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: 3
35
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2010 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


He deserved privacy too. Unfortunately he lied under oath. If he had told the truth, he would have been fine.




posted on May, 13 2010 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to argue...are you asking why the punishment is so extreme???

From the article:


The charge is punishable by up to one year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000.


This is just stating what the maximum is for the charge against them...it isn't what they are getting. If they are found guilty then the judge will decide the punishment UP TO one year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000.

They aren't getting a special punishment becaus it was Obama's record...it is just what the law is.


Is that honestly what you are all bent out of shape about???



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Maybe you don't know this because you ain't got a clue, but THE GOVERNMENT IS SPYING ON EVERYTHING.


No, not really everything.


INTERNET,


They know I am posting on ATS and get adds for viagra in my email!!!!


PHONES,


They can listen to me chat about the lates VH1 reality show for hours on end!!!!!


MAIL


The government is reading my junk mail and birthday cards? Oh no, they know about the stuff I ordered from Compusa last month!!!!!


BANK ACCOUNTS


The money that I have to report to the government when I get it, you mean they can see if I still have it? Oh NO!!!!!


EVERYTHING.


Hardly everything. I will admit the government is a sneaky thing that oversteps its bounds quite often but "everything?" How many federal employess do you think it would take to monitor EVERYTHING? Just watching all college records in the US would take millions of people to do. Really think that makes sense? You think there are enough people to listen to every phone call being made? I got 519 emails myself yesterday. 500 in one day to one person. Who is reading allllllllllllllllll those emails? Superman? Aliens?

Anyway, "everything" would include many of the things I do each day that actually do not fall in line with what the government spies would approve of. I have not been interfered with for any of that yet and I can only assume it is because either...

No one is spying on EVERYTHING I do

or

They are but do not care what I do so the point of them taking the time and resources to do it makes little to no sense at all.

Now that that is out of the way, on to the logic of that. So if the government spies on everyone, then we get the right to break laws ourselves? The government spies so people can violate the privacy of others?

OK, how about I buy that. The government is spying on EVERYTHING that is being done. OK, I got that. So now I have the right to dig into your private records because of that? Can you explain that to me?


When they do it, IT'S OKAY. EVEN WITHOUT WARRANTS.


Who says it is ok?


But when the legitimate people


What makes the legitimate people? Because they broke the law or because you perceive them as breaking a law you do not like?

want to have true information THAT SHOULD BE PUBLIC SINCE HE WORKS FOR THE PEOPLE,


They are not his employer and you are not his employer. Why should that information be public?

AND THAT ALL PRESIDENTS BEFORE HIM RELEASED, they are arrested.


Quick, what was Millard Fillmore's GPA?



GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK.


Tell me about it.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 



They should pass laws requiring all presidential candidates to release everything. About their former jobs, former schools, family... EVERYTHING.


Well maybe they should...but currently there is no law saying the President or any elected official is required by law to release ALL their records.

So instead of being all frantic on a website about Obama not doing something he actually isn't required to do...maybe you should call/write your representative and Senators and petition for a law to require all elected officials to release all records they have.

It will never be passed...because they are American citizens too and as much as you don't think so...they do have a right to privacy.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:01 AM
link   
So going on the posts by many in this thread I hear the following.

Everyone is entitled to their privacy.
This includes all records from their past etc.

SO!! You in the USA could in fact elect a President that was a satanic communist, KKK member, illegal imigrant with ties to the Taliban.

And you wouldn't know because he has his privacy...



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


Pretty sure that would come out on the campaign trail



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


No, I'm just wondering how many people in the USA get to the stage of being arrested for a similar crime, and lets face fact, it happens a lot.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


I didn't know KKK membership was protected information.


Seriously...so you get proven wrong on one of your arguments (that they are being punished harder because it is Obama)...so you just dive right into fantasy land and take it to the idiotic extreme.

There is certain information that is PRIVATE and certain information that is PUBLIC. If you do not understand this concept...then this is a pointless conversation.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:07 AM
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.


Which legally protected private documents have you seen from these people?



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by davidmann
Let's see...any idiot can by keystroke to keystroke spyware. Why? Because it is legal.



It is not legal to surreptitiously use that software to obtain private information from another person or to use that information in any way.

It is legal to buy knives too, not legal to stab people with them though.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Well there was a certain video that was released of Hilton. I truly wish that had remained private.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


Ask the guy who hacked Sarah Palin's email.

Palin Email Hacker Article


So tell me...do you think her email should be private? It isn't technically hers...it is technically Yahoo's. And if she was running for VP...shouldn't all of her "records" been public???


I'm assuming you guys are not going to be hypocrits and you will also be defending the actions of the Palin hacker as well...right??? He is a patriot for doing his American duty of investigating her...right???


I don't defend him...he broke the law...he is now going to face the consequences. Doesn't matter that I think Palin is maybe the dumbest person in the world...her email sitting on Yahoo's servers were not for that guy to look at.


So let's hear it...where do you all stand on that situation???


I have a bad feeling I'm going to hear some excuses and contradictions.

[edit on 13-5-2010 by OutKast Searcher]



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


Why wouldn't KKK membership be protected information?

And I was not wrong, you just don't all answer questions.

I said it wasn't the penalty but the fact that they got arrested as opposed to the others who do the same thing.

Personnaly I'm tired of some on ATS with BS posts and may just use the ignore button more often.
Some obviously have set views and agendas that no amount of logic will alter, and are very good at twisting arguments.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Heck, I'm just wondering if every peson that accesses someones private information cops the same..
I don't think it matters if I'm in Australia or on Mars.
And I'm still betting it is a BIG NO...


Not really sure what you just said there but I am assuming you are trying to answer my question about what you base your guess on. So the answer is...NOTHING? You just say it again? Should I believe it now? Some guy in Austrailia with apparently little knowledge of US law is taking a wild guess about how many people get arrested for breaking a certain law he did not know much about and is basing it on nothing but apparently gut instinct and the afformentioned ignorance? Yeah, I am convinced.


How about this.

CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THIS GUESS IS BASED ON?

Maybe it is easier to answer that way?


You're the one argueing the OPs post so it's up to you to prove your point.


Huh? I am not allowed to respond to you? I have a point to prove? What is it? What do I need to prove? That we have laws? I can do that.


Don't get lazy on me cause I see you defending at every opportunity.


OK, since you did such a good job answering my question I guess I owe you, right?


Well if you think there is something I need to prove or that I am being lazy about, lay it out for me!



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Is this the reason for these threads? There is some kind of disconnect happening in people's heads when it comes to this topic.


Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
You have proven that you are able to use critical thinking, without resorting to nonsense. I commend you for that, seriously.

That said, I am amazed you are spouting the same nonsense that has been going around for a long time now.


'Good job on not resorting to nonsense. That being said, let me comment on your nonsense.'

That kind of sums these threads up right there.

[edit on 13-5-2010 by K J Gunderson]



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Very large post of nothing.

Seriously very childish.

OK, I'll bite though..I'm not in the US so please help me by directing me to where I can find the arrest rate for people illegally accessing private data.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


Well not to be contrary, but the person bringing the topic up bears the burden of proof.



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by virgom129
 


And I'm tired of doing people's research for them. It's not hard really...you are already on the interwebs...just go to google and type your question.

Apparently cyber crime is a big deal (SHOCKING...really...where have you been the last 10 years?).

It is important enough that the government has a website for it.

CyberCrime

And they even have a nice manual on prosecuting computer crimes.

Computer Crimes Manual


It doesn't really matter what information they accessed...they accessed a FEDERAL COMPUTER connected to a FEDERAL DATABASE without AUTHORIZATION.

Yes...that is kind of a big deal...doesn't matter that it was only student loan information.

Have I answered all your questions now??? Or do you really think the government should just let everyone go and access any federal computer/database that they want to???



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Yes I see your point but that is talking about private emails.
This is about what I always thought were public records.
Or am I wrong in thinking that it was the public purse this money comes from?



posted on May, 13 2010 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by virgom129
So going on the posts by many in this thread I hear the following.

Everyone is entitled to their privacy.
This includes all records from their past etc.

SO!! You in the USA could in fact elect a President that was a satanic


Satan has a notoriously big mouth so I am not worried about that. Any Satanists running for any office get blown out by him because he like to brag more than succeed.


communist,


Then he would be running on the cummunist ticket which is perfectly ok here in the US. Chances are he would get few votes but when you belong to a party, you run on rhat platform so being a communist would be something that would be a staple of the campaign

KKK member,
Well if he was a memeber and never did anything noteworthy to get his name associated with it, then that is a risk but then again the risk of the president being a racist kind of exists anyway. You do not have to be a clansman to be an ignorant redneck. Chances are he would have positions people would recognize as racist or he would be a great liar. That is the risk we take for freedom here and I can live with that.

illegal imigrant
Actually, the president does have to prove they are not an illegal immigrant. Unfortunately, they are not required to stop and answer Orly Taitz every time she gets a new "Kenyan" birth certificate so that one does not even apply.

with ties to the Taliban.
What kind of ties to the Taliban could an elected president have that would not involve public knowledge at some point? I am not arguing this last one but genuinely asking if you have a real idea here.


And you wouldn't know because he has his privacy...



I am starting to think an American Civics class might be in order for peopler on the other side of the planet with strong opinions and a lack of knowledge on the subject.




top topics



 
35
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join