vote ny cock

After asking why we don't have a room for the more mature pics, got a reply that if there is enough interest the mods will consider a return of the Over30s room.

So if you would like to see this room back please vote for it

news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law, CNET has learned.

Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns, according to three individuals who have been negotiating with Leahy's staff over the changes. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.
Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

CNET obtained a draft of the proposed amendments from one of the people involved in the negotiations with Leahy; it's embedded at the end of this post. The document describes the changes as "Amendments intended to be proposed by Mr. Leahy."

It's an abrupt departure from Leahy's earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill "provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by... requiring that the government obtain a search warrant."

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys' Association and the National Sheriffs' Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to "reconsider acting" on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

One person participating in Capitol Hill meetings on this topic told CNET that Justice Department officials have expressed their displeasure about Leahy's original bill. The department is on record as opposing any such requirement: James Baker, the associate deputy attorney general, has publicly warned that requiring a warrant to obtain stored e-mail could have an "adverse impact" on criminal investigations.

Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said requiring warrantless access to Americans' data "undercuts" the purpose of Leahy's original proposal. "We believe a warrant is the appropriate standard for any contents," he said.

An aide to the Senate Judiciary committee told CNET that because discussions with interested parties are ongoing, it would be premature to comment on the legislation.

Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said that in light of the revelations about how former CIA director David Petraeus' e-mail was perused by the FBI, "even the Department of Justice should concede that there's a need for more judicial oversight," not less.

Markham Erickson, a lawyer in Washington, D.C. who has followed the topic closely and said he was speaking for himself and not his corporate clients, expressed concerns about the alphabet soup of federal agencies that would be granted more power:

There is no good legal reason why federal regulatory agencies such as the NLRB, OSHA, SEC or FTC need to access customer information service providers with a mere subpoena. If those agencies feel they do not have the tools to do their jobs adequately, they should work with the appropriate authorizing committees to explore solutions. The Senate Judiciary committee is really not in a position to adequately make those determinations.

The list of agencies that would receive civil subpoena authority for the contents of electronic communications also includes the Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Maritime Commission, the Postal Regulatory Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Mine Enforcement Safety and Health Review Commission.

Leahy's modified bill retains some pro-privacy components, such as requiring police to secure a warrant in many cases. But the dramatic shift, especially the regulatory agency loophole and exemption for emergency account access, likely means it will be near-impossible for tech companies to support in its new form.

A bitter setback
This is a bitter setback for Internet companies and a liberal-conservative-libertarian coalition, which had hoped to convince Congress to update the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act to protect documents stored in the cloud. Leahy glued those changes onto an unrelated privacy-related bill supported by Netflix.

At the moment, Internet users enjoy more privacy rights if they store data on their hard drives or under their mattresses, a legal hiccup that the companies fear could slow the shift to cloud-based services unless the law is changed to be more privacy-protective.

Members of the so-called Digital Due Process coalition include Apple, Amazon.com, Americans for Tax Reform, AT&T, the Center for Democracy and Technology, eBay, Google, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, TechFreedom, and Twitter. (CNET was the first to report on the coalition's creation.)

Leahy, a former prosecutor, has a mixed record on privacy. He criticized the FBI's efforts to require Internet providers to build in backdoors for law enforcement access, and introduced a bill in the 1990s protecting Americans' right to use whatever encryption products they wanted.

But he also authored the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which is now looming over Web companies, as well as the reviled Protect IP Act. An article in The New Republic concluded Leahy's work on the Patriot Act "appears to have made the bill less protective of civil liberties." Leahy had introduced significant portions of the Patriot Act under the name Enhancement of Privacy and Public Safety in Cyberspace Act (PDF) a year earlier.

One obvious option for the Digital Due Process coalition is the simplest: if Leahy's committee proves to be an insurmountable roadblock in the Senate, try the courts instead.

Judges already have been wrestling with how to apply the Fourth Amendment to an always-on, always-connected society. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police needed a search warrant for GPS tracking of vehicles. Some courts have ruled that warrantless tracking of Americans' cell phones, another coalition concern, is unconstitutional.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies already must obtain warrants for e-mail in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, thanks to a ruling by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010.

I see the moron who goes through every Board posting down-voting ecverything has just arrived on the scene again.

You need to get a life buddy. Every day at the same time. Got nothing better to do? At least jack off you idiot.

Of course, maybe using your mouse pointer to click little buttons is what gets you off. Who am I to judge?

Would you fuck me? Feel free to vote and tell me what you would do to me. :)

u mad bro?
if so, vote Romney to abolish faggot vehicle transports like this and severe federal punishment to selfish pricks of the road.

Please Vote.

Vote Frog and keep out the pest in Washington.

Him a handing out to you a just one solution,
A new revolution of a mass execution.
Smart bomb in the hand of stupidity,
I didn't know that this was hereditary.
Him a one man Texas chainsaw massacre,
If you're gonna vote him in to be your governor.
But you nah need vote when wi Jeb it's won,
Him a kill, him a steal, him a lie, him a bomb.

Him say that there ain't no money for education,
This a two step back in progress of creation.
Now we see you're not afraid to cheat and lie,
Sexing up the propaganda on your alibi.
Him a smug bastard and you know that I hate him,
Head up the buttock of a backward nation.
I can decide for myself what I think is wrong,
When him a kill, him a steal, him a lie, him a bomb.

Him a chimp in a three-piece suit.

I confess, I wrote this post I response top another thread, and my cock got so fucking hard writing it and always gets so fucking hard whenever I do anything like it. Who's with me? Who loves to eat nipples? Oh wait, that's right, I almost forgot, these boards have almost completely transitioned into fag boards. I'm apparently the last real man here. You fucking faggots wouldn't slice off a tasty nipple if your fag lives depended on it.

Whatever, here's the post from the other thread. Also, VOTE TRUMP, you retarded, nigger-loving fucktwats.

"If she's almost 80 she does NOT have a nice body, you fucking moron. Besides, she's so close to death you might as well push her over the cliff yourself and have some fun doing it. I would start by slicing those big hard nipples off with a razor-sharp hunting knife and then forcing her to watch you eat them. Take your time to savor their fleshy goodness. Then keep her alive while you carve her cunt off and force her to watch as you use it to masturbate.

Then just let her bleed out and toss what's left of her ragged old body into a dumpster behind Dunkin Donuts. Imagine the look on the face of some teenage bitch when she takes out the donut garbage!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!"

So let's see who wins :)
Vote and Comment please

First girl to get 100 votes wins