JackNaylorPE :
Not saying it is or it isn't but illegal investigative techniques are used every day. "Legal" didn't matter either for anyone at Guantanamo Bay. If I suspect you of being a drug dealer and I tap your phone, that's illegal and anything I hear can't be used in court. But if I hear you set up a buy and I "just happened" to be staking out the location "on a hunch" the illegal wiretap never needs to get introduced in court.
Did you read my post, I never said Microsoft was shut down I was merely asking for documentation on what Rodney posted.
The reason email client's (Windows Mail (not Live)) was no longer supported or updated or bundled with operating systems was because of three reason:
1) It was not for Windows Xp, or any other operating system besides Vista.
2) Many emails (including hotmail) redesigned their email network/servers to new form of HTTP servers allowing for POP3, HTTPS, among other features; thus making Windows Mail client unusable hence the errors you receive when you try to log on to Windows Mail.
3) No reason to update Windows Mail client, whenever Windows Live software was being announced in 2005 and developed through 2006.
Lastly, Microsoft won the Antitrust suit for email client and other software. So that is not a reason why they choose to remove mail clients.
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3375791
Guantanamo bay was not illegal in any way or form, the legal jurisdiction lays in the host country NOT citizenship of criminals. The reason why we choose Cuba is just that, no legal repercussions.
Guantanamo bay was in Cuba, a country we share very few relations with since the United States Embargo against Cuba in 1960, then finalized by Cuba's expropriation of American citizen/corporation's private property this in turn caused a near total embargo.. This is also irrelevant since Obama ordered the suspension and programmed shut down of all 3 camps in Guantanamo bay
@argument over illegal evidence. Actually it is incongruent with reality. I will list why:
"If I suspect you of being a drug dealer and I tap your phone, that's illegal and anything I hear can't be used in court. But if I hear you set up a buy and I "just happened" to be staking out the location "on a hunch" the illegal wiretap never needs to get introduced in court."
The first bit is correct illegal wire tap would negate any evidence collected via that extraction method.
The second bit is incorrect, because for you to arrest someone on those grounds you would need an arrest warrant to have a team setup, thus bringing you to court to mention the reason of such suspicion in which case no viable credible witness=cop fails since no court will warranty thousands of dollars for a hunch. Also if a cop is going to bust a drug deal alone, they must have balls of steel or a suicidal tendency this isn't Die Hard. Let's say a cop is that crazy this is what would happen:
When the individual is arrested, his house/properties will be seized, confiscated and filed in an inventory. The phone will no doubt reveal a wiretap, which upon release of this information to the defendant's lawyer would file in a "illegal search method" claim; thus making it very difficult for the prosecutor to build a fair case. I bet the whole evidence found would be thrown out after some media publicity specially since corrupt or abusive cop's seems to be favorites for the media.
Either way you want to look at it, such an event would require too much many ideal events for it work flawlessly that it would be called the perfect crime (weird I know but I didn't write the laws).