The Emperor's perspective has putin's russia as the geopolitical force on top of the food chain. Once he told me that a long time ago I understood what subjects we could see eye to eye while others, never.

He can correct me if I am wrong.

Yeah...
By the way, can you share with us all your google research you've made in the past 6 months? Don't tell us you are using duckduckgo, that would be lame...
Also, when I clicked on your profile it says your email was hidden... We are not trying to sell you stuff... You don't need to hide from us.

Aren't we all for total openness on the internet and not care about what people know about us, what we buy, from clothing to a specific prescription?

What's your real email address? Do you have a facebook account? I need to link your bitcointalk.org profile to your google research, to your email address to your facebook to the prescription you are taking, you and your family...

Nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide...

 

We do not have geostationary labs for deeper sample analysis... Yet there will be point when it would be safer to have a lunar base (for example), when we start bringing stuff back home.

Google will let companies target ads using your email address


Google will soon let advertisers tap into one of the most lucrative types of ad targeting: email addresses. The search giant is rolling out a new tool called Customer Match, which lets advertisers use a list of email addresses to target specific users across Google services. To be targeted through this technique, you only need to be logged into your Google account and have given your email address to a retailer, perhaps by buying something from their website or giving it out to sign up for a loyalty program. Google says the individual email addresses are anonymized through Customer Match. That means companies won't be able to create personalized profiles of individuals, but they will still be compiling lists with general customer habits like YouTube viewing and Google search histories to target ads with.

For instance, Google will let a retailer you've shopped at upload your email address to Customer Match so that it can serve up ads while you're watching YouTube, searching Google for related products, or checking your Gmail inbox while signed into that email account. The ad product also lets companies create a general audience profile based on existing customers' habits and interests to target new customers when they use Google services.

Google rose to the upper echelon of tech titans by amassing a lion's share of the web advertising market. Now, the company is looking for new forms of ad revenue as more consumers gravitate toward mobile devices, where an ad's money-making potential is reduced. Further complicating Google's position are strategic moves from Apple and Facebook to reduce the strength of the web. Apple is doing this by allowing new ad-blocking software on iOS 9, accessible only from using its own mobile Safari web browser as opposed to Google's Chrome. Facebook, on the other hand, has created a robust web and mobile ad service from within its social network while expanding the variety of the web's information, from news articles to videos, users can access right from their News Feed.

By tapping into email addresses, as both Facebook and Twitter do with their own respective products, Google can take higher cuts of the more costly and better targeted ads being served even from within the Gmail and YouTube apps on mobile devices. Google calls Customer Match a "privacy-safe" product, but that may not quell the concern of users who feel that advertisers are getting even more specific with their ad targeting.


http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/28/9410975/google-customer-match-ad-targeting-email-addresses

SAUDI ARABIA: BLACK STONE OF MECCA REVEALED TO BE A METEORITE

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/saudi-arabia-black-stone-of-mecca-revealed-to-be-a-meteorite/

Yes, Hillary Clinton broke the law





Since there has been much evasion and obfuscation about Hillary Rodham Clinton’s email use, it seems appropriate to step back and simply review what we know in light of the law. It’s also instructive to compare Clinton’s situation to arguably the most famous case of our time related to the improper handling of classified materials, namely, the case of Gen. David Petraeus.

Instead of turning his journals — so-called “black books” — over to the Defense Department or CIA when he left either of those organizations, Petraeus kept them at his home — an unsecure location — and provided them to his paramour/biographer, Paula Broadwell, at another private residence. (None of the classified information in the black books was used in his biography.)

On April 23, Petraeus pled guilty to a single misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials under 18 USC §1924. Many in the intelligence community were outraged at the perceived “slap on the wrist” he received, at a time when the Justice Department was seeking very strong penalties against lesser officials for leaks to the media.

According to the law, there are five elements that must be met for a violation of the statute, and they can all be found in section (a) of the statute: “(1) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, (2) by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, (3) knowingly removes such documents or materials (4) without authority and (5) with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location [shall be guilty of this offense].”

The Petraeus case meets those conditions. Does Clinton’s?

Clinton originally denied that any of her emails contained classified information, but soon abandoned that claim. So far, 150 emails containing classified information have been identified on her server, including two that included information determined to be Top Secret.

She then fell back on the claim that none of the emails in question was “marked classified” at the time she was dealing with them. The marking is not what makes the material classified; it’s the nature of the information itself. As secretary of state, Clinton knew this, and in fact she would have been re-briefed annually on this point as a condition of maintaining her clearance to access classified information.

Then there’s location. Clinton knowingly set up her email system to route 100 percent of her emails to and through her unsecured server (including keeping copies stored on the server). She knowingly removed such documents and materials from authorized locations (her authorized devices and secure government networks) to an unauthorized location (her server).

Two examples demonstrate this point.

When Clinton would draft an email based on classified information, she was drafting that email on an authorized Blackberry, iPad or computer. But when she hit “send,” that email was knowingly routed to her unsecured server — an unauthorized location — for both storage and transfer.

Additionally, when Clinton moved the server to Platte River Networks (a private company) in June 2013, and then again when she transferred the contents of the server to her private lawyers in 2014, the classified materials were in each instance again removed to another unsecured location.

Next we have the lack of proper authority to move or hold classified information somewhere, i.e., the “unauthorized location.”

While it’s possible for a private residence to be an “authorized” location, and it’s also possible for non-government servers and networks to be “authorized” to house and transfer classified materials, there are specific and stringent requirements to achieve such status. Simply being secretary of state didn’t allow Clinton to authorize herself to deviate from the requirements of retaining and transmitting classified documents, materials and information.

There is no known evidence that her arrangement to use the private email server in her home was undertaken with proper authority.
Finally, there’s the intent to “retain” the classified documents or materials at an unauthorized location.

The very purpose of Clinton’s server was to intentionally retain documents and materials — all emails and attachments — on the server in her house, including classified materials.

The intent required is only to undertake the action, i.e., to retain the classified documents and materials in the unauthorized fashion addressed in this statute. That’s it.

It borders on inconceivable that Clinton didn’t know that the emails she received, and more obviously, the emails that she created, stored and sent with the server, would contain classified information.

Simply put, Mrs. Clinton is already in just as bad — or worse — of a legal situation than Petraeus faced.

Does this mean she’ll be charged? FBI Director James Comey has a long history of ignoring political pressure. So it’s likely that the FBI will recommend prosecution, and then it will be up to President Obama’s Justice Department to decide whether to proceed. Stay tuned.


http://nypost.com/2015/09/27/yes-hillary-clinton-broke-the-law/

Death Toll In Mecca Stampede Much Higher Than Saudi Officials Originally Reported


ISLAMABAD — Saudi Arabia has given foreign diplomats some 1,100 photographs of the dead from last week’s hajj crush and stampede, Indian and Pakistani authorities said, an indication of a significantly higher death toll than previously offered by the kingdom.

Saudi officials could not be immediately reached for comment Monday night about the discrepancy in the toll of the disaster in Mina. The Saudi Health Ministry’s latest figures, released Saturday, put the toll at 769 people killed and 934 injured.

Tariq Fazal Chaudhry, a lawmaker in Pakistan’s governing PML-N political party who is leading his country’s response to the disaster, said Saudi officials gave diplomats “1,100 photos” of the dead from Mina. Chaudhry told journalists during a news conference broadcast nationwide on Monday night that the photos could be viewed at Saudi embassies and missions abroad.

“This is the official figure of martyrs from Saudi officials, given for the identification process,” Chaudhry said.

His comments echoed those of Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj from Sunday.

“Saudi authorities have released photos of 1,090 pilgrims who have died in (the hajj) stampede,” Swaraj wrote on Twitter.


http://nypost.com/2015/09/28/death-toll-in-hajj-disaster-much-higher-than-saudi-officials-originally-reported/


-----------------------------
Liars.

Let me guess: Kos, Gore and Soros?

Funny how people with zero counter arguments tell your how to disregard your sources, but to believe everything they read as... Gospel.

Either believe in human rights for all humans, like the pope and Swine Flu here, or you don't...

[...]
One concern this is raising for NASA is how to check out the areas with liquid water (presumably the best shot at finding life) without risking contaminating them with life from Earth. Personally I think that ship may have already sailed. We recently found plankton living on the outside of the space station so we’ve pretty much proven that extremophiles can live pretty much anywhere and can even survive for extended periods in the freezing vacuum and radiation of space. We do try to sterilize everything we launch, but are we that effective at the microbial level? I bet there’s already some Earth based microbes hanging out on Mars thanks to us.

What I’d really like to see is some bacteria that’s actually Martian and figure out a way to bring it back and study it. If it has the same basic type of DNA as all the sub-microscopic critters on the Earth that might really tell us something about the solar system and the universe. (And before you ask, yes… bacteria have DNA. It’s just really simple and located in the nucleoid in the bacterial chromosome.) More to the point, if it’s completely different than any life on Earth, then it arose independently. That might really change our outlook on the world, eh?

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/28/big-nasa-mars-mystery-announcement-gets-watered-down/

And now...


Lawmakers: U.S. plan for Internet may be unconstitutional


President Obama's plan to "internationalize" the Internet may be unconstitutional, key members of Congress are claiming.

The group of lawmakers sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office last week, saying the plan to relinquish oversight of Internet domain name functions to a global, multi-stakeholder body raised questions about the administration's "authority to transfer possession and control of critical components of the Internet's infrastructure to a third party."

The letter was signed by the chairmen of both congressional judiciary committees, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va; presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. Issa is also a former chairman of the House Oversight Committee.

The lawmakers point out that the Constitution says "Congress has the exclusive power 'to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.'"

The Internet's root zone file was developed by a grant from the United States, and since 1997, it has been operated by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration under contract with the Department of Commerce. The department had planned to transfer its management rights to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, an international agency, by this Wednesday, but announced this summer that the date would be postponed until roughly June 30 next year.

In their letter, the lawmakers asked the GAO whether transferring ownership of the Internet domain name functions would cause government property to be transferred to ICANN, whether the root zone file constituted U.S. property, and whether it was constitutional for that property to be transferred to any non-federal entity.

The lawmakers did not provide a deadline for answers, saying that the GAO would need to "conduct both significant audit work and complex legal analysis" in order to respond.


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/lawmakers-u.s.-plan-for-internet-may-be-unconstitutional/article/2572941

--------------------------------------------------
No such things as coincidence... He wants the UN to be in charge. Then that group of harpies to be in charge of the whole internet. This is so transparent.

You've created a never ending thread which sucks everything in, just like a b...

Obama Nudges Government Toward Better Behavior

Here comes the White House brainwashing that everyone was warning about.


The Obama administration issued an executive order Sept. 15 directing executive agencies and departments to find ways to use behavioral science to change the way people behave — giving them a “nudge” — in an effort to make government function more effectively and efficiently.

That’s a pretty big challenge, but officials say they are encouraged by early results from a White House group launched in 2014 known as the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team.

In one instance, the administration worked with the Health and Human Services Department to prompt applicants who had created an account on the federal health insurance marketplace to complete their application. The officials sent out eight versions of letters to applicants, one of which included a photo of the sender to “personalize the message,” as well as an invitation to the recipient to write down when they expected to complete the application. That letter boosted enrollments by 13.2 percent, while a letter with neither a picture nor a prompt boosted enrollment by just 1.8 percent.

In another effort, at the Agriculture Department, officials created a dialog box that popped up on employees’ computers that asked them to change the default setting on their computer from one- to double-sided printing. The prompt increased the likelihood that people would use double-sided printing by 5.8 percent.

“The social and behavioral sciences are real science — with immensely valuable, real, practical applications — the views of a few members of Congress to the contrary notwithstanding,” John P. Holdren, assistant to the president for science and technology, said at a rollout event.
A House bill (HR 1806) passed in May sliced funds to the National Science Foundation for research in the behavioral, economic and social sciences by 45 percent. The congressman who shepherded that bill through the House, Texas Republican Lamar Smith, made clear his stance on the softer sciences, calling them “lower priority areas.”

In June, the House passed a fiscal 2016 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill (HR 2578) that would cut social, behavioral, economic and geosciences by 20 percent over current spending levels.

Behavioral science has caught the attention of those abroad as well. In 2010, British Prime Minister David Cameron created what is believed to be the world’s first-ever government “nudge” unit.

President Barack Obama has long been a big fan of the notion. He chose legal scholar Cass Sunstein, a leading behavioral proponent, to helm the White House’s regulatory affairs office in 2009. And in 2012, he reportedly used a group of unpaid academic advisers to come up with ideas on how best to characterize Mitt Romney in ads, as well as fight the false rumors that the president is a Muslim.


http://cdn.rollcall.com/news/Obama-Nudges-Government-Toward-Better-Behavior-243882-1.html?popular=true&pos=hln&cdn_load=true&zkPrintable=1&nopagination=1

--------------------------------------------
When you sign up to become a US civil servant, do you forgo your human rights?

NBC Files Copyright Claims Against All Videos Of Hillary Clinton On ‘Meet The Press’




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1OymVU9LME


#vast right wing conspiracy

Almost All US Temperature Data Used In Global Warming Models Is Estimated or Altered



We have written many times about the fact that the temperature data used in the alarmists’ global warming models are not original data as measured by thermometers. Rather, they are “adjusted” numbers, consistently changed to make the past look cooler and the present warmer, so that more billions of dollars will flow from the world’s governments to the climate alarmists who serve government’s cause. This is, in my opinion, the greatest scandal in the history of science.

This article at Watts Up With That? adds incrementally to that picture. John Goetz analyzes the U.S. temperature data that finds its way into “official” tabulations. This is particularly important because, while the U.S. represents only 6.6% of the total land area of Earth, we account for close to half of the data relied on by the Global Historical Climatology Network. This is a big topic, and you should study the Goetz article in its entirety if you have time. I am still digesting it.

But a few highlights are obvious. First, Goetz finds that approximately 92% (or even more, depending on how you calculate it) of US surface temperature data consists of estimated or altered values. Very little raw data finds its way into the warmists’ climate models–which, of course, is the way they want it. Second, the adjustments that are made to the U.S. data consistently skew the numbers as we have described many times before–they try to make the present look warmer, compared with the past.


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/09/almost-all-us-temperature-data-used-in-global-warming-models-is-estimated-or-altered.php

It is politically safer to vaguely blame inhabitants of a whole continent than targeting and naming a specific country...

Thank you for checking my thread...

 

Hillary Supporters All Have A Suspiciously Identical Feelings About Her ‘Meet The Press’ Interview


In a massive coincidence, every single Hillary Clinton staffer and surrogate who watched the Democratic presidential candidate’s Meet the Press interview had the exact same thoughts, sometimes using identical language.

Now at first, it may appear that these responses were all coordinated in some fashion. However, it would be against the law for campaign officials to coordinate with a pro-Clinton Super PAC director like Brad Woodhouse. So clearly it’s a coincidence that his tweet was identical to Clinton staffer Karen Finney’s.




http://www.mediaite.com/online/hillary-supporters-all-have-suspiciously-identical-feelings-about-meet-the-press-interview/

What are dpuf (extension) files?

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21825611/what-are-dpuf-extension-files