lookin

Perhaps, to reflect our international user base, we should be using Greenwich Mean Time. A few days ago, someone told me that the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, shoots a green laser beam over London, marking the exact spot where time begins. For me, the relevant time here on the Forums would be how long ago something was posted. If a post says 'an hour ago' or 'three days ago' or 'almost two years ago', it would be more meaningful. Making it a clickable link that would show the exact date and time would be a bonus. Or why not get rid of time stamps altogether, acknowledging the timeless nature of many of the contributions here?

I was afraid of that.

Just make sure it's not your parole officer. I once got six months added to my house arrest for something I posted in the Fetish Forum.

Woof!

Lurkerspeaks, EXPAT, eeyore, stripfan, are you listening?

Your secret's safe with us.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more of an uproar over the NYPD's surveillance program, originally designed to collect information on "terrorists" but certainly capable of collecting information on anyone else the largely unregulated officials decide is worth a second look. Of course, these kinds of programs are pretty easy to get up and running when those whose rights and privacy are being violated are widely considered "dangerous" and "collateral damage" is a small price to pay, but what happens when a group that one of us belongs to is labelled "dangerous" by somebody, somewhere? And what happens when one of us gets included in the "collateral damage"? Frankly, the mere existence of such technology gives me the willies. Let alone some kind of undercover operation at Club 39. Judge asked to review monitoring of Muslims * Black New Yorkers fear 'siege' New York's camera system will be better than London's * Link is busted; here's the article: Judge Is Asked to Allow Review of Police Dept. Monitoring of Muslim Communities By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM Published: October 3, 2011 Lawyers in a federal lawsuit that has governed how the New York Police Department investigates political and religious groups for more than 25 years asked a judge on Monday to let them collect information to see if the department had violated his orders in how they monitor Muslim communities. In papers filed in federal court, the lawyers cited a series of recent news articles that detailed the use of undercover officers and informants to gather and maintain information about political activity among Muslims in circumstances in which there was no indication that crimes had occurred. "These accounts, if true, suggest that the N.Y.P.D. is conducting surveillance and maintaining records of such surveillance in violation of the terms of the Modified Handschu Guidelines," the lawyers wrote, referring to the court-ordered guidelines in effect as a result of the class-action lawsuit. The guidelines were first set forth in a 1985 consent decree and significantly loosened in 2003 after the Police Department asked that they be thoroughly revamped because of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The lawyers on Monday also asked the judge in the case, Charles S. Haight Jr. of United States District Court in Manhattan, for an order requiring the department to preserve its records and databases. The changes to the original 1985 Handschu Guidelines allowed law enforcement agencies to exchange information more freely and no longer required the police to file statements on its investigations of political and religious activity with the Handschu Authority, a panel made up of two senior police officials and a civilian. To ensure that constitutional rights are respected, the guidelines require the police to follow a 22-page set of F.B.I. guidelines issued in 2002. Judge Haight said in 2003 that he would allow greater police powers because the nature of public peril had changed. His ruling led to a rewriting of the decree that established the original guidelines governing police investigations of political activity, which were known for the name of the original plaintiff in the 1971 lawsuit, Barbara Handschu. In their court papers, the lawyers said the news articles — two lengthy and detailed articles published by The Associated Press in August and September and two columns by the blogger Leonard Levitt on his NYPD Confidential Web site — described a Police Department policy of focusing on Muslim communities in New York to identify "hot spots," including mosques, social gathering places and student organizations based on college campuses. One of the lawyers, Jethro M. Eisenstein, noted in the papers that the surveillance of political activities detailed in the articles might not violate the Modified Handschu Guidelines, which say that for "the purpose of protecting or preventing terrorist activities, N.Y.P.D. is authorized to visit any place and attend any event that is open to the public, on the same terms and conditions as members of the public generally." But he wrote that keeping records about "protected speech and behavior heard and seen during those operations is a violation of the Modified Handschu Guidelines," as "no information obtained from such visits shall be retained unless it relates to potential unlawful or terrorist activity." Celeste Koeleveld, the executive assistant corporation counsel for public safety, who is representing the city, said through a spokesman that her office had just received the papers and was evaluating them. Paul J. Browne, the Police Department's chief spokesman, did not respond to a telephone call and an e-mail seeking comment. The relaxed guidelines initially went into effect in early 2003 as internal department rules, leaving the class-action plaintiffs with what they said were no means to enforce them; previously, they could go to Judge Haight if they thought the department had violated the consent decree. But in August of that year, just six months after the new guidelines went into effect, it was revealed that the department had been debriefing arrested Iraq war protesters about their political views and affiliations and recording their responses on a debriefing form, a violation of the new rules. Judge Haight then incorporated the new guidelines into the consent decree, prompting a lengthy battle over whether the plaintiffs' lawyers had the power to bring what they believed were violations of the guidelines to the attention of the court. The department opposed any role for the court, but Judge Haight ruled that the plaintiffs had the power to complain about Police Department policies that they believed violated the modified guidelines. If they prove the policies violate the guidelines, the court has the power to order their end.

My thought was more along the lines of a fifteen-minute walk every day, not that we all go get preggers and run a marathon. Although I certainly admire your enthusiasm.

"It doesn't take a lot. You don't have to be super intense, like a triathlon or an Alcatraz swim," said Dr. Moshe Lewis, a California Pacific Medical Center physician who specializes in pain management and sports medicine. "Only 15 minutes a day, that's not much. It's great for people to know that walking around, doing some stairs, that's getting a cardiac regimen going." Read the article

Having a large penis is nothing to be proud of. Of course it's nothing to be ashamed of either. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- Old Hungarian Proverb

Has BiBottomBoy gone away? I'll bet he just met someone gay. While I'm being banal, He's out getting anal. I really have nothing to say.

They must be reading the MER Board. Netflix kills plan to split off DVD rentals

Thanks for posting this. I heard a mention on the radio yesterday, and meant to check it out. According to the article, "This is very odd and clearly outlier behavior," (Donald Kraybill, an expert on the Amish) wrote to HuffPost. "Amish-on-Amish violences is extremely rare. ... These appear to be malicious assaults on symbols of Amish identity by a wacko little group." Personally, I wouldn't cross them off the list of peaceful societies, based on these instances. I recall another story from a few years ago that made a deep impression on me. Amish families who lost children in a school shooting showed up at the shooter's funeral and forgave the shooter and consoled his family. Always worth remembering, I think, that societies are made up of individuals and not everyone's the same. Even the Tea Party has the occasional disagreement.

Better get a wiggle on. Tomorrow the feds are announcing that they sent letters to at least sixteen California medical marijuana dispensaries telling them to close up shop before Thanksgiving. If they rent the space, their landlords got a letter too demanding they kick the pot clubs out or go to jail and turn over any rent they collected along the way. San Diego was particularly hard hit, but at least one Marin club got a letter on Wednesday: Greg Anton, a lawyer who represents a Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana, said the 14-year-old dispensary's landlord received an "extremely threatening" letter Wednesday invoking a federal law that imposes additional penalties for selling drugs within 1,000 feet of schools, parks and playgrounds. The landlord was ordered to evict the pot club or risk imprisonment, plus forfeiture of the property and all the rent he has collected while the dispensary has been in business, Anton said. The Marin Alliance's founder "has been paying state and federal taxes for 14 years, and they have cashed all the checks," he said. "All I hear from Obama is whining about his budget, but he has money to do this which will actually reduce revenues." Some say the letters are no worse than the ones the Bush administration sent out in 2006. More bark than bite, although some clubs did close. If I were the suspicious sort, I couldn't help but observe that the letter arrived on the same day than Ken Burns wrapped up his "Prohibition" series with a segment called "A Nation of Hypocrites". I watched most of the series and the thrust seemed to be how damaging the 18th Amendment was to the country. I wonder what folks who watched the series are going to think tomorrow morning when they hear that the government is back to its old ways. I'm not sure what to think, and was wondering what the views are among the Distinguished Dudes of MER. Is the government doing a bit of saber rattling to please the Far Right, or is it really getting ready to put on another Volstead Act? . .

Allegedly, there's an outfit in the Midwest that sells one in the shape of a corn dog.

You guys are incredible! Such healthy eaters. Recently, I picked out a quinoa salad at a healthy deli I enjoy, not knowing what it was. It seemed like barley to me and took on the flavor of the other ingredients in the salad. Delicious, but I had no idea it was good for me too. Many thanks for increasing awareness of this excellent ingredient, for the recipes, and for the cooking tips. Lazy as sin, I'm on my way now to a local Fresh Choice restaurant where, for $7, I'm going to let somebody else put the goodies together. Thanks again, guys. Your posts really do make a difference!

There are those who say it's plenty good. (Tim) Bajarin, the longtime Apple watcher, is confident that Apple will quickly overcome the perception problem once technology reviewers get a better handle on all the new bells and whistles. He believes that the improved camera and speech-recognition technology are compelling enough additions to make the iPhone 4S another hit for Apple. "People are going to get over their initial disappointment and want this phone," he said. Add a processor that's twice as fast and a high-definition video camera and it's pretty tempting. I had hoped to see the thinner form factor and larger screen that were predicted for the iPhone 5, but Apple may have decided to spread the goodies out over two upgrade cycles rather than one. Not sure what to do.

Seems a surefire way to get participation, as the OP asked, is to start a thread on how to get participation. It draws folks in like bears to honey. As a public service, I'm sure, MsGuy has now schooled us on how to lose participation. If anyone needs me, I'll be in my room poking my eyes out.

If I implied that, it was not intentional. I don't personally know anyone who I think 'deserves' to kill another human being. But I do know several folks who believe that they are entitled to make that decision. For me, it always comes back to a conversation that each of us has with himself. I had my first such conversation in my mid-twenties, and have updated that conversation every few years since. I don't try to intrude on anyone else's personal conversation. Each of us must decide for himself. For example, I wouldn't try to convince you that your views are right or wrong. If asked, I'll share the dialogue I've had with myself, and how I came to believe what I believe. My own personal dialogue included all the situations you have mentioned, from the abstract to the individual. Among the decisions I have made is not to go to war, and to discourage my country from going to war. I would not pull a switch on the electric chair, even if I were one of six people with 'only' a 16.7% chance of delivering the fatal shock. As far as I know, I would not take another person's life to save my own; however, I realize that an instinct for self-preservation may very well kick in. If I did end up taking another life to save my own, I expect my remaining years would be unhappy ones. The hardest conversation I've had is whether or not I'd kill another person to protect the life of another, especially someone who is very dear to me. I've concluded that I probably would although, again, I would not expect much joy in my life after I did it. I was able to 'serve' my country in a peaceful capacity, and I've been fortunate to be able to live in a fairly safe environment. In practical terms, I've been blessed to be able to keep some distance from the line of fire. Among my ethical concerns at the moment are that my country gets into wars where thousands of people are slaughtered to help support my 'lifestyle', and that many of my fellow citizens are killing many other of my fellow citizens without my voice being raised loudly enough to prevent it. I do make my views known in these areas, although I could do more. I hope this gives you some insight into my personal dialogue. Again, I am not making any comment on yours or anybody else's. For me, it's enough that you are having it.

I'll ask around.

I was going to invite you for an Irish coffee or some such, until I realized you meant Science Fiction. Still, if you're ever in the neighborhood . . .

I knew I should have left that 'qualified' phrase out and stayed with my original version of the statement: 'My viewpoint is based on who I am, not who they are. I simply don't want to put myself in the position of taking another person's life. I don't deserve to make that call.' Qualification be damned, the issue of deserving to make a life-or-death decision for another human being is the big one for me. It troubles me that some of the least evolved human beings on the planet have managed to convince themselves that they are entitled to put an end to someone else's life. I'm glad that most countries are getting out of the execution business and I'll be even gladder when ours is one of them. Legend: Abolished for all crimes Abolished for crimes not committed in exceptional circumstances (such as crimes committed in time of war) Abolished in practice Legal form of punishment According to this this article, nine countries carried out executions so far this year: Bangladesh China Iran North Korea the Palestinian Authority Saudi Arabia Somalia UAE USA

I understand what you're saying, Lucky, and agree that there are some nasty folks out there. However, my viewpoint is based on who I am, not who they are. I simply don't want to put myself in the position of taking another person's life. I don't deserve to make that call, nor am I qualified.

I could get behind that, TY. Hell, I'd even put Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann on either side of the miscreant, and pipe in medleys from the Captain & Tennille.

Personally, I decided a long time ago I don't want to kill anybody. Not John Wayne Gacy, not William Bonin, not even Ethel Rosenberg. Not anybody. Simple as that.