So much no, this was irresponsible pet owner who was very close to a police raid (as is obviously evident by the number of cars and the assault weapon that is clearly visible around 3:00). The police are detaining him likely until they can ensure that he is not attempting to cause problems. Notice how the guys across the street from the guy being detained were fine continuing to record, were allowed to take the video away (despite showing a cop shooting a dog).

The dog did not deserve to be placed in a situation. But with your argument, if I saw a friend getting arrested I am entitled to charge cops and not get tazed or shot? To hell with that. But you know, its cool to blame cops whenever people do something dumb, illegal, or dangerous. Its cool to give them a hard time when they are trying to do their job and you know, protect someone.

Well then, perhaps you would be joining me in raiding the liquor and snacks compartment.

Ok this is a professionally made Gameplay Trailer and you don't think that was voice acting? Seriously?!

This was voice acting and BAD voice acting at that. No one stuttered, or clarified an incomplete thought. No one even made a joke or varied their rate of speech, cadence, or pitch of their voice.

If this isn't voice acting, these people are robots and are actually not having any fun. I've played online MMOs at a very high level, there's always jokes and changes in peoples voices at world first kills, or daily boring ones.

Also NO ONE In the History of Gaming has ever said "Whoa whoa whoa it's another group of players, Brace for PVP." And even if someone had it wasn't in the most boring monotone voice EVER!

My god I'm usually talking like Zapp Brannigan when I lead raids, I wouldn't ever play with such boring people, and I wouldn't want to buy a game that was advertised to be played by these utter wastes of time! I want to play a game with INTERESTING Funny people!

"Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: A leaked top-secret order has revealed the Obama administration is conducting a massive domestic surveillance program by collecting telephone records of millions of Verizon Business customers. Last night The Guardian newspaper published a classified order issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court directing Verizon’s Business Network Services to give the National Security Agency electronic data, including all calling records on a, quote, "ongoing, daily basis." The order covers each phone number dialed by all customers along with location and routing data, and with the duration and frequency of the calls, but not the content of the communications. The order expressly compels Verizon to turn over records for both international and domestic records. It also forbids Verizon from disclosing the existence of the court order. It is unclear if other phone companies were ordered to hand over similar information.

AMY GOODMAN: According to legal analysts, the Obama administration relied on a controversial provision in the USA PATRIOT Act, Section 215, that authorizes the government to seek secret court orders for the production of, quote, "any tangible thing relevant to a foreign intelligence or terrorism investigation." The disclosure comes just weeks after news broke that the Obama administration had been spying on journalists from the Associated Press and James Rosen, a reporter from Fox News.

We’re now joined by two former employees of the National Security Agency, Thomas Drake and William Binney. In 2010, the Obama administration charged Drake with violating the Espionage Act after he was accused of leaking classified information to the press about waste and mismanagement at the agency. The charges were later dropped. William Binney worked for almost 40 years at the NSA. He resigned shortly after the September 11th attacks over his concern over the increasing surveillance of Americans. We’re also joined in studio here by Shayana Kadidal, senior managing attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights.

First, for your legal opinion, Shayana, can you talk about the significance of what has just been revealed?

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Sure. So I think, you know, we have had stories, including one in USA Today in May 2006, that have said that the government is collecting basically all the phone records from a number of large telephone companies. What’s significant about yesterday’s disclosure is that it’s the first time that we’ve seen the order, to really appreciate the sort of staggeringly broad scope of what one of the judges on this Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approved of, and the first time that we can now confirm that this was under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which, you know, has been dubbed the libraries provision, because people were mostly worried about the idea that the government would use it to get library records. Now we know that they’re using it to get phone records. And just to see the immense scope of this warrant order, you know, when most warrants are very narrow, is really shocking as a lawyer.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, some might argue that the Obama administration at least went to the FISA court to get approval for this, unlike the Bush administration in the past.

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right. Well, we don’t know if the Bush administration was, you know, getting these same orders and if this is just a continuation, a renewal order. It lasted for only—it’s supposed to last for only three months, but they may have been getting one every three months since 2006 or even earlier. You know, when Congress reapproved this authority in 2011, you know, one of the things Congress thought was, well, at least they’ll have to present these things to a judge and get some judicial review, and Congress will get some reporting of the total number of orders. But when one order covers every single phone record for a massive phone company like Verizon, the reporting that gets to Congress is going to be very hollow. And then, similarly, you know, when the judges on the FISA court are handpicked by the chief justice, and the government can go to a judge, as they did here, in North Florida, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan, who’s 73 years old and is known as a draconian kind of hanging judge in his sentencing, and get some order that’s this broad, I think both the judicial review and the congressional oversight checks are very weak.

AMY GOODMAN: And, of course, this is just Verizon, because that’s what Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian got a hold of. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t other orders for the other telephone companies, right?

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Absolutely.

AMY GOODMAN: Like BellSouth, like AT&T, etc.

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: As there have been in the past.

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Yeah, those were—those were companies mentioned in that USA Today story in 2006. Nothing about the breadth of this order indicates that it’s tied to any particular national security investigation, as the statute says it has to be. So, some commentators yesterday said, "Well, this order came out on—you know, it’s dated 10 days after the Boston attacks." But it’s forward-looking. It goes forward for three months. Why would anyone need to get every record from Verizon Business in order to investigate the Boston bombings after they happened?

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, William Binney, a decades-long veteran of the NSA, your reaction when you heard about this news?

WILLIAM BINNEY: Well, this was just the FBI going after data. That was their request. And they’re doing that because they—if they want to try to get it—they have to have it approved by a court in order to get it as evidence into a courtroom. But NSA has been doing all this stuff all along, and it’s been all the companies, not just one. And I basically looked at that and said, well, if Verizon got one, so did everybody else, which means that, you know, they’re just continuing the collection of this kind of information on all U.S. citizens. That’s one of the main reasons they couldn’t tell Senator Wyden, with his request of how many U.S. citizens are in the NSA databases. There’s just—in my estimate, it was—if you collapse it down to all uniques, it’s a little over 280 million U.S. citizens are in there, each in there several hundred to several thousand times.

AMY GOODMAN: In fact, let’s go to Senator Wyden. A secret court order to obtain the Verizon phone records was sought by the FBI under a section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that was expanded by the PATRIOT Act. In 2011, Democratic Senator Ron Wyden warned about how the government was interpreting its surveillance powers under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act.

SEN. RON WYDEN: When the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the PATRIOT Act, they are going to be stunned, and they are going to be angry. And they’re going asked senators, "Did you know what this law actually permits? Why didn’t you know before you voted on it?" The fact is, anyone can read the plain text of the PATRIOT Act, and yet many members of Congress have no idea how the law is being secretly interpreted by the executive branch, because that interpretation is classified. It’s almost as if there were two PATRIOT Acts, and many members of Congress have not read the one that matters. Our constituents, of course, are totally in the dark. Members of the public have no access to the secret legal interpretations, so they have no idea what their government believes the law actually means.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Senator Ron Wyden. He and Senator Udall have been raising concerns because they sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee but cannot speak out openly exactly about what they know. William Binney, you left the agency after September 2001, deeply concerned—this is after you’d been there for 40 years—about the amount of surveillance of U.S. citizens. In the end, your house was raided. You were in the shower. You’re a diabetic amputee. The authorities had a gun at your head. Which agency had the gun at your head, by the way?

WILLIAM BINNEY: That was the FBI.

AMY GOODMAN: You were not charged, though you were terrorized. Can you link that to what we’re seeing today?

WILLIAM BINNEY: Well, it’s directly linked, because it has to do with all of the surveillance of the U.S. citizens that’s been going on since 9/11. I mean, that’s—they were getting—from just one company alone, that I knew of, they were getting over 300 million call records a day on U.S. citizens. So, I mean, and when you add the rest of the companies in, my estimate was that there were probably three billion phone records collected every day on U.S. citizens. So, over time, that’s a little over 12 trillion in their databases since 9/11. And that’s just phones; that doesn’t count the emails. And they’re avoiding talking about emails there, because that’s also collecting content of what people are saying. And that’s in the databases that NSA has and that the FBI taps into. It also tells you how closely they’re related. When the FBI asks for data and the court approves it, the data is sent to NSA, because they’ve got all the algorithms to do the diagnostics and community reconstructions and things like that, so that the FBI can—makes it easier for the FBI to interpret what’s in there.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We’re also joined by Thomas Drake, who was prosecuted by the Obama administration after he blew the whistle on mismanagement and waste and constitutional violations at the NSA. Thomas Drake, your reaction to this latest revelation?

THOMAS DRAKE: My reaction? Where has the mainstream media been? This is routine. These are routine orders. This is nothing new. What’s new is we’re actually seeing an actual order. And people are somehow surprised by it. The fact remains that this program has been in place for quite some time. It was actually started shortly after 9/11. The PATRIOT Act was the enabling mechanism that allowed the United States government in secret to acquire subscriber records of—from any company that exists in the United States.

I think what people are now realizing is that this isn’t just a terrorist issue. This is simply the ability of the government in secret, on a vast scale, to collect any and all phone call records, including domestic to domestic, local, as well as location information. We might—there’s no need now to call this the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Let’s just call it the surveillance court. It’s no longer about foreign intelligence. It’s simply about harvesting millions and millions and millions of phone call records and beyond. And this is only just Verizon. As large as Verizon is, with upwards of 100 million subscribers, what about all the other telecoms? What about all the other Internet service providers? It’s become institutionalized in this country, in the greatest of secrecy, for the government to classify, conceal not only the facts of the surveillance, but also the secret laws that are supporting surveillance.

AMY GOODMAN: Thomas Drake, what can they do with this information, what’s called metadata? I mean, they don’t have the content of the conversation, supposedly—or maybe we just don’t see that, that’s under another request, because, remember, we are just seeing this one, for people who are listening and watching right now, this one request that is specifically to—and I also want to ask you: It’s Verizon Business Services; does that have any significance? But what does it mean to have the length of time and not the names of, but where the call originates and where it is going, the phone numbers back and forth?

THOMAS DRAKE: You get incredible amounts of information about subscribers. It’s basically the ability to forward-profile, as well as look backwards, all activities associated with those phone numbers, and not only just the phone numbers and who you called and who called you, but also the community of interests beyond that, who they were calling. I mean, we’re talking about a phenomenal set of records that is continually being added to, aggregated, year after year and year, on what have now become routine orders. Now, you add the location information, that’s a tracking mechanism, monitoring tracking of all phone calls that are being made by individuals. I mean, this is an extraordinary breach. I’ve said this for years. Our representing attorney, Jesselyn Radack from the Government Accountability Project, we’ve been saying this for years and no—from the wilderness. We’ve had—you’ve been on—you know, you’ve had us on your show in the past, but it’s like, hey, everybody kind of went to sleep, you know, while the government is harvesting all these records on a routine basis.

You’ve got to remember, none of this is probable cause. This is simply the ability to collect. And as I was told shortly after 9/11, "You don’t understand, Mr. Drake. We just want the data." And so, the secret surveillance regime really has a hoarding complex, and they can’t get enough of it. And so, here we’re faced with the reality that a government in secret, in abject violation of the Fourth Amendment, under the cover of enabling act legislation for the past 12 years, is routinely analyzing what is supposed to be private information. But, hey, it doesn’t matter anymore, right? Because we can get to it. We have secret agreements with the telecoms and Internet service providers and beyond. And we can do with the data anything we want.

So, you know, I sit here—I sit here as an American, as I did shortly after 9/11, and it’s all déjà vu for me. And then I was targeted—it’s important to note, I—not just for massive fraud, waste and abuse; I was specifically targeted as the source for The New York Times article that came out in December of 2005. They actually thought that I was the secret source regarding the secret surveillance program. Ultimately, I was charged under the Espionage Act. So that should tell you something. Sends an extraordinarily chilling message. It is probably the deepest, darkest secret of both administrations, greatly expanded under the Obama administration. It’s now routine practice.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Shayana, I’d like to ask you, specifically that issue of the FISA court also authorizing domestic surveillance. I mean, is there—even with the little laws that we have left, is there any chance for that to be challenged, that the FISA court is now also authorizing domestic records being surveiled?

AMY GOODMAN: FISA being Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right. I mean, you know, two things about that. First, the statute says that there have to be reasonable grounds to think that this information is relevant to an investigation of either foreign terrorist activity or something to do with a foreign power. So, you know, obviously, this perhaps very compliant judge approved this order, but it doesn’t seem like this is what Congress intended these orders would look like. Seems like, on the statute, that Congress intended they would be somewhat narrower than this, right?

But there’s a larger question, which is that, for years, the Supreme Court, since 1979, has said, "We don’t have the same level of protection over, you know, the calling records—the numbers that we dial and how long those calls are and when they happen—as we do over the contents of a phone call, where the government needs a warrant." So everyone assumes the government needs a warrant to get at your phone records and maybe at your emails, but it’s not true. They just basically need a subpoena under existing doctrine. And so, the government uses these kind of subpoenas to get your email records, your web surfing records, you know, cloud—documents in cloud storage, banking records, credit records. For all these things, they can get these extraordinarily broad subpoenas that don’t even need to go through a court.

AMY GOODMAN: Shayana, talk about the significance of President Obama nominating James Comey to be the head of the FBI—

SHAYANA KADIDAL: One of the—

AMY GOODMAN: —and who he was.

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right. One of the grand ironies is that Obama has nominated a Republican who served in the Bush administration for a long time, a guy with a reputation as being kind of personally incorruptable. I think, in part, he nominated him to be the head of the FBI, the person who would, you know, be responsible for seeking and renewing these kind of orders in the future, for the next 10 years—he named Comey, a Republican, because he wanted to, I think, distract from the phone record scandal, the fact that Holder’s Justice Department has gone after the phone records of the Associated Press and of Fox News reporter James Rosen, right?

And you asked, what can you tell from these numbers? Well, if you see the reporter called, you know, five or six of his favorite sources and then wrote a particular report that divulged some embarrassing government secret, that’s—you know, that’s just as good as hearing what the reporter was saying over the phone line. And so, we had this huge, you know, scandal over the fact that the government went after the phone records of AP, when now we know they’re going after everyone’s phone records, you know. And I think one of the grand ironies is that, you know, he named Comey because he had this reputation as being kind of a stand-up guy, who stood up to Bush in John Ashcroft’s hospital room in 2004 and famously said, "We have to cut back on what the NSA is doing." But what the NSA was doing was probably much broader than what The New York Times finally divulged in that story in December ’05.

AMY GOODMAN: Very quickly, will Glenn Greenwald now be investigated, of The Guardian, who got the copy of this, so that they can find his leak, not to mention possibly prosecute him?

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Oh, I think absolutely there will be some sort of effort to go after him punitively. The government rarely tries to prosecute people who are recognized as journalists. And so, Julian Assange maybe is someone they try to portray as not a journalist. Glenn Greenwald, I think, would be harder to do. But there are ways of going after them punitively that don’t involve prosecution, like going after their phone records so their sources dry up.

AMY GOODMAN: I saw an astounding comment by Pete Williams, who used to be the Pentagon spokesperson, who’s now with NBC, this morning, talking—he had talked with Attorney General Eric Holder, who had said, when he goes after the reporters—you know, the AP reporters, the Fox reporter—they’re not so much going after them; not to worry, they’re going after the whistleblowers. They’re trying to get, through them, the people. What about that, that separation of these two?

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right. I’ll give you an example from the AP. They had a reporter named, I believe, John Solomon. In 2000, he reported a story about the botched investigation into Robert Torricelli. The FBI didn’t like the fact that they had written this—he had written this story about how they dropped the ball on that, so they went after his phone records. And three years later, he talked to some of his sources who had not talked to him since then, and they said, "We’re not going to talk to you, because we know they’re getting your phone records."

AMY GOODMAN: We want to thank you all for being with us. Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights. William Binney and Thomas Drake both worked for the National Security Agency for years, and both ultimately resigned. Thomas Drake was prosecuted. They were trying to get him under the Espionage Act. All of those charges were dropped. William Binney held at gunpoint by the FBI in his shower, never prosecuted. Both had expressed deep concern about the surveillance of American citizens by the U.S. government. You can go to our website at democracynow.org for our hours of interviews with them, as well." - Democracy Now!

Between wars of aggression (Iraq, Afghanistan) and the violation of national sovereignty (Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Jemen, Somalia), the running of gulags (Gitmo, Baghram) and torture facilities (airport in Mogadishu), the NDAA and the war on whistleblowers on the one hand and the entire corporate corruption (too big to fail/jail in particular) on the other hand, there's plenty of reason to take a good look at what the latest administrations have been responsible for.

But hey, Benghazi and the IRS are the real scandals, right?

Not Thomas Drake, John Kiriakou and Bradley Manning or Anwar al-Awlaki, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Certainly not HSBC or Gitmo. And neither nightly JSOC raids nor cruise missile attacks, much less torture and kidnapping.

are you an md? if you are, the number of patients you see, the treatments you can provide, and what drugs you deal are dictated by insurance and pharmaceutical companies, and you have no choice but to comply while you pay off your 200k in loans.
Do you know what iatrogenic death means, or what the rate of iatrogenic death is? check it out....
There is plenty of quackery in the western md world.

as for Chiropractic, at least they are attempting to address the most glaring hole in western medicine: the rather obvious relationship between the structure of the body and the function of the body.

And when it comes to somatic/structural issues - which make up over 50% of hospital visits, and of which the western world treats with drugs or surgery, the chiro's at least have some of the theory correct, it's just their methodology that is fucked.

But, as for fundamental quackery, let's look at how the western world treats kids. First, hook them on sugar, then call them ADHD and give them methamphetamine salt (Adderol), followed by Ambien cause they can't sleep, followed by Prozac caused they are depressed cause they can't sleep, ...all the while they are raiding mom's medicine cabinet for the oxycontin or whatever opiate derivative they can find.
yeah, it's a JOKE. But we were trained to bow to authority, call the doctor god and worship the white coat and piece of paper on the wall.

I mean, for fuck's sake, listen to the side effect list of any major drug out there. really? that's "health care". bullshit.

Western md's shine in trauma, which was learned from our spirited attempts to have a continual state of warfare. for that they are top-notch. Anti-biotics were a huge deal, but all they've learned to do since the advent of penicillin is to make analogue after analogue, and they've stuffed so many people full of anti-biotics for just about every malady, that we are becoming genetically resistant to them as a species.
health care. yup.
how many of you out there can even afford this type of "health care"?
but please, do some research and go on for hours.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 12 Badge!

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Soooo what was that supposed to be? She didn't look like someone who was getting raided, whyd the camera go black?

When was torture last sanctioned by the state? The dark ages? Of course violent crime was higher in the dark ages. It was pretty difficult to enforce the law back then due to the lack of cars, satellites, computers, security cameras, guns, etc, not to mention that laws varied greatly depending on which part of the land you lived in and what lords you served under. Does Pinker's book have any contemporary examples that support your position?

In any case, regardless of whether you favor punishment or rehabilitation, the real solution is to address the root of the problem: lousy upbringings. Anyone can have children, no matter how qualified they are. They can have a criminal record, a history of mental illness and be unemploymed and still have as many kids as they want. It's ridiculous and the reason why so many children grow up to be criminals. We need to have strictly enforced regulation of reproduction. Parents should have to go through a thorough testing process and meet certain requirements (like having enough money to actually support a family) before being allowed to have kids. If a woman walks into a hospital with an unlicensed pregnancy, both she and the father should be arrested and executed without trial. Legal births would be recorded in an international database, which employers and government workers would reference during any hiring, licensing or authorization process. Essentially, illegal children would have no chance of ever becoming a part of regular society, forcing them to the outskirts and slums. This would make it easier to focus raids and clear out the most prominent concentrations of criminals.

This may sound dystopian but it's really the only way to fix the root of the problem. You will never be able to make people better if you let them be raised under lousy conditions. Morality is learned, not innate. If we want everyone to follow the same rules, they need to be taught to respect them. If the parents don't, why would the children?

what if, beyond all negativity, they DO keep it true to elder scrolls? kinda like an ultima online system. Ultima Online was more like elder scrolls in its execution with no levels and only skills. so it could very well work. and if its just skyrim multiplayer. so what! i wished i could go online and raid towns with a buddy. or dungeons if thats your thing

Sample: lamentations, lamentations, lamentations worldwide

Watch out (repeated)

LB: In the beginning men and women had an obligation to their children
Lateef: Then there was a real and true necessity in need for building
LB: There was still the discipline and will proliferate the lineage
Lat: Matters of the spirit, mind, and body taken serious
LB: But the way that we became what we became
Somebody please explain
Lat: Well we could tell you if you're curious
Those that reign got the masses in chains
And their minds enslaved
Both: And that's the part that makes me furious

Watch out (repeated)

Both: Cos they're definitely aint no info readily avai'
Lable to the general A (?) people so let me know x2

Lat: It's easily this multimedia crews that feed you to the neediest
It's the greediest trying to cheat us out of our God given right
LB: To a quality education minimal opportunities available
Limited occupations we are not given a choice
Lat: Or given a voice within a political system pimped and gangsta'd out
Wherein the people are the victim sheep being lead about
LB: While the followers and the patrons of any faith outside the mainstream
Are being raided, falsely painted as endangering the way things work
Lat: And the way things are remain
LB: I can't believe that things aint worse
Lat: When all the wicked seeds we've sown have grown
LB: And poisoned all the Earth
Lat: It serves us right
LB: Can't really act surprised when the harvest has no worth
Lat: The curse that's lurking round the corner
Both: Is the product of our work

Watch out (repeated)

Right now
LB: The holy war's growing opposing forces polling of the origins
Of which have been historically been ignored
Right now
Lat: Our foreign policy is mallets of democracy
Upholding an aristocracy of secret terrorist cells
Right now
LB: The global poverty that we accept so commonly
Turns people into property one step away from hell
Right now
Lat: Healthcare battles bioengineering for the worldwide scare
Of the plague the we're fearing
Right now
LB: They got the right to put our lives under surveillance
Right now
Lat: They got the right to lock us up we don't obey them
Right now
LB: Modern education don't prepare the youth
Right now
Right now
Both: Do what you gotta do
Right now
LB: There's people shooting at people that's throwing stones
Right now
Lat: There's a movement of people across the globe
Right now
Both: Right now is where we're at
What goes around comes around
Time for action before the last trumpet sounds

>> ^SpaceOddity:

>> ^Yogi:
You know, the reason these people feel that they are invincible is that no one has bothered to murder any of them yet. People say that's not the way to deal with them, but I can guarantee if they worried about their safety they wouldn't protest as much at all. The heads of that church are just barely keeping those people enthrall, if you make their adventures personally too costly, they will no longer protest and we will be free of them. Take one of these guys into an alley, and blow their brains out of the back of their head, and you will see a dramatic change in behavior.

Yogi, I am a Marine Corps Iraq veteran who happened to instruct other Marines in marksmanship.
I am also a native of Kansas who thinks the WBC (along with our education board, but that's another matter...) is an embarrassment to all Kansans.
My girlfriend is from Topeka and lived not far from their compound.
I won't deny the temptation to use my skills and the intelligence she could provide to conduct a midnight raid and rid the world of these hatemongers.
But when I think through the moral implications of this, taking another's life for their extreme utilization of the freedom of speech which I hold dear just doesn't sit right.
It's easy to be cynical and support the murder of strangers from your armchair.
It's not so simple when you are in the position to do it.


As the son and grandson of Marines I understand where you are coming from. Here's what I'm suggesting though, we are American citizens responsible for a lot of blood on our hands. Right now Israel is bombing the living shit out of Gaza killing civilians as well as children. They are only able to do this with our funding and selling them arms. I'm just saying if we're responsible for all these horrific deaths around the world, why not just a few more here at home? What I'm saying is we don't have the morality to say that it's not right because we do it so often, lets use it as a strength. We know where they are, lets get rid of them...it's only fair.

>> ^Yogi:

You know, the reason these people feel that they are invincible is that no one has bothered to murder any of them yet. People say that's not the way to deal with them, but I can guarantee if they worried about their safety they wouldn't protest as much at all. The heads of that church are just barely keeping those people enthrall, if you make their adventures personally too costly, they will no longer protest and we will be free of them. Take one of these guys into an alley, and blow their brains out of the back of their head, and you will see a dramatic change in behavior.


Yogi, I am a Marine Corps Iraq veteran who happened to instruct other Marines in marksmanship.
I am also a native of Kansas who thinks the WBC (along with our education board, but that's another matter...) is an embarrassment to all Kansans.
My girlfriend is from Topeka and lived not far from their compound.
I won't deny the temptation to use my skills and the intelligence she could provide to conduct a midnight raid and rid the world of these hatemongers.

But when I think through the moral implications of this, taking another's life for their extreme utilization of the freedom of speech which I hold dear just doesn't sit right.

It's easy to be cynical and support the murder of strangers from your armchair.
It's not so simple when you are in the position to do it.

>> ^moodonia:

I bought a SATA3 SSD recently for my OS/programs/couple of games and its well worth it. Power on to usable desktop in Windows 7 in less than 10 seconds. Still keep a RAID array of conventional disks for mass storage.
It really is a good upgrade for old computers, anything with a SATA port should show a big improvement over a HDD even if the SATA controller is only SATA1. In my experience they are backward compatible, they should just run at the lower speed of the controller .
Nice to see OAG making some squids out of her internet fame, she seems to be making the most of it, good for her.
Youre experience may vary, check with your PC manufacturer


Try RAIDing a bunch of SSDs. The time dilation effects are a bit nauseating though.