Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
(08-23-2013, 04:57 PM)FAHQTOO Wrote: [ -> ]In the mean time...I'm gonna sit back and enjoy this, 
and laugh at you.
It never ceases to amaze me how “cool” menopausal domestic soup chicken potheads are! Bwahahaha!
Doobie up pothead I will be waiting for you when the cold light of day and reality kicks in and you realise to your horror you are still you and not Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz.
I'll bet when you are toking you look in the mirror and see Michelle Pfeiffer looking back at you as opposed to when you are sober and see Phyllis Diller.
Toke up loser, escape your reality.
(08-23-2013, 04:53 PM)FAHQTOO Wrote: [ -> ] (08-23-2013, 04:16 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: [ -> ][quote='FAHQTOO' pid='337248' dateline='1377288139']
Me too...
In a nutshell...CN is going to take me to hell with his scathing replies to me in the future. 
Whoopsie
He's also going to surf your butthole on a daily basis. I'm not exactly sure what he meant by that, but I think I'd rather just put up with his scathing replies.
Sorry CN. But F2 spanked your ass before she handed it to you. You're probably lucky she's high and mellow now.
I don't know if CN could really pull off the Butthole Surfer deal.
He doesn't strike me as a street person who gets off on the shame of life.
Plus, Butthole Surfers love to get high and they love the girls.
So, I think FAHQTOO could probably handle a Butthole Surfer pretty easily.
They are OK........and I just knew they were the same and one.
(08-23-2013, 08:47 PM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]They are OK........and I just knew they were the same and one.
Always loved their music and warped lyrics.
You'll recognize the bartender in this one:
Anymore epic drivel posts you want me to pick through and dissect methodically piece by piece fakepoo?
Yes please...dissect them all. Nothing better than you making an ass of yourself repeatedly.
Fakepoo?...what are you 12?
(08-23-2013, 07:17 PM)sally Wrote: [ -> ] (08-23-2013, 04:53 PM)FAHQTOO Wrote: [ -> ] (08-23-2013, 04:16 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: [ -> ][quote='FAHQTOO' pid='337248' dateline='1377288139']
Me too...
In a nutshell...CN is going to take me to hell with his scathing replies to me in the future.
Whoopsie
He's also going to surf your butthole on a daily basis. I'm not exactly sure what he meant by that, but I think I'd rather just put up with his scathing replies.
That's a tough decision.
Syria's kinda on the back-burner with developments there over the last several weeks, but Obama's got some tough questions to answer next week from the EU.
Stop Looking at Us!!
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - A delegation of lawmakers from the European Union will travel to Washington on Monday to seek a response to allegations of widespread spying by the United States against EU citizens and governments, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
The three-day visit by members of the European Parliament's civil liberties committee follows reports this week that the U.S. National Security Agency accessed tens of thousands of French phone records and monitored Merkel's mobile phone.
The revelations have drawn condemnation from EU leaders meeting in Brussels, with Merkel demanding that the United States sign up to a "no-spying" agreement with Germany and France by the end of the year, in line with similar deals with Britain and others.
full story:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/25...62418.html
A "no spying" agreement.
THAT is truly funny.
^ That line made me laugh, too.
Spying ain't going anywhere, IMO.
But, the process for determining who has access to the methods used and the data collected is definitely being revisited and tightened up since Snowden's leaks. I doubt that's true only in the U.S.
Snip:
Under fire about disclosures of broad National Security Agency snooping on global leaders, President Barack Obama is offering a two-pronged response: You do it, too, and we'll make some changes.
Full story:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/25/politics/n...?hpt=hp_t1
NSA PHONE DATA MINING RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL INVASION OF PRIVACY
![[Image: 130606191546-nsa-logo-story-top.jpg]](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/130606191546-nsa-logo-story-top.jpg)
A federal judge said Monday that he believes the government's once-secret collection of domestic phone records is unconstitutional, setting up likely appeals and further challenges to the data mining revealed by classified leaker Edward Snowden.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon said the National Security Agency's bulk collection of metadata -- phone records of the time and numbers called without any disclosure of content -- apparently violates privacy rights.
"I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval," said Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush. "Surely, such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the Founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment."
Leon's ruling said the "plaintiffs in this case have also shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits of a Fourth Amendment claim," adding "as such, they too have adequately demonstrated irreparable injury."
He rejected the government's argument that a 1979 Maryland case provided precedent for the constitutionality of collecting phone metadata, noting that public use of telephones had increased dramatically in the past three decades.
Leon also noted that the government "does not cite a single instance in which analysis of the NSA's bulk metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack, or otherwise aided the government in achieving any objective that was time-sensitive in nature."
However, he put off enforcing his order barring the government from collecting the information, pending an appeal by the government.
A Justice Department spokesman said Monday that "we believe the program is constitutional as previous judges have found," but said the ruling is being studied.
Democratic Sen. Mark Udall of Colorado, a critic of the NSA data mining, said Leon's ruling showed that "the bulk collection of Americans' phone records conflicts with Americans' privacy rights under the U.S. Constitution and has failed to make us safer."
He called on Congress to pass legislation he proposed to "ensure the NSA focuses on terrorists and spies - and not innocent Americans." (HOTD: This is what I'd like to see too - scour all the data if it really aids in anti-terrorism effort, ferret out potential terrorist communication, destroy the rest - subject to audit verification.)
Full story:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/ns...?hpt=ju_c1
--------------------------------------------------
This ruling may help strengthen the case to grant Snowden amnesty here in the US, IMO.
Will be interesting to see how 2014 plays out for Snowden and the NSA.
How do you tell innocent from guilty if you aren't allowed to look at everything/the whole picture?
This judge obviously knows sod all about the practicalities of intelligence gathering. At the airport EVERYONE gets scanned because terrorists don't where “I heart terrorism” t-shirts. Terrorists hide in plain sight and can be potentially anyone that's why a blanket catch all approach is not only preferable its essential.
21st century terrorism is a threat that can't be treated the same as old school terrorism.
I'm reminded of that Rolling stones song "Under my thumb"
So...it took a federal judge to say that collecting domestic phone records is unconstitutional. Who knew!
Terrorists make domestic telephone calls and without intelligence no one knows who the terrorists are.
Deluded people want freedom and safety at no cost whatsoever.
Cloud cuckoo land.
NSA META DATA COLLECTION RULED LEGAL BY FEDERAL JUDGE
Yesterday, a federal judge (Pauley) in New York ruled the NSA's bulk collection of data on nearly every phone call made in the United States was legal. This contrasts with federal Judge Leon's ruling in Washington week before last.
15 separate judges of the FISA Court have held on 35 occasions that Section 215 (of the Patriot Act) authorizes the collection of telephony metadata in bulk in support of counterterrorism investigations."
Pauley said the NSA's bulk collection of phone records under Section 215 of the Patriot Act was legal.
The New York ruling makes it more likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will have to tackle the issue of privacy and settle the dispute over the the NSA program.
For years, the courts have relied on a 1979 Supreme Court precedent that found privacy rights didn't extend to personal information people give to third-parties such as the phone companies, which store basic data on calls made. The secret court that oversees the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has relied on that ruling to periodically reauthorize the NSA phone data program.
But technology has come a long way since then; modern cell phones are in constant communication with phone towers and tell a lot more information about phone customers than old land line phones. And at least some justices may be ready to take on the issue again.
Full story:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/justice/ns...?hpt=ju_c2
===================================================
Obama says that he is reviewing the pros and cons of the NSA meta data collection program; what data should and shouldn't be collected moving forward, etc... He'll have a plan to announce in January.
I'm interested to see how the President ultimately weighs what many consider their constitutional right to privacy against how to best possibly protect society from terrorism in today's technological world.
I wouldn't want to be looking down from that tightrope, but it's better for Obama to be forced to walk that tenuous walk now than it would have been during his first term.
Pauley also said that if the current NSA data collection procedure had been active in 2001 9⁄11 could have been averted.
Food for thought.
(12-28-2013, 12:21 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: [ -> ]Pauley also said that if the current NSA data collection procedure had been active in 2001 9⁄11 could have been averted.
Food for thought.
George Bush & his administration knew about the attacks before they went down. They choose to disregard the information they had in their possession.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
![[Image: fingers-crossed-behing-back1.jpg]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UaRSRYn8Acs/T_rTaArTLkI/AAAAAAAAAME/bR5ZgYygtXE/s1600/fingers-crossed-behing-back1.jpg)