"They methodically fired explosives into every room in this house in order to extract one person. Granted, he had a handgun, but against 100 officers? You know, the proper thing to do would be to evacuate these homes around here, ensure the safety of the homeowners around here, fire some tear gas through the windows. If that didn’t work, you have 50 SWAT officers with body armor break down the door."

-----

You see, they methodically blew out walls with explosives to force him into one area. They used an APC with a breaching attachment to open multiple entries into the residence. One hundred cops against a guy with one handgun.

If this is our standard procedure, terrorists don't need to hit big targets, just split up and hide out in buildings. By the time our militar...oops, police force is done, the building will be wrecked to a shell. But we'll have that one terrorist, so as the Chief of Police said in this case, it's a WIN!

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

I wanna holler the loud funny words.

Two points abaft the beam mast port side was breach of the main deck hull. Jib jab yarr rip rap scowed the anchor, but Jesus only knows why the scuttlebutt was a spanker for the third mate's tailshaft. Iceberg right ahead!

The world wide web is under attack
They're taking it away but we're pulling it back
The world wide web is under attack
They're taking it away but we're pulling it back

So the FCC won't let me be
They want to stack the deck for the ISPs
but we've got a couple of tricks up our sleeves
It's far too important to leave to police
it could lead to the streets
a breach of the peace
and even decrease our freedom of speech
there's never been a bigger reason to read up
and see what's agreed 'cause of greed for the green and deceit
The greener the leaf, the sweeter the tree
the quicker they'll chop it down and leave nothing but tree stumps; debris
the damage is done, no refund received
see, the thing about net neutrality
is unless you get huge salaries
? the paramedic won't rescue casualties
' til they've seen to the rich next dude's allergies
they'll prioritise cash over content
wanna send one bit? That's one cent
What nonsense, man it's scaring me
a planet of plenty's selling scarcity
Innovation paved the way
Now invaders are paying to take it away
but they ain't gonna make it today
! Letting that happen's a major mistake
If Lessig was rapping he'd tell you the same
LETTING THAT HAPPEN'S A MAJOR MISTAKE
Tim Berners Lee baked us a cake
and they've taken the cherry.. AND THE CAKE
discrimination is happening today
to blacks and to gays and to packets of data
though ethically they're exactly the same
so Oi, we're not gonna stand 4 it m8

U WOT?
THE FOK U SAYIN BRUV?
U WOT M8??????
! THE FOK U SAYIN BRUV
U WOT?
FAK OFF U ARSEHOLE!

The world wide web is under attack
They're taking it away but we're pulling it back
The world wide web is under attack
They're taking it away but we're pulling it back

I'm from the place John Oliver came from
but no matter where you live you should be singing the same song
at long last, I'm putting Comcast on blast
'cause they never learn their lesson like they're in the wrong class
well I'm the professor and I'm setting you with one task
Get them knocked back like a shot glass
Straight in front of me's a cable company
The way they're behaving's unbelievable
Comcast is in league with the devil
and it's pissing me off, I'm not even American
! Take a peek, see from the evidence
Netflix had to pay a fee to get better links
it's a shakedown, communication breakdown
There's a bully in the playground
I had enough of that at school, won't lay down
lay a finger on me, you'll be laid out
You'll be laid out
You'll be laid ou
You'll be laid out
You'll be laid out
lay a finger on me, you'll be laid out

The world wide web is under attack
They're taking it away but we're pulling it back
The world wide web is under attack
They're taking it away but we're pulling it back

Taking it back, we're taking it back
We're taking it, we're taking back

There were multiple factors involved, and in the case of the Titanic sinking it was possibly partly related to the water temperature and the properties of both the steel hull and the rivets, as well as the design and the careless operation of the vessel.

Before the wreck was found, much more was made of the design of the watertight bulkheads which only went up to E deck. This allowed any four to be compromised without sinking the vessel, but six were breached in the Titanic, so as the boat tilted more, water could flow over the top of the bulkheads.

More recently, since inspection of the wreck became possible, metallurgy has been blamed much more. The hole made by the iceberg was straight and at the bottom of steel panels, indicating rivet failure. Testing of the steel used in the construction also found quality issues there, impurities would have made it more brittle than intended.

The first video on the subject that came up was this one:

Intelligence sharing between GCHQ and the NSA breached human rights laws, says IPT.

Consequences?

:crickets:

It seems you should take your own advice about reading comprehension - do you even realize that I wasn't referring to your whole post, just a particular statement? I guess not because otherwise you wouldn't be continuing to ramble on about something that I never even implied; show me where I wrote that her situation wasn't a bad thing. There, you see, I didn't.

Her situation is horrible but she is still responsible for the existence of those pictures as they were taken consensually and with her full knowledge. That her trust was misplaced and breached isn't the point of contention here. If you disagree, then consider if Ms Holten or her boyfriend had accidentally lost the phone containing the pictures and some unscrupulous person found it then posted the pictures online. It doesn't change the fact that Ms Holten is still responsible for the existence of the pictures to begin with and she should have retained tighter control over them (keep them on an encrypted hard drive, etc.)

Let's not forget that we are only hearing her side of the story. Have you seen these hateful emails that she speaks of? The details of whether her accounts were hacked or if the boyfriend just uploaded the pics from his phone are vague as well (but an important detail in my opinion.) Unless I missed an article, and that is always a possibility, I didn't see any mention of charges being brought against the boyfriend for an obvious crime - if he indeed "hacked" her phone or accounts, that is a criminal offence. I've also not seen any mention of legal action against the websites that host(ed) the pictures. I'm not trying to imply that she is lying and in all likelihood her ex-boyfriend is a douche, but I like to hear both sides of an argument first and get all the facts.

But I understand you quite clearly now: if you can't attack the argument, attack the person. Got it...you big cyber-bully...

No, but they should accept in this day and age that a ton of douches might snap secret pics of them (potenially upskirt shots when the girls are going up an escalator or something), fap to said pics, then upload the pics for others to potentially fap to. Not saying that's right, but it's a possibility that anyone wearing a mini-skirt would be foolish to ignore.

It's a digital world now. As @Jerykk was pointing out, the best way to avoid naked pics of yourself showing up on the Net is not to take naked pics of yourself (and even then some scumbag might install a hidden camera in a changing room or shower and you wind up on there anyway). From jilted ex-lovers to NSA hoovering data to security breaches/password leaks that seem to be making headlines every day, the odds of a naked pic of yourself being made public against your will (whether you're male or female) are exponentially higher these days. I think anyone who takes naked pics of themselves and doesn't expect them to show up online at some point (could be decades from now) is being a bit naive, especially if they are digital pics,

I am surprised they didn't breach the plastic door.

9 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

*dead -- "This video has been suspended either due to a copyright claim, or for breaching the terms of use."

Holy cow, the breach on that gun is enormous. Pictures of the barrel just don't do justice to how large those things were.

Three, actually.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/14/nsa-stellar/

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/snowden-documents-indicate-nsa-has-breached-deutsche-telekom-a-991503.html

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/gchq-and-nsa-targeted-private-german-companies-a-961444.html

And here's some of the original GCHQ documents specifically about Stellar: http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-34756.pdf

My biggest complaint about Verizon is that they took all these tax benefit arrangements with many states, in return for the promise to build out "broadband" infrastructure. In those agreements, Verizon said they would do FTTH (fiber-to-the-home, 10Mbps or more), but some years later they conveniently redefined "broadband" as 512kbps DSL, after saving 10s of millions of dollars from each of those states.

That is literally criminal (breach of contract), but nothing ever happened to them for doing so.

Once the infrastructure is built, Verizon (and Comcast, AT&T, TimeWarner, etc) profit margin is ENORMOUS. (more than any oil company makes on gasoline, by %)

If they are going to charge so much, they should at least deliver what they promise, and make an effort to make popular sites (netflix, youtube) as fast as possible.

I don't mind if ISPs attempt to throttle certain criminal sites (piratebay, sarahpalinchannel, etc)

More from Photography is not a crime:
First, Andrea Mears called police on a man for flying his remote control quadcopter over a public beach in Connecticut.

Then, when police didn’t respond in seconds, she attacked the man

“He’s taking pictures of people on the beach … with a helicopter plane,” she told the cops by phone.

“Can you guys hurry? I already talked to him, just come.”

Seconds later, she attacked him.

The man, who goes by Hogwit on Youtube, began recording the encounter on his iPhone as his quadcopter was flying overhead, capturing her clawing at his face and pulling at his shirt.

“You want to take pictures?” she asks him as she jams her fingers into his mouth. “Yeah, you’re going to see how it feels when police come.”

Then she has the audacity to tell him “let go of me” as she is all over him.

“If you wouldn’t be assaulting me, I wouldn’t be touching you,” he responds, remaining exceptionally calm considering the circumstances.

“He’s taking pictures of people on the beach!” she yells as she continues to rip his shirt. “I’m going to kick your ass, you little motherfucker.”

“Can someone call the cops!” the man yells. “I’m being assaulted! Help!”

Police arrived and arrested her for assault in the third degree and breach of peace. The incident took place May 12 at Hammonassett State Park in Madison.



Here are more details from the man who was flying the drone that he posted on a forum shortly after the incident:

I went to a nearby beach that is a whopping 2 miles long, set up, talked to some people that were curious what my “thing” was, demonstrated the loiter feature (pulling the quad to one direction or another), demonstrated rtl (flying it away then having it return), and make a lot of people think the quad was just awesome. I never went below 50 feet save for take off/landing, then after the end of my last flight, some crazy lady came over and started taking pictures of me…and dialed 911 for the 3rd time in 15 minutes…she said something to the effect of, “There’s a guy here taking pictures at the beach with a helicopter plane.” (I distinctly remember her saying, “with a helicopter plane,” because that just sounds hilarious.) They basically said that they’d send someone when one gets free during each of the 3 calls she made, she decided they didn’t care enough about someone obeying the law so when no one was around she assaulted me and she decided to stop when she got a phone call. I called the police to report the assault, and boy was the response big…10 or more vehicles arrived (cops, DEEP, and an ambulance)…They first listened to her story of lies (she claimed I was taking close ups of people in bikinis, and that she had asked me to stop flying before calling the police, and that I was the one that assaulted her, and and and). The police approached me very aggressively, believing her full story, and before anything else was said I brought up something that she missed… The fact that the cell phone in my hand has a camera…that was recording. I had video evidence that she went nuts completely unprovoked, and was the one that assaulted me. She was then charged with assault, and breach of peace and I gave the cops a copy of the video for their prosecution. I then also showed them my last flight where you can make out her colorful shirt getting up from the beach then following it until it lands which proved that she lied when claiming that she asked me to stop flying before calling the police.
At the end of it all, one of the officers said to me basically, “Flying that thing the way you were is fine, you’re not in any trouble. You can come back and fly, but just be aware that some people can be alarmed.”


*fail, *lies, *wtf