No, actually it is easy. The FOIA request needs to ask for any emails sent by Napolitano or by any person acting as her agent in the sending of emails.
If the secretary sends email on Napolitano's behalf, then the secretary is her agent. So a request of that nature would require any secretary's messages to be produced as well.
"We can remove anything we want from the public domain. In fact, we are removing the letters CIA from the public domain. Hereafter, any word containing the letters CIA must be either redacted or the letters replaced by SIA.
"We realize this will result in some artifisial-looking words. It will also require some superfisial correction or redaction of existing documents.
"Be warned: This is now offisial policy, and our technisians will be search carefully for any violations to be turned over to the judisiary."
Unfortunately stay down is not impossible. Just ban the individual from uploading anything for the stay-down period--easy.
"The question is: what will be the next bad idea governments adopt?"
It will be equally bad, or worse, whatever it is; there is no bottom to this hole. MCAA and RIAA won't be happy until you pay for every second of music you sing in the shower for your own enjoyment, and every scrap of dialog you repeat.
I think conscious memories require conscious attempt to organize the memory.
My earliest memory is placed by my mother, as best we can, at about 12-14 months. It is a memory of the sound of crickets at night, and I remember it (I think) because I also remember quite clearly imagining that the sound was caused by the turning of wheels; such as the wheels on my pull toy. (The toy made a chirping sound, you see.)
This is one of those mixed-feelings things. On the one hand, it is yet another NRA "we haz rights to be trigger happy" laws. But I am conflicted because anything that reigns in Zero Tolerance senselessness has got to be a plus.
I suggest an automatic penalty for non-compliance:
If the department improperly declines to fill (including improper redaction) an FOIA request, as determined by the court, then the request must be completed at zero cost to the requestor.
A three-letter security agency lie?
Are they still breathing? Because if they are, then they're lying.
Sure I'd hire him. Write down his every single recommendation.It would be the best advice you could buy: All you have to do is exactly the opposite of what he recommends...
It is estimated that the manager's approval of fraudulent time-and-attendance records cost the government more than $500,000...
she believed [...] that Mr. Beale worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. She never questioned Mr. Beale further, she said, because she believed the questioning might compromise national security...
I'm gonna patent shooting against a periwinkle background!
"Being good researchers, they did just that, looking at whether the number of works created in the United States from 1870 to 2006 increased as the government strengthened copyright law. They found that stronger copyright indeed led to more works being created."
Like this will do a lot of good: If they win, we'll all get to easily read the name of the PAC that bought that advertisement. Which we can see right now, with a DVR and a magnifying glass. (The DVR to stop motion during the half-second the message is displayed and the magnifying glass to help us read the Flyspeck 4-point font.)
Then all we'll need is a psychic to learn who financed the PAC. And since that doesn't work very well, all we'll learn is that the advertisement was paid for by "The We for Us Political Action Committee" or some other equally pithy thing.
In other words, if they win these lawsuits, we will still know NOTHING.
Might as well be Sgt. Schultz.
Rich person: "When are you mouthy, insubordinate, insufferable little peons going to get it?! First Amendment privacy is only for people who can afford to finance a PAC!"
Hey guys, we're tough, we can take it.
I suppose there's a few whiners in our government that would get their feelings hurt, but who cares about them?
Wally Wallington moves blocks up to 20 tons by himself. He can move a one-ton block 300 feet in an hour, by himself.
The video shows erection of 128 cubic-foot foot, 9.5 ton concrete block that looks to be about 20 feet long.
Man Moves Huge Blocks! (Youtube)
"The use of technology to tailor instruction for individual students is still an emerging concept and inBloom provides a technical solution that has never been seen before. As a result, it has been the subject of mischaracterizations and a lightning rod for misdirected criticism."
use of technology - for only the best of all possible purposes
tailor instruction - determine admissibility to higher education institutions
individual students - so each student can grow to his/her potential (within their limitations, of course) by having their lives reduced to simple bureaucratic rules
emerging concept - grand new profit opportunity from a whole new area of privacy invasion
technical solution - solves "all your problems" automatically so you no longer have to think about how this all affects students for the rest of their lives
never been seen before - no one else had the nerve
subject of mischaracterization - we only meant the best, trust us, so why do they say we are evil?
lightning rod for misdirected criticism - why are they picking on us?
I understand the principle of fighting fire with fire...in firefighting. Burning the fuel in advance of an approaching fire line is very effective.
I don't exactly see how that works here, though. Wouldn't we just wind up with a bigger fire?
"Justice Kagan suggested, correctly, that people don't always know what is stored on their device and what is stored 'in the cloud.'"
And by this, demonstrates her own issue with understanding the implications. Because whether or not the document is in the cloud or the phone is irrelevant, since the whole point of having it in the cloud is so that I can have it in my phone, in seconds, on demand.
So there isn't really a distinction between cloud and phone; not a useful one, anyway.
Maybe the TPP crowd hasn't heard that those with little knowledge are dangerous. The less they give out, the more dangerous we become.
Now eating our own
Apparently, Germany is as much into useless laws as we are.
The intelligence agencies will have no problem at all ordering companies to lie in the contracts and, once leakage is discovered, leaving them to take the contract penalties without support.
The U.S. intelligence agencies will now begin destroying companies in their zeal to pursue surveillance.