Fbi Trying To Seize Individual Usa Players Neteller Funds?

[nutzbuster 7]

It's a little unsettling to see the amount of people who think they are "safe", or the non-US players who feel they will not be effected in any way shape or form, some to the point of acting almost gleeful.Are you kidding? This mindset can spread like a cancer to other funding mechanisms and other countries. I guess I'm just suggesting the we take nothing for granted. My best wishes go out to anyone and everyone dealing with the current crisis.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Your interpretation of the Constitution is wrong, so who is the one that is misinformed?

My interpretation differs from yours. How EXACTLY is it "wrong"? In fact, by DEFINITION mine is currently right since it has not been contradicted by the SCotUS

[delphi12 0]

There is a solution to this problem. I dont know why anyone hasnt thought of it:Neteller claims that they have other businesses besides online gambling as merchants. I cant find one. Why don't you people set up a site and get a merchant account thru neteller. Hopefully, when people buy "stuff" from you, you can then get the money out since it is a legitimate transaction. Then once it becomes cash, give a refund (minus a small fee). 80-90% of your money is better than 0%. BTW, I know personally a few people who have 6 figures tied up in Neteller and have pretty much written it off. Even if you do get your money back, it will be years from now, though I doubt anyone will. The money is being seized because the govt thinks and will attempt to prove that is illegal laundered money, thus you have no right to it. Sucks, but it is the truth.

[freak2304 0]

Let's order a bunch of pizzas and have them delivered to their houses...VIVA LA RESISTANCE!

[yourboygsarida 0]

we need the EU to continue pressing the WTO asap. that realistically is our only shot.

[Muck, You Suckers! 0]

Yeah. I am planted here to monitor activity of a Poker Related website. I make relevant posts to Strategy and other threads and wait for the opportunity to try and brainwash others into believing that the Internet Gaming Legislation is a good thing.Your tax dollars at work.We are part of a Super Secret Agency run by the CONSERVATIVES. We are called Domestic/International Monitoring of Wagering on Internet Theads (DIM WITs).I get a black hellicopter next month.I've said too much...

Don't flatter yourself flunky. At no time did I think you were of any importance. I was thinking more along the lines of one of those idiots that work at the airport checking baggage. You know, "the government signs my paycheck so I must defend them at all times" kind of people. Still think you are.

[matrix_x 0]

So what exactly does this mean - USA players will have to wait even longer to cash out of NETeller? I want to put an update on my website (see below) but I simply can't find any solid info on this, everything (including the Gambling911 articles) seems to be VERY skeptical.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

RAC, I like your attitude, so I'm going to let you pass on a few things, simply because I don't feel like breaking everything down on a point-by-point basis. Flame-wars suck.So, this is not aimed directly at you, but to anyone reading this...Bottom Line:A government can do only what its citizens allow.Understand it. Believe it.Simply believing that "they can do whatever they want" is the worst sin of all. Write your Congressman/woman (again). Write your Senators. Tell them (using intelligent language) how disappointed you are. Give them options to rectify the situation.

Another outstanding post.I too feel the danger in believing that "they can do whatever they want" - and never meant to advocate that. I just also think that there is nearly as much danger in blind, rote, knee-jerk opposition just because you like how something supports your point of view.I support everyone writing their Senators to change or eliminate the legislation.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Don't flatter yourself flunky. At no time did I think you were of any importance. I was thinking more along the lines of one of those idiots that work at the airport checking baggage. You know, "the government signs my paycheck so I must defend them at all times" kind of people. Still think you are.

Lol.Your read is wrong.

[hblask 1]

My interpretation differs from yours. How EXACTLY is it "wrong"? In fact, by DEFINITION mine is currently right since it has not been contradicted by the SCotUS

You can interpret the constitution to be an ennumerated list of government powers. This is the "original intent" doctrine. You can interpret it to be an ennumerated list of citizen's rights -- which leaves citizens with the few rights listed in the Bill of Rights, minus the 9th and 10th, which you have to blatantly ignore. This is totalitarianism. Or you can say it is somewhere in between, in which, although we have no actual rights, we'll get them because politicians and SCotUS are all really really good-hearted people who would never do ill against us, sort of "totalitarianism lite".Based on all historical and theoretical evidence, which do you think will provide the best result?

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

we need the EU to continue pressing the WTO asap. that realistically is our only shot.

Yeah, as I have said before:"What this world needs is more special interest fueled litigation - especially foreign countries telling the US what we can and cannot do regarding our own economic decisions. "

[zedd2005 0]

where's jack bauer when ya need him

[silkyjonson 1]

The right to be left alone in our home when we harm no one has always been a fundamental right in this country, so yes, it is taking a right away from us. The federal government has no right to legislate private voluntary behavior. According to your theory, there is no limit to what the government may regulate. That is called "totalitarianism". We live in a republic, where certain rights are fundamental. These include the right to be left alone if you harm nobody else, and the right to the fruit of your labor.

oh really, so I can smoke crack, watch kiddie porn while and rape my dog if I do it in my own home???

[hblask 1]

Yeah, as I have said before:"What this world needs is more special interest fueled litigation - especially foreign countries telling the US what we can and cannot do regarding our own economic decisions. "

LOL, I sort of agree with this one. The UN and World Bank have been disasters, both for the US and for the world. And in theory, I agree with this. On the other hand, there is apparently something in the structure of the WTO that keeps them on the right track. They seem to not have the negative incentives inherent in most governement agencies. I've never seen a good description of what it is, but they've lasted a lot of years with almost a perfect batting average. So while I am skeptical of these mega-government foreign-intrusion type institutions in general, and normally agree with you whole-heartedly, the WTO seems to be one of the last refuges for economic freedom in government.So yeah, I think that, unfortunately, the WTO is our best hope.

[ChrisRichey 1]

oh really, so I can smoke crack, watch kiddie porn while and rape my dog if I do it in my own home???

You should be able to smoke crack in your own home, however child pornography and raping your dog infringes upon the rights of others.

[hblask 1]

oh really, so I can smoke crack, watch kiddie porn while and rape my dog if I do it in my own home???

If this government was moral and ethical, yes, you would be able to smoke crack in your own home.As for kiddie porn, children are not adults and therefore cannot consent to making pornography, and cannot be expected to defend themselves from adults who would force it on them. Therefore, there is a good moral reason for child porn being illegal.Rape is, by definition, non-consensual, so no. Raping your dog in particular could be quite dangerousunless your dog is muzzled. (Explain those bite marks at the ER!) The question of whether animals have rights, and if so, are capable of consent, is beyond the scope of this forum, but personally, I think if that is your fetish, go for it. Iwon't tell.

[silkyjonson 1]

LOL, I sort of agree with this one. The UN and World Bank have been disasters, both for the US and for the world. And in theory, I agree with this. On the other hand, there is apparently something in the structure of the WTO that keeps them on the right track. They seem to not have the negative incentives inherent in most governement agencies. I've never seen a good description of what it is, but they've lasted a lot of years with almost a perfect batting average. So while I am skeptical of these mega-government foreign-intrusion type institutions in general, and normally agree with you whole-heartedly, the WTO seems to be one of the last refuges for economic freedom in government.So yeah, I think that, unfortunately, the WTO is our best hope.

Special interest groups should stay out of the affairs of sovereign nations, as should the United States, Canada and every other country, as you guys have said a country should be run by the citizens and elected officials should represent those citizens with their intentions in mind. I don't think the WTO has any clout, the US seem to ignore the requests of these type of organizations (UN).

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

You can interpret the constitution to be an ennumerated list of government powers. This is the "original intent" doctrine. You can interpret it to be an ennumerated list of citizen's rights -- which leaves citizens with the few rights listed in the Bill of Rights, minus the 9th and 10th, which you have to blatantly ignore. This is totalitarianism. Or you can say it is somewhere in between, in which, although we have no actual rights, we'll get them because politicians and SCotUS are all really really good-hearted people who would never do ill against us, sort of "totalitarianism lite".Based on all historical and theoretical evidence, which do you think will provide the best result?

What in the world is "theoretical evidence"?Like you, I believe that the Government has remarkably few roles that they should play. That a "good law" is a law that adds to an individual's rights, not limits them. I even believe that our Founding Fathers never intended for a "Two Party" system that would make it so easy to pass legislation - I'd even say that a smart lawyer could possibly find a way to get the Two Party system declared "Unconstitutional". However, by definition, the Congress CAN and DOES pass laws - and until our OUTSTANDING system of checks and balances finds them to be nconstitutional, they ARE Constitutional. I believe that the Constitution MUST be applied to an infinite set of circumstances and a changing world that our Founding Fathers could not have predicted. The basis remains the same.

[Muck, You Suckers! 0]

What gets me is that we have millions of illegals and millions of pounds of drugs flowing across the southern border. Thousands of stolen vehicles and tons and tons of stolen merchandise going back across the other way and the govt. says they can't control it. Yet, they have the time and money to go after online poker players. Osama will never be caught, but they'll stamp out poker in the name of Homeland Security. Pure frickin' insanity! Sorry you guys got your funds tied up. Hope it works out for you. I doubt it though.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Special interest groups should stay out of the affairs of sovereign nations, as should the United States, Canada and every other country, as you guys have said a country should be run by the citizens and elected officials should represent those citizens with their intentions in mind. I don't think the WTO has any clout, the US seem to ignore the requests of these type of organizations (UN).

One person's "Meddling Special Interest Group" is another person's "Supportive Advocate".

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

What gets me is that we have millions of illegals and millions of pounds of drugs flowing across the southern border. Thousands of stolen vehicles and tons and tons of stolen merchandise going back across the other way and the govt. says they can't control it. Yet, they have the time and money to go after online poker players. Osama will never be caught, but they'll stamp out poker in the name of Homeland Security. Pure frickin' insanity! Sorry you guys got your funds tied up. Hope it works out for you. I doubt it though.

Yeah......and let's stop arresting speeders until we have all of the Child Molesters behind bars.

[silkyjonson 1]

If this government was moral and ethical, yes, you would be able to smoke crack in your own home.As for kiddie porn, children are not adults and therefore cannot consent to making pornography, and cannot be expected to defend themselves from adults who would force it on them. Therefore, there is a good moral reason for child porn being illegal.Rape is, by definition, non-consensual, so no. Raping your dog in particular could be quite dangerousunless your dog is muzzled. (Explain those bite marks at the ER!) The question of whether animals have rights, and if so, are capable of consent, is beyond the scope of this forum, but personally, I think if that is your fetish, go for it. Iwon't tell.

Well if you are going to argue that you cant watch kiddie porn than you should argue the same for crack, because I could use the argument for kiddie porn that it is already made, and I am not taking advantage of any kids to get it so who am i hurting by watching it? Obviously you have to cut off the supply to stop the abuse, same for crack it was brought in criminally and you don't know if people were killed, harmed etc. so you should still cut off the supply.You have to realize that the gov't as a collective is supposed to be responsible for the well being of its citizens, who in general may not always have the best intentions or logic behind decisions. For example the gov't medels with the economy in order to keep it competitive (somewhat anyway) and to make it work for the over all whole. So its not just the gov't letting everyone run wild, as long as we don't harm anyone. The gov't has a responsibility to look out for people who cannot look out forthemselves (children, mentally challenged etc) and the same goes for what is deemed good for society, and if that is no gambling than so be it, but where it is idiotic is that they are attacking online gambling and letting every other form of gambling stand?? so hipocracy rules.

[hblask 1]

What in the world is "theoretical evidence"?Like you, I believe that the Government has remarkably few roles that they should play. That a "good law" is a law that adds to an individual's rights, not limits them. I even believe that our Founding Fathers never intended for a "Two Party" system that would make it so easy to pass legislation - I'd even say that a smart lawyer could possibly find a way to get the Two Party system declared "Unconstitutional". However, by definition, the Congress CAN and DOES pass laws - and until our OUTSTANDING system of checks and balances finds them to be nconstitutional, they ARE Constitutional. I believe that the Constitution MUST be applied to an infinite set of circumstances and a changing world that our Founding Fathers could not have predicted. The basis remains the same.

Mistyped --- theory, not theoretical evidence. Game theory applied to politics predicts increasingly concentrated benefits and increasingly dispersed costs, and that is what is happening here. That is why it is important to be a republic and not a pure democracy. There are some things congress and the people should NOT be allowed to vote on, primarily, voluntary consensual behavior, and the right to be secure in your home.As to your argument that SCOTUS said it was consitutional, so it is, that argument always leaves me shrugging. Yeah, I guess, but it is *clearly* outside the original intent and scope of the document. The constitution was meant as a limitation on federal power. A means to deal with changing circumstances was incorporated: amendments. Prohibition was allowed by amendment. People respected the original intent when dealing with a current "problem". When prohibition was repealed, that was also by amendment, again showing respect for the original intent. Since then, things have gone downhill, and we get the Insane War on Drugs, the Harmful War on Poverty, the Federal Paving of West Virginia, and now, the Insane War on Spending Money in the Privacy of Your Home.The power of the federal government is too big of a hammer to be used with the indiscretion that Congress has treated it. The founding fathers knew that, FDR trashed it. Online poker suffers.

[gold4278 0]

Does anyone know if we have our "frozen" funds in Neteller can we use it to buy stuff from merchants and if so which online merchants offer neteller as a payment option? I figure I might as well spend my Neteller money rather than just let it sit there collecting dust.

[Muck, You Suckers! 0]

Yeah......and let's stop arresting speeders until we have all of the Child Molesters behind bars.

The gaming bill was passed under homeland security. The law is being handled as a homeland security issue. That's the point. The southern border is a huge homeland security issue. But I can see how you wouldn't see that.