Excuse me? There was something the government had to disclose to the FISA Court? Yes? I know someone with a pen and a telephone.

Published time: January 27, 2014 23:17
 
British intelligence officials (click here) can infiltrate the very cables that transfer information across the internet as well as monitor users in real time on sites like Facebook without the company's consent, according to documents leaked by Edward Snowden.

The internal documents reveal that British analysts gave instruction to members of the National Security Agency in 2012, showing them how to spy on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube in real time and collect the computer addresses of billions of the sites’ uploaders. 

The leaked documents are from a GCHQ publication titled ‘Psychology: A New Kind of SIGDEV’ (Signals Development). Published by NBC News on Monday, the papers detail a program dubbed ‘Squeaky Dolphin,’ which was developed for analysts working in “broad real-time monitoring of online activity.”

Sources told NBC that the British have proven their ability to both directly monitor the world’s web traffic cable and use a third party to view the data stream and extract information from it.

Representatives from the companies in question said they have not provided any data to the government of the United Kingdom under this program, either voluntarily or involuntarily. One person who wished to remain anonymous said that Google, the company that owns YouTube, was “shocked” to discover the UK may have been “grabbing” data for years... 

I wonder how many lies the people and the companies were provided by the NSA and the British government. After all, all these companies were providing data voluntarily for the good of all humanity. Why bother asking? Except, it would cover their backsides when people were actually arrested and/or prosecuted with information from the companies.

Something like this:

Richard R. Clapper: "Magnificent."

GCHQ (click here) Agent: "Absolutely. Makes the metadata gathering completely antiquated. I mean did the metadata ever really produce anything consistent?"

Clapper: "No, it didn't really. But, I'll tell you this much, the metadata collection covers our tracks when information from these companies are actually used to arrest individuals."

GCHQ Agent: "True. Very true." 

"Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee."

If I were 'the best' and an opponent was trying to talk me down, I would be proud I never was shaken.

Mr. Sherman comes from a long and distinguished history of those that are sincerely great.

It is called bragging rights. When you got it, you got it.

Go, Richard, Go!

Senator Paul's revival of the Clinton Impeachment is unfortunate. Those that live in glass houses should cast stones.

No finds infidelity attractive or a character strength. President Clinton was not predatory. Ms. Lewinski was equally seductive in her behavior. She claimed they were in love and I am sure that is the way she felt.

Ms. Lewinski has moved on. It would be unfortunate to cause her any adverse problems with her life. This is very old news. I am quite certain Mrs. Clinton has made her peace with the troubled times, has seen her daughter married and carried out a successful career as a Senator and a Secretary of State.

Monica Lewinsky (click here) is Rand Paul's answer to Democratic charges that Republicans are waging a 'war on women.' But it could backfire. Bill Clinton remains broadly popular with the public.

By Peter Grier, Staff writer 

January 27, 2014

Senator Paul referenced Ms. Lewinsky when talking about past Democratic charges that the Republican Party wages a “war on women."
When making that rhetorical attack, Democrats should remember that their now-beloved ex-President Bill Clinton had an affair in office with a woman who was much, much younger than he, said Paul....

I am quite certain Senator Paul would love a sex scandal to end the career of Secretary Clinton. That is a common Republican strategy and it simply won't happen.

Republicans have more than their fair share of sex scandals, including those that have involved interns. The latest is the Vitter wants to be Governor. Amazing. He might even pass a law making prostitution legal. 

This was the vote for impeachment:

...In the noisy House chamber, (click here) a lone Republican applauded. Five Republicans crossed party lines to vote against impeachment. Five Democrats broke with their party to support it.

The margin was enough to forestall charges that the President's fate might have been different if the vote had been delayed to the 106th Congress, which will have five more Democrats.

A second article of impeachment, charging Mr. Clinton with obstruction of justice, passed on a narrower vote of 221 to 212. It accused him of inducing others to lie in order to conceal his affair with Ms. Lewinsky. This time 12 Republicans voted no, while 5 Democrats voted yes....

Perhaps Senator Paul was too young, but, certainly his father would remember; there were members of the US House that excused themselves from leading the charges because they had engaged in infidelity. 

As a matter of fact, the Republcans had to go through at least two members before they found one that hadn't committed adultery.

By bringing this up Senator Paul is trying to prove the war on women is artificial and hoping people would believe that Secretary Clinton should have divorced her husband.

Really? I thought Senator Paul was more savvy on women's right than this. No one is going believe for one minute Senator Clinton is an example a victimized woman. She isn't. She made her choices and she lives with them. She is accomplished unto herself and is eminently qualified to serve as President of the USA.

I want to repeat, "She made her choices and she lives with them." That is the issue Senator Paul and the rightwing has yet to come to terms with it. Women are more than capable of making decisions about their lives. They are capable of deciding when they want to be married, start a family and how many children they will bring into a family.

The rightwing chronically victimizes women because they disrespect their life choices by putting limits on reproductive choice. That means women have the right to make the decision to use contraception or not. It also means women are capable of deciding that an unwanted pregnancy is adverse to their best outcomes. When a woman has to make a decision that her life will be ill effected by an unwanted pregnancy, it means she has made the decision the child would not have the benefit of all she is capable of providing.

Republicans demand women allow the state make child bearing decisions for them. That is the USA? No, it is not. Women don't want to be raped and be required to carry a fetus to birth when the father has caused her permanent emotional damage. 

The state wants women to carry fetuses to term in the case of incest. I don't think so. The emotional burden of the mother to lie to the child about how he or she was conceived and what the father did isn't really a bedtime story now is it?

In the state deciding women can't have birth control, that means they may very well have one baby after another. Multiple pregnancies beyond two are proven to adversely impact a woman's long term wellness. And what is the solace to women with many children? "The hand me downs will be a great savings to child rearing?"  It will never be enough savings to put all those worthy children through college.

Senator Paul, your statements only prove, you have never learned to accept a woman's decision. When a woman makes a decision it isn't up for barter. She has decided a path for her life and invests in it. Her decisions are her own. Secretary Clinton made her choices. She loves this country. She loves her husband and family and they love her. She is admired for her personal strength that brings reality to her personal and professional decisions.

It isn't enough for a political figure to state they respect and honor women; they have to live it. In this case, Senator Paul has regressed to a very old paradigm for women to apply to Secretary Clinton. Sir. She broke the mold.

Twenty children were killed in one incident at Sandy Hook Elementary School, too.

Michelle Healy
USA TODAY 12:12 p.m. EST January 27, 2014

Almost one child or teen (click here) an hour is injured by a firearm seriously enough to require hospitalization, a new analysis finds. Six percent of the 7,391 hospitalizations analyzed in 2009 resulted in a death, says the study in February's Pediatrics, released Monday.

The damage caused by gun-related injuries rarely gets the same attention as fatalities, "but that every day, 20 of our children are hospitalized for firearms injury, often suffering severe and costly injuries, clearly shows that this is a national public health problem," says Robert Sege, director of the Division of Family and Child Advocacy at Boston Medical Center and a co-author of the study.

Despite declining rates over the past decade, firearm injuries remain the second leading cause of death, behind motor vehicle crashes, for teens ages 15 to 19, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention....

"Good Night, Moon"

Waning Crescent

19% Full

25.2 days old

January 26, 2014
...Celestial hugging (click here)

Tuesday morning, see if you can spot Venus just to the lower left of the thin waning crescent moon in the very low southeast sky about 45 minutes before sunrise. Venus is only 28 million miles away and through a small telescope or pair of binoculars appears as a very thin crescent. Go for it, early morning risers.


(Lynch is an amateur astronomer and author of the book, "Stars, a Month by Month Tour of the Constellations." Contact him at mikewlynch@comcast.net.)