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.

 

9 indicted on charges of accessing Obama records

page: 10
35
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by King Loki
 


Actually this information is somebodies property. It's like the files on your computer, even though its connected to the Internet, the files on it are your private files. In this case these were the property of a government agency and these people violated their trust and broke the law by taking the files. They likely used passwords provided as part of their employment ignoring the rules.

The problem with files like these is offices all over the place need access for various legitimate reasons. They have to make them accessible over the net but they can't always control the integrity of their workers.




posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by King Loki
 


You stated that whatever is on the internet is free for all to see. I corrected you. No biggie, thanks. Blaine pretty much said what I wanted to say lol.

[edit on 13-5-2010 by GorehoundLarry]



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by gaslaugh123
 


I agree he should provide info like this but he is within his rights not to. I can't access your banking or loan information. Would you want me to be able too? What he should do and what he has the right to do are seperate topics. On its own though, the fact he did not release every bit of info people want is his choice.

Obviously not enough people found it troubling as he won the election.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LurkerMan
they payin outkast searcher overtime for this thread..


hes got all his accounts on full steam



Believe me, if I was getting paid to do this...I wouldn't be able to bill for this thread because it is so easy...it is like teasing children. Birthers are without a doubt the dumbest creatures on the planet.

I've come to a conclusion about you birthers...you're all crazy...plain and simple.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
I don't agree with the way they went about it. They broke the law, that much is for sure. But just because they broke the law doesn't mean the punishment is fair. A lot of laws in our country aren't fair and I think most would agree. For example, drug laws.
But if the people want these records then they should be able to get a hold of this information plain and simple. He is a public figure now and when you are a public figure, your right to privacy is not like the rest of ours. Hence the paparazzi. Hence why a public figure must prove malicious intent in order to sue for libel and defamation.

I see what they're trying to get at by trying to get his student loan files. They just want to try and prove he's not a citizen, which even if he wasn't, sorry but you're not gonna find anything. Everyone knows you must be a natural born citizen to be President of our country and if you really think whoever put him in power didn't think about it before they put him there, then you're delusional.

I just don't understand why he won't release his college transcripts. Supposedly he was so smart and all so what is there not to be proud of? Unless of course, he's not what he was made out to be which is all I really get from all this. Bush, being the idiot that he is, even released his transcripts no matter how terrible they were. Obama, supposedly graduated cum laude and magna cum laude at two of the most prestigious institutions in the WORLD, not just the US, the WORLD. What is there to hide? That's an illustrious college career, anyone would be proud.

For those people saying he doesn't work for us. You're crazy. He does work for us. It says so in the constitution. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

When the President takes his oath of office, what does he say? "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Meaning WE established the constitution and he is merely following OUR rules. Where does he get his rules from? OUR constitution. If that doesn't scream employed to the people then idk what does.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 




sorry i don't understand that,

say i took a chair (my property) from my house and wrote my name and phone number on it and i drove 4 hours south of my home and put that chair in the middle of a public park or some other public place and left it there deliberately and drove home ... could i set up a camera to secretly film my chair and if anyone looked at it charge them with a crime for looking at my information i placed in an area owned by the public ... its exactly the same scenario using different objects.

would i be able to charge them with a crime ... i own the number and the chair .. but they looked at it ?? 100,000 fine and or 1 year jail be a fair punishment ?



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Or, could it be they actually care and believe in what they are doing? I don't agree with them but I don't fault them. They asked a reasonable question and can't get a satisfactory answer.

Even though I find it odd he did not simply release the original certificate, it seems clear he was born in Hawaii.

I do however think he has the potential of being the worst President in our history and of doing irreparable damage to us economically.

Are those who blindly support him regardless of the absurdity of what he does just as out of line as the Birthers? You bet they are. Are those who stick with him regarless of the flood of documented lies he has told as radical as the Birthers? Yes.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by djzombie
 


Nearly everyone I know who voted for Obama are wishing they had not. I've never seen this before except to a lesser degree with Carter.



When ever I hear a statement like this I think..."hmmm...that is odd...I haven't heard the same thing...except maybe on Fox or conservative talk shows".

And then I think...why isn't this poster give out Obama's approval numbers with this statement...or quote the latest poll saying they dropped??? So I go an check...and suprise....his approval numbers are in the positive...you guys are a bit predictable. Once you can't use "poll" numbers...you go to your personal experiences. I really don't care about the poll numbers...not at this stage of the cycle anyway.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by King Loki
 


That is a false analogy. The information they took required they access the computer it was on (in your analogy they entered your home) and used a password entrusted to them to extract the information (in your case they took the chair from your house before you threw it away).

When they used the password to gain access to the files from a computer they were trusted to use at their place of employment, it is the same as breaking the lock on the door to your home to gain access.

Under your idea, I could go to your bank records and take them anytime I want.

Information is property like any other and it has value. For instance I have a marketing list associated with my business that contains 15 years of marketing data, customer lists and employee files. If you access that illegally, I'll see to it you do years in a Prison. It is my property. If one of my employees take it and share it or misuse it, they are going to spend time behind bars. In my case though, since I don't need other offices to have access, its on a computer not connected.

Don't you have firewall on your computer? Why? To protect your property.


[edit on 5/13/2010 by Blaine91555]



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 



Sometimes you have to do what you feel is right in spite of the laws.


I'm assuming you have the same feelings towards illegal immigrants....right? They are just doing what they feel is right for their families...a much better cause then trying to prove a internet rumor.

I don't know your stance on illegal immigration...but because it is another hot topic right now...I thought it appropriate to tie the two together with the same type of logic you are using in this case.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by King Loki
 



but seriously no one owns the Internet ... so wouldn't that mean that its a public free for all and that if his information is on the Internet and able to be accessed through he Internet that anyone who uses the Internet has a right to do so ?


what would have happened if someone outside of the USA's jurisdiction accessed this information using the Internet and posted it on the Internet for other people to read ???


This information isn't on the "internet"...it is on a some government database accessed most likely by a private network. Could some savy hacker get in there through the internet if it is connected to the interent (which it may or may not be)...sure...but some good thief could also get into your car on a public road...it is still illegal. Think of the road as the internet and your car as a private database...no one "owns" the road...but that doesn't give anyone the right to take any car they want to because it is parked on the road.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
i didn't say they took anything i said they looked at it .... they wouldn't have removed the records ... just look at them ... argue my point not one you made up yourself ...


so in your scenario just looking at the car would net you the jail time they wouldn't have taken the car just looked at it or took a photograph and by doing that 100,000 fine and or 1 tear in jail for LOOKING at something in a publicly owned area

[edit on 13/5/10 by King Loki]



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 



Compare it to those who hacked the private emails to find the information behind the climategate fiasco if it helps. The point is, sometimes we need to look to see what, if anything, is being hidden from the people.

I'm not saying they were legally correct but instead morally correct as I see it. When you are in the limelight, people are going to look into you. It may not be fair but that is the way it is. And if you will be part of governing an entire country, I support the citizen's curiosity to an extent. As in, things that are relevant to the constitution and leadership.

I frown on invading the personal space of others for irrelevant matters (who have they slept with, what sexuality are they, etc.) but remember some of the accused did the deed years ago while the topic was fresh and not well known. Had they uncovered something revealing, they would have altered history.

Sometimes the ends justify the means, in other words.


Some people take ATS very seriously...some even think it is a government front to track people who believe in conspiracy theories.

You, as a moderator and a host of a new ATS show, are a public person for ATS. You are no longer a "private" member...you are one of the faces of ATS.

So if a member on here suspects that you are a secret government agent and thinks hacking into your ATS acccount may prove his theory...maybe he will uncover a secret board all you secret government agents post on, or maybe your U2U's will show something revealing...if that would happen....you are telling me you would be in support of his actions???

In the position you are in at ATS...you have just declared yourself a "public" person...and some may think you no longer have the right to some of your privacy because you have special access to some of their information.

Are you really saying you would be ok with that?



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


guys are you reading what i am writing thats 2 people now ...


I said they LOOKED at the chair not took it, the people who went into these files did not remove the files they bloody looked at them ...

please answer what i have written not change what i said and answer that ...

wouldnt they have just looked or copied the info .... that would be the same as looking at the chair or taking a photo of it in a public place



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Seven people in my office right now. Four voted for Obama. Three of them have commented to me they would like their vote back. I can't speak to your experiences.

You sound like a person who is so Partisan, no matter what Obama does, no matter how many documented lies he has told, you will go to your grave supporting him just because he is a member of the same Party you are. Or, some other reason.

One thing I find so odd is how rude Obama supporters are to others who simply don't agree with his politics. Mean in fact. Calling people Racists and other mean vile nonsense. The Daily Koss is shocking and the people who allow that behavior disgusting. Makes me ill when I see that from either side.

That is the plan however. They keep us at each others throats because if we ever come together they know their little criminal games are over. Amazing how easy some people on both sides are to fool. Good little slave buddies running around doing their dirty work for them. You know, Partisans



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Unless there was a specific request for information under the freedom of information act, this was illegal access and should be prosecuted.

How would you like any Tom, Dick, or Harry who works for the Government just randomly checking up on your records for no reason at all?

While our lawmakers (and certainly the President) need to be held to higher levels of accountability and respectability than the average citizen, this was an illegal act and should be treached as such.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by King Loki
 


But looking at information IS taking it.

Give out your SSN and bank account information in your next reply...I swear I will only LOOK at it. I won't grab it off the screen...it will stay right where it is at.


Your argument is kind of silly.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   


Six of them are accused of accessing Obama's records when he was a candidate, according to the indictments online. One is accused of accessing the records when he was president-elect. An indictment for the ninth defendant was not immediately available online.



So you have 6 accessing records when he was a candidate
and you have 1 when he was Pres-elect
then you have 1 not available on-line

6 + 1 + 1 = 8 huh?

Thats irrelevant I know


So what happened here?

One guys looks....... sees something not good, tells a friend. That person can't believe it, so they look....... omg then they tell 2 friends.....


Now think about this. If these people came out and confirmed the rumour about the application, saying they "saw it". Without having hard copies who would believe them?

Birthers would believe them

Obama supporters would say.... prove it! and accuse the accused of being crazy birthers making sh** up.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by King Loki
 


But looking at information IS taking it.

Give out your SSN and bank account information in your next reply...I swear I will only LOOK at it. I won't grab it off the screen...it will stay right where it is at.


Your argument is kind of silly.



show me the law that says i cannot look at information in a public area ???

what your saying is that if i see the registration number of some ones car on their number plate when there car is parked in a public area that i have broken the law because i have looked ( you say taken now) their registration number which is thier private information and also held on a government site ????????

[edit on 13/5/10 by King Loki]



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by InvisibleAlbatross
 


People give up their Private Life when they become Public Figures.

That has been known and accepted for centuries.
Just ask Paris Hilton, Charlie Sheen or Tiger Woods.


They don't give up their rights given to them by the constitution and the bill of rights though.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join