Interesting wording though for the Chief: Our department will not arrest civilians if they audio-record any on-duty police officers in a public place
So does this mean that they will arrest you if you film them in a private business? or your home? While this is probably over analyzing, this guy does seem to give words a twist when he speaks. (Reference his previous statement: "He honestly thought he was OK to do it, so now if he continues to do it, I can’t tell you that he certainly won’t be arrested.”
Buy stock of light bulb company via the subsidiary of their shell company. Promote said Company's light bulbs as brighter thus allowing for better security from terrorists and child molesters. Also fight for local light bulb installer union and how the LED consortium is trying to take away good American jobs,
Then after all the lobbying, fighting, delaying tactics, and closed door trade agreements are done: we pay 16.63 million for a guy with a top secret security clearance to come in and screw in a light bulb.
I didn't see anything about them having to pay back and money made while the ads run. In reality, if rumblefish did this with a bunch of vids that weren't really theirs and only half of the owners stopped them by arguing RF would still make quite a bit of change wouldn't they? Maybe that was their plan? (I get that they won't make a ton on ads but I could see where it would all add up if they did this a lot.
When I read this, I wondered if this was actually part of an undisclosed agreement between Apple and Giz to make the whole iPhone prototype thing go away. I know the DA dropped charges a while ago but just made me wonder if this was the plan all along.
Mom: OK please sign this indemnification clause for me (since I gave you permission) and this other statement that states I am your sole beneficiary in the case of your accidental death and that your father has no claim on any funds you or I receive.
"would take into effect the level of political understanding"
I love this line. So "someone" would need to come up with a test or evaluation method that would check political understanding as part of the Census (per the article.) Does this mean the incumbents would vote on defining "political understanding" prior to the Census so that they ensure the right set of voters?
It does because of the choice of people.
If I choose to make this information publicly available then the government has free access to it no warrant involved.
If I choose NOT to post these types of things, then the government doesn't get free reign to it without a proper warrant.
If I choose to share this information say on Facebook but lock it ONLY to friends then the government should not be allowed to snoop my facebook account without a warrant. Granted, if my friends share the info with them, then I will have a few less friends but no beef with the government (which is funny because the government also thinks that this is completely fair EXCEPT when wikileaks does it of course.)
Oh I am sure they will make BP pay....well pay this congressman and this one and this one over here, oh that one in the back too. That way these poor public servants can "get their lives back too" after all the complaining of their constituents and from having to spend all that energy blustering about the tragedy for votes.
exactly, it always makes me laugh how whichever party has the majority ALWAYS blames the other party when their particular agenda doesn't get passed even though it's based on a majority vote and then the local sheeple take up the cry of damn republicans or stupid democrats. Let's face it, neither group has adhered to the foundation of those two parties in decades and nor do most of them seem to have a foundation they actually stand on for more than a few days.