It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I say 'everyone' hack 'everyone' and upload it all to WikiLeaks and quit being crybabies already

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 12:39 PM
link   




posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Please articulate one good reason why politicians and better yet why political parties deserve "privacy". In light of what unfolded this year, please be sure to include some kind of real world example / context (besides the Bill of Rights in general).

The Bill of Rights. /done



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So you're all about politicians / political parties / governments existing under the shroud of secrecy, a lack of transparency. From now on when I see you stick up for despotism, at least I'l wont be wondering if you actually support it.

Good times!
edit on 14-12-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Apparently the ends justify the means these days.

PS: Start with your own harddrive. Why haven't you posted all your personal information online? Lead by example!


LOL
All this time and you still do not have a complete understanding of that issue.
It was not the personal information on the harddrive that was a crime.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   
I know you don't really want everyone to hack everyone and send it to Wikileaks. It's not what it used to be.




posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So politicians have a right to privacy but we don't?

They can see everything we do but not vise versa?

Weird. The way you say it makes it seem like we work for then and not the other way around.
edit on 14-12-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I'm for the Bill of Rights. If that is a problem then you can see yourself out of the country.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Apparently the ends justify the means these days.

PS: Start with your own harddrive. Why haven't you posted all your personal information online? Lead by example!


LOL
All this time and you still do not have a complete understanding of that issue.
It was not the personal information on the harddrive that was a crime.

And what was the crime exactly? No one is in jail.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What's your thought on mass surveillance then?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So politicians have a right to privacy but we don't?

I'm sorry. Where do you have a quote of me saying this? Why are you putting words into my mouth?


They can see everything we do but not vise versa?

They can't do that... The NSA spying program was dissembled. If it is still ongoing it is working off the books.


Weird. The way you say it makes it seem like we work for then and not the other way around.

More like I just understand how the Bill of Rights works, but apparently me citing the Bill of Rights says SOOOO much more about my opinion than I would have thought. Not sure how that works, but I guess I should keep that in mind the next time I see someone like you using it as a defense for whatever you are whining about at the time.
edit on 14-12-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

By disassembled do you mean expanding?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Where's Troll-Trace when you need it?

Hey Denmark, get on this already! LOL



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

The NSA ended one of its contentious spying programs this weekend
You are free to believe what ever you want though. I really don't feel like trying that hard with you guys anymore. It's always strawmans and putting words in my mouth. I'm sure you'll do just that again with your response to this one. Or there will be some ad hominem about how I believe the MSM narrative and not some random blog on the internet or whatever. Or just the tried and true method of declaring me guilty of something just because I'm a liberal. That's pretty popular these days.
edit on 14-12-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What's your thought on mass surveillance then?

I don't like it because I feel like it violates the Bill of Rights. That's why I spoke up incessantly about PRISM when I first heard about it. Check my thread history if you don't believe me.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No I won't do anything of the sorts. All I'll say is that is an article on them ending the phone Metadata program. And earlier you said that the NSA spying program was disassembled. Correct me if I'm wrong but that is just a part of it that got stopped.

Heres from 2016

"Their ability to obtain records has broadened, but by all accounts, they're collecting a far narrower pool of data than they were initially," he said, referring to returns on specific searches. "They can use a type of legal process with a broader spectrum of providers than earlier. To me, that isn't like a strike against it. That's almost something in favor of it, because we've gone through this public process, we've had this debate, and this is where we settled on the scope of the authority we were going to give them."


ABC news
edit on 14-12-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ongoing investigation as far as I know.
How quick you are to point out the crime in hacking. Not so quick to point out the crime in failing to secure classified info.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No I won't do anything of the sorts. All I'll say is that is an article on them ending the phone Metadata program. And earlier you said that the NSA spying program was disassembled. Correct me if I'm wrong but that is just a part of it that got stopped.


I'm not gonna lie I was using the word "disassembled" liberally, but I think you got the idea of what I was getting across. The program was curtailed significantly. Sure its not all the way gone and I certainly would like to see it gone, but it also isn't as devious as it used to be.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ongoing investigation as far as I know.
How quick you are to point out the crime in hacking. Not so quick to point out the crime in failing to secure classified info.

Which one has a federal official speaking about it under oath saying there is nothing to prosecute again? It's hard for you guys to admit that Hillary's "crimes" were blown out of proportion by the media, isn't it? I mean Trump has already walked back his promise to prosecute her, the "incriminating" leaks have stopped since the election ended, and there is no further developments in that avenue from any source. Yet stuff keeps coming in daily implicating the Russians in this hack. It's a wonder why you guys are so keen to ignore this stuff.
edit on 14-12-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Copy that, I guess some progress is better than none in this case.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Which one has a federal official speaking about it under oath saying there is nothing to prosecute again?

You really have a twisted version of the facts.
He was not "under oath" as he was not being investigated.
www.fbi.gov... -a-personal-e-mail-system


Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.




To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.

Much different that what you represented as fact.
As it is an ongoing investigation, and prosecutors will change with the administration I would wager at the least a grand jury will be convened, as is appropriate, and we will see what comes with that.

Too bad for hill had she been charged the big O could have pardoned her.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join