This is what the article on NJ 105 writes: shouting “f— the police!” It's obviously false, their reporting is lying, because the man was actually shouting "fuck the police".
Since when is it okay to falsify your reports in order to satisfy some puritan moral standards about what kind of words you should use?
Of course you can censor yourself and say "f- the police", but it's entirely different when you're reporting about something. Because then you're simply lying.
The white house press team laughing its ass of on how the mainstream media (and certain elements on twitter et.al.) are nothing more than their personal amplifier.
Yes, imagine, we even have the right not to be spied upon by the USA. Yes, funny enough, the NSA spying on foreigners is of course a violation of the 4th amendment, unless "...upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Wholesale surveillance neither qualifies for "probable cause", nor for "particularly".
Right. Counting all terrorist plots in the USA, including all the failed one, it turns out that the FBI is indeed responsible for the majority of them.
Granted, the FBI is probably not responsible for any of the plots that worked, but still, they're obviously not doing what anyone could call "fighting terrorism".
Getty Images is the outfit that claims rights on reproductions of paintings from the 15th century and wants you to "license" them. We call this copyfraud.
See for yourself, go search Getty Images for "Da Vinci" and discover a whole abyss of illegally claimed rights.
So in fact, Getty Images is siphoning traffic and creating an environment where it can claim the profits from individuals’ creations as its own..
I don't know, but if the FBI says it won't comply, were I a judge, I would open proceedings against the FBI itself, on suspicion of illegal hacking and eavesdropping.
Wow, you're right. I think I recognize maybe three names or something like that.
So this authors guild represents (only) 800 relatively unknown authors. No heavyweights whatsoever, neither in the literary sense, nor the economic one.
Yeah, I can tell you how this would work. If woke up by chance an noticed that bugger of a robot trying to brute force my phone, I'd fry him with some live wires.
After that, I get arrested and dragged to a court, for "destruction of government property", and the judge explains me that the intrusion is not a violation of privacy, since it's a robot and not a human being, and also that what the robot did does not require a warrant, since no human will be looking at the contents of the phone, or use the PIN, and that I will only have any standing when some human eventually decides to have a look at the material. That fact will also be classified.
I'd rather have a president lying about his sex affairs than one lying about affairs of state, like lying about WMDs in Iraq, or lying about closing Guantanamo Bay.
On the post: Why Is Twitter Sending Legal Letters Warning People About Tweeting About The Gagged Topic Of A 'Celebrity Threesome'
Re:
On the post: Cop Abuses Bad Cyberbullying Law To Arrest Man For Calling Him A Pedophile To His Face
falsifying facts because of puritanism
shouting “f— the police!”
It's obviously false, their reporting is lying, because the man was actually shouting "fuck the police".
Since when is it okay to falsify your reports in order to satisfy some puritan moral standards about what kind of words you should use?
Of course you can censor yourself and say "f- the police", but it's entirely different when you're reporting about something. Because then you're simply lying.
The video has been tampered with as well.
On the post: UK Queen's Speech: More, Faster Broadband... But It Will Be Censored And Spied On
You should remember your roots
- Gentlemen don't read gentlemen's mail
and
- Britons never will be slaves
You're violating both right now.
On the post: Local Fox Affiliate's Reaction To Brutal Police Beating Is A Dereliction Of Its Duty
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Either your "Libs" is not referring to "Liberals", or somebody has got the definition about "liberal" wrong. You choose.
On the post: Local Fox Affiliate's Reaction To Brutal Police Beating Is A Dereliction Of Its Duty
Re: Re:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/magazine/the-aspiring-novelist-who-became-obamas-foreign-policy-gu ru.html
The white house press team laughing its ass of on how the mainstream media (and certain elements on twitter et.al.) are nothing more than their personal amplifier.
On the post: The Saratoga Conundrum: Is It Water, Or Is It Juice
How did they get a trademark?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saratoga
On the post: Rep. Issa Calls Out Civil Asset Forfeiture As Letting 'Cops Go Treasure Hunting'
Re: Re: Re:
Wholesale surveillance neither qualifies for "probable cause", nor for "particularly".
On the post: Rep. Issa Calls Out Civil Asset Forfeiture As Letting 'Cops Go Treasure Hunting'
Re: So long as this is a revenue source
On the post: Elsevier Keeps Whac'ing Moles In Trying To Take Down Repository Of Academic Papers
Re:
On the post: Thank Snowden, As NSA Estimates He Singlehandedly Sped Up Encryption Adoption By 7 Years
Re:
Granted, the FBI is probably not responsible for any of the plots that worked, but still, they're obviously not doing what anyone could call "fighting terrorism".
On the post: And Out Come The Wolves: Now Getty Images Files EU Antitrust Complaint Against Google About Image Piracy
From the worlds biggest violator of copyright
Getty Images is the outfit that claims rights on reproductions of paintings from the 15th century and wants you to "license" them. We call this copyfraud.
See for yourself, go search Getty Images for "Da Vinci" and discover a whole abyss of illegally claimed rights.
So in fact, Getty Images is siphoning traffic and creating an environment where it can claim the profits from individuals’ creations as its own..
On the post: Rhode Island Attorney General Pushing For A State-Level CFAA That Will Turn Researchers, Whistleblowers Into Criminals
Re: Let's use it in our favor
On the post: FBI Says It Will Ignore Court Order If Told To Reveal Its Tor Browser Exploit, Because It Feels It's Above The Law...
Re: Re: Re: Ignoring Court Orders
On the post: The Erdogan Insult Mess: Dutch Reporter, German Politician Arrested For Mocking Erdogan; Swiss Art Exhibit Targeted Too
Re:
On the post: Authors Guild Petulantly Whines About How Wrong It Is That The Public Will Benefit From Google Books
Re: Re: Attorney for Authors Guild
Insert joke about Texians and cattle.
On the post: Authors Guild Petulantly Whines About How Wrong It Is That The Public Will Benefit From Google Books
Re: Who are they?
So this authors guild represents (only) 800 relatively unknown authors. No heavyweights whatsoever, neither in the literary sense, nor the economic one.
On the post: Ignorant Anti-Encryption Law Enforcement Groups Made A Logo And A Hashtag... And It All Backfired
Re: Re: cough
After that, I get arrested and dragged to a court, for "destruction of government property", and the judge explains me that the intrusion is not a violation of privacy, since it's a robot and not a human being, and also that what the robot did does not require a warrant, since no human will be looking at the contents of the phone, or use the PIN, and that I will only have any standing when some human eventually decides to have a look at the material. That fact will also be classified.
Maybe I should write a book about something like this. Would be a bit close to that one, though: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7849
On the post: Obama: The Word 'Classified' Means Whatever We Need It To Mean
Re: Re: I've heard this before
On the post: More People Recognizing Copyright's 'Free Speech Problem'
Re: But...
Anyone who claims one is lying and committing copyfraud.
On the post: The Ultimate In CwF: How Lovers Of Stardew Valley Fought Piracy By Buying The Game For Pirates
Re: Price has a lot to do with it
Next >>