• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI can activate your android phone's microphone.

There is an article about all the abuses of the Patriot Act the FBI committed, and the current tactics it takes to get around court oversight, and their history of warrantless searches.

This again does not make them illegal under the law.

Listen, like I said I agree with you that the government is not to be trusted in most cases. I also think we need to trust our government up to a point without any evidence of anything illegal. Thus far there is no evidence.
 
This again does not make them illegal under the law.

Violating the Patriot Act actually is. Subverting the Judicial branch actually is. Some of the warrantless searching does not as the government arbitrarily declared it legal, and I have said as much already.
 
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.

Ya, bringing up the constitution is a red herring from the legality of the way these warrants are being issued... If you say so.


The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

Actually, that was not a strawman, because I accepted your argument as a premise, and then tried expanding on that to the ridiculous in order to determine where the line would be for yourself...

Please feel free to point out how I ignored it?

Go back an re read your own posts keeping in mind the sources that had been provided, if it's not abundantly clear, well, there's nothing I could tell you to make it clearer.

But now that you've read up on a couple logical fallacies, perhaps you will apply that to future debating points...
 
Ya, bringing up the constitution is a red herring from the legality of the way these warrants are being issued... If you say so.

Absolutly is. Had nothing to do with anything I pointed out or said.

Actually, that was not a strawman, because I accepted your argument as a premise, and then tried expanding on that to the ridiculous in order to determine where the line would be for yourself...

Which is by definition a strawman, nothing more.

Go back an re read your own posts keeping in mind the sources that had been provided, if it's not abundantly clear, well, there's nothing I could tell you to make it clearer.

But now that you've read up on a couple logical fallacies, perhaps you will apply that to future debating points...

So again you got nothing.

Thanks for playing.
 
Violating the Patriot Act actually is. Subverting the Judicial branch actually is. Some of the warrantless searching does not as the government arbitrarily declared it legal, and I have said as much already.

It did not say they were done by the FBI? You keep talking in broad terms and cutting my comments up and taking them out of context.
 
I recommend putting opaque tape over the camera and a dummy plug in the mic jack on phones and computers that are not being used.
 
It did not say they were done by the FBI? You keep talking in broad terms and cutting my comments up and taking them out of context.

What I linked was FBI.
 
I can activate the podium microphones in the Federal buildings all over the country.

Sometimes, when their blather is ridiculously boring, I can substitute recorded fart noises for what they are saying.
 
Absolutly is. Had nothing to do with anything I pointed out or said.

Since you don't even know the point you are trying to make, I'm not surprised that this would be your response.


Which is by definition a strawman, nothing more.

No, go back to the wiki page on a strawman argument, I wasn't even arguing against that point, I was trying to establish just how ridiculous your position is...

So again you got nothing.

Thanks for playing.

What game?? How little sense can a person make while pretending like they have a valid position??
 
Since you don't even know the point you are trying to make, I'm not surprised that this would be your response.

No, go back to the wiki page on a strawman argument, I wasn't even arguing against that point, I was trying to establish just how ridiculous your position is...

What game?? How little sense can a person make while pretending like they have a valid position??

Jeeesh... I am correct and you have no idea.

Good day.
 
What I linked was FBI.

From what I read it was all legal under the Patriot act? Please point out what was considered illegal, and point it out to me. I will then concede as it will establish your argument is correct.
 
Jeeesh... I am correct and you have no idea.

Good day.

Correct about what?? You still haven't made a point, or at least you haven't been able to verbalize that point.

Funny given the attitude you had put off...good day.
 
Correct about what?? You still haven't made a point, or at least you haven't been able to verbalize that point.

Funny given the attitude you had put off...good day.

I said good day!
 
Back
Top Bottom