Archive for Internet

Pro-aborts defend woman who illegally took abortion pills to kill 5 1/2 month old baby boy

Posted in Abortion pill, Pro-choice People with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 9, 2015 by saynsumthn

REPUBLISHED FROM LIFE DYNAMICS BLOG

A Georgia woman who allegedly took an abortion pill she purchased off the internet to abort a five-and-a-half-month-old baby boy has been charged in the child’s death and abortion advocates have come to her defense.

Kenlissia Jones

According to reports published by a local media outlet, police say that 23-year-old Kenlissa Jones purchased Cytotec, from a source in Canada.

The drug, also known as Misoprostol, is promoted by abortion advocates in home abortion remedies online.

Reports indicate that Jones got a neighbor to take her to the hospital, but she delivered the baby boy in the car on the way.

Kenlissia Jones homes

Dougherty County police say that Jones’ baby boy died after about half an hour at the hospital and have now charged Jones with malice murder and possession of a dangerous drug.

Kenlissia Jones Riggins

Jones’ brother, Rico Riggins, told WALB that he did not know his sister was pregnant.

“Once she took those pills, from the way I’m understanding it, she was in a world of hurt for a while,” Riggins said.

Riggins said his family is grieving and in need of prayers.

We lost what would have been a nephew for me. And everything. And then my sister,” Jones’ brother said.

Dougherty County District Attorney Greg Edwards said the case will likely go before a grand jury, because Georgia and federal laws will need to be explored.

According to Georgia law:

    No abortion is authorized or shall be performed if the probable gestational age of the unborn child has been determined in accordance with Code Section 31-9B-2 to be 20 weeks or more unless the pregnancy is diagnosed as medically futile, as such term is defined in Code Section 31-9B-1, or in reasonable medical judgment the abortion is necessary to avert the death of the pregnant woman or avert serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman. O.C.G.A. § 16-12-141 (2014)

WALB.com, South Georgia News, Weather, Sports

This is not the first time a woman has been charged after ordering and consuming drugs to self-induce an abortion.

Earlier this year a 33-year-old Indiana woman was sentenced to 20 years in prison on feticide and neglect charges after she took abortion pills she had ordered to abort her roughly thirty (30) week pregnancy.

Purvi Patel Charged with Baby Death9-0132-0831-0eae5eefacd9  Thumb

The woman, Purvi Patel then threw the almost fully developed baby into a dumpster behind a restaurant her family owns where the infant died.

Abortion advocates wasted no time coming to Purvi’s defense. (read here.)

Life Dynamics president, Mark Crutcher called Patel’s defenders, savages, saying that abortion advocates never met a baby they didn’t want to kill.

Crutcher pointed out that had Patel’s baby been found in the dumpster of an abortion clinic, no charges would have been filed, “The fact is, if the body of this child had been found in the dumpster of an abortion clinic instead of the dumpster of a restaurant this arrest would have never happened and Patel would just be another enlightened woman exercising her constitutional right to choose,” he stated at the time of Patel’s arrest.

Now, abortion advocates are rushing to the aid of Kenlissa.

Kenlissia Jones abortion supporters

Kenlissia Jones abortion supporters  2

On twitter they have set up the twitter hashtag #justiceforKenlissa to defend Kenlissa’ actions.

No page has been established to grieve her dead son, though.

To repeat Crutcher’s statement, abortion advocates never met a baby they didn’t want to kill.

Vid: testimony on how women lose their virginity posted to YouTube

Posted in Virginity with tags , , on October 7, 2013 by saynsumthn

Apparently- you can now buy Virginity on the Internet

Virginity on Internet

NSA spying on American citizens deepens to internet traffic

Posted in Big Brother, Internet, NSA with tags , , , , , on August 21, 2013 by saynsumthn

The Wall Street Journal peels back another layer of the NSA surveillance onion with an exclusive report:

The National Security Agency—which possesses only limited legal authority to spy on U.S. citizens—has built a surveillance network that covers more Americans’ Internet communications than officials have publicly disclosed, current and former officials say. The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic in the hunt for foreign intelligence, including a wide array of communications by foreigners and Americans. In some cases, it retains the written content of emails sent between citizens within the U.S. and also filters domestic phone calls made with Internet technology, these people say.

More details on “filtering” capabilities and processes. Note well the bits about content interception and data storage:

The NSA’s filtering, carried out with telecom companies, is designed to look for communications that either originate or end abroad, or are entirely foreign but happen to be passing through the U.S. But officials say the system’s broad reach makes it more likely that purely domestic communications will be incidentally intercepted and collected in the hunt for foreign ones…This filtering takes place at more than a dozen locations at major Internet junctions in the U.S., officials say. Previously, any NSA filtering of this kind was largely believed to be happening near points where undersea or other foreign cables enter the country….The NSA is focused on collecting foreign intelligence, but the streams of data it monitors include both foreign and domestic communications. Inevitably, officials say, some U.S. Internet communications are scanned and intercepted, including both “metadata” about communications, such as the “to” and “from” lines in an email, and the contents of the communications themselves. Much, but not all, of the data is discarded, meaning some communications between Americans are stored in the NSA’s databases, officials say. Some lawmakers and civil libertarians say that, given the volumes of data NSA is examining, privacy protections are insufficient.

MORE at TownHall

FBI wants backdoor wiretapping access to internet and your facebook accounts

Posted in Big Brother, FBI, Police State, Privacy with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on May 21, 2012 by saynsumthn

As technologies have advanced, they have dramatically changed the way that we live and interact. We, as consumers, have become accustomed to the convenience, capabilities, and even the entertainment that they provide. But, should these same advantages be applied to other areas such as law enforcement?

This topic has recently come up for debate after the FBI indicated that it is contemplating legislation that would require Internet firms to build backdoors into their services for government surveillance. The bureau is hoping to amend the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) in order to require companies such as Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Facebook to comply with federal wiretapping orders if the need arises.

CALEA, in its current form, applies to telecommunications companies. It was amended in 2004 to also include broadband networks, but if the FBI’s effort works, it could also force Web companies to alter their code to ensure surveillance capabilities.

“Basically, the FBI wants to amend CALEA to keep up with the changes in technology that have taken place over the last 18 years since CALEA became law,” Michael Donahue, partner at Marashlian & Donahue, LLC, tells WebProNews.

In the past, the FBI has worked to develop independent solutions for these types of companies, explained Donahue. However, due to budget cuts, the funding for them no longer exists.

These recent developments are part of the bureau’s mission to resolve, what it calls, its “Going Dark” problem. According to information released by the FBI, “Going Dark” refers to “law enforcement’s limited capability to comprehensively and lawfully collect data and information, conduct electronic surveillance and analyze the raw data due to the rapid evolution of telecommunications and data collection technology and services.”

Research shows that the “Going Dark” problem dates back several years. Under this initiative, Donahue told us that the FBI is trying to achieve the following actions:
•To commit the FCC to regulate technical standards for solutions
•To require the FCC to approve a standard in order for it to be considered a safe harbor
•To eliminate or modify the current exemption in CALEA for private networks (i.e., Universities, Colleges, etc.)
•To eliminate or modify the current exemption for information services
•To provide stronger enforcement of existing requirements that providers that enable encryption are also able to decrypt the information for law enforcement
•To require providers to certify their CALEA compliance annually

Read Rest Here

CISPA: (Cyber Security Snoops) Say Hello To Big Brother

Posted in Alex Jones, Constitution, cyber security, free speech, Internet with tags , , , , , , , , on April 24, 2012 by saynsumthn

According to Techland Time: CISPA, a bill that would essentially nullify current privacy laws and set companies up to share data about users with the government without the need for court orders. CISPA would amend the National Security Act of 1947 — responsible for merging the Department of Navy and War, splitting the Air Force from the Army and creating both the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and National Security Council (NSC) — by adding provisions that would apply to cybercrime. It aims “[to] provide for the sharing of certain cyber threat intelligence and cyber threat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities,” as well as “other purposes.”

What qualifies as a “cyber threat” according to the latest draft of the bill?

…information in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity, including information pertaining to the protection of a system or network from (A) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or (B) efforts to gain unauthorized access to a system or network, including efforts to gain such unauthorized access to steal or misappropriate private or government information.

Congress has attempted to sneak legislation that could change the face of the Internet as we know it, and all in the name of national security. First there was SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act, but now CISPA (Cyber Intelligence Sharing Protection Act) is threatening the privacy and freedom of US citizens. No online activity will be safe when it comes to these bills because as of now what’s considered a cyber security threat is a large grey area, but David Seaman, journalist and host of The DL Show, joins us to take a closer look at CISPA.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

CISPA: (Cyber Security Snoops) Say Hello To Big…, posted with vodpod

TEXT OF BILL: HR3523

Official Summary
11/30/2011–Introduced.Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 – Amends the National Security Act of 1947 to add provisions concerning cyber threat intelligence and information sharing. Defines “cyber threat intelligence” as information in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity, including information pertaining to the protection of a system or network from:
(1) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or
(2) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information. Requires the Director of National Intelligence to:
(1) establish procedures to allow intelligence community elements to share cyber threat intelligence with private-sector entities, and
(2) encourage the sharing of such intelligence. Requires the procedures established to ensure that such intelligence is only:
(1) shared with certified entities or a person with an appropriate security clearance,
(2) shared consistent with the need to protect U.S. national security, and
(3) used in a manner that protects such intelligence from unauthorized disclosure. Provides for guidelines for the granting of security clearance approvals to certified entities or officers or employees of such entities. Authorizes a cybersecurity provider (a non-governmental entity that provides goods or services intended to be used for cybersecurity purposes), with the express consent of a protected entity (an entity that contracts with a cybersecurity provider) to:
(1) use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information in order to protect the rights and property of the protected entity; and
(2) share cyber threat information with any other entity designated by the protected entity, including the federal government. Regulates the use and protection of shared information, including prohibiting the use of such information to gain a competitive advantage and, if shared with the federal government, exempts such information from public disclosure. Prohibits a civil or criminal cause of action against a protected entity, a self-protected entity (an entity that provides goods or services for cybersecurity purposes to itself), or a cybersecurity provider acting in good faith under the above circumstances. Directs the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board to submit annually to Congress a review of the sharing and use of such information by the federal government, as well as recommendations for improvements and modifications to address privacy and civil liberties concerns. Preempts any state statute that restricts or otherwise regulates an activity authorized by the Act.

Democrats to continue Internet coup with new cyber bill

Posted in cyber security, Homeland Security, Internet with tags , , , on February 8, 2012 by saynsumthn

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, following a recent anti-piracy legislative debacle with SOPA and PIPA, will lead his second effort of 2012 to push Internet-regulating legislation, this time in the form of a new cybersecurity bill. The expected bill is the latest attempt by the Democrats to broadly expand the authority of executive branch agencies over the Internet.

Details about the bill remain shrouded in secrecy. Clues available to the public suggest that the bill might be stronger than President Barack Obama’s cybersecurity proposal, which was released in May 2011. Reid said that he would bring the bill — expected to come out of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, chaired by Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman — to the floor during the first Senate work period of 2012.

A classified meeting behind closed doors in October 2011 between key Senate committee leaders with jurisdiction over cybersecurity and White House officials, took place at the request of the Obama administration. Lieberman, in an interview with The Hill in October, said that past Senate cybersecurity bills were considerably stronger than the White House proposal.

The White House proposal recommended that the Department of Homeland Security be given broad regulatory authority for cybersecurity matters over civilian networks. The White House proposal also recommends that the DHS program be “developed in consultation with privacy and civil liberties experts and with the approval of the Attorney General.”
Read Rest here: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/06/democrats-to-continue-internet-coup-with-new-cyber-bill/

Internet Spying? Judge Throws Out Privacy Lawsuit Against LinkedIn

Posted in Big Brother, Privacy with tags , , on November 15, 2011 by saynsumthn

A California man claimed that LinkedIn (NYSE: LNKD) “humiliated” him by sharing his Internet browsing history with marketers. In a big win for the professional social networking site, a federal judge found that the man couldn’t go forward with the suit because he hadn’t been harmed—financially, emotionally or otherwise. The case is yet another episode in courts’ ongoing efforts to decide what individual privacy is worth.

In a ruling handed down late Friday, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh dismissed the suit after finding that Kevin Low didn’t have standing to bring a $5 million class action lawsuit that was filed last March in San Francisco on behalf of all U.S. LinkedIn users. The judge found that, since Low had not suffered any actual harm, he did not meet the “case or controversy” threshold that the Constitution requires for a federal lawsuit to go forward.

SEE ALSO: Facebook Squelches ‘Friend Finder’ Class Action

LinkedIn is a fast-growing website that allows people to post their professional profiles and to network with other users. Low claimed the site violated federal and state privacy laws by combining his LinkedIn identification number with his browsing history (a list of websites he visited) and then selling the packaged information to market research companies like Nielsen Netratings and Scorecard Research.

In her decision, Judge Koh quotes Low’s claim that people who “‘seek advice about hemorrhoids, sexually transmitted diseases, abortion, drug and/or alcohol rehabilitation, mental health, dementia, etc., can be reasonably certain that these sensitive inquiries have been captured in the browsing history’ and sent to third parties to be exploited.” But she also found that Low could not prove the humiliation he claimed because he could not point to any specific information about his web browsing that LinkedIn had shared with third parties.

Read rest here