Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It wouldn't matter if terrorists were storing on cell phones, information that the FBI needs, or not. Simple fact is, the terrorists COULD do that, and they should not have that opportunity to use that advantage to kill Americans.Oh, so you think "because the FBI wants access" is proof that terrorists store plans on iPhones, and we should surrender our 4th amendment rights because the FBI needs us to do that in order to stop the terrorists? Nice circular logic.
Still no proof that eliminating the 4th amendment (without a constitutional amendment) will prevent more terrorist attacks? The worst one ever was planned in a cave. Did they use iPhones?
As for the 4th Amendment, have you noticed it does have the word "unreasonable in it ? Nothing unreasonable about doing what is necessary to PROTECT the American people from lunatics trying to kill us. And the current iPhones in question are under court order, just as the 4th amendment specifies. Future searches can be also. I see nothing wrong happening here on the part of the FBI.
If Apple keep going on the way they are, they may find themselves out of business, before they know what hit them. They thought they were too big to be challenged? They thought wrong.
Interesting Mr. Straw Man, how you pretend that I'm ignoring warrants, when in my post (that you quoted). I talked about them as necessary part of the process >> "And the current iPhones in question are under court order, just as the 4th amendment specifies. Future searches can be also.""Unreasonable" is one of the important words in the 4th amendment. But if you choose to ignore the part about issuing warrants, your reading comprehension is pitiful. Want access to someone's private "... persons, houses, papers, and effects...", you have to get a warrant. That is the law.
EARTH TO WB: There is no problem with the Constitution here, and that Straw man ploy won't fly. This isn't about the Constitution (which there;s no violation of). It's about NATIONAL SECURITY, which you keep deflecting away from, and using the Constitution as a distraction. And as a national security issue, what terrorists COULD do most certainly IS the point. It is exactly THE point.The terrorists COULD be storing them by memory. We must have cameras in every room in every building, because they COULD be planning another attack.
What someone COULD do is not the point. Our Constitution does not get flushed because someone COULD do something.
Better not buy Apple products. They won't have any customer service or technical support, when they've gone out of business, which is exactly where they're headed. There won't need to be a boycott.Buy Apple products as long as they tell the government to fuck off
Apple go out of business??Better not buy Apple products. They won't have any customer service or technical support, when they've gone out of business, which is exactly where they're headed. There won't need to be a boycott.Buy Apple products as long as they tell the government to fuck off
I said >> Apple go out of business, I think you heard me right.Apple go out of business??
Interesting Mr. Straw Man, how you pretend that I'm ignoring warrants, when in my post (that you quoted). I talked about them as necessary part of the process >> "And the current iPhones in question are under court order, just as the 4th amendment specifies. Future searches can be also.""Unreasonable" is one of the important words in the 4th amendment. But if you choose to ignore the part about issuing warrants, your reading comprehension is pitiful. Want access to someone's private "... persons, houses, papers, and effects...", you have to get a warrant. That is the law.
You're sinking, WB. I mean really. But then you've really run out of things to say, haven't you ?
I haven't run out of things to say. I was on the road, coming back from a long weekend in Florida. Good times.
Now, back to the topic at hand.
I am not pretending you are ignoring the 4th amendment. I am simply going by what you said in this thread. In the interest of keeping it brief, allow me to quote posts you have made (without reposting your entire post).
Post #87 “It wouldn't bother me a bit if they got the code key to all cell phones."
Post #110 "That's right. I have no problem WHATSOEVER giving up my privacy rights and some freedom, because I'm scared a terrorist will kill me (and millions of other Americans), and annihilate America."
Post #117 "2. Yes, remove a right guaranteed by the 4th Amendment on the chance that 14 people won't be killed + millions of others, and the whole nation destroyed. You're really not getting this."
Post #146 "“I am ready to violate the US Constitution 24/7, when national security is in question, and especially during time of war ..."
Post #149 "Of course, I will violate the Constitution when it is necessary for national security, and so will all those (even the liberal Obama administration) whose job it is to PROTECT America (the # 1 responsibility of govt, not ensuring civil liberties 100%), and so will the majority of Americans (51% of recent polling). And that's not going to change to suit some oddball fringe techies, and a money-grabbing corporation, concerned only with it's product and profits."
Post #171 "2. Of course we flush constituional rights in deference to national secuirty."
So spare me your backtracking and pretending that you are in favor of the US Constitution. You have made it clear that that document is simply to be adhered to when it is convenient.
I haven't run out of things to say. I was on the road, coming back from a long weekend in Florida. Good times.
Now, back to the topic at hand.
I am not pretending you are ignoring the 4th amendment. I am simply going by what you said in this thread. In the interest of keeping it brief, allow me to quote posts you have made (without reposting your entire post).
Post #87 “It wouldn't bother me a bit if they got the code key to all cell phones."
Post #110 "That's right. I have no problem WHATSOEVER giving up my privacy rights and some freedom, because I'm scared a terrorist will kill me (and millions of other Americans), and annihilate America."
Post #117 "2. Yes, remove a right guaranteed by the 4th Amendment on the chance that 14 people won't be killed + millions of others, and the whole nation destroyed. You're really not getting this."
Post #146 "“I am ready to violate the US Constitution 24/7, when national security is in question, and especially during time of war ..."
Post #149 "Of course, I will violate the Constitution when it is necessary for national security, and so will all those (even the liberal Obama administration) whose job it is to PROTECT America (the # 1 responsibility of govt, not ensuring civil liberties 100%), and so will the majority of Americans (51% of recent polling). And that's not going to change to suit some oddball fringe techies, and a money-grabbing corporation, concerned only with it's product and profits."
Post #171 "2. Of course we flush constituional rights in deference to national secuirty."
So spare me your backtracking and pretending that you are in favor of the US Constitution. You have made it clear that that document is simply to be adhered to when it is convenient.
No backtracking. I said all those things, and I stand by every word 100%. And I also am in favor of the US Constitution. But the US Constitution is malleable. It can be changed by SCOTUS decision as well as amendments added and reversed. That is part of the beauty of it. What may have been applicable in 1789, may not quite be the case in 2016, with today's social problems, and technology.
And anyone who would minimize NATIONAL SECURITY to anything other than the # 1 priority in America, is being as ridiculous as it's possible to be. As for a "document is simply to be adhered to when it is convenient", I have noticed that to be the case from Muslim appeasers when they put Islam's gooney law above the Constitution, in direct contradiction to the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2)
Whether the FBI fucked up or not isn't the issue. The issue is Apple giving the FBI all that it can to help the FBI know all that it can about the SAn Bernardino terrorists, and whoever they had been in contact with.Are you aware of all the data that Apple has already provided the FBI where the San Bernadino phone is concerned? They gave them all his text message traffic and all the cell phone use.
Also, are you aware WHY the FBI is having so much trouble?
from: Apple vs. FBI: Everything you need to know about Apple's fight with the FBI (FAQ)
"On Friday, Apple executives revealed that within 24 hours of the government taking possession of the device, the Apple ID password linked to the terrorist’s iPhone was changed. That was the biggest blunder. Since the Apple ID password associated with the phone had changed, and it also cannot be unlocked, it cannot access iCloud services. If the password hadn’t been changed, FBI could have taken a backup of the device and got the data they were looking for by connecting it to a previously joined network."
So the FBI fucked up and now wants to make it look like Apple is the problem.
I haven't run out of things to say. I was on the road, coming back from a long weekend in Florida. Good times.
Now, back to the topic at hand.
I am not pretending you are ignoring the 4th amendment. I am simply going by what you said in this thread. In the interest of keeping it brief, allow me to quote posts you have made (without reposting your entire post).
Post #87 “It wouldn't bother me a bit if they got the code key to all cell phones."
Post #110 "That's right. I have no problem WHATSOEVER giving up my privacy rights and some freedom, because I'm scared a terrorist will kill me (and millions of other Americans), and annihilate America."
Post #117 "2. Yes, remove a right guaranteed by the 4th Amendment on the chance that 14 people won't be killed + millions of others, and the whole nation destroyed. You're really not getting this."
Post #146 "“I am ready to violate the US Constitution 24/7, when national security is in question, and especially during time of war ..."
Post #149 "Of course, I will violate the Constitution when it is necessary for national security, and so will all those (even the liberal Obama administration) whose job it is to PROTECT America (the # 1 responsibility of govt, not ensuring civil liberties 100%), and so will the majority of Americans (51% of recent polling). And that's not going to change to suit some oddball fringe techies, and a money-grabbing corporation, concerned only with it's product and profits."
Post #171 "2. Of course we flush constituional rights in deference to national secuirty."
So spare me your backtracking and pretending that you are in favor of the US Constitution. You have made it clear that that document is simply to be adhered to when it is convenient.
No backtracking. I said all those things, and I stand by every word 100%. And I also am in favor of the US Constitution.
