What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
120 Comments
- AnaHadWolves, on 10/12/2007, -5/+35The little weasel thinks he is King George the 4th! He would do well to remember the demise of the King of France when the "peasants" finally rose up to protest their treatment.
- swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31Can somebody please explain to me why this isn't an impeachable offense?
- mikelieman, on 10/12/2007, -7/+31Every SINGLE Federal and Corporate employee who obeys the president's orders to violate an explicitly guaranteed Right enumerated in an Amendment, has shown they have the exact same personality which enabled a formerly Democratic Germans to shovel homosexuals and Jews into the ovens.
Obedience to orders is NEVER an excuse.
We hanged Nazis at Nuremberg to prove the point.
Grow some Balls, guys. Tell your bosses at the White House and AT&T NO, It's wrong, and you won't PERMIT THEM to do it. Then call 60 minutes. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18Wiretapping citizens is unconstitutional. What enemy combatants are stupid enough to plan attacks by phone?
- wafflez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10because REAL terrorists use encrypted skype or other voip. =3.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Bush only wiretaps terrorists. You're not a terrorist, are you? Just let the nice man install the transmitter.
- HigherLogic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@craka:
Your rant reminded me of this:
When they took the 4th Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't deal drugs.
When they took the 5th Amendment, I was quiet because I wasn't a criminal.
When they took the 2nd Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't own a gun.
Now they've taken the 1st Amendment, and I can say nothing about it.
And Jesus H. Christ, did you really just mention Clinton?! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Since you have no secrets, please post the names and passwords to every account you own.
Also, please post the complete account numbers, expiration dates, security codes and digital copies of your signature for every credit card and bank account you possess.
Next, list, in order, the sixteen most embarrassing things you've done. Not the ones you joke about with your friends, mind you, but the ones that make you feel two years old with your parents looming large above you. Post all the embarrassing things you know about your parents, siblings and closest friends, too.
Next, record video of yourself measuring your penis size (both length and girth) and post it to YouTube. While you're doing so, name all the girls you've slept with and invite them to comment on your bedroom abilities.
You've got nothing to hide, right?
And finally, go look up the term "private life" and consider why even someone with 'nothing to hide' might want one.
Until you've done all these things, shut the ***** up. - zanzzz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I'm tired of the "nothing to hide" excuse for condoning illegal and unconstitutional actions by the government. If these actions are illegal then Congress is obligated to investigate and consider impeachment. The President has sworn to uphold the Constitution. The oath doesn't say only when he feels like it or only in times of peace. Bush has admitted he authorized the NSA to violate the law by avoiding FISA court warrants. Both the President and Congress have not lived up to their obligations and are a disgrace. The system stinks and the lessons learned are that there is little or no accountability if you violate the law. It will only get worse until politicians are held responsible for the crimes committed whether in good faith or bad.
- classicalcomp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I would just like to say ....... (((Censored by the Government)))
- auxplage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Mr. Chuck:
I hope you continue to live in your little world and the government ***** you over. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8So what you are saying in your incorrect and ignorant way, SwedishNinja, is that -- in effect -- one may never, ever discuss anything about WWII Germany, ever?
Even when the parallels with modern America are staggering, blatant and unmistakable, you truly insist no-one must ever learn from the mistakes of the past?
When I was in grade school and our history lessons reached WWII, the class had one question: How could the German people have allowed this to happen?
You, SwedishNinja, are how. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I would really like an investigation into all of the warrant-less wiretaps that have been conducted so far. Given this administrations track record, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there has been some shady wire tapping going on.
- ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6that is not the point at all
while you are busy lookin at me saying "what do you got to hide" someone else is actually doing something wrong
if i get pulled over for speeding and an officer wants to look through my car (im 21 male) what do i say?
you pulled me over for speeding, what does that have to do with needing to look in my car? no i do not consent to a search of my car. than comes out the well what are you hiding? i say nothing... but speeding does not warrant a search of my car, if you feel it does get a warrant if not leave me alone so i get back to my life (note i am not an ***** to officers as they are generally nice people just doing a job like anybody else)
like you republicans keep telling us, "innocent til proven guilty" - CertainTruths, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Because the wire taps are actually on the international end of the call not any that originated in the U.S.
The almighty FISA court actually approved this so no it is not an impeachable offense. - smex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Wiretapping is not illegal if the British do it then deliver information to us. This is how bad treaties are more important than our constitution. I wish everyone knew this but most people don't.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Earth to moonbats: the Constitution protects the people from _unreasonable_ searches. There are very good _reasons_ to monitor individuals who spend too much time on the phone with Osama bin Laden's lieutenants discussing jihad.
- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That would be un-constitutional authority.
- naturewoman56, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I'm with you, Zanzzz. Illegal acts are not relative; the ends do not justify the means. I, for one, have something to hide (my privacy), and even more to protect (my constitutional rights). Let's not take them for granted, folks.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So, Sephraa, what's the URL for the 24-hour webcam of your life? You must have one, right?
If not, why not? - stauken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@wafflez
You realize the NSA is also taking good care of tapping our internet communications as well, right? :) - s2iHysteric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You people make it sound like the NSA hasn't been passively listening, possibly recording, every single call ever made for a much longer time than this President has been around. Guess what? They have been, and it isn't major news. If you aren't a terrorist, just go on living your life like you have been. It shouldn't apply to you anyway, right?
- Ouzin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wiretaps can be used to gain an advantage against one's enemy. The enemy can be terrorist or your opponent in a political race. If you were to be jailed for something they caught you doing, totally unrelated to terrorism, you'd be hollering your head off. But, it hasn't happened yet, so you don't see that it can happen. Governments slowly chip away at freedoms, citizens never realizing it, and before you realized it you have 1984 all over again.
I like my private life, want it to remain MY "private life." I don't really care if we have millions of terrorist running around the country planning to bomb something else. ( /rolls eyes) In my opinion the Government is just inciting fear to get what it wants. Go read a history book, governments love to play the "internal enemy" card to get everyone all scared, as it slowly takes over.
/shrug, food for thought - jackhowitzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You do realize the President himself doesn't actually tap your phone.
That's what lackeys are for.. - shaanti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This program has and will save many lives. When it comes to saving lives and personal privacy sometimes you have to make sacrifices, this is a very different US we live in these days. If you are not doing anything illegal then do not worry. The government is not spying on your dirty emails or your sick indulgences whatever it may be that you do not want anyone to know about. It is not your freedom or right to have people die when the government could of prevented those deaths if they could of obtained critical information through wiretapping.
Stop thinking you are so important. - megarock, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Dubya's done plenty to get impeached and should be. The Constitution doesn't even exist according to him and he's able to totally ignore it except in the cases where it involves him and his cronies getting caught.
The American people should demand his ouster. Dick Cheney needs to go with him. - loganhid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Bush can kiss my ass without a warrant
- ddxChrist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I am finding digg more frightening every time I read these comments. There is a sizable portion of people willing to hand over their freedoms for a false sense of security; even though some of these posts are sarcastic, there are still far too many that aren't.
I'm sorry, but society fails when protection translates into giving up your freedoms. It's completely unacceptable and backwards. Humans cannot progress when they're locked into fear. - jlhoben, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2President Jackboots is destroying the GOP's credibility, and, as a libertarian, I have absolutely no problem with that. By the time most of the senior party brass realize this it will be too late and the democrats will clean up for the next decade.
- retard75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1thank you letting common sense rule in your life , over stupidity.
I really don't understand how people really cannot grasp this concept. - unsolicited, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I do not expect civil rights when my country is at war.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2A Democratic President locks up tens of thousands of US citizens for being oriental for years during WW-II and Democrats cheer.
A Democratic Governor prevents blacks from going to high school and college and Democrats cheer.
A Democratic President invades Cuba without declaring war and then leaves the troops on the beaches to die and the Democrats cheer.
A Democratic President drops the A-Bomb on a foreign power and the Democrats cheer.
A Democratic President invades Vietnam on faulty intelligence and the Democrats cheer.
A Democratic President orders the slaughter of Native Americans and the Democrats cheer.
A Republican President orders the wiretapping of US Citizens talking to KNOWN ENEMY COMBATANTS and the Democrats loose their ***** mind.
Oh what a sad sad world we live in. Up is down, left is right. - Ouzin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"and the US came close to total collapse from it"
...you lost me.... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9Thanks, President Traitor!
- swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just to clarify for those of you who didn't RTFA, wiretapping US citizens without a warrant is ILLEGAL under FISA guidelines. This article is about administration officials trying to get congress to LEGALIZE the illegal surveillance that is currently going on.
You ***** really don't care about constitutionally guaranteed rights, do you? Just admit it, you'd rather live in a facist police state. Why don't you move to North Korea if you like totalitarianism so much? - Ouzin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not a democrat. I'm against wiretaps.
I don't see your point. - crosswalkernie, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I can't believe Americans are standing by and taking this. Impeach him NOW!
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2How dare BOOSH infringe on my Constitutional Right to commit treason.
- Jyff, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3
*****.
"Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither"
-benjamin franklin - bustaballs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Last time I checked, the constitution specifically says no warrentless searches or seizures. Therefore, no matter how many laws are passed by you and congress, it is still unconstitutional.
- jeopardydd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@certaintruths
if they have done what the president is talking about, wiretapping americans without going through any court including the FISA court, then the FISA law has been broken, along with the 4th amendment. the Supreme Court has held that wiretaps by the government require a warrant from a judge or magistrate (Katz v. US). - crosswalkernie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yeah, no big deal. If you aren't doing anything wrong why would you care?
While we're at it, we should have cameras installed in people's bedrooms just in case they aren't having sex correctly. I mean, if they aren't doing anything wrong, why should they care? - Jyff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1***** no he can't
- Murrabbit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Remember now, technically he has had the power to wiretap without a warrant ever since he took office - as has ever president since Nixon. The stipulation, though was that they then had to get approval from a special rubber-stamp FISA court sometime within the next 72 hours.
What is different with Bush's wiretapping, though is that they're not even bothering to get court approval after doing the wiretaps, the rational apparently being that they're doing so many of these wiretaps that having to get approval, even after the fact, would just slow things down too much.
Makes you feel really safe in this glorious police state of ours, doesn't it? - CertainTruths, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What law has been broken? Quick to say but no one has ever produced any actual event.
Just like the supposed freedoms lost to the Patriot act. Which ones were they? Again no one ever has produced any actual cases just a lot of posturing. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@chucknorrisman
"But seriously, we need these measures to protect us and our children if we're to survive this war of terror."
Like 3000 people died from terrorism. Get over it bro.
Should they monitor all of our speedometers to prevent traffic deaths?
Should they install GPS on all of our guns to prevent shooting deaths?
Should everyone with AIDS have to wear a lowjack to prevent the spread of AIDS?
We don't want American citizens phones wiretapped because we believe in freedom. If you hate freedom so much, why the hell do you live in this country? - jeopardydd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1that's absolutely NOT true. They can get the number you dialed (the pen registry) from the phone company, and it is legal to do so (see Smith v. Maryland holding that there is no expectation of privacy for numbers dialed). However, there is an expectation of privacy under the 4th amendment for the actual conversaions over the phone (Katz v. US, holding that unconsented interception of a conversation by the government using an electronic tapping device is a "search" subject to the 4th Amendment). Therefore, government wiretaps need a showing to a judge of "probable cause", something that Bush is trying to get around so that he can tap phones without any good reasons to think that the people being tapped are doing anything wrong.
- kufu91, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1why?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Sheesh. They must have had a sale on tinfoil at the grocery store where this clueless ***** shops.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is