Oooops...

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Adak

Adak #2
On Benghazi:

I was duped as well as CBS and the reporter. I guess Davies wanted to be a "big shot" for awhile, and made up the story quite well.

Unfortunately, we STILL can't speak to the actual survivors of the attack at the Consulate in Benghazi, by Obama's decree!

What a sorry state for getting the truth out - which would make Obama look like a stupid ass, of course. That's WHY we have the shut up decree in place. If his popularity dropped any lower, we'd have to use negative numbers - and mid-term elections are coming up in 2014.

I bet you can't prove this, mr "getting the truth out".

Of course, you ALREADY believe the President looks like a stupid ass, so, whatever you find will only reinforce your already made up and closed mind. Your posts are simple and boring.

[Lamplighter]

How's this for 'in your face' jurisprudence...

Business Insider
Brett LoGiurato
Dec. 20, 2013

Judge Completely Trolls Justice Scalia In Striking Down Utah's Gay Marriage Ban

When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia handed down a scathing dissent
in United States v. Windsor
— the case in which the high court deemed the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional —
he warned of the domino effect it would have on state bans on gay marriage.

Scalia warned that the Supreme Court's reasoning that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act
— which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples —
could be used to strike down state laws banning same-sex marriage.

Scalia, who's notoriously anti-gay marriage, was saying this was a bad thing. In an interesting twist,
Utah's Judge Shelby quoted Scalia's negative prophecy in his pro-gay marriage opinion.

Shelby then wrote that he "agreed" with that part of Scalia's opinion, and offered his response.
Though Scalia meant it as some kind of dire warning,
Shelby cited the Supreme Court's decision as a reason to overturn Utah's law:

Shelby also cited Scalia's dissent in 2003's Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark case
in which the Supreme Court ruled that laws banning sodomy were unconstitutional:

[Lamplighter]

Washington Post
Andrea Peterson
December 20,2013

This FBI agent had a boneheaded plan to copyright a secret interrogation manual

<snip>The author of a sensitive FBI interrogation manual submitted the document for copyright protection
-- in the process, making it available to anyone with a card for the Library of Congress to read.<snip>

First is that the American Civil Liberties Union fought a legal battle with the FBI over access to documents just like this
… But the copy they released to the ACLU was heavily redacted --
unlike the 70-plus page version of the manual Baumann reviewed at the Library of Congress.
<snip> For instance, the full version includes a sentence that says
the manual is intended for the FBI's "clean" teams
-- the investigators charged with collecting information for use in federal prosecutions.
"That raises the question of whether teams collecting information that's not for use in federal courts
would have to follow the manual's (already permissive) guidelines at all," says Baumann.

And second, the manual almost certainly shouldn't even qualify for a copyright because it is a government work.
Anything "prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government
as part of that person's official duties" is not subject to copyright in the United States.
And yet, according to Baumann, the author of the manual deposited a version
of the interrogation manual dated 2008 with the U.S. Copyright Office in 2010.

[Griff]

I feel like I've read this story before.

[Lamplighter]

I feel like I've read this story before.

Griff, what a great reference !

... In the Penal Colony -> "The Colony" -> GitMo

This end of video is not quite accurate, but so what...

[Lamplighter]

Scientists abandon highly publicized claim about cosmic find
Sacramento Bee = MALCOLM RITTER - 01/30/2015

Scientists who made headlines last March by announcing that they hadd found
long-sought evidence about the early universe are now abandoning that claim.
New data show that their cosmic observations no longer back up that conclusion, they say.

The original announcement caused a sensation because it appeared to show evidence that
the universe ballooned rapidly a split-second after its birth, in what scientist call cosmic inflation.
That idea had been widely believed, but researchers had hoped to bolster it
by finding a particular trait in light left over from the very early universe.

This article doesn’t say so, but what seems to be the situation is that
“dust” in this particular region of the universe (sky) gives off infrared radiation
at 7 distinct wavelengths. These astronomers (the Biceps group) were collecting data
at only 1 of these 7 wavelengths. They did not have access to the data for the other 6.

The initial results were publicly challenged by the astronomers who first described the 7 wavelengths.
When these astronomers eventually shared all of their data, both groups came to this
agreement that the Biceps data is due to cosmic dust.

Oh well, so they will now start playing nicely with one another
and working together to gather additional data.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Unfortunately this reporter could only get an abbreviated telephone interview with Brian Keating of the University of California, San Diego, a member of the BICEP2 team. He and the rest of the team are busy moving their offices and equipment to the brand new Koch Brothers Science Research campus.