Utopia Talk / Politics / More talk about lying whores

Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 19 12:01:12 Rugian, with due respect seb is not saying we should believe the woman without evidence. He is explicitly saying we should ”examine it”. I am 100% sure that we do ”examine it” then seb will find something he thinks is evidence. And so is seb. Well, we will see, between finding something and knowing how low seb bars for ”evidence” goes, I like the odds :-)
Delude Member	Wed Sep 19 12:03:01 I like my title better but; So it wasn't kavanaugh's other flaws but a woman's complaint that triggered you? Go on.
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 19 12:09:45 Nim, like you say it'd be one thing if there was any evidence to gather.
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 19 12:10:14 "When it comes to lifetime appointments to such a position it warrants to be reviewed and considered." If by "reviewed and considered" you mean "take an automatic listen and believe attitude regarding an ancient and unverifiable claim, cuz #meToo."
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 19 12:11:21 But it's not like the people saying "men need to shut up and stand up" are really waiting on any evidence to inform their opinions anyway.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 19 12:15:11 I think seb will find something he thinks is evidence enough to validate what all liberals feared in "another conservative SC judge gonna take muh womens rights" turned out to be a groper. This would be the greatest liberal victory since all those anti gay republicans and pastors turned out to be gay and using meth.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 12:15:28 Nim: I don't think we need to examine it to conclude he's unfit for office. There's plenty of evidence for that already. Rugian: How about his statement to sen Hatch that he definitively did not even attend the party where the sexual assault occurred, despite the party not bring specified? It's pretty close to: "Your honour, I could not have left fingerprints for I wore gloves when I definitely didn't stab the victim". Not enough to convict of course, but clearly one way or another he's not being truthful. I'm sure you can find another partisan hack that doesn't stink.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 19 12:18:51 But is also a bit fishy, that she just so happened to be a professor in _psychology_. First of all we know with 99.99% certainty that she is NOT a Trumps supporter. Just by adding her gender to her profession. Secondly, her profession actually makes her an expert in human psychology as told from among other trauma. She may actually be very informed about the stories and emotions of sexual trauma victims. If she tells her story, I bet it will be, very compelling :)
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 12:20:36 Rugian: To answer your question in the other thread: The point is "he said she said", not the 36 years ago. And frankly given what he said to hatch, that shows the merit of it being considered. I'd err on the side of caution - better not to take even a small risk of appointing him. Find a better candidate. The point of Senate hearings is to ensure you've picked the best candidate, not merely reject only those that can be proved criminal.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 19 12:24:31 >>I don't think we need to examine it to conclude he's unfit for office. There's plenty of evidence for that already.<< Really? You don't say? "I think seb will find something he thinks is evidence enough to validate what all liberals feared in "another conservative SC judge gonna take muh womens rights" turned out to be a groper. This would be the greatest liberal victory since all those anti gay republicans and pastors turned out to be gay and using meth." I can read minds :)
The Children Member	Wed Sep 19 12:24:45 1 WORD BITCHES: MGTOW Thats M_G_T_O_W no more fuckin drama. no more fuckin sleepless nights. no more fuckin brain overload.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 19 12:26:18 Also, btw this is a bit of a tangent, but Delude Member Wed Sep 19 12:03:01 I like my title better but; Is that^ the correct usage of a semi colon? Asking for a friend.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 19 12:29:02 "no more fuckin drama. no more fuckin sleepless nights. no more fuckin brain overload." No more pussy. Have you ever had pussy? Once you have pussy, either you love it or you are gay. And if you love it you will do anything, climb mountains, slay dragons, anything to get more of it.
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 19 12:32:12 Seb, Kavanaugh is perfectly qualified. WTF is with the unfitness claims? "How about his statement to sen Hatch that he definitively did not even attend the party where the sexual assault occurred despite the party not bring specified?" I think you're making a bigger deal about off the record paraphrasing than is warranted. Why don't you just come out and say that you just don't want Kavanaugh on SCOTUS because you really love Rowe v Wade? I'd appreciate the honesty at least.
The Children Member	Wed Sep 19 12:33:53 gaymatzo ur the one 2 talk about pussy when ur suckin on shlongs every friday night. worse, u probably let ur wife suck it while u watch like a shitty weak cuckolds. u dumb fuck. MGTOW does not mean that u never get pussy no more. it just means u never commit to a pussy, u pathetic gaychild.
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 19 12:34:21 Nim, Yep, you called it. "Is that^ the correct usage of a semi colon? Asking for a friend." It's not. You shouldn't need to worry about your English though; it's perfectly fine. Unlike some other people on here (cough jergul cough)
The Children Member	Wed Sep 19 12:40:33 coz why commit to a cheatin lyin unfaithfull whore. sure not every woman is like that blah blah bla... heard it all before. the problem is like 90% of women are like that. so ur chance of encounterin such an unfaithfull dishonest manipulatin bitch is like 90%. fuck that shit. u lose half ur shit over a cheatin bitch when u divorce. loyalty died 200 years ago. people dunt stay untill they get old no more. she will leave ur ass and take half ur shit plus u end up payin alimony 4 the rest of ur pathetic stinkin life. just look at history. thousands of examples. david hasselhoff practically banktrupt over this bullshit. why does his ex need 100k 2 raise his children. WHY. WHYYYYY!!!! why cant they eat instant ramen and grow up like the rest of us. she doesnt need 100k every fuckin month. fuck that shit.
The Children Member	Wed Sep 19 12:43:13 now i aint sayin he such a great guy and all. he sure as hell tried 2 get into pamela andersons panties when they were shootin baywatch. he sure as fuck was some dirty piece of shit that was starin endless at those melons from his many female coworkers... but why does his stinkin ex need 100k to raise his stinkin useless children? explain that 2 the rest of us. i ate instant ramen growin up. if they dunt like ramen, they can go eat macaroni with cheese. fuck them.
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 19 12:47:01 TC definitely blew up a relationship after she complained he was spending all of his time watching videos of PS4 games being played. That's rough, man.
Aeros Member	Wed Sep 19 12:47:44 Taking a skeptical stance to accusations is not an endorsement of rape delude. Any accusation of anything needs to be treated skeptically. Be it Stacy saying brad raped her in the locker room, or Mike saying Joe stole his quesadilla out of the office fridge. Humans need to be a left to trust each other for society to function. Part of this trust is to believe everyone follows the rules, and punishing harshly those who break the rules. The fact that punishment, particularly for sex crimes, is so harsh makes necessary the burden of proof being upon the accuser, not the accused. Nobody should be forced to argue the negative. That they DIDNT do something. It needs to be shown that they DID. If we don't preserve this mentality then there is no longer any trust and society cannot function. We already see this with male managers refusing to mentor women, and male professors refusing to tutor their female students. There is a growing breakdown of trust between men and women, and it is precisely because #metoo has made the accusation all that is necessary to carry out the social punishments. So I am not "implying" that #metoo is a self serving power grab that is being pushed by liars out to run a witch hunt I am explicitly saying that is what it is.
Paramount Member	Wed Sep 19 12:53:50 ”she will leave ur ass and take half ur shit” Yeah, she takes half your moneys and then she marries a new man. And if she does marry, does she really need half of your moneys? She can live off her new man instead, and not live off YOUR moneys.
Paramount Member	Wed Sep 19 12:55:31 *of or off
Dukhat Member	Wed Sep 19 15:08:00 Why does it have to be all or nothing? I believe most of the accusations because it is incredibly hard for the women and their lives are definitively worse afterwards. Why would anyone subject them to constant public bullying if the accusations aren't true? All these women face constant death threats by cuckservative men. A lot of cuckservatives seem to think that these women's lives are better or something afterwards and that billionaire SJW's shower them with money and praise. Nothing could be further from the truth. Now there is also room for interpretation too. Like what happened to Aziz Ansari was revenge porn and unfair and most people believe this. Most of the cases usually have differing degrees of assault in the accusation. But what Kavanaugh is being accused of is not simple grab ass but actual assault which is very serious. We'll never know for sure if it's true but from a legal standpoint; the facts do warrant further investigation. Here's conservative Max Boot's comments: "-- Conservative columnist Max Boot, who has been supportive of Kavanaugh, is calling on Republicans to delay the vote. “Her story is amply documented: She told it in couples therapy all the way back in 2012, long before Kavanaugh’s nomination, and the therapist’s notes reflect that, even though they don’t mention Kavanaugh by name,” Boot writes in today's paper. “She even passed a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent in August. That may not be admissible in a court of law, but it has already been admitted into the court of public opinion. That makes Ford a credible witness and renders inadequate the denial issued by Kavanaugh last week … If Republicans try to muscle Kavanaugh’s nomination through now, without any further investigation, they will be guilty of gross deflection of their duty to ‘advise and consent.’” ******************************** What's weird is all these poor white men so scared of the #metoo movement. Most of the people taken down are rich assholes who thought they were above the law. These are people who have walked all over you your entire lives and yet by throwing in some catch words and some exaggerated anecdotes; you're also suddenly in their corner. Deep down you know you've been cucked which is why you try so hard to call other people "cucks" and project.
hood Member	Wed Sep 19 15:38:52 "Kavanaugh is perfectly qualified. WTF is with the unfitness claims?" I think any advocate for NSA blanket spying on US citizens is a pretty automatic "not fit" binning. I mean, he legit doesn't understand law at that point.
kargen Member	Wed Sep 19 15:49:48 "The point of Senate hearings is to ensure you've picked the best candidate, not merely reject only those that can be proved criminal." No it isn't. Best candidate has nothing to do with it or they would have had hearings for multiple people instead of the one nominee. THe process for finding the best candidate happens before the president submits the nomination. The Senate then looks at the nominee and decides is he qualified or not. Kavanaugh has gone through a number of very thorough background checks and has been vetted by the FBI a few times. There has been nothing found in any off the extensive background checks nor in the two days of questioning that in any way begins to disqualify the nomination. If anyone had evidence to the contrary it should have been provided long ago.
The Sentinel Member	Wed Sep 19 15:52:41 Rugian is right. This happened too long ago and all catholic priests should be free and clear of any scrutiny.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 19 16:23:31 Ruggy Do you want you goat back? I got it.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 16:44:37 Nim: Your insinuation is that I would say he's a sex pest. Actually I think the whole stolen emails thing is enough in and of itself (which has nothing to do with sex pests). It's sad you've let your absurd crusade to make the world safe for rapists has got to the point you will now ignore people blatantly lying and engaging in professional malefesance just because in a different part of their life they are all being accused of sexual assault.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 16:46:04 Rugian: I don't think someone who fishes around for stolen emails, acts on them, does not report them, and then lies about them has the upstanding character you should look for in a senior justice.
American Democrat Member	Wed Sep 19 16:47:04 "No it isn't. Best candidate has nothing to do with it or they would have had hearings for multiple people instead of the one nominee. " You've probably should review Appointment and confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States then.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 16:49:35 Nim: "ut is also a bit fishy, that she just so happened to be a professor in _psychology_. First of all we know with 99.99% certainty that she is NOT a Trumps supporter. Just by adding her gender to her profession. Secondly, her profession actually makes her an expert in human psychology as told from among other trauma. She may actually be very informed about the stories and emotions of sexual trauma victims. If she tells her story, I bet it will be, very compelling :)" Break out the tin foil hats. Nim will be ranting about sheeple, chemtrails and false flags in a minute.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 16:59:05 Rugian: "I think you're making a bigger deal about off the record paraphrasing than is warranted." Precise use of language is the hallmark of a senior justice. If the dude is, like for example Nim and Hood here, incapeable of saying what they mean, that's incompetence when it comes to law. If in an interview on his suitability he's incapable of not saying something that has the meaning he intended to convey, really not fit for the job. I think the US approach to having politicians directly appoint judges is a legal and democratic abomination. The fact that your case law hinges on whether or not the ruling party can engineer a party hack to be appointed to your judiciary is a fucking joke. it's not just roe versus wade, it's very clear (this being the most egregious case) that to some degree most of your most senior "indepenent" judges owe a degree of fealty to a political faction. That's absurd. But Kavanaugh looks to be next level on this point. You'd be absurd to appoint him. The guy didn't even have the integrity to report to appropriate authorites that he was in receipt of stolen information. He did not pass over the evidence. He appears to have used it instead. You want to put a man who deliberately did not report a crime into a position of legal authority? but it's ok because he's got the right qualifications? Are you nuts? Put it another way, suppose you discovered that he had a friend who he knew had committed fraud, but had chosen not to report it. And that friend had bought him a gift using the stolen property. There would be no question at all, even if he was not party to the crimes commission, that this man is unfit to be the highest judge in the land. The problem is you fucktards in the US have normalised corrupt practices in your politics, most egregiously the Republicans, because fundamentally you don't think either side are legitimate holders of power.
Seb Member	Wed Sep 19 16:59:45
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Sep 19 18:33:12 Congress had done everything they needed to do to approve Kavanagh except the committee vote and the Senate vote. All other procedures were done and finished. Now comes this woman from the distant past with a murky claim about being touched 36 years ago. Congress has bent over backward to accommodate her and she comes up with a demand that Congress is not able to comply with. As soon as the FBI said that they do not investigate claims such as hers, she demands that the FBI investigate her claim even though she does not know exactly when or where the party was. Oh, and her only witness said it never happened. That leaves me with just one question. Just exactly how stupid are you liberals? Waiting...
American Democrat Member	Wed Sep 19 18:36:35 "As soon as the FBI said that they do not investigate claims such as hers," You're not a very smart person. FBI investigated Anita Hill's claims in 72 hours once ordered.
jergul large member	Wed Sep 19 18:41:30 http://www...ay-area-professors-accusation/
jergul large member	Wed Sep 19 18:43:25 We are as stupid as Ivanka Trump?
werewolf dictator Member	Wed Sep 19 18:54:46 developments.. third guy accused to be at "party" [of four other people.. who all in room according to therapist notes that are somehow now wrong] says he don't know anything about "party" anti-trumper cristina king miranda says she remembers rumor buzz at ford's high school in days afterwards about kavanaugh "assault".. nbc and other msm report story and confirm king miranda attended there and then she attends brown etc.. people point out that ford told nobody for decades and incident supposedly happened in summer.. king miranda ends up deleting both twitter and facebook accounts.. i guess in just that single high school there is at least one anti-trumper who is either political slanderer or has problem of recovering false memories after 30+ years
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Sep 19 18:57:05 Beats me. Go ask the FBI. All I know is what they said a day or two ago.
kargen Member	Wed Sep 19 20:01:46 "You're not a very smart person. FBI investigated Anita Hill's claims in 72 hours once ordered." Anita Hill claimed it happened while they were working for the federal government in a federal government building. That gives the FBI jurisdiction. Ford is claiming it happened in a house at a party and that means jurisdiction is the local department.
American Democrat Member	Wed Sep 19 20:09:34 The FBI can still investigate genius.
kargen Member	Wed Sep 19 21:59:15 The FBI in a local crime can be asked by the local department to assist if the local department feels they lack the resources to complete an investigation. Nothing about this is something the FBI would be involved in unless asked to do so by local authorities. That being said what is there to investigate? There is no crime scene. There is no timeline. There is no evidence to be examined. All potential witnesses are known and can testify before a Senate committee. There is nothing for the FBI to do here.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Sep 19 22:26:58 FBI does background checks, they don't need a crime scene. New information is out there, the background check could be furthered if authorized by the moron child president... who thinks the FBI is corrupt. "All potential witnesses are known and can testify before a Senate committee" if called by the R-controlled committee... who will not do so, they asked the 2 principals & that's it
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Sep 19 22:28:42 ...and all questioning will be to score political points rather than a goal of determining the facts
kargen Member	Wed Sep 19 22:38:59 They did the background check and added the letter to the report. To bad the letter wasn't submitted when the active background check and hearings were taking place. Ford said there was three people in the room. All three people are known. Two have been asked to speak before the Senate committee. "...and all questioning will be to score political points rather than a goal of determining the facts" yep, nothing has changed there and everybody in the room that gets the chance will do or say something for the sole purpose of helping their career. That is why I agreed with you that these things shouldn't be televised, but the press would scream about transparency if they couldn't televise it.
Dukhat Member	Wed Sep 19 23:15:45 No, the FBI can investigate. They need the White House's permission as it goes into the personnel file on Kavanaugh. Surprise, surprise; Trump probably won't allow it.
Dukhat Member	Wed Sep 19 23:18:16 A sex-assault victim in the same room with her attackeris not warranted especially when the reason is so 11 out-of-touch old white guys on the Senate Judiciary committee can harass her and try some "gotcha" questions. These guys know what up. They had that signed 65-women letter ready right away ... only when the same women were asked about it later; some had no idea what it was for and someone would take back their signature given what they now know. Republicans hope pretending to give the accuser a forum is enough to rush their shithead nominee through. It just might be at this point but the rest of the world can see it for what it is.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Sep 20 00:00:10 I guess the liberals since my earlier post has answered my question. Pretty damned stupid.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Sep 20 00:00:45 these were questions Kavanaugh recommended for Bill Clinton, so hard to feel bad for the guy " If Monica Lewinksy says: ... you inserted a cigar into her vagina while you were in the Oval Office area, would she be lying? ... that on several occasions in the Oval Office area, you used your fingers to stimulate her vagina and bring her to orgasm, would she be lying? ... that she gave you oral sex on nine occasions in the Oval Office area, would she by lying? ... that you ejaculated into her mouth on two occasions in the Oval Office area, would she be lying? "
Aeros Member	Thu Sep 20 00:29:07 What exactly is there for the FBI to investigate? How on earth can they investigate teenagers drunkenly groping each other four decades ago? Never mind that this falls firmly into "not their job". The responsible agency for investigating this allegation is the Montgomery County Police Department. Trying to say the FBI needs to get involved is a canard.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 00:34:23 Background checks are not the FBIs job?
Y2A Member	Thu Sep 20 00:40:14 Lol http://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna911111 "Many of us heard a buzz about it indirectly with few specific details."
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Sep 20 01:14:26 Seb I will gladly make the world safer for rapist against scumbags like you. Scumbags like will make the world unsafer for everyone. I am not taking sides unlike a liberal hack like yourself, I am merely here to enjoy the shitshow and make gossip.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 02:13:17 Nim: You have monomania about your pet issues to the point you can't separate them anymore. Hence you conflate the fact the guy benefited and had evidence of a crime (hacking) and did not report it which should flat out remove anyone from consideration as a judge; and the sexual assault issue. The logic appears to be "he is accused of sexual assault, ergo he is innocent of everything else".
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 02:24:55 Aeros: You'd have more credibility if you weren't so obviously partisan. The accusation is not that they were drunkenly groping each other. One person was drunkenly groping the other. The accused does not claim it happened but was consensual, he says it didn't happen period. So why are you trying to downplay the nature and seriousness of the assault rather than the likelihood it took place? What the FBI can do is interview, conduct checks etc. They can do a better job at obtaining a sensitive overview of the credibility of the witnesses based on whatever corroborating facts can be found. Whether that's the right approach I don't know. But again, the question isn't "can the fbi secure a conviction". Frankly I'm amazed this guy is still being considered on the basis of what he admits to. Roll on the 11 person court.
kargen Member	Thu Sep 20 02:45:54 "these were questions Kavanaugh recommended for Bill Clinton, so hard to feel bad for the guy" And should Ford show up on Monday they can question her then ask Kavanaugh to respond. "Background checks are not the FBIs job?" Yes they are. In fact they have already done six background checks on Kavanaugh. One of them was ongoing while Feinstein was sitting on the letter. During that background check would have been the time to submit it to the FBI. "Many of us heard a buzz about it indirectly with few specific details." That is a crock of shit. Ford claims to have told no one for several years. The party was in the summer so they wouldn't have been in school.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Sep 20 04:09:20 >>You have monomania about your pet issues to the point you can't separate them anymore.<< There is nothing to separate. You accept anything as evidence that validates your values. You are a dogmatic nutbag. "he is accused of sexual assault, ergo he is innocent of everything else". I wouldn't know of his guilt in anything else, I don't really care enough to find out so I will find out that ah typical seb kind of ordeal. I am just observing classical seb being classical seb. There is no plausible scenario where communist seb was going to like a conservative SC Judge nominee. You are one of the biggest hacks here. That is all.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Sep 20 04:20:38 If she told no one for several years then when did she suppress the groping? Was it right after she told someone several years later? Or was it right before she remembered the groping three decades later when in therapy?
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 04:37:13 Nim: "There is no plausible scenario where communist seb was going to like a conservative SC Judge" Communist. Lol. You've lost the plot Nim. Take a look at yourself.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 04:38:02 wow, that's ... epic. Mod want to clean that up?
delude Member	Thu Sep 20 05:16:53 "The FBI in a local crime can be asked by the local department to assist if the local department feels they lack the resources to complete an investigation. Nothing about this is something the FBI would be involved in unless asked to do so by local authorities. " Lack of resources are not a prerequisite. FBI can investigate at the request of the White House. This involves a current Federal Judge, which by default would be an FBI investigation. The background can still be conducted, despite it being finished, it can be reopened. "That being said what is there to investigate? There is no crime scene. There is no timeline. There is no evidence to be examined. All potential witnesses are known and can testify before a Senate committee. There is nothing for the FBI to do here." Very little, that is no doubt. But still have witnesses to piece together, involves other classmates of hers, and his. Which coincidentally be more focused as a background check more so than a crime. But I understand if you don't fully understand how investigations work because it's painfully clear that you are ignorant on this topic judging by your previous statements.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Sep 20 06:40:33 "Communist. Lol. You've lost the plot Nim." There is no "plot". I am telling you I am not going to dive into the background of this case, just to find out that you sebbed it up. My prediction was that, you disliked the guy, even prior to this. Which you did. If anything comes of what he did as a 16 year old, which given your low bar for "evidence" there will, that would only serve to validate your "fears" from the get go. I. Don't. Actually. Care. One way or another about this. I am in for the ride where ever it takes me. Hypocrite a la anti gay republicans or butt hurt liberals. BUTTHURT to the left and BUTTHURT to the right, BUTTHURT as far as the eyes can see. I am content.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 06:51:27 Seb: "wow, that's ... epic. Mod want to clean that up?" Smertphone posting is cancer.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 07:02:46 Nim: If you are calling me a communist, you really haven't being paying attention. "Lost the plot" is an idiom meaning, broadly, to mean you have gone crazy. Lost your marbles. Round the bend (so far you can't touch it with a barge pole). "My prediction was that, you disliked the guy, even prior to this." No, your prediction, very clearly, is that I would seize on the flimsiest piece of trivia in any investigation of his alleged sexual assault and claim it was evidence of guilt. To quote you directly: "He is explicitly saying we should ”examine it”. I am 100% sure that we do ”examine it” then seb will find something he thinks is evidence." That's pretty unambiguous, how stupid do you think people are Nim? I'm saying actually, we shouldn't have any need to even examine this issue to determine whether he is fit as frankly, if you have even the slightest bit of sense, he's already admitted to things that out to bar him from being considered. I dislike the guy because he's a candidate to be a judge, and he not only failed to report a crime he was aware of, he actively benefited from it (and possibly encouraged it). This is putting your party above the law. How can you possibly be a judge when you have shown you will put your parties interest above the law? Frankly, I don't even think anyone who pays in cash to secure a "discount" for handywork should be a senior judge. It speaks to honesty and integrity vs turning a blind eye to criminality. But to do so for party benefit is a huge red flag when it is a political appointment to a post that is supposed to be impartial. He's stone cold admitted to behaviour that shows he is prepared to set aside the law in favour of his party. This is a fundamental role in society - it shouldn't be a political appointment anyway, the Americans have fucked that one up royally as it is - but that makes it all the more important that candidates be impeccable in putting the law above all else. Whatever his mastery of the law, he's demonstrated (and admitted to) the wrong attitude, behaviours and principles.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 07:03:57 jergul: I think my phone might have cancer. I really need to find some time to go and figure out a decent replacement. My problem is I'm a max minner on these things. I probably need to learn when it's not worth my time and just fucking buy something.
hood Member	Thu Sep 20 07:24:00 Seb: do you care about camera? If not, get a Nokia. If you do, I don't have any cheap but quality recommendations at the moment.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 09:32:24 I read alot (including the newspaper via pressreader) so tend to like a big screen. Decent camera (doesn't need to be super duper) is good too - use it to snap notes, and walls full of post it notes. I think I was vaguely sold in an HTC phone.
hood Member	Thu Sep 20 09:44:00 Check out Nokia. Something in the 6-7 range (model #) might work pretty well for you.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Sep 20 10:28:59 Make sure you only consider phones made by africans and indigenous women seb. Otherwise you are a racist. Fight the patriarchy!!!
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 10:40:09 Huawei p20 looks nice. I would get that if I was looking to replace my p8.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Sep 20 10:41:30 Why dont you buy a russian phone jergul? I mean you love them and russians are good at making things right?
Forwyn Member	Thu Sep 20 10:56:06 lol @ the retards ITT whining about the FBI "investigating". Best they can do with 40 year old memories is potentially place them at the same location. The only witness denies the event taking place.
Delude Member	Thu Sep 20 11:04:23 Coming from a poster who thinks project veritas is credible.
hood Member	Thu Sep 20 11:12:09 "Huawei p20 looks nice." If you're a fan of Chinese spyware, sure. And that's established fact, not fearmongering. Htc is fairly bland, but acceptable.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 11:34:30 Hood Here is a tinfoil hat. You are now protected!
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 11:34:49 http://eu....huawei-zte-congress/356095002/
Dukhat Member	Thu Sep 20 11:43:42 HTC is old. Even an old note 4 would do well for Seb. A newer note would be better given what it seems like is his work flow. A pixel 2xl is also nice but lacks storage. An LG v30 is also a nice value fun with a good screen. I have a strong preference for OLED phones because you can have a fully black page and then white text on it for minimal eye glare.
Dukhat Member	Thu Sep 20 11:46:50 @Forwyn - Wrong again. Only witness who is also possibly a co-assaulter now says he has no recollection. This is a pretty credible accusation but republicans are still stuck in the past. While I don't agree with the excesses of metoo, you can't deny it's also outed a lot of shithead asshole serial rapists and assaulters. The facts of this case line up with a credible case and are corroborated by other individuals.
hood Member	Thu Sep 20 12:35:58 jergul, Huawei phones have literally been found to have spyware on them. There's no tinfoil needed. https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/11/15/security-firm-reportedly-finds-spyware-on-chinese-android-phones-including-blu-devices-sold-in-the-us/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/chinese-company-installed-secret-backdoor-on-hundreds-of-thousands-of-phones/ etc. etc.
Forwyn Member	Thu Sep 20 12:42:28 "Coming from a poster who thinks project veritas is credible." Coming from a poster who ignores that the raw footage has led to the oustings of two dem operatives, two NPR execs, and the total collapse of ACORN. Feel free to ignore his editorialized initial releases, but to deny their impact and efficacy is naive. "who is also possibly a co-assaulter" Only if the "victim" is now changing her story to include two perps instead of one. "This is a pretty credible accusation" Not really. There is zero corroborating evidence; as I said, best you can hope for is to put them at the same place. Witness testimony is unreliable for this; ask yourself if you remember all of the guests from a drunken party you remembered 5,10 years ago; now ask if you remember 2-3 people slipping away to a bedroom. Now make it 40 years. The claim is laughably unprovable, even for the FBI.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 13:21:39 Dukhat: I loved the notes, had a 2 and a 3, but too expensive to be good vfm, and I think I'll go for a new one Vs second hand. A note 4 would be older than this nexus 6! Jergul: Huwawi p20 was the one I was thinking of, not HTC. But yeah, hoods right. We've been warned off them. By people who would know. Forwyn: Again, are we asking them to prove beyond all reasonable doubt or assess witnesses and leave the senate to decide on the Ballance of probabilities?
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 13:41:39 Seb Hood is not correct. The security concerns are conjecture. We know China's goverment is fond of information control. We know Chinese companies have to care what China's government thinks. Therefore it is entirely possible that at some future date, Chinese phones will provide data to the chinese regime. Which is fair enough, particularly if you have a government job (boy would you be the fool if there ever was a security event). Norwegian cell-phone infrastructure is supplied by Huawei, so I guess it would be best not to even use a cell-phone in this country from a pre-cautionary perspective :). For actual practical security: I use a vpn and an f-secure security package for my cell-phone.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 14:26:54 Jergul: That's not enough given what might be the issue at the chip level. Put it this way, that's exactly what a corporate provider would do in their architecture anyway, so if that solved the issue we wouldn't be having this conversation. Dunno about infrastructure - I assume there's more monitoring of national infrastructure by security services? Anyway, given next Friday is my last day i don't think personal use of a huwawi is problematic.
hood Member	Thu Sep 20 14:30:36 "Hood is not correct. The security concerns are conjecture." No. They had, unequivocally, spyware on their phones that sent data back to Chinese servers. Please note I didn't implicate the Chinese government, which is what you seem to be fixated on. If you're alright with that, but Huawei. If you like at least a veil of privacy, buy from a company that hasn't explicitly squirreled your data away to their servers. Government concerns are just future (or unbeknownst current) conjecture/worries.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 15:09:32 Seb I was pointing to practical security (how users screw up and compromise their data). Vpn and a security package plugs a lot of holes. It will also catch aps and some os functions doing spyware stuff. Hood That some phone model was bundled with something that sent data to servers? I am sure that happened. I always do the due dilligence thing on new stuff. I do not even remember if I initially uninstalled stuff for that reason. Does it happen now? It seems exactly the kind of stuff huawei would not be doing these days.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 15:10:10 Sorry that I misunderstood what you meant.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 17:08:26 Hood and I might be talking about different things. I hadn't heard about the malware - but I think the concerns raised were more fundamental and specific to that co as far as I know (though of course the details were not gone into). e.g. using Lenovo kit was not a problem.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 17:16:04 Seb Spyware. Not malware. The concerns are likely just rehashed NSA junk passed across the Atlantic to privileged counterparts. Congress has formulated them as best it can (they are conjecture). That is my take on it. Though cell-phones are by definition not secure in any event.
Seb Member	Thu Sep 20 18:02:26 I would for reasons doubt that it is junk.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 18:53:02 Seb Chipset flaws are not actually the domain of security agencies. Its computer geek stuff. And yes, you will get security vulnerabilities if you google chipsets. The assumption of malice (this is intended backdoor weaknesses on the off-chance the regime desires access) is far-fetched. In sum: Western intelligence sucks donkey balls. I could conjecture better theories using my left brain.
jergul large member	Thu Sep 20 19:04:57 Note: Non-western security agencies. They are nice because everyone knows to distrust and be very wary.
Seb Member	Fri Sep 21 02:55:10 Jergul: Um. You dont think that gchq - for example - is at all interested in compromising phones? All I can say is we didn't go with our first choice on a number of devices, and it wasn't just their phones. Nor was it "yucky china". Could be a flaw, but then NSA and GCHQ have been known to have flaws introduced into commercial products. It wouldn't blow my mind if what at the time was China's premium phone brand had similar shenanigans.
Seb Member	Fri Sep 21 02:55:52 Btw, doesn't necesarily need to be architecture, it can be firmware which is pretty easy to unravel.
delude Member	Fri Sep 21 04:29:15 "Coming from a poster who ignores that the raw footage has led to the oustings of two dem operatives, two NPR execs, and the total collapse of ACORN. Feel free to ignore his editorialized initial releases, but to deny their impact and efficacy is naive. " Indeed, let's talk about the NPR execs and their heavily edited video; 1. The two Schiller's unrelated resigned because they expressed their opinion about the Tea Part Movement, in an undercover video, which was shown to be heavily headed. 2. Though with the video conservative media outlets, including The Blaze, despite the fact of their personal opinions expressed by the execs of tea party members; stated that NPR is a balance organization especially in regards when it came to donations that leads to this point number 3. 3. The criminal O'keefe was attempting to exploit how completely imbalanced NPR was because they receive charitable donations from George Soros, which is true, but it is also true that NPR receives charitable donations from a various organizations, and individuals, which includes the Koch brothers who are your conservative edition of Soros. Yes, two NPR execs who got caught up in an edited video to exploit them for unfair charitable actions or that they receive funds from an Muslim organization and Soros in an attempt to display them as some ultra liberal muslim loving organization where in fact it was their opinion of the tea party movement that was their cause for leaving. Yes, integrity at it's best. Aren't you an advocate of free speech? I would think if you were, opinions of execs wouldn't matter. But that's right, since it is the pillar of integrity and journalistic standards project veritas, their resignations show how great PV was. Yep, you showed us. ACORN: "This was despite several independent investigations that by December 2009 began to reveal no criminal activity by ACORN staff had taken place" "ACORN Vindicated of Wrongdoing by the Congressional Watchdog Office" "Brooklyn prosecutors clear local ACORN office" "Report of the Attorney General on the Activities of Acorn" "California AG Determines ACORN Broke No Criminal Laws" "Fake pimp from ACORN videos tries to 'punk' CNN correspondent" "Brown Releases Report Detailing a Litany of Problems with ACORN, But No Criminality" "Preliminary report clears ACORN on funds" All because of the heavily edited video produced by PV. Yes, once again, journalistic integrity. You expect an organization with such negative publicity would be so able to easily recover when something like that completely presents then in another way? Even after being clear of wrongdoing. If you're basing the success of ACORN's bankruptcy from a very skewed perspective guerilla journalism, sure Forwyn projecti veritas hands down made a difference. Except it being fabricated. 'denying their impact' is 'naive' If you think they are credible, you're retarded.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 21 10:32:46 Seb Yes I think you have a flimsy bar for evidence in support of your position and something else or as I have called it, empirical nihilism for everything you disagree with. But that isn’t the prediction, that is the theory based on interacting with you. I base my prediction on this theory or knowledge about you. And no. I am calling you a communist because I am paying a lot of attention to what you say. The conclusion is that I am going to meet people where they want to meet. No sense in me being cautious presenting data and making inferences, no sense in me paying attention to nuances and acting in good faith and getting peoples story straight, if I am the only one. If I am surrounded by idiots, when in Rome, as they say. So this recent whining about bad faith and misunderstanding you, I feel it is too late for you to start caring about stuff like that.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: