Quote from: The Boo Man... on November 25, 2013, 12:50:06 PM
Then why don't you post this on a UK board.

Again, a UK PAPER, American ownership.  American ownership by a man who FUELS and STOKES AMERICAN fires and is in bed with and actively courts the TOP political leadership in the country  An American owned paper whose craven management was CRUEL even by Republicans standards, I would think, who used a teenager and and infant as cheap fodder to sell product!  (It's one thing to out a middle-aged philandering royal and another to PAY COPS FOR PHONE #'S of crime victims and then hack them). 

QuoteAn American owned paper whose craven management was CRUEL even by Republicans standards, I would think,

LOL!

You are so transparent...

Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on November 25, 2013, 01:57:24 PM
Again, a UK PAPER, American ownership.  American ownership by a man who FUELS and STOKES AMERICAN fires and is in bed with and actively courts the TOP political leadership in the country  An American owned paper whose craven management was CRUEL even by Republicans standards, I would think, who used a teenager and and infant as cheap fodder to sell product!  (It's one thing to out a middle-aged philandering royal and another to PAY COPS FOR PHONE #'S of crime victims and then hack them).

I believe Murdoch is Australian.

Quote from: Solar on November 25, 2013, 12:07:12 PM
According to numb nuts, we're censoring.

I THINK I'm figuring it out but it sure seemed like I was being 'shunted' to or 'shunned'
(pick one late last week).  So far this afternoon, I'm seeing my stuff (where I thought it
was susposed to be).

Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on November 25, 2013, 02:46:18 PM
I THINK I'm figuring it out but it sure seemed like I was being 'shunted' to or 'shunned'
(pick one late last week).  So far this afternoon, I'm seeing my stuff (where I thought it
was susposed to be).

We don't censor, nor ban members for being libs.  Please stop saying we do that when we don't.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on November 25, 2013, 01:59:36 PM
LOL!

You are so transparent...

b o should learn from him.   

Quote from: taxed on November 25, 2013, 02:56:47 PM
We don't censor, nor ban members for being libs.  Please stop saying we do that when we don't.

Though we have banned idiots, people that even embarrass our lib members.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on November 25, 2013, 12:51:32 PM
Well so far it hasn't crossed the pond. If it does maybe we will care.

Actually it has!  NY Attorney General and the FBI.  I have zero idea whether either has had any subsequent legs but yes it 'crossed the pond' last year.  Apparently, some of the CITIZENS they hacked were BRITS who were American citzens OR visiting here and were hauled in or 'visited for discussion.   GRANT (the 'good looking' one, can't remember his name) SETTLED for an 'undisclosed' amount from Murdoch and Co.  As did a couple of others.  My guess is the BRITISH trials will help with 'discovery' here.  Whether it is just 'stars' who were hacked like an ex-Beatle (Paul) which I could give a shit about or whether those are pursued or OTHERS of import in public domain, waits to be seen.

Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on November 25, 2013, 03:26:05 PM
Actually it has!  NY Attorney General and the FBI.  I have zero idea whether either has had any subsequent legs but yes it 'crossed the pond' last year.  Apparently, some of the CITIZENS they hacked were BRITS who were American citzens OR visiting here and were hauled in or 'visited for discussion.   GRANT (the 'good looking' one, can't remember his name) SETTLED for an 'undisclosed' amount from Murdoch and Co.  As did a couple of others.  My guess is the BRITISH trials will help with 'discovery' here.  Whether it is just 'stars' who were hacked like an ex-Beatle (Paul) which I could give a shit about or whether those are pursued or OTHERS of import in public domain, waits to be seen.

Awesome. We still don't care.

Crazy persons rant here, impossible to read OP tedious post but his subsequent posts are hilarious  Anyone understand his point or does he even have a relevant conclusion?

Quote from: Mountainshield on November 26, 2013, 04:13:48 AM
Crazy persons rant here, impossible to read OP tedious post but his subsequent posts are hilarious  Anyone understand his point or does he even have a relevant conclusion?

I think the fact that he looked up "Liberalism Mental Disorders" in the DVM, (like looking up gullible in the dictionary because someone told him it wasn't there).
Says a hell of a lot.

Of course it's not there, libs wrote the damned book on mental disorders. Who better to explain abhorrent behavior, than the very people that support it as a party?

Why can't these people do simple math as in the form of critical thinking?

Quote from: Solar on November 25, 2013, 12:56:28 PM
I was talking about the press being dead silent over it.

If the press was silent on the subject, then HOW DID YOU AND I KNOW ABOUT IT?? 

(And they weren't silent and they were PISSED as they should have been as "Intelligence" was actually trying to
find out info ABOUT them and their sources, rather than just one of those grand 'sweeps' that happened to catch their calls in the sweep).

Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on November 26, 2013, 10:52:57 AM
If the press was silent on the subject, then HOW DID YOU AND I KNOW ABOUT IT?? 

(And they weren't silent and they were PISSED as they should have been as "Intelligence" was actually trying to
find out info ABOUT them and their sources, rather than just one of those grand 'sweeps' that happened to catch their calls in the sweep).

STFU already.  All logical Americans are against all of this surveillance already.  Only a total jackass would blabber about political or social issues in some sort of idiot connection.

Quote from: Solar on November 25, 2013, 01:13:07 PM
Nothing circular here, we have the RINO lined up against the wall.

As in "Reasonbleness Is Not an Option"? 

Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on November 26, 2013, 10:52:57 AM
If the press was silent on the subject, then HOW DID YOU AND I KNOW ABOUT IT?? 

(And they weren't silent and they were PISSED as they should have been as "Intelligence" was actually trying to
find out info ABOUT them and their sources, rather than just one of those grand 'sweeps' that happened to catch their calls in the sweep).

And just how long did that story stay in the news?
Now compare that to the constant drumbeat against any former GOP POTUS.