K&R if you favor Pro-Transparency, Pro-Accountability, Pro-Rule of Law, Pro-Constitution government.

[man4allcats]

:bounce:

[kid a]

1. I already kicked that thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8476168&mesg_id=8476168

[man4allcats]

3. Touche - n/t

[Dragonfli]

17. But doesn't he believe "moving forward" for political gain is more important than rule of law?

Also has he not decided that "transparency" only counts "sometimes?"

I am confused. You support a politician, good for you! You do not appear to support these principles however. They are not one in the same.

Get back to me when those that broke torture and wiretapping laws are arrested and face trial because of the direction of your preferred politician.

Transparency? Why hide evidence that should be legally attainable via FOIA? Your politician is rather anti-transparency on this issue as well as his "transparent" visitor logs (similar to cheney on that issue now.)

Supporting these principles and supporting a personality is not the same thing at all.
Not even close. To support both by supporting a personality, one would have to support a personality who's actions support these principles.

I do not expect you to get this, it is beyond the authoritarian follower personality to fathom.

[boppers]

39. As somebody who has done work as a "wiretapper"...

This is a damned if you do, damned if don't, situation.

Sure, you could try to condemn several hundred thousand of us to jail.

For following law.

For breaking law.

Whatever.

What few seem to grasp, however, is that law is vast and complex, and sometimes, following one law breaks another.

[frog92969]

41. Can you hear me now?

:nopity:

[boppers]

42. The Verizon tagline, "Can you hear me now?", is more relevant than you know.

Verizon is allowed to tap any call, or collect any records they want, on their network. They're a business entity, and thus, have a right to collect data on how people use their business.

If you don't want calls tapped, use a carrier that *isn't* a business, a 501c(3), or any other organization that has a right to tap your calls, or harvest data about who you called. (Hint: They don't exist.)

Lacking that, what many EU nations did was to make tapping legal (so businesses can manage their network), but make turning the data over to a government, without a warrant, a criminal action.

Right now, in the US, it's legal for, oh, Verizon, to tap all of your calls, and turn them over to the DoJ, if the government asks. No warrant needed, because the government isn't doing the tapping. They're just asking a business if they can "help".

[Old Codger]

58. Called the 4th

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I see no reference to any particular body be it government or business, any laws allowing this would be unconstitutional.

[boppers]

73. The 4th restricts government.

Businesses can search "your" desk at their business location any time they want to, they can look at any emails you send through them, they can tap your phone calls, etc.

For a similar comparison, freedom of the press doesn't mean you get to use your employer's fax machine to send out messages to anybody you want, without the employer being able to record the messages sent.

[Old Codger]

75. Apples and oranges here

A business may be able to listen in on phone calls I make on their phones if I am an employee, also they do have the right to read any e-mails I send using their equipment, but my private phone is my private phone no one , government , law enforcement or private entity can tap my phone legally without a warrant.. regardless of anything they may think... if you have information saying otherwise I would appreciate if you would post a link to something that states that. Thank You

The fourth amendment does not just apply to the government.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It is illegal for anyone to read my private mail (not e-mail) or listen in on private phone calls, there is a basic law applied as a reasonable expectation of privacy...

[boppers]

79. You do not own all of your phone wires.

You only own the wires in the house.

Outside of the house, at the DMARC point, the wires begin to be owned by a business. Further up, there are likely more businesses involved.

They have the right to do what they want with anything on that wire.

This is one of those "national secrets" that everybody in the industry is quite aware of. One overview is available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping

Mail is different, as it it not run by a non-governmental business.

[Old Codger]

72. Probably

They have the right to monitor their system as to traffic going where and when, BUT the do not have the right to listen in on or tape and call made by anyone without a warrant period, Any company regardless of what the sell has a right to monitor that business, BUT they cannot invade personal privacy in doing so. We have a few constitutional rights left (I think).

[Dragonfli]

44. All the other kids are doing it? That's the new defense?

Handing over information without a warrant provided is the part I don't see as flexible. There are very clear laws on wiretapping, er sorry I mean suggestions.

Much like the torture "suggestions" as recommended by international law er I mean guidelines.

You really believe that enforcing the law breaks the law? Then laws are meaningless.

Time to throw open the prison doors then! Or does this only count for the ruling class?
May I now rob a bank because all the other kids are doing it as well?

Nation of laws.
Nation of Men.

Which is it to be? They are mutually exclusive.

[boppers]

74. Well, perhaps we shall see better privacy laws.

"Handing over information without a warrant provided" seems like a good idea, but keep in mind that there's some sticky problems in the issue of ownership and privacy.

[Dragonfli]

76. The laws are already in place. No company has rights to view buy or sell my private conversations

They would love that, of course, sell anything I say about my business on the phone to my rival because they own them, or as I would more clearly paraphrase your opinion "they own the right to my private conversations because they own the wire it travels".

You are quite mistaken.
If what you say is true (I do not see your "belief" as constitutional so I doubt it).
A law will need to be written to warn people that anything they say on the phone the carrier can listen to and provide to whomever they please.

My guess is people will do ALL BUSINESS via mail rather than give money to you people to sell or blackmail at the whim of your bottom line or personal preference. If we use the mail, none may tamper with it and read it without breaking federal law. How do you compete with that using your utopia of no privacy that I must admit, I believe is a twisted personal fantasy all your own.

Privacy is guaranteed my friend, for good reason!

[boppers]

78. You might be interested in learning about "common carrier" law.

It's a complex field.

[Dragonfli]

82. A complex rationality used to try to circumvent our constitutional right to privacy perhaps.

Complexity is often used to attempt to create one's own law - while ignoring the law.

Why are you selling these anti-american, fascist, scofflaw, corporate rationalizations here?

You do realize that no one would be comfortable using lines that are assured to be recorded, and such recordings of our private conversations are further claimed to be property to be potentially sold to the highest bidder for profit or blackmail.

Your rationalizations are bullshit plain and simple. My phone carrier does not own my private conversations.

It is this corporate belief in being above the laws of us mere mortals that can lead to fascism. I do not believe your proclamations that we have already crossed that line are correct.

We are still a democracy wherein the citizens are protected by a Constitution, no matter what your supervisor told you to get you to so meekly break the law and infringe upon the privacy of your fellow citizens.

I will not say "It can't happen here", but I do insist however that there will be a fight before our democracy is lost to fascists such as yourself. You will have to win that battle before you proclaim your lawless victory. You will not gain your corporate fascism by lawyer proxy and convoluted legal arguments alone.

So piss off until your coup. I still claim the rights of a Democratic citizen until your "corporate revolution" takes my rights via blood-letting force.




:hi:

[earcandle]

53. Catch-22: The ability to deal with ambiguity is a sign of mental health

The way you do that is to expand to include the whole thing. 
The paradox is revealed when all things from
one side to the next is acknowledged and then the
relationships become clear and actionable.  

Break it open, dust off the constitution and the rule of law,
and apply with gauze, tape to contain the oozing of the
wounds. 

http://www.earcandleproductions.com/Atlas_Wept.swf

[Eric J in MN]

2. K&R. Regarding transparency, the Joe Lieberman bill to cover up war crimes...

...by exempting torture photos from the Freedom-of-Information Act was NOT included in the House appropriation bill, and so now it's up to the Supreme Court if the torture photos will be released.

[chill_wind]

5. Obama promised Gophers/Dem Chickenhawks he would support separate war crimes cover-up legislation

to keep them suppressed, "should a legislative remedy prove necessary."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/06/war-funding-drama-obamas-pledge-unstalls-war-money-torture-photos-cash-for-clunkers-etc.html

[Dragonfli]

14. Sounds like "someone" does not get the whole transparency rule of law thing.

And to think, there are those that idolize people that promote lawlessness and cover-ups.
sigh....

[earcandle]

54. crack it open, let the light in.

The way you do that is to expand to include the whole thing. 
The paradox is revealed when all things from
one side to the next is acknowledged and then the
relationships become clear and actionable.  

Break it open, dust off the constitution and the rule of law,
and apply with gauze, tape to contain the oozing of the
wounds. 

http://www.earcandleproductions.com/Atlas_Wept.swf

[jgraz]

4. Oh, you mean a self-hating Defeat-o-crat concern troll?

Why would anyone need to see the visitor logs? I'm sure if we need to know anything, Obama will tell us.



(Yes, this entire post is :sarcasm:. Sadly, it's almost a literal reprint of recent serious posts on this site.)

[man4allcats]

6. Re:"...it's almost a literal reprint of recent serious posts on this site."

I prefer to think of it as an experiment. }(

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. I'm kicking for anti-Imperial Presidency, anti-Congress usurping, anti-Executive Ordering

:-)

[man4allcats]

8. Thanks and kudos!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[incapsulated]

9. Yay!

No matter *who* is in office!

What a concept, I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter!

[mmonk]

10. This thread is calling me.

[endarkenment]

11. That was a major part of the 'change' I voted for. nt

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

57. When is the last

time we've heard the now president use the phrase Hope And Change?

I "think" it was when he was still looking for campaign contributions. The out-dated and forgotten past of the less than powerful, a mere Senator vying for a position in a race to disappoint the the little people.

[chill_wind]

12. "Obama and transparency: judge for yourself."

Glenn Greenwald
Wednesday June 17, 2009 06:18 EDT

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/17/transparency/index.html

For the record.

[man4allcats]

15. Disturbing to say the least.

Thanks for the link.

[Dragonfli]

13. K&R Because I believe in that "god damn piece of paper" even if the centrists don't!

[man4allcats]

16. I'm with you, Dragonfli.

Thanks. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Moochy]

61. Looking Forward, Moving Ahead, Hard Work

please proceed to GDP, for your loyalty oath assembly, presented to the faithful today by the Mighty Centrist Hoof.

[Dragonfli]

77. Your centrist representative will be along shortly to collect your loyalty oath

His named is Wyldw**f and he will be your silencer today.

Now please move along as his pay is determined by volume of voices silenced or demeaned....

[The Hope Mobile]

18. absolutely!! K & R Anything else and we're Iran. nt

[noiretextatique]

19. yes

:kick:

[AntiFascist]

20. K&R, now this post has some substance! n/t

[man4allcats]

23. Thanks!

:hi:

[mullard12ax7]

21. You mean like holding war criminals accountable with years of collected evidence?

I agree.

[redqueen]

22. Welcome to DU.

[avaistheone1]

24. Absolutely that is the foundation of our country, otherwise we are no better than some ruthless

vigilante banana republic.

[man4allcats]

25. Couldn't have said it better!

:hi:

[Senator]

26. K&R

[Starry Messenger]

27. K to the R!

A thread I can get behind! :bounce:

[donheld]

28. ok

[Eyerish]

29. K&R nt

[emilyg]

30. k/r

[lbrtbell]

31. Proudly K&R'ed!

:patriot:

I salute Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, and Rachel Maddow for doing their best to uphold accountability.

[DKRC]

32. K&R

I believe in "that goddamned piece of paper" too.

[leftstreet]

33. K&R

[rug]

34. I'm in! Where is it?

[waiting for hope]

35. K&R!

[HughMoran]

36. Who doesn't agree with that?

What is the purpose of this thread?

(don't answer that)

[earcandle]

37. Hot off the ECP press: Atlas Wept

http://www.earcandleproductions.com/Atlas_Wept.swf

[checks-n-balances]

38. knr n/t

[frog92969]

40. That was my ONE issue

so I voted for the Constitutional professor.

Has anybody seen him?

K&R

[thread-bear]

43. k&r

Seems like we need new laws so that phone companies don't just casually destroy our privacy in the name of managing their business,regardless of how many go to jail. I'd settle for jailing the top officials. I hope that someday we get leaders who actually love this country and it's freedoms. It's astonishing to me how these people can sell out the future of this country for money.

[styersc]

45. K&R for the presidency that we were promised.

It's not too late.

[seaglass]

46. I am for it, when are we going to elect a President with the courage to provide it? n/t

[Kermitt Gribble]

47. K&R!

I don't usually like these "rec if you..."" threads, but I can get my pom poms out for this one.

[Joe Bacon]

48. KICK!

Looks like this is still something we don't have :-(

[biermeister]

49. please email me when some of that stuff starts to happen

[Fiendish Thingy]

50. a k&r for the Constitution and the rule of law!

Hopefully the NSA is monitoring this thread, and will keep an accurate tally of all those DU'er's who believe in restoring the Constitution as a top priority.

[swilton]

51. That's what Democracy Looks Like

:kick:

[Strong Atheist]

66. Belated Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[McCamy Taylor]

52. Um...are we being disloyal? K&R

[earcandle]

55. We are not in the streets like the Iranians. I would say they are more American than we!

This is for the world, made in America.


http://www.earcandleproductions.com/Atlas_Wept.swf

give a listen. pass it around.  music makes our hearts pound,
our bodies move, and our wills change.  

[man4allcats]

68. Our loyalties must lie

with a system that respects our republic and our democratic ideals. Indeed, we are disloyal if we do not fight for transparency, accountability, the rule of law and the Constitution.


Scene: September 18, 1787 | The Close of the Constitutional Convention | Independence Hall in Philadelphia

On September 18, 1787, as a Mrs. Powell anxiously awaited the results, and as Dr. Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task then finished, Mrs. Powell asked him directly, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy ?” Dr. Franklin replied, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.”

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

56. K&R - Where do we find this Gov.?

:hurts:

[man4allcats]

60. Uhh...

I'll have to get back to you on that one. B-)

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

67. Great, I'll be in Gulag 13

:P

[man4allcats]

70. Save me a place.

:hippie:

[Canuckistanian]

59. k&r

[Deep13]

62. Hmmm. I think I read about that somewhere.

[pam4water]

63. Can only kick. R time limit is up.

[man4allcats]

64. Thanks for the kick!

:hi:

[Vidar]

65. kick ( too late for r _

[Hell Hath No Fury]

69. Too late to recommend ---

but will give it a kick -- that's the kind of government I want! :applause:

[HamdenRice]

71. That's why I support the Obama administration ! nt

[NoPasaran]

80. Prefer slovenly dictatorships with silly opera bouffe uniforms myself

[man4allcats]

81. Thanks for kicking.

:kick: