Are practical jokers exempted from the right to free speech? Or was the point that this was just another of his "pranks"? How is the contents of his website relevant to the story?
Attractive woman wearing T-shirt: "What are you looking at, jerk?"
Me: "Um... I was trying to read your T-shirt."
Attractive woman: "Nice try."
Me: "It's true. Your breasts kind of get in the way. Sorry. Never mind."
Woman: "It says, 'Yanni Live'."
Me (looking away): "Thanks"
but said no State Department personnel were wounded or killed. He
spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to
speak to media."
So what was he doing speaking to media?! How is this system supposed
Giving away secrets is against the law, but "officials" do it, and
get away with it, all the time. Sometimes, as in the case of Valerie
Plame, it seems to be the people in charge who *want* information
Why do some nurses and doctors smoke? Wouldn't you think that health professionals would exemplify good health? But many of them are overweight and have poor health practices, like smoking and failing to get enough sleep. Why is that?
Why do religious leaders and organizations get involved in lawsuits? Aren't they supposed to be the experts at getting along with others?
Why is a nation ostensibly devoted to individual freedom and choice trying to force its system on other nations?
What really caught my eye was the name of DHS' chief privacy officer. Here's a quote from the AP article:
'"ATS does not replace human decision-making," said Hugo Teufel III, the department's chief privacy officer.'
The guy's name is German for "devil". How ironic is that?