Another intelligent post....Quote:
Originally posted by Killar_Boy
I think it is because of the twin tower bombings and that is why they have changed the our rights and that is why they are so strict!!
What are you like 10 years old?
Printable View
Another intelligent post....Quote:
Originally posted by Killar_Boy
I think it is because of the twin tower bombings and that is why they have changed the our rights and that is why they are so strict!!
What are you like 10 years old?
KorpDeath, we should 'virtually' kick his ass. :D
Laughable, purely laughable. Shmoo, you don't need to virtually do anything. I mean Killar_Boy already has the Ebonics keyboard upgrade, what more could you possibly do to him????
HAHAHAHAHA!!! I love it.
I'm tearing up over here..
Must be a conspiracy.
I think I'll write a book
about and get rich.
"Overzealous Prosecutor Takes Bribe"
or
"Hillary Killed OJs Wife"
:cool:
Ok. What planet are we on? Reality is that due to the Sept 11th bombing things are more sensitive. That said however most of the attention is still on the airports and such. The government still does not perceive "cyber terrorism" as a possibility. A topic for another thread at another time.Quote:
Originally posted by Killar_Boy
I think it is because of the twin tower bombings and that is why they have changed the our rights and that is why they are so strict!!
If you took the time to READ the article (that is to put letters into words, words into concepts, concepts into ideas) you'd notice a glaring fact: The incident in question happened in AUGUST. Clue alert: this was PRIOR (that means before) the Twin Tower destruction.
If you are going to comment on a facet of society, be aware of the facts.
lmao, what a dumbass...lol
Well, I was going to give Shmoo some positive points for this post but damn, JP limits how many I'm allowed to give out. Bah!
Although the article is dated (from late summer 2001) it does show how a misrepresentation on everyone's part can present an image. It is a sad state that our media is no longer a non-partial observer to events of the world but rather an instrusive participant that often changes the environment that they are supposed to just report on.
Lesson to be learned: take everything with a grain of salt since the TRUTH has many sides.
Man that is crazy.
They are simply just making an example of this case.
Govement:"look at this man; he commited a terroist act and now he will pay!!! ahahahaha"
The common american:
"wtf! all he was doing was reporting a flaw he found. Good for him. Don't punish him."
Government: "SHUT UP! we do what we want"
I feel like this is akin to the JP/Meinel/GRC/Attrition/GRCsucks stuff. Any report you read will be biased one way or the other, and nobody knows the whole truth, and both sides are exaggerating.
I find it easy to believe both that the company might be attacking for no good reason, and/or that the accused might have done a little bit of extra exploring.