You've shown no sources. You've cited no facts. You've been demonstrably proven wrong time after time in post after post, yet none of that deters you in the least.
I've shown you why Carnivore is legal. I've shown you why sniffers are legal. I've explained to you how the Internet works. I've explained that machines and software MUST read every packet of data traffic in order for the Internet to function and function correctly. I've explained that public funds were used to build the original Internet backbone. I've given examples of people who legally read messages that aren't intended for them in order to diagnose technical problems.
But none of that can possibly soak through your Libertarian anti-logic filter. Only if I claim that the government is bad (except for the Internet and e-mail, 'cause Libertarians cling to those as if they were sacred rights) would you dare open up to the possibility of agreeing with me.
Sad.
There is a tenant in science called "disprovability." Theories which can be shown to have a theoretical way of disproving them can be considered worthy of scientific pursuit. In your case, I'd rephrase that tenant to ask you to point out just what would have to be said for you to ever admit that you were wrong.
Unfortunately, I'm almost certain that you would provide no black and white "disprovability" test for that tenant.
Of course, the good news about that anticipated response (or more accurately, estimated lack of response), is that it would only demonstrate that you aren't worth pursuing.
For someone who subscribes to a radical fringe ideology (i.e., Libertarianism) which has a stated goal of increasing the size of its membership, that's a bad position to be in. You aren't making friends or convincing others with your ludicrous circumlocutions. People who have never heard of "Libertarianism" are certainly going to be turned off by your behavior, as well as your destinct lack of intellectual depth and honesty in this and other threads.
If the Democrats or Republicans wanted to destroy the chances of new members joining the Libertarian Party, they could hardly do better than to place your personality onto chat boards across this great nation and claim to be an example of a Libertarian.
Neither have you. In fact, you explicitly refused to.
I've shown you why Carnivore is legal.
No, you haven't.
I've explained that machines and software MUST read every packet of data traffic in order for the Internet to function and function correctly.
You're right: the computers have to "read" the data they pass along, just as phone lines have to "listen" to every conversation they transmit.
Doesn't prove a damn thing, and never did.
I've explained that public funds were used to build the original Internet backbone.
As a military project.
I've given examples of people who legally read messages that aren't intended for them in order to diagnose technical problems.
People fixing technical issues and people spying are two different things.
In what form, exactly, do they look at it anyway?