Obummer- computer = no rights

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by Legion489, Jun 7, 2016.

  1. Legion489

    Legion489 Rev. 2:19 Banned

  2. Salted Weapon

    Salted Weapon Monkey+++

    I was kinda lost on the article, it seemed to be about gun rights >??
  3. Legion489

    Legion489 Rev. 2:19 Banned

    It was about how Obummer said, openly and on TV, that anything Obummer doesn't like, exposing his stupidities, exposing Billary (you know, the photo of her in black face and then lying about nearly everything she said or did) and BAM! You is history. You might need to read it again if you didn't pick that up the first time.
    Taku likes this.
  4. Salted Weapon

    Salted Weapon Monkey+++

    Let me clarify browser history ?
  5. Yard Dart

    Yard Dart Vigilant Monkey Moderator


    At some point, the talking.... the writing....the internet.... the bitching and so-on.... have run their course.... and you have to make a stand.... or fall in line like a good little [sheep]
    Salted Weapon, Bandit99, Dont and 3 others like this.
  6. VisuTrac

    VisuTrac Ваша мать носит военные ботинки Site Supporter+++

    One can make a stand just by ignoring the blathering coming out of DC and anywhere politicians gather.
    Wonder how long it will take if we just tell them to talk to the hand before they just go away.

    If one want's to research something .. they should be free to do so. It's all about intent. Unfortunately, I think they decide what your intent was during trial or as they give the fire order to the drone operator.
    GOG, Dont, Tully Mars and 1 other person like this.
  7. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey Site Supporter+++

    Shepard Smith was interviewing Judge Napolinao, on Fox News, this afternoon about this subject and the judge became very animated about it as did Shepard. I started to think that Napoliano would make a fine Supreme court Justice..
  8. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Saw this being discussed on Fox news, while that doesn't necessarily give it validity, it isn't conspiracy theory. They want unwarranted access to the browsing history of anyone they consider a potential "threat" or terrorist. We all know who the "terrorists" are to the government. Anyone who disagrees with them. But it's for our safety. :rolleyes:
    VisuTrac, Bandit99, GOG and 2 others like this.
  9. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

    I do not know why this is put in such an inflammatory manner with no back up.

    I posted last week the admistriative ruling for this

    Senate Just took a Hatchet to Liberty | Survival Monkey Forums

    Why does every inflamatory post get more inflammed I think we are being manipulated here. Lets just have a fact based discussion rather than a 'the skye is fallin' discussion
    Bandit99 and chelloveck like this.
  10. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Inflammatory posts are designed to inflame. Least ways, that's how it seems to me to work. Thing is, there are folks that don't recognize flames until they get burnt --

    Want to start something? EZ, take a short speculation based on a rumor or extrapolation from something even more speculative, and quote it as fact. Think Nat Enquirer level journalism. "We heard that Oprah told zero (____________). Kim says it's true on kanny's facebook page."
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2016
    Ganado likes this.
  11. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Guess I must be missing something here. Inflammatory? No back up? WTH. I don't guess I'm reading the same thing. The link is to a respectable site, not infowars or some henny penny, the sky is falling site. It is discussing a topic that is verified and legitimate. It has been reported that the authorization to search, without warrant, anyone's browser history is fact. It is also fact that what is found on that history can get you on the no fly list. And it is also fact that Obama wants to have anyone on that list barred from owning a firearm. So where is the rumour and where are the flames?
    I see a whole lot of facts and things people should be concerned about. I guess inflammatory, rumour and speculation are in the eyes of the beholder.
    Thanks Legion for an informative and fact based post.
  12. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    That is correct, my answer was to Genado. It remains true that inflammatory posts do what they are designed to do. Yep, off topic, and my apologies for the misdirection.
    Minuteman likes this.
  13. Oltymer

    Oltymer Monkey++

    Browser history, hmmmm, time for TOR?
    Salted Weapon likes this.
  14. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    From my reading of the article, It seems that All Outdoor are justifiably outraged that any US ISIL sympathiser (or Muslim for that matter), should be denied their 2nd Amendment rights, simply because, their web browser history shows an unhealthy interest in information about ISIL or jihadism in Syria/Iraq/USA.

    They (ISIL sympathisers) should be free to own, possess, purchase, sell.....and use.....as many firearms as they can afford to pay for. You all know that you would want to support their 2A rights also

    A healthy degree of skepticism is worth being apportioned to "respectable" sites, as much as the dodgy sites, (which content seems far too often swallowed whole by my fellow monkeys). It is worth fact checking even the claims of "respectable" sites.
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
    ghrit likes this.
  15. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    All you have to do is read reports on those who are on the "no fly" list. Many for very innocuous reasons. In our country you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Many people on that list and have the potential to lose their second amendment rights, have committed no crime and if called a terrorist sympathizer in a newspaper or other media would have a basis to bring legal action for slander.
    Are you prepared to have all of your searches reviewed and questioned and determined by some agent of the government whether they "show an unhealthy interest"? I suppose in socialist countries that doesn't raise such an alarm as it does in ours.
    3M-TA3, Altoidfishfins and Taku like this.
  16. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    I'm not sure why you are giving me the rounds of the kitchen for affirming what the article has expressed. I'm not exactly suggesting that ISIL sympathisers should be welcomed as card carrying members of the NRA....that would be plain ridiculous...but that by all means ISIL sympathisers should be extended the same 2A rights as all other US citizens and residents....it's the right thing to do. it's the Constitutional thing to do: As I keep being told.

    (NB I made no mention of terrorist sympathisers)

    Undoubtedly I already have an ASIO file as undoubtedly you also have "alphabet.gov case files"....I doubt that my association with SM is particularly noteworthy as much as my extensive browsing of Betty Bowers Ministries Mrs. Betty Bowers, America's Best Christian!
  17. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

    @Taku no one was trying to silence you or anyone else. kind of paranoid if you ask me, my point is this was and over the top inflammatory article.

    Maybe I missed it but I saw no suggestion that they were going to remove anyone's rights. He made a case for no arming terrorists, which in theory is a good idea but in practical application just won't work. The inflammatory part is the way this is head lined 'take away your constitutional rights' is free speech in danger with this move? is your right to representation being impinged on? yes to both if this goes thru.

    and who uses their real IP address anymore? who doesn't clean their browser? silly not t protect yourself any way but back to the topic,

    Inflammatory is the title, and it offer's no solution, makes no suggestion for how to act. When an article or talk radio is like this it is part of the problem because it offer's no solution. If we continue to talk about us vs them, liberal vs conservative, we will continue to rip this country in to two camps. You let the media manipulate you with inflammatory talk.
    chelloveck likes this.
  18. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Therein lays the rub. In entirely too many cases, some sort of regulation, or policy, or fiat by a low level bureaucrat gets a person on a list that takes that right away. The "no fly" list is just that sort of decision making process that needs to be squelched. That said, there are far too many unfounded rumors of actions pending which are just plain hokum of the henny penny flavor. Given the first amendment, I do not know how to stop that crap.
    GOG likes this.
  19. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    It can't be stopped,and, unfortunately, there are some here, whose raison d'être appears to be to uncritically replicate that kind of crap like it's A Grade confirmed Intel.

    Member's options include......

    Become more effective of filtering the BS that some folk are too lazy or too negligent to be bothered fact checking themselves. After a while,wolf crying truthiness can be sussed out as wolf crying BS.

    Cut it off at the source, by ignoring serial offenders.....the BS still exists but it needn't offend one's sensitivities and waste one's bandwidth.

    Having some sport at the BS artist's expense in exposing the BS artist's BS for what it is (BS), can be satisfying, but abide by the COC, and be prepared to be placed on ignore (which often is no great loss, but generally can be counted as evidence of the BS artist's moral and intellectual cowardice). The down side is that fact checking can take time and effort, and at the end of the day....evidence matters not a jot to the BS artist....in their mind, mostly, faith and belief trumps evidence and factual knowledge.

  20. Bandit99

    Bandit99 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+

    Did I miss something or is this something he said he would like to do, would be good to do?
    But, here is a fact if you want to get spun up about something...right now, Bill H.R. 5077 is going to the full Senate for vote to allow Law Enforcement agencies to sequester your emails without warrant - your personal, private correspondence... It has already passed the House (May 24, 2016) and the Senate Intelligence Committee did indeed approved it (I think 27 May) and it goes now to the full Senate... This Bill is a Game changer...

    Edit: Thinking about this some more...it is not a far stretch to sequester one's Browsing History also if this Bill is passed. In fact, I wonder if it's already in the Bill since we wouldn't know having heard so little about the Bill?
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
    Minuteman, Salted Weapon and Dont like this.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary