• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

NSA used persistent Cookies

Stinger said:
Well this is a debating forum not a news reporting forum or a referral forum.
Click to expand...

Yes, but this was also placed in the "Today's News" section, which was quite appropriate. And obviously, it is a topic that is debateable.

The fact is you posted a one-sided cite leaving out the VERY salient facts. The fact is you posted a statement from one group trying to give the impression that NSA was pruposely putting tracking cookies on computers but then so how just cut out the NSA spokesman's rebuttle.Very selective, stopping just at the point that the article reports
Click to expand...

No, the fact is that I posted a news article I found while looking through the Yahoo news section. The fact is that if you find it so one sided, why don't you provide an article more to your liking? The fact is, I did not post a statement from anyone - again, I posted a NEWS ARTICLE. The fact is, I was following forum rules by not posting the entire article. I simply copied the first two paragraphs, because I figured that if anyone were to be interested in the article, that interest would be apparent after reading the first two paragraphs. And that doesn't just go for this particular article, that goes for just about ANY news article.

Sorry, but I don't play those stupid partisan games when posting news articles. If that were my intent, I wouldn't have cited a news article that DOES have a quote from someone at the NSA. Nice try, Stinger, but no cigar. Not everyone can be painted under your broad brush.

"Don Weber, an NSA spokesman, said in a statement Wednesday that the cookie use resulted from a recent software upgrade. Normally, the site uses temporary, permissible cookies that are automatically deleted when users close their Web browsers, he said, but the software in use shipped with persistent cookies already on."

In all fairness shouldn't the rebuttle have been post too? Even your title was misleading according to the NSA rebuttle, that they "used" them. "Used" them for what?
Click to expand...

Perhaps it should have, but I wasn't thinking in terms of he said, she said. I was simply posting the first two paragraphs, not trying to say one side was right and one was wrong, nothing sinister was intended. Try not to read so much into what I posted and what I left to the member to read on their own, and try focusing on the article itself. I apologize if my title misled you, I was simply saying "used" as in "Their website normally uses temporary cookies, but with the new software, they were using persistent cookies".
 
Quit Yer Bitchin'

Besides, the rebuttal of the NSA cookies thing is lame.

Why? Is ignorance ever an excuse for breaking the law for a common person?

Why should the government be excused?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom