So, if they're targeting everyone 3 hops from a suspected terrorist, and Santa knows the location of Al Queda, then everyone who has received a present from Santa needs to be targeted. Santa is one big hop.
I think techdirt should make the number of votes for each visible on the comments.
...because most readers can't discern what's insightful or funny without then.
I can't believe they said 'XXX hits'. In my paraphrasing, I changed it to "'x' hits", since they were talking about a number.
Well, if he's holding a hornets nest, then obviously the people are the hornets. Some may sting you and some may not. He claims it is hard to tell the bad hornets from the good hornets without more metadata. Alas, all he's doing is gripping the nest tighter and tighter, suffocating us all.
The corporation / worker model doesn't work; both players exist at a loss. A corporation cannot pay the worker more than it sells. A worker cannot pay the corporation more than he is paid. After taxes from every angle, there's nothing left to talk about.
Then what are triple exclamation marks for!!!
Hated how popular news, and I thought the TD article, only mentioned if there's a possible connection to a possible terrorist. No, remember it's more like a possible connection to a possible connection to a possible connection to possible terrorist.
"...banning these nonlethal weapons leaves officers employed by schools with few options when the use of force is necessary."
That's nonsense implying a problem maintaining in the past when there were fewer weapons to choose from? Without getting in history, though, anybody working next to mental health is trained in takedowns. That includes 4'9" 105 lbs. females. Being unarmed rather places the majority of risk (still being, arguably, not much) on the staff members, which society should see as acceptible and noble, since staff risks themselves to protect the children.
I'd rather wear a sword in public. I don't have that option.
That is the ultimate fabrication for when your wife asks "Why is Midget_Porn_2013.avi on the flash drive?"
The quote is "fearing for his safety".
That should be read "fearing for the perpetrator's safety". The cops are treated as plural in that paragraph, so if it meant the cops, it would have read "fearing for their safety".
I don't see "fear for my safety" in the article.
Someone running around the streets with his hands cuffed behind his back might hurt himself, so obviously you tase him in the face for his safety.
So, we can suggest that JCVD's stunt is worth watching... but only once. It has no replayability. That should be a factor against it.
I propose "literally, in the strictest sense."
Except, literally now means figuratively.
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/22/according_to_the_dictionary_literally_now_also_means_figuratively_newscred/
Webster?s second definition of literally is, ?in effect; virtually.?
Because nobody spoofs MAC addresses? You want to prove it came from my secular PC, I'm going to argue that my NIC's physical identity does not agree with what was reported.
...if I had a secular PC.
I cannot yet handle any positive spin regarding SimCity [2013].
Re:
666