Why propagate the HISS (Head In Sand Syndrome) that seems to affect both aged enterprise and bureaucratic monoliths? It's out so one can either shout about it or pout about it, I guess.
And I hope that you do not have an active clearance because it's still classified...
Yeah, basically. People have three choices for using services that track..
1. Use it and STFU 2. Use it and take your own countermeasures (plentiful options) 3. Don't use it (sorry four, 4. Be Blue and go through life as a self-righteous asshat.)
It simply boggles the mind that this woman has any credibility whatsoever in matters pertaining to intelligence. Her top donors are pretty heavily vested in taking in the money of the American people. She's proven beyond a reasonable doubt whose interests hold sway over her actions.
Feinstein is a staunch supporter of the U.S Surveillance State (USSS).
How comfortable her life must be as one of the richest members of the Senate. Living proof that you can buy and sell anything.
Yeah, between the lines, sure. I just figured it was worthy of its own print AND I get to type "fuck". Win/win. There's too much "between the lines" as it is.. Give it to me straight man.. "We are the NSA and we collect fucking everything.". Surely that rips away any willfully ambiguous bullshit, no?
I'm a fan of the last paragraph of the article. I might've ended it with "Representative Peter King is a fucktard." though.
"There are many ways to care for America, most of which involve challenging the powers that be. King is one of those "powers," and his love of his country is the most insincere of all. His "love" asks for subservience from its countrymen, rather than accountability from its leaders. These leaders can make our country stronger, but that means they have to stop crippling their constituents and diluting their rights. We need courage, not bombastic flag-waving from a man so blinded by irrational hate he can't even see his own hypocrisy. Representative Peter King is a fucktard."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Love is not Marriage
"Society decided that marriage is between a male and a female, not "religion"."
That's just it, Michael, Society, like religion, doesn't get to decide. To imply that two people get "different"rights because they are a male/male pair vs a female/male pair is denying individuals' their rights. Neither the government nor religion can be allowed to deny rights, or worse, give rights to some and not to others. (re: marriage)
What you've been saying all along is "I'm am part of the Society that wishes to deny rights to individuals because those rights belong *solely* to parties that I /We deem more appropriate. Intolerable.
Marriage, between two consenting adults, is an unalienable right. Which, by-they-by, might happen to be precisely why attempts at defining it are not meeting constitutional muster. The civil aspect of what privileges those rights entail are legal rights. The "contest" is to merge them and completely and irrevocably integrate the two : The right to marry shall be recognized and all of those so married shall be equal with regards to their legal status .
When one attempts to determine or establish that one married couple receives more benefit than another you, thereby, deny some basic premise of individual liberty and equality. Which, in essence, effectively terminates religious eligibility to integrate with this government in this matter.
"Society" and "Majority" are of little consequence here thanks to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
And this is the single most absolute reason the cell phone gig is pure bullshit cuntery.
A smartphone is a pretty good piece of computing gear and I don't have a say? I can't get your piece of bullshit crap app off much less put up a firewall of any comms on it?
Fuck you AT&T et al. Fuck you.
Plug the NSA behind that and .. it's all gone.
All those folks that have zero tech handling experience - owned.
There is only conflict here because you're insisting that your definitions trump someone else's. Everyone has a right to couple up and be recognized. Marriage, i in the eyes of the state, is between two people. In other words religion(s) are no longer the defining characteristic of matrimony, people are.
I can't make you see that and don't mind if you don't see that but that is root.
Re: Re: Re: Obama is Correct... for the wrong reasons.
Yeah? Well, then, he'll definitely not receive a pardon for "corrections" then, will he?
Yeah, yeah, I get it. I'm simply trying to steer out of the "he thinks, they thinks" phase and onto a concrete discourse that could potentially lead to a pardonable path.
Disclosing classified documents is fucking crime. Get it? Don't forget it. Any possibilities for him receiving a pardon are going to be rooted in that "criminal activity".
Two wrongs don't make a right and all that. Let's fucking keep fucking emotion at fucking bay at least until he is fucking "officially" a fucking whistle-blower... for fuck's sake.
On the post: NSA Defenders Offer Weak Rebuttal Of The RNC's Condemnation Of Mass Surveillance Programs
Re: Re: Can't fucking believe it!!
On the post: Newcastle Might Win The S**** B*** Ad Championship With An Ad It Didn't Make And Can't Afford To Buy
Super Bowl
And they haven't paid much in tax since the 60's. Nice free ride they got there.
On the post: New York Times Suffers Redaction Failure, Exposes Name Of NSA Agent And Targeted Network In Uploaded PDF
Re:
And I hope that you do not have an active clearance because it's still classified...
On the post: British Judge Rules Google Can Be Sued In UK Over Privacy Case
Re: Should Google be a charity?
1. Use it and STFU
2. Use it and take your own countermeasures (plentiful options)
3. Don't use it
(sorry four, 4. Be Blue and go through life as a self-righteous asshat.)
On the post: Ex-CIA Director And Current Surveillance Task Force Member Mike Morell Parrots Talking Points To Defend Bulk Collections
now, I only wish they'd eat it
On the post: President Obama Surpasses Exceptionally Low Expectations On NSA Reforms, But Reforms Are Still Very Weak
Re: Bottom of page 2
"We regret to inform you that your privacy died on a training mission. Take this flag in appreciation and recognition for your privacy's service."
On the post: Average Wait Time For A Response At Administration's 'We The People' Petition Site At 298 Days
On the post: Dianne Feinstein Admits That Her 'NSA Reform' Bill Is About Protecting Existing Surveillance Programs
Feinstein is a staunch supporter of the U.S Surveillance State (USSS).
How comfortable her life must be as one of the richest members of the Senate. Living proof that you can buy and sell anything.
... I wonder what the future holds.
I am decidedly disgusted.
Treacherous wench.
On the post: Fearmonger Extraordinaire Rep. Peter King Accuses Sen. Rand Paul Of 'Fearmongering,' Says He Doesn't Deserve To Be A Senator
Consistently
Under-performing
Neocon
Tool
On the post: Terrorist Appeaser Peter King Blasts NY Times For Supporting 'Terrorist Appeaser' And 'Traitor' Ed Snowden
Re: Re:
On the post: Terrorist Appeaser Peter King Blasts NY Times For Supporting 'Terrorist Appeaser' And 'Traitor' Ed Snowden
"There are many ways to care for America, most of which involve challenging the powers that be. King is one of those "powers," and his love of his country is the most insincere of all. His "love" asks for subservience from its countrymen, rather than accountability from its leaders. These leaders can make our country stronger, but that means they have to stop crippling their constituents and diluting their rights. We need courage, not bombastic flag-waving from a man so blinded by irrational hate he can't even see his own hypocrisy. Representative Peter King is a fucktard."
Yeah, that looks better... even if it doesn't.
On the post: Unfortunate: ACLU On The Wrong Side Of A Free Speech Case
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Love is not Marriage
That's just it, Michael, Society, like religion, doesn't get to decide. To imply that two people get "different"rights because they are a male/male pair vs a female/male pair is denying individuals' their rights. Neither the government nor religion can be allowed to deny rights, or worse, give rights to some and not to others. (re: marriage)
What you've been saying all along is "I'm am part of the Society that wishes to deny rights to individuals because those rights belong *solely* to parties that I /We deem more appropriate. Intolerable.
Marriage, between two consenting adults, is an unalienable right. Which, by-they-by, might happen to be precisely why attempts at defining it are not meeting constitutional muster. The civil aspect of what privileges those rights entail are legal rights. The "contest" is to merge them and completely and irrevocably integrate the two : The right to marry shall be recognized and all of those so married shall be equal with regards to their legal status .
When one attempts to determine or establish that one married couple receives more benefit than another you, thereby, deny some basic premise of individual liberty and equality. Which, in essence, effectively terminates religious eligibility to integrate with this government in this matter.
"Society" and "Majority" are of little consequence here thanks to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
On the post: TSA Courts Next Generation Of Groping Victims With Cartoons And Coloring Pages
9/11
The United States Government is completely out of fucking control.
Freedom is overrated when you're trying to protect your positions of power, receiving of public funds and excusing every action that subverts justice.
Oversight is a protection racket. Checks are bouncing. The scales are laden with drugs and the blindfold is for the public.
"A republic, if you can keep it." -Benjamin Franklin
On the post: UK's New Mandatory Porn Filter Already Defeated By A Single Chrome Extension
Re: Re: Law
aaaandd we're off...
On the post: AT&T Finally Caves; Agrees To Issue A Transparency Report
Re:
A smartphone is a pretty good piece of computing gear and I don't have a say? I can't get your piece of bullshit crap app off much less put up a firewall of any comms on it?
Fuck you AT&T et al. Fuck you.
Plug the NSA behind that and .. it's all gone.
All those folks that have zero tech handling experience - owned.
My country is disgusting.
Immunity. Suck. my. god. damned. cock. in. hell.
On the post: GCHQ, NSA Spied On Known Terrorist Haven... UNICEF
Re: Re:
There was this one bit about a listening outpost but, I believe, it was a dress job made to look like it was a Snowden revelation via the UK folks.
On the post: Unfortunate: ACLU On The Wrong Side Of A Free Speech Case
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Love is not Marriage
There is only conflict here because you're insisting that your definitions trump someone else's. Everyone has a right to couple up and be recognized. Marriage, i in the eyes of the state, is between two people. In other words religion(s) are no longer the defining characteristic of matrimony, people are.
I can't make you see that and don't mind if you don't see that but that is root.
On the post: Rep. Peter King Says It's A Disgrace To Call Out James Clapper For Lying To Congress
Oh, OK
ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC
And their apologist, authoritarian fucks too.
And this guy *wants* to be POTUS. Yeah, good luck with that one, jackass.
On the post: Zynga's Founder Asks Obama To Pardon Snowden
Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama is Correct... for the wrong reasons.
On the post: Zynga's Founder Asks Obama To Pardon Snowden
Re: Re: Re: Obama is Correct... for the wrong reasons.
Yeah, yeah, I get it. I'm simply trying to steer out of the "he thinks, they thinks" phase and onto a concrete discourse that could potentially lead to a pardonable path.
Disclosing classified documents is fucking crime. Get it? Don't forget it. Any possibilities for him receiving a pardon are going to be rooted in that "criminal activity".
Two wrongs don't make a right and all that. Let's fucking keep fucking emotion at fucking bay at least until he is fucking "officially" a fucking whistle-blower... for fuck's sake.
Next >>