Freedom of speech is 'universal' right, Michelle Obama tells China

[blackface]

Give me your wife for western formalities. Perhaps I can grant you some white points.



In Brazilian culture, letting your wife sleep with your best friend is also a part of greeting. Why?

Because you people have no honor. No shame in hiding it. Just be outright and say that your people are honorless. It makes much more sense.

What you said is a lie. That is not part of Brazilian culture and what does honour have to do with anything? It doesn't make sense. You are imposing your islamic beliefs on other cultures.

 

[RazPaK]

thank you for tax dollars that go to kill extremist like you... .

Take solace in bobii jindal bharti. That's all you will ever get. But we will make sure the next president is Muslim.

 

[JayAtl]

Except in Harward in which the talented professor like swamy is removed as a faculty because of writing an article on Islamic terror in india.

Not familiar with the case- but Harvard is a private institution and it can decide to let go of an employee for any reason if it not because Ethnic/National Origin, Color, Race, Religion & Sex Discrimination

 

[gambit]

Except in Harward in which the talented professor like swamy is removed as a faculty because of writing an article on Islamic terror in india.

Here is where you are wrong...

The violation of a 'universal right' by a private person or entity does not equate to wholesale approval of said violation by the government. Your argument is akin to saying a common robbery mean the US does not respect property rights.

Get it ?

 

[Developereo]

Fine...Then let the court weigh the sins of each party.

I agree that he can't clear his name until he does so in court.
However, as he has said in his interviews, he did not feel safe in the US because he didn't think he would get due process.

tell us what in article IV was broken?

People's private communications were tapped in a wide net without specific authorization.

Read Amendment IV again: it specifically says that the person to be searched must be identified explicitly by a legal authority, or probable cause shown, before such a search can proceed.

 

[JayAtl]

Take solace in bobii jindal bharti. That's all you will ever get. But we will make sure the next president is Muslim.

Muslim is always welcome to be a president in our democracy, but your " we" hang among mullah terrorists... and have zero chance of being president.

 

[blackface]

Will you let me kiss your mom, bro?

No, because you seem abnormal. But for a normal man and a woman, a kiss on the cheek is completely normal and harmless. It's a part of our custom. It's like how you guys say Salam or indians say namaste. It's just a greeting, nothing more.

 

[HariPrasad]

Here is where you are wrong...

The violation of a 'universal right' by a private person or entity does not equate to wholesale approval of said violation by the government. Your argument is akin to saying a common robbery mean the US does not respect property rights.

Get it ?

Nonsense!!!

What sort of Violation of Univarsal right.

US has different criterion for herself and her allies. Her so called right to freedom of speech and Commitment to Human right are sham. I do not want to enter into that lengthy debut now. so leave it.

Muslim is always welcome to be a president in our democracy, but your " we" hang among mullah terrorists... and have zero chance of being president.

Infact Fakruddin ali ahmed, Abdul Kalam etc are examples.

 

[JayAtl]

I agree that he can't clear his name until he does so in court.
However, as he has said in his interviews, he did not feel safe in the US because he didn't think he would get due process.



People's private communications were tapped in a wide net without specific authorization.

Read Amendment IV again: it specifically says that the person to be searched must be identified explicitly by a legal authority, or probable cause shown, before such a search can proceed.

1. him "thinking" he wont get due process , does not make it true. Every citizen gets due process. That is weak argument and rubbish if you go " he thinks". it has Zero bearing on article IV

2. every data collected had NO private information attached to it. It was just phone numbers - without 'whom it was associated to'. so nobody was identified ( I thought you knew about the case LOL). NO violation of IV ...

3. When a call was identified as being " terror related" between US and international number- a probable cause was established, that probable cause went to the FISA courts, and a warrant was requested. After and ONLY after a judge granted the warrant- was the person's private information gathered. ( I thought you knew about the case LOL)

Again , you did not comprehend what article IV said and the what the program was about or how it " legally" worked.

 

[gambit]

I agree that he can't clear his name until he does so in court.
However, as he has said in his interviews, he did not feel safe in the US because he didn't think he would get due process.

What he feel is irrelevant to the cold fact that he violated many laws and morals.

In all the companies I worked for, NOT ONE have a law that says I cannot deceive my colleagues into access of their private files, physical or electronics. You do not deceive your colleagues into gaining unauthorized access to their lockers, desks, projects, or mailboxes. It is such a basic bit of morality that violation of such constitutes a gross violation of trust among colleagues that it would undermine the entire organization that no corporate law is necessary. Such a person would be terminated at best or terminated and take to court at worst. Snowden did exactly that. Just because he feels justified by a higher moral call, which I doubt, does not negate the moral impact of what he did.

Nonsense!!!

What sort of Violation of Univarsal right.

US has different criterion for herself and her allies. Her so called right to freedom of speech and Commitment to Human right are sham. I do not want to enter into that lengthy debut now. so leave it.

You ain't got the brains to enter this discussion. So yes, YOU leave. Else whatever you say, if I deem it stupid, I will call it stupid.

 

[Developereo]

1. him "thinking" he wont get due process , does not make it true. Every citizen gets due process. That is weak argument and rubbish if you go " he thinks". it has Zero bearing on article IV

See below.

2. every data collected had NO private information attached to it. It was just phone numbers - without whom it was associated to. so nobody was identified ( I thought you knew about the case LOL)

Whether the information is tagged or not is irrelevant. It is the intrusion of privacy itself which is forbidden, And some of the intrusion was done without a warrant.

again , you did not comprehend what article IV said and the what the program was about or how it " legally" worked.

Sadly, it is you who lack comprehension of the Fourth.

What he feel is irrelevant to the cold fact that he violated many laws and morals.

He claims the whistleblower protections will not protect him.

BBC News - Edward Snowden: 'No chance' of a fair US trial

current whistleblower protection laws, which, through a failure in law, did not cover national security contractors like mysel

In all the companies I worked for, NOT ONE have a law that says I cannot deceive my colleagues into access of their private files, physical or electronics. You do not deceive your colleagues into gaining unauthorized access to their lockers, desks, projects, or mailboxes. It is such a basic bit of morality that violation of such constitutes a gross violation of trust among colleagues that it would undermine the entire organization that no corporate law is necessary. Such a person would be terminated at best or terminated and take to court at worst. Snowden did exactly that. Just because he feels justified by a higher moral call, which I doubt, does not negate the moral impact of what he did.

Setting the moral issue aside, that argument is void.

If I work for a company that steals people's online credit cards, and I sign a contract to protect my fellow workers, that contract is worthless in the face of higher laws. Snowden clearly felt that the actions of the NSA violated the US Constitution and he acted accordingly.

 

[HariPrasad]

You ain't got the brains to enter this discussion. So yes, YOU leave. Else whatever you say, if I deem it stupid, I will call it stupid.

Ok

 

[gambit]

He claims the whistleblower protections will not protect him.

BBC News - Edward Snowden: 'No chance' of a fair US trial

current whistleblower protection laws, which, through a failure in law, did not cover national security contractors like mysel

And how many amateur lawyers got himself proven wrong by the pros ? Would YOU dare to represent yourself in court ?

Setting the moral issue aside, that argument is void.

If I work for a company that steals people's online credit cards, and I sign a contract to protect my fellow workers, that contract is worthless in the face of higher laws. Snowden clearly felt that the actions of the NSA violated the US Constitution and he acted accordingly.

Holy Shit...!!!

If you work for an organization whose core of existence is theft, how the hell is this organization going to incorporate itself by being honest with the public to earn the protection of laws ?

The NSA is an organization that was authorized by law and is an organ of the government. It may have gone overboard with its activities but those activities were interpreted to be authorized by law. So since when is theft of credit cards info is authorized by commercial laws ?

 

[blackface]

So why won't you allow me to kiss your mother or girlfriend?

Normal in the parameters that you define is just a tool.

You, yourself are just a tool. You are not here to learn, but enforce your cultural practices upon the rest of the world. Your thinking comes from a line of superiority, whereas about a 100 years ago, you brazilians were just slave booty for the europeans. You guys have no honor. You just don't want to accept it.

Think about it.

What is Brazil's largest export?


Brazilian girl's asses?

Again. Have some shame. I request you again and again. Have some shame. Stop selling your female's asses.

Ok we have no honour. All the honour in the world is found in Pakistanis. We are slaves and you are? You were ruled by British while most of us are at least mixed with those European settlers. Brazil wouldn't exist without colonization. Our only export is our women's asses and your export is? Terrorismo? Congrats. You forced me to insult Pakistanis by through your hostile attitude.

 

[Developereo]

And how many amateur lawyers got himself proven wrong by the pros ? Would YOU dare to represent yourself in court ?

It's his life which is at stake so it is not surprising that he would take the conservative approach.

Holy Shit...!!!

If you work for an organization whose core of existence is theft, how the hell is this organization going to incorporate itself by being honest with the public to earn the protection of laws ?

The NSA is an organization that was authorized by law and is an organ of the government. It may have gone overboard with its activities but those activities were interpreted to be authorized by law. So since when is theft of credit cards info is authorized by commercial laws ?

The example I gave was deliberately an extreme case to make the point that protecting co-workers is not sacrosanct.

The concept applies to more mainstream cases. That is why whistleblower laws exist in the first place -- because legitimate corporations do run afoul of the law. And sometimes, they do so with complicity at many levels. Exposing such transgressions of the law will put colleagues in the firing line.