http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/chines ... ar-BBkHFqx
I am not sure whether to angry or relieved that the chinese (let's face it this is a PRC army operation) did this instead of a hacker from the U.S. Somebody 2 years ago tried to FOIA a list of every OSHA inspector. That got squashed. Last thing I want is someone publishing said list anonymously.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

Now, the vast majority of Fenspace stories pertain to the antics of Fen in outer space (that is, space beyond the Earth's atmosphere).  But what about inner space (i.e. the oceans)?  IRL we know more about outer space than we know about our own oceans.  I'd be surprised if there haven't been at least a few Fen who have tried to explore the depths of the oceans, almost certainly using handwaved tech (e.g. cars 'waved to survive the crushing pressures several miles below the surface).

For example, imagine having some Fen-tech be used in the search for Malaysian Airlines Flight 370.  Or perhaps being used to locate long-lost shipwrecks.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015 ... /28373087/
My concern now is that it might jump to cities world wide.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

Poi!
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

As a result of too many high profile drunken driver arrests involving California legislators, state senate officials have hired designated driving employees to drive home inebriated lawmakers. 
Spending $60k a year to drive drunk senators home is a wise use of taxpayer money? Why can't they call a cab and use their own money like the rest of us? They're  already overpaid and get tax free per diem so they should be able to afford it.

And people wonder why California is going bankrupt... 
ThsThey're  already overpaid and get tax free per diem so they should be able to afford it.

Okay, I finally broke down on two fronts.
One: I decided to go ahead and cut my list down to fifteen worlds, with a caveat for two 'stumbles'.

Two: I've decided that I want to go ahead and share the list with everyone.

1. Tenchi Muyo
   
2. MLP:FiM
   
3. Macross
   
4. Firefly
   
5. Pokemon
   
6. Katanagatari
   
   
   1. AIR (Stumble)
      
7. Utawarerumono
   
8. Sailor
   Moon
   
9. Kill
   la Kill
   
10. Battle
    Angel Alita
    
11. Banner
    of the Stars
    
    
    1. Forgotten
       Realms (Stumble)
       
12. Star
    Wars
    
13. Diebuster
    
14. Melody
    of Oblivion
    
15. Puella
    Magi Madoka Magica
    

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/soccer/ ... ar-BBkpFIy
The only way that would happen is if he bribes the Attorney General or he somehow "persuades" the next Presdient to institute a "Saturday Night Massacre" ala Richard Nixon.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

Dail debates are a matter of public record. Speech in the Dail is absolutely privileged.

Yet a speech made in the Dail in thursday is being kept out of the news. Most newspapers aren't reporting it - and the few that do only mention that it exists. RTE, the government owned broadcaster demonstrated its usefullness by trying - only to be blocked by a Court order.

Now, as a bit of background there's been ructions in the media lately about a few shady deals and the impression that one particular individual was basically using his connections to the higher levels of a publicly-owned bank formed from the mess of Anglo to get himself better deals on debts - the usual generally shady old-boys-club crap that happens. But especially galling when the same bank is basically gutting small businesses and smaller investors.

Of course, the court's jurisdiction doesn't extend far beyond the shores of the island. I suppose it's better of pointing to the Guardian to give a reasonable account. Or maybe The New York Times.

And what nobody's trying to actually report:
So, here goes.

Quote: That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to amend the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993 in order to make an addition to the First Schedule, to expand the areas under which an examination under section 9 may be conducted, and to provide for related matters.

The Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Bill 2015 proposes to extend the functions and powers of the Comptroller and Auditor General to cover IBRC. It was the Taoiseach who first suggested that the Comptroller and Auditor General review the Siteserv sale process at which time it was pointed out to him that the IBRC does not come within the Comptroller and Auditor General's remit. With this Bill, I am attempting to address that problem by broadening the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General. The reason I anticipate the need to involve the Comptroller and Auditor General, if not a full commission of inquiry which latter might well be a better option, is that the Government has got this matter badly wrong. That is not least because most of the key players in the Siteserv saga have links with KPMG and the eventual purchaser and vice versa. It is a web of connections and conflicts that requires outside eyes to unravel.

I have no doubt that the special liquidator is more than capable of carrying out such a review, but his direct involvement in the sale process, his relationship with the eventual purchaser of Siteserv and his current actions in the High Court in supporting Mr. Denis O'Brien against RTE place him in a position where there is, at the very least, a perceived if not an actual conflict of interest. The review is not confined to Siteserv, but that is the transaction that prompted a review in the first instance. I worry about the transactions that have been excluded from the review given what that we now know that in the final months before prom night, the relationship between the Department and IBRC had completely broken down. If deals were being done without the knowledge or input of the Minister, we must know what those were. We are now aware, for example, that the former CEO of IBRC made verbal agreements with Denis O'Brien to allow him to extend the terms of his already expired loans. We also know that the verbal agreement was never escalated to the credit committee for approval. I am led to believe and would welcome clarification by the Minister that the rates applicable to the extension were extremely favourable. I understand that Mr. O'Brien was enjoying a rate of approximately 1.25% when IBRC could, and arguably should, have been charging 7.5%. Given that we are talking about outstanding sums of upwards of €500 million, the interest rate applied is not an insignificant issue for the public interest. We also know that Denis O'Brien felt confident enough in his dealings with IBRC that he could write to Kieran Wallace, the special liquidator, to demand that the same favourable terms extended to him by way of a verbal agreement be continued. We now have Kieran Wallace, who has been appointed by the Government to conduct the IBRC review, joining with IBRC and Denis O'Brien in the High Court to seek to injunct the information I have outlined from coming into the public domain. Surely, that alone represents a conflict.

In documents released to me under freedom of information, the Minister, his officials, the Central Bank and even the troika acknowledge that IBRC - the former Anglo Irish Bank - is no ordinary bank and that there is a significant public interest as the bank was fully nationalised and was in wind-down mode. They all accept that this is the people's money we are dealing with and that there can be no dispute regarding the public interest in this. The same materials obtained under freedom of information detail instances where the Minister can specifically intervene and issue a ministerial order that material matters have a significant public interest. Included in these material matters are instances that are outside the ordinary course of business. I argue that what I have outlined here regarding verbal deals and extensions etc. are outside the normal course of business and ask the Minister to exercise his right to intervene in the current proceedings to defend the public interest.

I have a motion on the Order Paper signed by the majority of Opposition Members calling for a debate on the proposed review. I note that 45 Members have signed and more are welcome to. When I tried to raise the matter on the Order of Business, I was silenced and told to take it up with my Whip. I am the Whip of the Technical Group and I had raised the matter at the weekly Whips' meeting. The Government Chief Whip told me that the Government would not be altering the KPMG review and that it would not provide time to debate this issue. He suggested that we use Private Members' time. This is not just an Opposition issue; it is an issue for the whole House. It is an issue of serious public concern involving public money. If the Minister opposite, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, got his hands on an extra €20 million, he would not have to think too hard about how to spend it. I urge the Government to reconsider this matter and to give the Bill and the motion the time they deserve. It is in the public interest to do so.

Quote:“We are now aware…that the former CEO of IBRC made verbal agreements with Denis O’Brien to allow him to extend the terms of his already expired loans…

Quote:“I understand that Mr O’Brien was enjoying a rate of approximately 1.25 per cent when IBRC could, and arguably should, have been charging 7.5 per cent.

Quote:“Given that we are talking about outstanding sums of upwards of €500m, the interest rate applied is not an insignificant issue for the public interest.”

More specifically, an obsolete http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... sight.html]400-year old law in the remote Westfjords region:

Quote:The law, which applies only in Westfjords – a northern peninsula jutting out into the sea, and the most remote part of Iceland – dates back to 1615.

In that year Basque whalers ran aground in Strandir, in the far north of the Westfjords. The Westfjords sheriff at the time, Ari Magnusson, declared that any Basque people found in the Westfjords could be legally killed on the spot.

Quote:"The decision to do away with the decree was more symbolic than anything else," said Jonas Gudmundsson, Westfjords district commissioner, when he officially repealed the law at the http://www.galdrasyning.is/]Museum of Icelandic Sorcery last month.

Any wordplay title I could come up with wouldn't be as geeky as the simple statement "NASA ringtones," so:

http://www.nasa.gov/connect/sounds/index.html]NASA ringtones

Now for the wordplay: I choose to answer my phone, not because it is easy, but because it is ringing.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012