General Discussion

Corruption Inc

(1,568 posts)

20. The sad thing is that about 1/2 our population loves criminal acts

Fri Jun 28, 2013, 03:27 PM

Jun 2013

They'll support criminal banks, torture, killing civilians, jailing reporters and pretty much anything they're told to support by their propaganda masters. Part of the reason is plain stupidity but the other most insidious reason is that they too are corrupt.

Americans sell war and don't really care about any reasons for war. We sell propaganda as fact. We believe almost any lie our government tells us. We repeat the lies as gossip to fill up the uncomfortable time we have to spend with other people whom we can't stand to even be in the presence of. Worse of all, we sell any f-ing thing we can to make enough money to keep up with every corrupt segment of our culture such as real estate, gas prices, food inflation and for-profit medical corruption.

We're corrupt to the core as a nation now, but thankfully a lot of people are choosing to not partake in it anymore. I see a lot of people like that right here on DU which is why I read posts such as yours.

REC!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

111 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Let's Be Clear, say Legal Experts, What NSA Is Doing Is 'Criminal' [View all] 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 OP

Of course it isn't. Why else would a constitutional lawyer President classify it so extraordinarily? Catherina Jun 2013 #1

or federal courts say it isn't? arely staircase Jun 2013 #15

What courts? reusrename Jun 2013 #40

The FISA court that issued the warrant that Snowden leaked clearly thinks it is arely staircase Jun 2013 #43

I really disagree. reusrename Jun 2013 #58

I don't like secret courts either. But I can understand them for certain warrants. arely staircase Jun 2013 #60

I think it is becoming clear how the FISA court acts. reusrename Jun 2013 #63

thanks for that info. arely staircase Jun 2013 #65

Snowden's arrest warrant and the survelliance program are separate legal issues Martin Eden Jun 2013 #85

" But courts are not going to declare this illegal." Strange logic. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #86

Even the Rubber Stamp known as FISA has ruled that the NSA has violated the constitution think Jun 2013 #101

proud to be 5th rec nashville_brook Jun 2013 #2

Waiting for the gang to show up and tell us how this is all legal Hydra Jun 2013 #3

more kill the messenger posts.. frylock Jun 2013 #12

Chinese officials were asolutely scathing in their response to truedelphi Jun 2013 #4

The World is laughing at the hypocrisy. bvar22 Jun 2013 #9

The world is indeed laughing at US, or worse. 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #14

I wait with baited breath for us to be corrected nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #5

What 'disease'? Do you refer to the dreaded 'cognitive thinking malady'? randome Jun 2013 #17

.... questionseverything Jun 2013 #96

... questionseverything Jun 2013 #97

I don't get your objection. randome Jun 2013 #105

where they in touch with Snowden for some answers we don't have yet? n/t Whisp Jun 2013 #6

If anyone is looking for a specific statute (and some appologists have demanded that others AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #7

You've claimed to be an attorney. Could you cite the statutes broken? When you were an attorney, msanthrope Jun 2013 #11

USC Title 18 Part I Chapter 119 § 2511 wtmusic Jun 2013 #19

Oh lordy....read your first sentence. Then read sub-section (2)-- msanthrope Jun 2013 #23

Lordy, yourself. (e) and (f) refer to foreign intelligence, not domestic. wtmusic Jun 2013 #30

But he provided the warrant. The one to Verizon. If he's got other info, he should release it. msanthrope Jun 2013 #31

Eric Holder determined he could keep anything they picked up as a boo-boo. wtmusic Jun 2013 #35

Absolutely they can. I'll give you a hypo. msanthrope Jun 2013 #38

Not analogous wtmusic Jun 2013 #39

Nonsense. Agent Mike needs a warrant (like the one produced by Mr. Snowden.) The problem is that msanthrope Jun 2013 #41

The FISA court is not entitled to authorize interception of ANY domestic calls. wtmusic Jun 2013 #42

You are conflating two different things--domestic calls to foreign entities and calls that msanthrope Jun 2013 #45

No, I'm not. wtmusic Jun 2013 #46

Wikipedia? Ok. And thank you for admitting that you were wrong about FISA interception. nt msanthrope Jun 2013 #47

I'm admitting no such thing wtmusic Jun 2013 #50

I am a lawyer...which is why I am laughing at your cite of Wikipedia. nt msanthrope Jun 2013 #66

There's a number at the end of the quote in Wikipedia wtmusic Jun 2013 #67

It is not from Harvard Law. It is from the Kennedy School of Government and the Belfer Center and msanthrope Jun 2013 #68

Good. Since I've got you in a less dismissive mood now wtmusic Jun 2013 #69

Prove that the government intercepts and stores the communications of every American. nt msanthrope Jun 2013 #70

None of this is new. wtmusic Jun 2013 #71

None of this is proof. You've made a fantastical claim--that the communications of all Americans msanthrope Jun 2013 #73

Wow - you haven't been paying attention. wtmusic Jun 2013 #74

Apparently I have been paying better attention. You have made the fantastical claim that all msanthrope Jun 2013 #87

But Snowden said he "saw things"! He said stuff! How much clearer do you need it to be? randome Jun 2013 #88

How odd that you discount eyewitness testimony. wtmusic Jun 2013 #90

James fiucking Sensenbrenner. Next up...Tom Delay on DOJ overreach....nt msanthrope Jun 2013 #106

And I've provided evidence. In 12 posts here, all you've provided is attitude. wtmusic Jun 2013 #89

excerpt from the ohio free press follows questionseverything Jun 2013 #93

just a look at how this started questionseverything Jun 2013 #95

So you've moved on from a House impeachment manager to an NYT op-ed? msanthrope Jun 2013 #104

If it's too daunting, no problem. nt wtmusic Jun 2013 #107

I guess you were wrong. wtmusic Jun 2013 #109

Slides? From a guy charged with espionage? That's your proof? nt msanthrope Jun 2013 #110

Those are screenshots of the Prism user interface. wtmusic Jun 2013 #111

But does the law consider the metadata of what phone number called cstanleytech Jun 2013 #24

Yes, it does. All data. nt wtmusic Jun 2013 #26

And ???????? cstanleytech Jun 2013 #28

And...it's prohibited. wtmusic Jun 2013 #32

Even with a warrant its prohibited? cstanleytech Jun 2013 #33

See #35. nt wtmusic Jun 2013 #36

Ugh, I think that the court is just going to have to resolve this as it looks like a mess. cstanleytech Jun 2013 #57

Read the NYT article, the case against the NSA couldn't get much clearer. wtmusic Jun 2013 #62

The NY Times article does point to FISA and to the Patriot Act. eomer Jun 2013 #37

Thanks. 18 U.S.C. § 2511 AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #51

But remember 911 changed everything. zeemike Jun 2013 #8

If only America LWolf Jun 2013 #44

Well, are any of these legal experts on the Supreme Court or is this group some of the same Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #10

bbbbut the Sino-Russo-Bolivarian-Greenwaldian Axis!!!! MisterP Jun 2013 #13

kick ....n/t Ichingcarpenter Jun 2013 #16

knr Douglas Carpenter Jun 2013 #18

The sad thing is that about 1/2 our population loves criminal acts Corruption Inc Jun 2013 #20

And I'm sure you can provide the case law that supports this opinion. baldguy Jun 2013 #21

are you claiming that an op-ed doesn't have legal force? Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #78

Post removed Post removed Jun 2013 #80

Well that was a cheap shot. I had no say in what my parents named me. Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #81

Problem is though that SCOTUS has not stepped in and said it was criminal. cstanleytech Jun 2013 #22

Congress already prohibited this: 18 U.S.C. § 2511 AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #52

SCOTUS doesn't "step in" to anything. Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #83

I am well aware that the courts usually take a hands off approach to such cases cstanleytech Jun 2013 #94

another kick Douglas Carpenter Jun 2013 #25

K&R forestpath Jun 2013 #27

The Patiot Act Herlong Jun 2013 #29

This is a really good article marions ghost Jun 2013 #34

And what's worse, writes The Nation's Jonathan Schell marions ghost Jun 2013 #48

Great post. woo me with science Jun 2013 #54

Back atcha marions ghost Jun 2013 #55

+1000000000000000000000 blackspade Jun 2013 #49

+10000000000. K&R woo me with science Jun 2013 #53

This is an eye opening post Harmony Blue Jun 2013 #56

I agree. With 75 recs and so many posts, it's still not ANYwhere on the home page, 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #64

k & r! nt wildbilln864 Jun 2013 #59

+ Infinity - The American Democracy And Constitution Has Clearly Died cantbeserious Jun 2013 #61

K+R sibelian Jun 2013 #72

Things would be better if they were illegal, unfortunately, this is the law that got passed Recursion Jun 2013 #75

By the logic of some in this thread, legally, the Nazis were justified in doing what they did. Democracyinkind Jun 2013 #76

As much as I hate bringing up the Nazis 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #77

"two legal scholars" DCBob Jun 2013 #79

I think more could be found who say it was illegal, however, is populist media support HereSince1628 Jun 2013 #82

perhaps but.. DCBob Jun 2013 #84

Of course there's a great way to counter it wtmusic Jun 2013 #91

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #92

thanx for the kick. ~nt 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #100

k&r. thanks for posting this. nt limpyhobbler Jun 2013 #98

u r most welcome . ~nt 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #99

Millions of people have sulphurdunn Jun 2013 #102

Very good point. Snowden is going with what he "believes is right" 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #103

Yes, sulphurdunn Jun 2013 #108