PRISM Thread (Post #215),

    you will see that the US citizen's relief from proceedings incident to the Government's finding of a non-national security crime are burdensome, onerous, exhorbitantly expensive. Any relief is doomed to failure as the accused must establish that the evidence was "unlawfully acquired" or not acquired pursuant to the appropriate paperwork, all of which is conveniently secret. The Government should have to approve lawfulness.

    I, personally, am sorry that Mr. Snowden had to take this course. But, I am glad he did: our Congresspersons seem not to have been minding the store.
    The relief from any such evidence is no more burdensome than any other relief that is sought in court. And any crime someone is charged with requires the government to prove the person is guilty, not for the person to prove they are innocent. Further, any evidence introduced as evidence of guilt is required to be provided to the defense for rebuttal.

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    I don't....especially your theoretical reasoning that imagines all government employees never break the law and are Heaven bound as a result of their saintly lives.
    My "theoretical reasoning" will stand at that until your or any of your kind show any evidence that government employees have broken the law. We operate on an innocent until proven guilty system of government here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Exactly. Laws all over the country also exempt goverment officials from doing actual harm so long as they claim they were endeavoring to do their jobs. The mere existence of such laws proves we have had rights taken away, because they allow authorities to detain, jail, and otherwise harm citizens with no recourse allowed.

    "With liberty for the rich and the justice you can afford" is the truth.
    Do you have evidence of any of your claims? Again, there is a lot of rhetoric here and lofty claims with no substantive proof of anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Heh -- yeah. Reading his posts is like qtching a "science fiction" movie where they obviously didn't have any advisors who grasped so much as middle school physics: the suspension of disbelief required is enormous... and disgusting.
    Quote Originally Posted by White Eagle View Post
    1. I don't go by what others say.
    2. I really didn't say what my decision was. I said I trust what Jubbers say because I know their beliefs and how they lead their lives. And just look at Palbert's post #243. The ones I believe will show more of what they are going by. Palbert did just that.

    I am going there right now.
    Yes please read that. I never claimed that you had made up your mind. However, I clearly reference what I am going by in my posts as well. I invite you to read through both this and the linked thread.

  10. #260
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    The final chapter of this saga has not been written...with the further thought that speculation serves no useful purpose ...other than to add to the sense of mystery that fuels this spy story worthy of John Le Carre at his very best.
    Every post you've made in here has been nothing but speculation. You're speculation's best friend.

    Quote Originally Posted by White Eagle View Post
    I have to thank palbert for these links. I didn't read the Prism thread, therefore my problem in not figuring out what it is about. OH, BTW, I mentioned getting emails about protecting Snowden. I wasn't saying that I believed the emails. It's just who do you believe? The Congresscritters, generally GOP, whom I won't believe. Cheney? Right! It just adds to the confusion.
    kallipolis and Kulindar and Sausy each bring up points to consider. Kulindar, whom I've had many PMs with about a lot of different subjects, I would trust his points. Sausy and I differ on some things, but I'm with him on this subject. kallipolis is someone else I trust. I see Kulindahr brought up the police state once in these links. It seems you are indifferent about what is being done with NSA. You, it seems, are the type that will be surprised when the police state becomes a fact. I have looked into these "police actions" from Calif to NYC. There are many instances of police wrongdoing. Someone HAS to step up and confront why this happens. A lot of these "police actions" are allowed to happen.
    So, yes, I am taking into consideration what these jubbers are saying. Altho I am not letting this make my decisions. It's just the people who think Snowden is the traitor are the ones that I have trouble believing.
    Again, can you (or anyone you named) present ANY BIT OF EVIDENCE that any of these police state actions have actually occurred? Everything that they have posted has been nothing BUT speculation on what the NSA does and does not do. I get it. They don't know and they're scared. It's ok to be scared of the unknown. But there has been no proof provided that NSA engages in any of these activities against Americans at all. They, like the news media, has taken the small amount of information they have received about the existence of a technical capability, and have filled in the remainder of the story they tell with what they personally believe is bing done without any proof to back it up. And if you notice, it's the libertarian folks who are screaming the loudest because they started off with a preconceived notion of the government being out to get them. This is why the majority of the public doesn't care.

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    According to information provided by the CIA Ecuador is a democratic state but, I am happy to be corrected if some one has information that indicates otherwise.

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/ec.html
    According to the CIA, the United States is a democratic state, so what's wrong with bringing him here to answer for the crimes "he had no intent of hiding from"?

  11. #261
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,097

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    The South China Morning Post (SCMP) this morning (their June 25, 2013) reported:

    Snowden sought Booz Allen job to gather evidence on NSA surveillance

    For the first time, Snowden has admitted he sought a position at Booz Allen Hamilton so he could collect proof about the US National Security Agency's secret surveillance programmes ahead of planned leaks to the media.

    "My position with Booz Allen Hamilton granted me access to lists of machines all over the world the NSA hacked," he told the Post on June 12. "That is why I accepted that position about three months ago."
    http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/a...a-surveillance

    I can hear the howls of outrage now.

  12. #262
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    The South China Morning Post (SCMP) this morning (their June 25, 2013) reported:



    http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/a...a-surveillance

    I can hear the howls of outrage now.
    Me too. Guy goes out of his way to become a traitor. He had no intentions but to gather secrets to release. And what's best is he still didn't get any evidence of spying on Americans.

  13. #263
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    One of my favourite quotes from 1984:

    Winston Smith: Does Big Brother even exist?

    O'Brien: Of course he exists.

    Winston Smith: No, I mean... does he exist like you or me?

    O'Brien: You do not exist.
    There was a short story published in one of the libertarian magazines that was spun up from that quote. It still haunts me sometimes, in the way it displayed how many people can be convinced that what the State says is true, regardless of facts staring them in the face.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  14. #264
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    There was a short story published in one of the libertarian magazines that was spun up from that quote. It still haunts me sometimes, in the way it displayed how many people can be convinced that what the State says is true, regardless of facts staring them in the face.
    This whole thread is a short story that haunts me showing how many people out there buy into these claims with absolutely no truth or evidence to back up those claims. Those are the real people who are dangerous. It's funny that, despite all of the "facts" you said are staring us in the face, you're unable to produce even one showing any evidence of wrongdoing at all. Most people form logical conclusions based on reasoned fact and hard evidence provided. Then there are some who take some unsubstantiated claims and use those to be the "truth" and "facts" that back up their already preconceived ideas about how something is. Again, I've noticed it's the libertarian bunch that is all up in arms about this idea that the government is spying on all Americans, despite there being no proof, and coincidentally, that just happens to be what they believed before any of this was put into print.

  15. #265
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    This whole thread is a short story that haunts me showing how many people out there buy into these claims with absolutely no truth or evidence to back up those claims. Those are the real people who are dangerous. It's funny that, despite all of the "facts" you said are staring us in the face, you're unable to produce even one showing any evidence of wrongdoing at all. Most people form logical conclusions based on reasoned fact and hard evidence provided. Then there are some who take some unsubstantiated claims and use those to be the "truth" and "facts" that back up their already preconceived ideas about how something is. Again, I've noticed it's the libertarian bunch that is all up in arms about this idea that the government is spying on all Americans, despite there being no proof, and coincidentally, that just happens to be what they believed before any of this was put into print.
    Of course libertarians believe government can't be trusted: the record is 100% consistent, that no government can be trusted. The evidence is immense that our own government can't be trusted, and the courts have freely bestowed legitimacy on government behaving in untrustworthy ways.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  16. #266
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Of course libertarians believe government can't be trusted: the record is 100% consistent, that no government can be trusted. The evidence is immense that our own government can't be trusted, and the courts have freely bestowed legitimacy on government behaving in untrustworthy ways.
    Care to state any of the evidence? You've not made a single post yet that contains any of the vast troves you apparently believe exist. You're conspiracy theories about all sectors of the government being out to get the American people are vast and far-reaching, but you have nothing but your own paranoia to back it up. In fact, I would say that the fact that you're on here making these ridiculous accusations and claims and that you haven't been arrested, detained, imprisoned, or killed is evidence that maybe you might be wrong.

    These types of ideas without any substantiative proof or any real ideas on how to move forward are why the libertarian party has not gone and will never go anywhere.

  17. #267
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    According to the CIA, the United States is a democratic state, so what's wrong with bringing him here to answer for the crimes "he had no intent of hiding from"?
    Ecuador is not accusing Mr. Snowden of treason a good reason for him to reside in Ecuador.

  18. #268
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Care to state any of the evidence? You've not made a single post yet that contains any of the vast troves you apparently believe exist. You're conspiracy theories about all sectors of the government being out to get the American people are vast and far-reaching, but you have nothing but your own paranoia to back it up. In fact, I would say that the fact that you're on here making these ridiculous accusations and claims and that you haven't been arrested, detained, imprisoned, or killed is evidence that maybe you might be wrong.

    These types of ideas without any substantiative proof or any real ideas on how to move forward are why the libertarian party has not gone and will never go anywhere.
    I am sure that the United States government is filled with virtuous people dedicated to serving the well being of the American people, can do no wrong, never lie, never cheat for, all government employees always place the needs of the American people before their own personal and political party interests........now, back to reality to note your repetitive requests for proof of my assertions.

  19. #269
    JUB Addict cm98059's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Holdenville
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Posts
    1,381

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Hmm, Evidence? Proof of Cover ups, Proof of police states? Proof of Federal Employees being found guilty of wrong doing? Try these for starters:

    Guantanamo, Watergate, Occupy Wall Street, Iran Contra, Secret Courts Issuing Secret Warrants, When is Manning Scheduled to be placed on trial?,

  20. #270
    JubberClubber White Eagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Widower
    Posts
    10,834

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by ArseYouLikeIt View Post
    ^ If you`re so concerned about "Police states" why don't you appear to care that first Assange and now Snowden are seeking refuge in Ecuador?
    What makes you think I don't care about them having to go to Ecuador? I have filed my share of emails to my congresscritters over the past 20 or 30 years to make things right. Remember Texas is run by the GOP. None of my politicians care about why they have to go to Ecuador. One person don't make the changes, it is the rest of us that need to ban together.
    Last edited by White Eagle; June 25th, 2013 at 05:02 AM.
    BEWARE! Harassing the Indian may result in sudden and severe hair loss.

  21. #271
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,097

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Putin confirmed the presence of Edward Snowden spy in Russia

    ....
    - Mr. Snowden really arrived in Moscow - said Vladimir Putin. - For us it is a complete surprise. He came as a transit passenger, and he does not need a visa. As a transit passenger, he can buy a ticket and fly wherever he wants.

    The President stressed that Edward Snowden did not cross the border of Russia, as it is still in the transit hall. Therefore, according to the head of state, an unexpected visitor visa is not necessary and all accusations against our country - the "nonsense and rubbish." Putin said that the Russian secret services have never worked and have no plans to work with former CIA officer.
    http://lifenews.ru/news/115534 (Google Translator)

  22. #272

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Telling the truth about the USA will get you killed or imprisoned. The propaganda about the USA would make Nazi Germany blush. We are just another "EMPIRE" in a long line of empires that seek to suck dry the weak countries to the benefit of the homeland. All the rest is propaganda and spin. The USA has never been a big supporter of democracy or "the little people". The truth coming out is just another sign of the end times for the USA empire. Whomever gets the keys to the next empire will be no better. Mankind is a dismal failure.

  23. #273
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,226

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    I am sure that the United States government is filled with virtuous people dedicated to serving the well being of the American people, can do no wrong, never lie, never cheat for, all government employees always place the needs of the American people before their own personal and political party interests........now, back to reality to note your repetitive requests for proof of my assertions.
    If Snowden had any original intent of being a human rights advocate he would have stayed and argued quite publicly via our media and courts system. He is not what you all make him out to be.. but it really doesnt matter.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  24. #274
    Slut ArseYouLikeIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Old Blighty
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    251

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    According to information provided by the CIA Ecuador is a democratic state but, I am happy to be corrected if some one has information that indicates otherwise.

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/ec.html
    I`m quite sure you`re happy to quote the CIA on every matter...

  25. #275
    Are u haleloo ya ? Telstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    28,340

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    If Snowden had any original intent of being a human rights advocate he would have stayed and argued quite publicly via our media and courts system. He is not what you all make him out to be.. but it really doesnt matter.
    You can tell that to Manning.
    Yes manning can speak to the media.

    Noticed i rarely use the "rolleyes" thing LOL


    NEVER LISTEN TO A ONE SIDED STORY AND JUDGE.

  26. #276
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    I am sure that the United States government is filled with virtuous people dedicated to serving the well being of the American people, can do no wrong, never lie, never cheat for, all government employees always place the needs of the American people before their own personal and political party interests........now, back to reality to note your repetitive requests for proof of my assertions.
    Again, lots of generalizations and opinions with no fact at all to back it up. Most of the government is filled with dedicated public servants who work to serve the American people. You seem to b confusing salaried civil servants with elected officials. But then again, it doesn't matter because you again fail the test of having any evidence to back anything up.

    Quote Originally Posted by cm98059 View Post
    Hmm, Evidence? Proof of Cover ups, Proof of police states? Proof of Federal Employees being found guilty of wrong doing? Try these for starters:

    Guantanamo, Watergate, Occupy Wall Street, Iran Contra, Secret Courts Issuing Secret Warrants, When is Manning Scheduled to be placed on trial?,
    Guantanamo - Where is the cover up, proof of police state, or proof of federal employees being found guilt of wrongdoing? In fact, what is your claim at all about Guantanamo? Who there has ever been convicted of wrongdoing?

    Watergate - I think this is more evidence of individual wrongdoing than government wrongdoing, especially since it involved only a handful of people in Nixon's inner circle. But I will agree with you that it shows that individuals can and will do bad things and should be held accountable (which they generally were in this case.)

    Occupy Wall Street - See above about Guantanamo. This was a non-government related movement and I don't understand where your claims of government abuse or wrongdoing are even coming from.

    Iran Contra - This I will agree with was a poor decision on Reagan's part and it violated some international ban on arms. It was done to secure the release of American hostages in Iran, but do the ends really justify the means? I guess it depends on whether you were one of the hostages or not.

    Secret Courts Issuing Warrants - Again, not sure where there is wrongdoing or abuse. The FISC was legally created by Congress under the powers the Constitution grants them to create lower courts. The court was given the power to arbiter and adjudicate cases involving classified material. There is no malfeasance here at all. Just because you don't agree with how something works, doesn't mean it's illegal, that it's a coverup, or that it's an abuse.

    When Is Bradley Manning Trial? - It's going on right now. It's in its fourth week. Have they not published that in Libertarian Times? Was there a particular grievance you had here? Keep in mind this guy was an enlisted soldier which affords him a fairly different set of rights under the UCMJ. These are contractually acknowledged and legally binding when a person enters the armed forces.

    Anything else you have? I notice this is just a brief list of general complaints Libertarians always have, but as you see, there isn't much substance there in terms of actual illegalities or abuses. Mainly, they just rub you the wrong way so you translate that in your mind as being illegal, abusive, or somehow infringing on your rights.

  27. #277
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    If Snowden had any original intent of being a human rights advocate he would have stayed and argued quite publicly via our media and courts system. He is not what you all make him out to be.. but it really doesnt matter.
    As more than a few Soviet dissidents showed, patriotism is sometimes best and most effectively exercised from afar.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  28. #278
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    As more than a few Soviet dissidents showed, patriotism is sometimes best and most effectively exercised from afar.
    Wow. The words of a Libertarian coward. This guy has shown not one ounce of patriotism thus far. He did this strictly for his own personal satisfaction (and given that he's been spending a while in both Russia and Hong Kong, possibly monetary gain as well). When he first suspected something, instead of reporting it to the proper channels, he concocted a plan to get a job with Booz Allen and steal secrets. He used lies and deceit to obtain his clearance and position and then abused those. Then, once he found the documents he was looking for, he again shirked the correct channels and decided to run away with not just the documents needed to start a national dialogue, but multiple laptops FULL of information, much of which didn't even relate to the PRISM and Verizon programs and solely revolved around programs we had in the foreign domain. He then ran off to a list of countries that are hostile to the US, spending more than just "transit time" in each. If this guy hasn't purposely sold or given our secrets to hostile governments, then I can bet you they've stolen them from him and then he goes and tries to cower away in Ecuador saying he's afraid the US might be mean to him.

    Fuck him and fuck anyone who tries to defend him. This guy is not a hero. This guy is not a patriot. This guy is a lying, dishonorable traitor and I'll be popping a cork when they drone him out of existence. You'll be on here crying about it, but now is his chance to come home and face these charges in a court of law like an American citizen instead of running away like a coward.

  29. #279
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    This guy has shown not one ounce of patriotism thus far. He did this strictly for his own personal satisfaction (and given that he's been spending a while in both Russia and Hong Kong, possibly monetary gain as well). When he first suspected something, instead of reporting it to the proper channels, he concocted a plan to get a job with Booz Allen and steal secrets. He used lies and deceit to obtain his clearance and position and then abused those. Then, once he found the documents he was looking for, he again shirked the correct channels and decided to run away with not just the documents needed to start a national dialogue, but multiple laptops FULL of information, much of which didn't even relate to the PRISM and Verizon programs and solely revolved around programs we had in the foreign domain. He then ran off to a list of countries that are hostile to the US, spending more than just "transit time" in each. If this guy hasn't purposely sold or given our secrets to hostile governments, then I can bet you they've stolen them from him and then he goes and tries to cower away in Ecuador saying he's afraid the US might be mean to him.
    Your religion is amusing: you make claims about government which are contradicted thoroughly by history, yet leap to conclusions about people you don't know in the least. You invent your own facts and totally ignore those presented by leaders of the government you worship.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  30. #280
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Your religion is amusing: you make claims about government which are contradicted thoroughly by history, yet leap to conclusions about people you don't know in the least. You invent your own facts and totally ignore those presented by leaders of the government you worship.
    Is this a self-written forward to your autobiography? Sounds like you described yourself perfectly. What facts have I made up? He's admitted that he got his job in order to get the access he needed. He has stated he has several laptops full of data. We have seen the releases he has made to the press about stuff completely unrelated to American citizens' rights (i.e. supposedly hacking into Chinese systems.) These are all from interviews and stories that his mouthpiece The Guardian has printed.

    Your denial of facts that are in front of your face is amusing. Instead of presenting any reasoned argument throughout any of this (one thing I will give to palbert who actually goes out and links stuff in his posts), you just come on here, indirectly attack a poster, provide no details or evidence of your own, and then throw in some garbage that is almost completely unrelated to the content of the post. You have nothing to back up your position but your own biases and you know it. You can't post anything to support your position and you know it. No proof exists of any of these claims you make against the government and you know it. What is actually amusing is watching you flop around like a fish out of water addressing everything but the actual topic.

  31. #281
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Is this a self-written forward to your autobiography? Sounds like you described yourself perfectly. What facts have I made up? He's admitted that he got his job in order to get the access he needed. He has stated he has several laptops full of data. We have seen the releases he has made to the press about stuff completely unrelated to American citizens' rights (i.e. supposedly hacking into Chinese systems.) These are all from interviews and stories that his mouthpiece The Guardian has printed.

    Your denial of facts that are in front of your face is amusing. Instead of presenting any reasoned argument throughout any of this (one thing I will give to palbert who actually goes out and links stuff in his posts), you just come on here, indirectly attack a poster, provide no details or evidence of your own, and then throw in some garbage that is almost completely unrelated to the content of the post. You have nothing to back up your position but your own biases and you know it. You can't post anything to support your position and you know it. No proof exists of any of these claims you make against the government and you know it. What is actually amusing is watching you flop around like a fish out of water addressing everything but the actual topic.
    You epitomize the truth and danger of this observation:

    Those who learn nothing from history are doomed to repeat it.

    Government in the US has fought free speech in every generation. It has fought equal application of justice in every generation. This is known to anyone with the most cursory knowledge of US history.

    But you insist that names such as Selma and Wounded Knee have no meaning. You pretend that there has never been censorship of what can be aired on broadcast media, or anywhere else.

    I shouldn't have to list what is common knowledge. That you reject reality and substitute your own proves you nothing but a troll.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  32. #282
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    You epitomize the truth and danger of this observation:

    Those who learn nothing from history are doomed to repeat it.

    Government in the US has fought free speech in every generation. It has fought equal application of justice in every generation. This is known to anyone with the most cursory knowledge of US history.

    But you insist that names such as Selma and Wounded Knee have no meaning. You pretend that there has never been censorship of what can be aired on broadcast media, or anywhere else.

    I shouldn't have to list what is common knowledge. That you reject reality and substitute your own proves you nothing but a troll.
    It's always funny to hear a tlling of history from a Libertarian's perspective. I especially like the part where they say their rights, the very same rights given to them by the government, are being taken away by that same government. But you'r right. History does hold many stories of certain people and groups of people experiencing the horrors of war, blatant prejudice, and what they perceive to be a loss of rights. But throughout history, the federal government has been an advocate for the betterment of peoples' rights. Slavery wasn't abolished because the slavers got together and decided they'd had enough of the US government taking away their slaves' rights. Racial discrimination wasn't greatly reduced because the bigots got together and decided they were tired of the federal government treating people with different skin color as lesser people. World War II wasn't ended because the Japanese and Germans felt like America had enough and had learned their lesson.

    As many situations in history you can name that you interpret as evidence that the government is out to systematically deny Americans their rights, I can name 3 or 4 to demonstrate what I see as the government actually standing up for the rights of the citizens.

  33. #283
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,097

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Let us not forget that many of us are viewing PRISM and related efforts in the light of history. NSA has never been remiss in its efforts to accumulate information on Americans.

    Sister Projects SHAMROCK and MINARET are prime examples. These lead to the Church Committee and, ultimately, FISA. (Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Sen. Frank Church concluded that Project SHAMROCK was "probably the largest government interception program affecting Americans ever undertaken.")

    It seems that NSA programs - and certainly program "creep" - are shielded from effective oversight or are unknown to those who should be informed. I commend Edward Snowden for exposing them, but wish he hadn't had to.

    Are elements of NSA's programs inimical to some "US persons?" Almost assuredly, but we know not how much.

  34. #284
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,097

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    One wonders if Snowden had US State DOJ help in having time to exit Hong Kong, or if it was just incompetence.

    Hong Kong officials say the U.S. government got National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden's middle name wrong in documents it submitted seeking his arrest.
    ....
    He (Justice Secretary Rimsky Kuen) said Hong Kong immigration records listed Snowden's middle name as Joseph, but the U.S. government used the name James in some documents and referred to him only as Edward J. Snowden in others.
    ....
    Yuen said U.S. authorities also did not provide Snowden's passport number.
    http://abcnews.go.com/International/...2#.UcsdE0TD_F4

    Apparently requests for clarification had not been received by flight time.

    Jeebus! Had they done it right a lot of this mess could have been avoided.

  35. #285
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    One wonders if Snowden had US State DOJ help in having time to exit Hong Kong, or if it was just incompetence.



    http://abcnews.go.com/International/...2#.UcsdE0TD_F4

    Apparently requests for clarification had not been received by flight time.

    Jeebus! Had they done it right a lot of this mess could have been avoided.
    I reject conspiracy theories..but..I wonder under these very special circumstances can a DOJ official have been that incompetent?

  36. #286
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    ....rights given to them by the government, are being taken away by that same government.
    Rights are not given by government -- that's the foundation of liberty. Rights are inherent and inalienable, given by "Nature and Nature's God", as Benjamin Franklin liked to say.

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    As many situations in history you can name that you interpret as evidence that the government is out to systematically deny Americans their rights, I can name 3 or 4 to demonstrate what I see as the government actually standing up for the rights of the citizens.
    The government never ceded the free exercise of rights until forced to do so. The examples you supplied show that.

    But thank you for conceding that corrupt people actually are in power: using your ratio, I'd say that for every three or four people in government interested in not spying on Americans, there's one who is diligently doing that spying.

    And it's because of that ratio that government can't be trusted: it isn't made of saints, it's infested with people not interested in the least in anyone's rights. I'll note that the Supreme Court showed firm evidence of this yesterday, by ceding the authority to states to disenfranchise people at will.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  37. #287
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    Let us not forget that many of us are viewing PRISM and related efforts in the light of history. NSA has never been remiss in its efforts to accumulate information on Americans.

    Sister Projects SHAMROCK and MINARET are prime examples. These lead to the Church Committee and, ultimately, FISA. (Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Sen. Frank Church concluded that Project SHAMROCK was "probably the largest government interception program affecting Americans ever undertaken.")

    It seems that NSA programs - and certainly program "creep" - are shielded from effective oversight or are unknown to those who should be informed. I commend Edward Snowden for exposing them, but wish he hadn't had to.

    Are elements of NSA's programs inimical to some "US persons?" Almost assuredly, but we know not how much.
    I'm glad you mentioned those two programs. Under laws in effect at the time, the US government was allowed to collect that information as they were telegraphs coming into and going out of the United States to foreign destinations. There were no laws at the time regarding the interception of electronic communications where only one party was an American citizen. So the intelligence agencies at the time were operating within the law. However, this does prove several points:

    1) That people accused under these "secret programs" do indeed have recourse to find what evidence the government has against them and how that evidence was obtained. This was determined in the Keith Decision by the Supreme Court and is what led to the FISA laws being drafted and implemented.

    2) That there is a way to challenge "secret programs" and have their Constitutionality determined.

    3) That there is no need for whistleblowers to stop certain behaviors. These programs were never leaked by whistleblowers. They were exposed when the government tried to use evidence obtained via Project MINARET against government employees they accused of crimes. This trial ushered in the way for the FISA laws to be passed which expressly laid out what intelligence agencies could and could not do.

    What they don't prove is that the NSA (or any government agency) subverts the law to "spy" on Americans. Again, when these programs were taking place, they were legal under the laws of the time. When the law changed, so did the programs.

    And I will challenge your accusation that they aren't subjected to the appropriate Congressional oversight. These laws were passed by Congress. These programs were briefed to all of the members of the Intelligence and Judicial Committees in both chambers (the system setup in Congress to provide oversight.) These programs have been approved by the courts. It seems that your idea of Congressional oversight involves every member of Congress being told every step that every government agency and employee takes, which is both impractical and impossible. The Congress is like the Board of Directors in a company. They set policy and high level goals and then monitor the progress of those goals through various committees. They don't manage and oversee day-to-day operations of the government. You see almost no outrage from members of Congress because they did know about these programs and they have seen that they haven't been abused. There is no evidence they have been abused. There has been evidence they obtained the proper warrants needed under the law.

    What you seem to be arguing is that you don't like the law, but are making it seem like you're accusing someone of breaking the law. If you don't like the law, then write your Congressperson to change it. But to just assume that the government is breaking the law because you don't like the government is asinine.

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    One wonders if Snowden had US State DOJ help in having time to exit Hong Kong, or if it was just incompetence.



    http://abcnews.go.com/International/...2#.UcsdE0TD_F4

    Apparently requests for clarification had not been received by flight time.

    Jeebus! Had they done it right a lot of this mess could have been avoided.
    I would like to see his immigration documents in Hong Kong versus his passport here. Could they have messed up his middle name? It's possible. Could he have lied about his middle name when filling out immigration documents in Hong Kong? That is certainly possible as well. Since it's only Hong Kong saying this with nothing to show to back it up, it needs to be taken for the grain of salt it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Rights are not given by government -- that's the foundation of liberty. Rights are inherent and inalienable, given by "Nature and Nature's God", as Benjamin Franklin liked to say.
    It's a beautiful sentiment, but it's just not true. You have those rights because the government expressly gave them to you in the Constitution. Don't believe me? Trying going to a country where the government DOESN'T give you those rights and see how far you get arguing that they are endowed upon you by your Creator. I'm sure they'll get a good chuckle out of that while you're sitting in your jail cell. Your rights are only as unalienable as the government who gives them to you sees fit to preserve them for and afford them to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The government never ceded the free exercise of rights until forced to do so. The examples you supplied show that.
    You seem to be lumping the local and state level governments in with the federal government. They are two completely different sets of governing ideals. If anything, the state government are more restrictive of basic rights and more discriminatory than the federal government is. This is funny because the state and local level governments are the ones more preferred by Libertarians yet they are the ones who are most restrictive on liberty, ceding power and decision making to the simple majority instead of what is right for the overall population.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    But thank you for conceding that corrupt people actually are in power: using your ratio, I'd say that for every three or four people in government interested in not spying on Americans, there's one who is diligently doing that spying.

    And it's because of that ratio that government can't be trusted: it isn't made of saints, it's infested with people not interested in the least in anyone's rights. I'll note that the Supreme Court showed firm evidence of this yesterday, by ceding the authority to states to disenfranchise people at will.
    As much as I would hate to admit it, there is no scientific polling behind my ratio, which I threw out there merely to demonstrate that the majority of government workers are not the terrible, freedom hating individuals you like to make them out to be, so I would caution against using said ratio as fact in any argument you are trying to make. It is true that a government of the people is going to have bad apples in it (Snowden is an example of someone who was part of the government system and abused his accesses), like all populations do because of the fallibility of humans. But to take one and make it representative of the whole is absurd. That's like saying all gay people must be child molesters because a child molester arrested last week was gay.

  38. #288
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    It's a beautiful sentiment, but it's just not true. You have those rights because the government expressly gave them to you in the Constitution.
    False. You have believe that the people who wrote the document were patent liars to hold your position here: they explicitly stated that the rights were granted by man's Creator, but that government needed to be kept from restricting those inalienable rights. Their opponents, BTW, argued that it is so obvious that rights are inherent and inalienable, and that only fools and tyrants would ever claim otherwise, that there was no need to write down protection for any rights at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Don't believe me? Trying going to a country where the government DOESN'T give you those rights and see how far you get arguing that they are endowed upon you by your Creator. I'm sure they'll get a good chuckle out of that while you're sitting in your jail cell. Your rights are only as unalienable as the government who gives them to you sees fit to preserve them for and afford them to you.
    So your root belief is that might makes right, people are not equal and are indeed legitimate property of others.

    Let's apply your "reasoning" to a basketball player whose driver's license says he's 7 ft 4 inches tall. You take him and sit him in a chair, then tie him so he can't stand up. By your reasoning, he has ceased to be 7' 4", because someone has used coercion on him (and his driver's license is a lie, because he's never 7' 4" in a car). So in your system the important thing is not any reality about individuals, but the coercion someone else can apply. Coercion is thus your basic moral foundation: whatever force can achieve is what is right.
    Last edited by Kulindahr; June 26th, 2013 at 07:13 PM.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  39. #289
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    False. You have believe that the people who wrote the document were patent liars to hold your position here: they explicitly stated that the rights were granted by man's Creator, but that government needed to be kept from restricting those inalienable rights. Their opponents, BTW, argued that it is so obvious that rights are inherent and inalienable, and that only fools and tyrants would ever claim otherwise, that there was no need to write down protection for any rights at all.
    How do you draw that parallel at all? I am saying that the mere fact that they had to write the document to codify your rights indicate that they are indeed not endowed by any Creator, but are instead created, granted, and recognized by government. But I guess it depends on how you view it. If you believe you have the right to say whatever you want that's fine, but you will not find that you actually HAVE that right universally. The rights outlined in the Constitution (which weren't claimed to have been endowed by the Creator FYI) are rights that are, in essence, given to you by the government because at the end of the day, it's the government, not your Creator that is charged with enforcing and protecting those rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    So your root belief is that might makes right, people are not equal and are indeed legitimate property of others.

    Let's apply your "reasoning" to a basketball player whose driver's license says he's 7 ft 4 inches tall. You take him and sit him in a chair, then tie him so he can't stand up. By your reasoning, he has ceased to be 7' 4", because someone has used coercion on him (and his driver's license is a lie, because he's never 7' 4" in a car). So in your system the important thing is not any reality about individuals, but the coercion someone else can apply. Coercion is thus your basic moral foundation: whatever force can achieve is what is right.
    My argument is more of "might makes rights", but it is definitely not that people are the legitimate property of others. The rights you possess are only valid if they are recognized by others. Your right to say whatever you want may hold true in this country due to the government established and protected Constitution, but your right to say whatever you want in another country doesn't exist. Sure, you have the physical ability to vibrate your vocal cords to produce whatever words you are trying to say, but that doesn't mean you won't be imprisoned or put to death for saying them. This is because other countries don't view the right to say whatever you want as a right that people have and so they don't provide it, condone it, or protect it (and they'll actually punish you for doing it).

    Your analogy to a basketball player is slightly flawed because you are taking a measurable, universally accepted model and applying it to an arbitrary list of "rights" that you feel have been bestowed upon you by some Creator. But you could be in a country that decides that the measure of a foot is 15 inches instead of 12 and find that your basketball player is indeed not 7' 4" anymore in that country. You could also be in a country that enforces the idea of height being measured from the ground to your head while sitting down. It's all arbitrary depending on the systems instituted wherever you are. You merely assume that this list of rights is unalienable and bestowed to you by some Creator because that is what you want to believe. It just so happens you live in a country that shares those beliefs so, to you, it would appear you're right. But venture to North Korea and try exercising your "rights" and see how that system views your unalienable rights.

  40. #290
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,226

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Telstra View Post
    You can tell that to Manning.
    Yes manning can speak to the media.

    Noticed i rarely use the "rolleyes" thing LOL
    Manning has had a ton of words with media -- thru his lawyer, by his choice.

    Manning is viewed as a criminal by most Americans and as Snowden continues to use our secrets to barter for his freedom he will be the same, just a rank traitor not worthy of our time.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  41. #291
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    How do you draw that parallel at all? I am saying that the mere fact that they had to write the document to codify your rights indicate that they are indeed not endowed by any Creator, but are instead created, granted, and recognized by government. But I guess it depends on how you view it. If you believe you have the right to say whatever you want that's fine, but you will not find that you actually HAVE that right universally. The rights outlined in the Constitution (which weren't claimed to have been endowed by the Creator FYI) are rights that are, in essence, given to you by the government because at the end of the day, it's the government, not your Creator that is charged with enforcing and protecting those rights.
    You do have that right universally -- no one else can control your mouth; it is yours, and yours alone, to decide what to use it for.

    And as the Framers held that rights were endowed by the Creator (how can you believe that's not the case? what do they teach in schools these days?), you're wrong. Government is supposed to protect those rights precisely because they were endowed by the Creator.

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    My argument is more of "might makes rights", but it is definitely not that people are the legitimate property of others. The rights you possess are only valid if they are recognized by others. Your right to say whatever you want may hold true in this country due to the government established and protected Constitution, but your right to say whatever you want in another country doesn't exist. Sure, you have the physical ability to vibrate your vocal cords to produce whatever words you are trying to say, but that doesn't mean you won't be imprisoned or put to death for saying them. This is because other countries don't view the right to say whatever you want as a right that people have and so they don't provide it, condone it, or protect it (and they'll actually punish you for doing it).
    If rights proceed from might, then people are property -- the property of those with the might. In fact, your position boils down to that, and is the very same one used to make others second-class citizens... or regard them as not human at all. It's your theory of government and rights that gave us such idiocy as "the white man's burden" and all its attached racism; it's the reality that people own themselves and thus have inalienable rights that toppled slavery and its cousin apartheid.

    What other countries may do merely reflects that they hold the same view you do: that whatever can be accomplished by might is what is moral, because there are no rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Your analogy to a basketball player is slightly flawed because you are taking a measurable, universally accepted model and applying it to an arbitrary list of "rights" that you feel have been bestowed upon you by some Creator. But you could be in a country that decides that the measure of a foot is 15 inches instead of 12 and find that your basketball player is indeed not 7' 4" anymore in that country. You could also be in a country that enforces the idea of height being measured from the ground to your head while sitting down. It's all arbitrary depending on the systems instituted wherever you are. You merely assume that this list of rights is unalienable and bestowed to you by some Creator because that is what you want to believe. It just so happens you live in a country that shares those beliefs so, to you, it would appear you're right. But venture to North Korea and try exercising your "rights" and see how that system views your unalienable rights.
    No, I do not assume anything about rights, I deduce it from the fact of self-ownership.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  42. #292
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    You do have that right universally -- no one else can control your mouth; it is yours, and yours alone, to decide what to use it for.

    And as the Framers held that rights were endowed by the Creator (how can you believe that's not the case? what do they teach in schools these days?), you're wrong. Government is supposed to protect those rights precisely because they were endowed by the Creator.
    Yes, you have the universal physical ability to say whatever words you want. You don't have the universal allowance to exercise that ability freely. But let's take another "endowed right". You aren't universally able to own a gun. You aren't universally guaranteed equal protection that someone else enjoys. You aren't universally allowed to vote. Rights have to do with what you are allowed to do, not what you can physically do (those are abilities.) ANd you do not universally have these rights. Again, I invite you to go to another country in this world where the government doesn't grant you those rights and try to use them. Go to Saudia Arabia and try to exercise your right to free speech. When you're arrested, try to demand your right to have a lawyer, a speedy trial, and to have all evidence and witnesses brought before you in a trial. Try to exercise your right to not have your house searched whenever the government wants. Try to publish your story of how you feel that the government has taken away your rights in a weekly newspaper out there. I think you will find quickly that your semi-principled idea of possessing unalienable universal rights is not actually true.

    ANother example is to look here in the US. ANyone crossing the border without becoming a citizen or legal alien is not granted many of the rights in the Constitution by our government. Are you arguing that, since apparently all of the rights in the Constitution are unalienable and given by the Creator, that they actually do have all of those rights and can freely exercise them as needed? I think many of them will disagree with you on that.

    And are you seriously using the argument that because the Framers said it, then it must be true and I must be wrong? Government was charged with protecting those rights - the rights they expressly gave you in the Constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    If rights proceed from might, then people are property -- the property of those with the might. In fact, your position boils down to that, and is the very same one used to make others second-class citizens... or regard them as not human at all. It's your theory of government and rights that gave us such idiocy as "the white man's burden" and all its attached racism; it's the reality that people own themselves and thus have inalienable rights that toppled slavery and its cousin apartheid.

    What other countries may do merely reflects that they hold the same view you do: that whatever can be accomplished by might is what is moral, because there are no rights.
    Not true. Rights go to those with the might (i.e. the ability to fight and defend them.) In this country, it's the government that has stepped up and said "yeah, we'll fight for your rights as it's part of our duty (and because we expressly gave them to you)." If those with the might don't fight for the rights, then no one will. So that does not mean people are property. It means that people will be given the rights (and have them taken away) based on what those with the might, whether it be the government or an individual, are able to fight for and obtain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    No, I do not assume anything about rights, I deduce it from the fact of self-ownership.
    You missed most of the point of what I said in regards to your analogy. And the belief that you have rights is indeed unalienable based on the idea of self-ownership. Whether or not you actually posses rights is a completely different thing totally independent of self-ownership.

  43. #293
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    And are you seriously using the argument that because the Framers said it, then it must be true and I must be wrong? Government was charged with protecting those rights - the rights they expressly gave you in the Constitution.
    Just because you believe something doesn't mean they were liars -- which is your case here. The Framers said they didn't give any rights, they just protected them. So either that's what they did, or you're calling them liars.

    The Constitution itself operates from that view, in that it notes that any rights not listed still belong to the people (or the states, when they are matters of states v federal). That indicates that rights exists, and can neither be taken away nor granted -- and that's the law of the land.

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Not true. Rights go to those with the might (i.e. the ability to fight and defend them.)
    . . . .
    Whether or not you actually posses rights is a completely different thing totally independent of self-ownership.
    Thank you for contradicting yourself and showing that you're wrong.

    Take a man who owns a car. Someone takes the car and buries it in concrete. By your reasoning, he no longer owns a car. But in fact, he still owns the car, he's just being prohibited from using it, by application of coercion.

    So again, you show that you believe that coercion is the only moral principle, that whatever anyone might manage to accomplish by the use or threat o force is what is legitimate. At root, that makes people property.

    Rights are merely aspects of what self-ownership means. Your position is that people don't own their own mouths, their own hands, their own lives even -- but that's patently false. If they didn't own their own mouths and hands, there would never have been a Magna Carta, a Bannockburn Declaration, a French Revolution, or more recently, a civil rights movement or an Arab Spring. THose all happened when people decided to exercise their rights -- their self-ownership -- despite what the forces of coercion that you champion might do in response.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  44. #294
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,679

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Ok, I really need to know - and I'm not being a smartass here - how do you see this whole worldview as pertaining to everyday reality? Rights have always been GIVEN, whether it was in the form of a ruler or a ruling body giving them, or in the shape of "they are yours, I am just protecting them". I just don't understand where you are trying to go with that whole self-ownership spiel.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  45. #295
    Know thyself kallipolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Piraeus, Greece
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    11,140

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    That we are addressing an English language culture, nation if you will (The United States) The Magna Carta speaks to these issues in volumes that address the rights of man (cue here Thomas Paine) it is transparent that each human person is responsible for their actions, for their contribution to the welfare of the community. It is the individual human person who best represents the liberties that the nation presumes to represent.

    It is not because a part of the government is elective, that makes it less a despotism, if the persons so elected possess afterwards, as a parliament, unlimited powers. Election, in this case, becomes separated from representation, and the candidates are candidates for despotism. ~ Thomas Paine, Rights of Man

    Thus, especially, in a democratic republic there must needs be an awareness that elected representatives are insufficient to represent the needs of each individual citizen, as we understand an nation through its component membership...thus, leading me to understand that each citizen must represent the spirit of the republic that presumes to inspire liberty for all. Here we speak to the actions of Edward Snowden who through his selfless sacrifices stands for those very liberties that the state apparatus has compromised in the name of state security.....a trap calculated to delude and deceive those who believe that their welfare and security resides within the organs of the state.

    My thanks to Kulindahr for being so much more erudite in expressing my understandings on the rights of man for Tom Paine would I am sure have approved of his choice of words.
    Last edited by kallipolis; June 27th, 2013 at 01:00 PM.

  46. #296
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    Ok, I really need to know - and I'm not being a smartass here - how do you see this whole worldview as pertaining to everyday reality? Rights have always been GIVEN, whether it was in the form of a ruler or a ruling body giving them, or in the shape of "they are yours, I am just protecting them". I just don't understand where you are trying to go with that whole self-ownership spiel.
    No -- rights have always been inalienable and inherent. And when authorities have recognized those rights, it has been because they have been forced to do so by people who realized that the rights are theirs -- they just have to remind government who is in charge. In that sense, you have it totally backwards: rights -- their free exercise -- have never been given, they have always been taken. The barons took the exercise of their rights back from King John, the colonists took back the exercise of their rights from the foreign king.

    Government is nothing but an artificial construct put together by people who decide there has to be some sort of authority. Nothing belongs to it by nature, neither power nor authority. It cannot give, because it only has what it has been given.

    So self-ownership is the most practical thing in the political realm: it tells people that all the power and authority rests with them, and if their government abuses that, they have the right to abolish that government and institute a new one. The government is their property, not that of those who fill the seats, elected or bureaucratic. Self-ownership is the reality; it's the notion that government is anything of itself that is the fantasy -- and that makes all the difference in everyday reality.*

    Without self-ownership and people becoming aware of it, we'd all still be living under absolute monarchs, most likely in poverty.




    * As an example, if everyone in the US followed the advice of multiple Supreme Court justices and never, ever answered questions from the police, it wouldn't take long before we had reminded those arms of coercion that they are our servants, and nothing more.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  47. #297
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,212
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    That we are addressing an English language culture, nation if you will (The United States) The Magna Carta speaks to these issues in volumes that address the rights of man (cue here Thomas Paine) it is transparent that each human person is responsible for their actions, for their contribution to the welfare of the community. It is the individual human person who best represents the liberties that the nation presumes to represent.

    It is not because a part of the government is elective, that makes it less a despotism, if the persons so elected possess afterwards, as a parliament, unlimited powers. Election, in this case, becomes separated from representation, and the candidates are candidates for despotism.” ~ Thomas Paine, Rights of Man

    Thus, especially, in a democratic republic there must needs be an awareness that elected representatives are insufficient to represent the needs of each individual citizen, as we understand an nation through its component membership...thus, leading me to understand that each citizen must represent the spirit of the republic that presumes to inspire liberty for all. Here we speak to the actions of Edward Snowden who through his selfless sacrifices stands for those very liberties that the state apparatus has compromised in the name of state security.....a trap calculated to delude and deceive those who believe that their welfare and security resides within the organs of the state.
    That is a superb observation from Paine.

    Your final paragraph points to the reason that checks and balances were imposed on the government from without, not merely within. Government schools teach the checks and balances between the branches of government, but remain mum when it comes to the power of the citizenry to balance that of the government, such as the ancient power of the jury to negate the law, or the ultimate right to insurrection.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  48. #298
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Just because you believe something doesn't mean they were liars -- which is your case here. The Framers said they didn't give any rights, they just protected them. So either that's what they did, or you're calling them liars.
    So we're going to have to draw a line here now between the two documents you are mixing together. The Declaration of Independence is the document that established the idea of unalienable rights (only those specifically mentioned were life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, though they held there may be others.) The rights that are being argued here are from the Constitution, which makes no mention of unalienable rights (and coincidentally was written by a different set of people). So now that's out of the way -

    No one is calling the Framers liars. As mentioned above, the Framers put nothing about Creator granted unalienable rights. The Framers couldn't even all agree on what rights should go to the people. They decided that a slave should count as 3/5 of a person, despite the fact that the writers of the Declaration of Independence declared "all men created equal." But the argument over whether the Framers (but not really since the Framers didn't write the Declaration of Independence), is not really of material to this debate about where rights come from.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The Constitution itself operates from that view, in that it notes that any rights not listed still belong to the people (or the states, when they are matters of states v federal). That indicates that rights exists, and can neither be taken away nor granted -- and that's the law of the land.
    Again, I'm thinking you're just not understanding the concept here. You're arguing the universality of unalienable rights by (incorrectly) referring to the US Constitution. Rights are not unalienable (adj. Not to be separated, given away, or taken away; inalienable) in countries that don't recognize the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. I'm going to try this again. If you walk into North Korea and bad mouth lil' Kim over there, you will be arrested and thrown in jail (depriving you of your "unalienable right" of liberty). You can be tortured indefinitely (depriving you of your "unalienable right" to pursuit of happiness). You could be killed (depriving you of your "unalienable right" to life). As you can see, when a right is taken away from you, it is not unalienable. There are countries that do not give you the right to free speech. Sure you have the physical ability to say what you want, and you could talk all day to yourself where no one else can hear (enter in your idea of self-ownership), but if you exercise what you view to be your right, then there will be consequences. Try to exercise your "unalienable right" of the right to bear arms in the UK. Try to exercise your "unalienable right" to vote in Somalia. Why don't you go investigate your "unalienable right" to equal protection under the law in Saudi Arabia (although this applies more to females, but you'd have it not too much better being what I assume to be a non-Muslim.)

    So while all of your quotes sound amazingly great (which is why Libertarians cream themselves every time they hear them), the reality of the matter is that your rights are not unalienable and you only have them because the government specifically gave them to you, despite it being dressed up in fluffy language.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Thank you for contradicting yourself and showing that you're wrong.
    I think the real problem here is you have a hard time understanding what words mean. That was clearly not a contradiction. You can have self-ownership and have freedoms with yourself all day, every day. You can live your life without a single person owning your body, forcing you to do things you don't want to do, etc. However, what you do with yourself is independent of how you interact with others. The idea of self-ownership is a contradiction in itself because it is impossible to achieve in a society of more than one. For instance, I can walk around all day controlling my thoughts and actions and feelings. I walk up to you and talk to you. The control you have over your life doesn't allow others to talk to you. So I've just now violated your idea of self-ownership in that you weren't in complete control of that interaction. Was it that I took away your self-ownership and you became my property? Or was it simply because my idea of how my life should be run clashes with your idea of how your life should be run? Either way, by your argument, I just took ownership of you and trampled all over your unalienable rights. Or maybe I actually didn't and you're just full of BS. I know which one has the most statistical weight currently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Take a man who owns a car. Someone takes the car and buries it in concrete. By your reasoning, he no longer owns a car. But in fact, he still owns the car, he's just being prohibited from using it, by application of coercion.
    Wow. You aren't good with analogies are you? Let's try one that reflects what I am actually trying to say. Take a man who owns a car. He owns this car in Jackfuckistan where the law states you only own a car if its condition is not buried in concrete. So I bury this guy's car in concrete. He now no longer owns that car. Since I am in Jackfuckistan and not the United States, I have to apply Jackfuckistan's law (since that is what is enforced by the mighty) instead of the United States's law. Now i may have damaged his idea of self-ownership (which I have shown above happens all of the time since you can't have a society where perfect self-ownership exists), but I do not own him. I don't control the way he thinks or feels. Barring other strange Jackfuckistanian laws on the books, I can't dictate to him how to feel or act. We'll even pretend Jackfuckistan decided they liked the US Bill of Rights and I can't take away his freedom to tell me to go fuck myself for burying his car and taking away ownership. But none of that changes the fact that he no longer owns a car in Jackfuckistan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    So again, you show that you believe that coercion is the only moral principle, that whatever anyone might manage to accomplish by the use or threat o force is what is legitimate. At root, that makes people property.
    I would restate that. I don't believe coercion is the only moral principle. People can completely choose to not coerce. Take the US Constitution for instance. This was generally a peaceful, non-coercive list of rights. Of course, I'm sure there was all sorts of coercion to actually to get everyone to agree to put them in there (the 3/5 person clause for instance is a great example of how coercion was used), but it wasn't a country-wide experience.

    I will agree that threat or force is what ultimately gets people to do anything. Whether it's me holding a gun to someone's head to make them give me all of their money or the threat of possibly losing your liberties that's gets you posting up on JUB, the idea of losing something you want is what gets people motivated. I don't think that makes people property. What it means is that they value their unalienable right to life more than they value their other rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Rights are merely aspects of what self-ownership means. Your position is that people don't own their own mouths, their own hands, their own lives even -- but that's patently false. If they didn't own their own mouths and hands, there would never have been a Magna Carta, a Bannockburn Declaration, a French Revolution, or more recently, a civil rights movement or an Arab Spring. THose all happened when people decided to exercise their rights -- their self-ownership -- despite what the forces of coercion that you champion might do in response.
    My position is not that at all. If you would just take the extra time to read what I say, I clearly said earlier you have the physical ability to say what you want, touch what you want, live however you want - but that doesn't mean that you're not going to be jailed for it in places that don't grant you those unalienable rights. Having an ability to do something and the freedom to do it are two completely different things. You mention the Arab Spring as an example. Sure, it worked in some places. But look at Syria. These people aren't given the rights by the government to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and they're getting killed for it. Maybe it's how you view rights. It seems your view is if I say a word a government says I'm not allowed to say and get shot dead for it, then that's ok because I exercised my unalienable right. I view a right as being something I can do without the worry of reprisal, punishment, death, loss of happiness, imprisonment, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by kallipolis View Post
    Thus, especially, in a democratic republic there must needs be an awareness that elected representatives are insufficient to represent the needs of each individual citizen, as we understand an nation through its component membership...thus, leading me to understand that each citizen must represent the spirit of the republic that presumes to inspire liberty for all. Here we speak to the actions of Edward Snowden who through his selfless sacrifices stands for those very liberties that the state apparatus has compromised in the name of state security.....a trap calculated to delude and deceive those who believe that their welfare and security resides within the organs of the state.
    You're forgetting that the US is a Representative Democratic Republic. That means that the government is specifically designed to be composed of representatives who speak for their constituents, not citizens voting directly on all matters. There is no type of government that can support the needs of each individual citizen. It sounds to me like you're championing anarchy maybe? Even then, not everyone's interests are addressed since resources MUST be shared. Anarchy is like 100% alcohol - you can only achieve it for a moment before it starts absorbing compounds from the environment around it to dilute it down.

    And what we talk about here is Edward Snowden - a traitor that exposed secrets of the government he was sworn to keep without providing any evidence of wrongdoing. And I would trust the government more to protect me from an aggressive Russia, a sneaky China, or a band of roving terrorists more than I would trust you or Kulindhar to do so (unless I wanted to drown them in internet bullshit.) Hell, I wouldn't trust myself to be able to do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    No -- rights have always been inalienable and inherent. And when authorities have recognized those rights, it has been because they have been forced to do so by people who realized that the rights are theirs -- they just have to remind government who is in charge. In that sense, you have it totally backwards: rights -- their free exercise -- have never been given, they have always been taken. The barons took the exercise of their rights back from King John, the colonists took back the exercise of their rights from the foreign king.
    "Free exercise" of rights in it's very use indicates that they are indeed granted by governments. Free exercise of rights indicates that there is some force that is opposed to those rights and that there is some mitigating factor there protecting the exercising of said rights. You're conflating the ideas of "ability to do something" with the idea of "unalienable right to do it." By your definition, anything I can think of that I can physically do is an inherent right that is unalienable. Thus, if I could physically do so, I could kill a person just because. If I could physically do so, I could rape someone just because I can. Which leads into the idea that rights are never ever to be truly freely exercised because there are other people on this Earth besides you who have a different idea of what their rights are and those might directly conflict with what your ideas of what your rights are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Government is nothing but an artificial construct put together by people who decide there has to be some sort of authority. Nothing belongs to it by nature, neither power nor authority. It cannot give, because it only has what it has been given.
    I could almost agree with you here. Although I won't because you have it partially wrong. Government is set up by SOME of the people because they realize that the population needs to be governed. The smart ones understand that everyone doing their own thing is not a realistically achievable situation because of the nature of humans and the environment we are forced to share. Yes, they all do rise and fall, but that is because they are all involving humans, which are fallible creatures.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    So self-ownership is the most practical thing in the political realm: it tells people that all the power and authority rests with them, and if their government abuses that, they have the right to abolish that government and institute a new one. The government is their property, not that of those who fill the seats, elected or bureaucratic. Self-ownership is the reality; it's the notion that government is anything of itself that is the fantasy -- and that makes all the difference in everyday reality.*

    Without self-ownership and people becoming aware of it, we'd all still be living under absolute monarchs, most likely in poverty.

    * As an example, if everyone in the US followed the advice of multiple Supreme Court justices and never, ever answered questions from the police, it wouldn't take long before we had reminded those arms of coercion that they are our servants, and nothing more.
    Self-ownership is actually the most impractical (and the most laughable) thing in the political realm. The idea that everyone has equal power and just voluntarily yields it to the government to govern is absurd. Everyone doesn't have the power. There are those that go out and do and those that sit back and watch those that do. And even if your idea of some self-owning Utopia existed, it would still be as corrupt and terrible as the current system and would actually eventually just turn right back into a government. I go back to my argument of "might makes rights." If you and I are living next to each other in our self-owned environment and I owned a gun and you didn't, you would have what I said you could have. Why? Because there is nothing you could do about it, unless you went to others who had guns to get together with you to get rid of me. Uh oh. Guess what? You have your beginnings of a government there again, where the ones with the guns will set the rules and you without will follow them until you get your own gun, at which point you'll be the one with the might and things will go the way you say, even if it is you ordering people to be self-owned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    That is a superb observation from Paine.

    Your final paragraph points to the reason that checks and balances were imposed on the government from without, not merely within. Government schools teach the checks and balances between the branches of government, but remain mum when it comes to the power of the citizenry to balance that of the government, such as the ancient power of the jury to negate the law, or the ultimate right to insurrection.
    There is no right to insurrection according to the Constitution. In fact, it charges Congress with putting down insurrections. And your characterization of a jury being able to negate the law is shaky. Yes, they could decide the case they were hearing despite the evidence in the face of a law, but they can't actually change a law.

  49. #299
    Are u haleloo ya ? Telstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    28,340

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Sounds like Americans accepts government spying on them ?
    Instead of talking about NSA, the government and the media blame other countries for not handed Snowden over.



    NEVER LISTEN TO A ONE SIDED STORY AND JUDGE.

  50. #300
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Telstra View Post
    Sounds like Americans accepts government spying on them ?
    Instead of talking about NSA, the government and the media blame other countries for not handed Snowden over.

    Actually, it seems like Americans, the government, and the news media have wizened up that there actually isn't any evidence indicating the government is spying on Americans and this has all been based on the half-truths about a technical capability mixed with the admitted biases of a Libertarian leaning person who admittedly got his job just to steal secrets to support his claim - which he failed to do in the case of providing evidence the US is spying on US citizens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.