US Navy members blocked from getting Fox News

[momonkey]

Why you interloping on KrustyFranks turf? He staked out the hack lying thingy a long time ago.

Your lame "libtard" name calling is a bit late and out of focus also.

I am a third(ormore) generation Republican looking back and up to Eisenhower and Goldwater. You on the other hand are a fruit fly.

Did someone ask what you are or are you that pathetic and self-absorbed that you feel compelled to offer details about yourself to people who didn't ask and couldn't care less?

Writer and inventor? Isn't that web-speak for unemployed alcoholic?

Did I ask you a question ccocroach? Did I single you out? When I want to see yor lips flapping you will know because I will offer it in a reply or your loggon name. My statement could be applied to several idiots on this thread. You are not the spokespeson for the idiots...Are You????

Your post is in response to mine. That's why the line goes from my post to your post.

 

[HUGGY]

Did someone ask what you are or are you that pathetic and self-absorbed that you feel compelled to offer details about yourself to people who didn't ask and couldn't care less?

Writer and inventor? Isn't that web-speak for unemployed alcoholic?

Did I ask you a question ccocroach? Did I single you out? When I want to see yor lips flapping you will know because I will offer it in a reply or your loggon name. My statement could be applied to several idiots on this thread. You are not the spokespeson for the idiots...Are You????

Your post is in response to mine. That's why the line goes from my post to your post.

Wrong moron. A reply is a reply and a post is a post. There is no line. The shoe fit so you put it on. I just wanted to see if you were that stupid. You are.

 

[JBeukema]

It's not a crime to lie in the news.!

Exactly what Fox argued

the courts agreed

Fox went to court to argue for their right to lie and their right to lie was upheld in the courts

I'm calling BS.

And don't waste everyone's time repeating the same crap until you have read the decision and have a clue what you're talking about.

I read it. I've posted it here before.

Fox won because they have a legal right to lie, meaning that the reporters' termination for refusing to lie did not qualify them for whistleblower status. That was what fox argued and the courts agreed, overturning an earlier decision that had ruled the reporters' actions protected as they were refusing to break the law (by lying.)

 

[CMike]

It's not a crime to lie in the news.!

Exactly what Fox argued

the courts agreed

Fox went to court to argue for their right to lie and their right to lie was upheld in the courts

Link?

 

[CMike]

Apparently Barak Hussein is confused. He still thinks he was annointed dictator, and that Americans no longer have freedom.

If anyone deserves to hear any news organziation they wish it's the people who fight for America's freedom.

It's disturbing, how some posters think America now should be a dictatorship, because their dictator is in office.

Get a grip fuckwit. Obama is the CIC. You want to dismantle the chain of command on what authority exactly?

What is scary and more and more apparent Mao Tse Huggy is that liberals do not tolerate any dissent.

They are communists and anti-American.

 

[CMike]

Apparently Barak Hussein is confused. He still thinks he was annointed dictator, and that Americans no longer have freedom.

If anyone deserves to hear any news organziation they wish it's the people who fight for America's freedom.

It's disturbing, how some posters think America now should be a dictatorship, because their dictator is in office.

Get a grip fuckwit. Obama is the CIC. You want to dismantle the chain of command on what authority exactly?

Both of you are wrong. Obama hasn't got jack shit to do with what ANOC lets pass through their web filters and onto government computers. Get a grip on reality.

So who made the decision?

 

[JBeukema]

It's not a crime to lie in the news.!

Exactly what Fox argued

the courts agreed

Fox went to court to argue for their right to lie and their right to lie was upheld in the courts

Link?

click the 'search' button and read one of the threads

 

[JBeukema]

Apparently Barak Hussein is confused. He still thinks he was annointed dictator, and that Americans no longer have freedom.

If anyone deserves to hear any news organziation they wish it's the people who fight for America's freedom.

It's disturbing, how some posters think America now should be a dictatorship, because their dictator is in office.

Get a grip fuckwit. Obama is the CIC. You want to dismantle the chain of command on what authority exactly?

What is scary and more and more apparent Mao Tse Huggy is that liberals do not tolerate any dissent.

They are communists and anti-American.

a liberal cannot be a communist any more than red can also be green

 

[HUGGY]

Apparently Barak Hussein is confused. He still thinks he was annointed dictator, and that Americans no longer have freedom.

If anyone deserves to hear any news organziation they wish it's the people who fight for America's freedom.

It's disturbing, how some posters think America now should be a dictatorship, because their dictator is in office.

Get a grip fuckwit. Obama is the CIC. You want to dismantle the chain of command on what authority exactly?

What is scary and more and more apparent Mao Tse Huggy is that liberals do not tolerate any dissent.

They are communists and anti-American.

Christ Mikey..get a fuckin grip. You come off like some idiot blond teen age bitch babysiter in a splatter film. The lights go out...The phone rings...there is a knock at the door...Mikey pees his panties...

The problem with you idiot fear mongering fundis is that thats all you see. The main difference between you and me is that I am not afraid of Obama and you are. It has nothing to do with political fundimentals. For the record I tried to get into the Air Force out of highschool so I could learn to fly bombers and drop bombs on the commies. I didn't have good enough grades cuz I was more interested in snow skiing and waterskiing than attending class. My bad.

 

[momonkey]

Did I ask you a question ccocroach? Did I single you out? When I want to see yor lips flapping you will know because I will offer it in a reply or your loggon name. My statement could be applied to several idiots on this thread. You are not the spokespeson for the idiots...Are You????

Your post is in response to mine. That's why the line goes from my post to your post.

Wrong moron. A reply is a reply and a post is a post. There is no line. The shoe fit so you put it on. I just wanted to see if you were that stupid. You are.

And your post was a reply.

Was it difficult to eat lead paint chips as a child without the benefit of opposable thumbs?

 

[momonkey]

Exactly what Fox argued

the courts agreed

Fox went to court to argue for their right to lie and their right to lie was upheld in the courts

I'm calling BS.

And don't waste everyone's time repeating the same crap until you have read the decision and have a clue what you're talking about.

I read it. I've posted it here before.

Fox won because they have a legal right to lie, meaning that the reporters' termination for refusing to lie did not qualify them for whistleblower status. That was what fox argued and the courts agreed, overturning an earlier decision that had ruled the reporters' actions protected as they were refusing to break the law (by lying.)

Leave the quotes in your other pants?


Powered by Google Docs


Go ahead, find anything that supports your BS.

I'll wait...

 

[JBeukema]

your source:

QUOTE]This case arose from a dispute between a broadcast news reporter and
her television station management about the editing of a news story.
Florida’s Private Whistle-Blower Act, §§ 448.101-105, Fla. Stat. (1997), a jury
awarded the reporter $425,000 in damages based on her claim that she was
terminated for threatening to disclose allegedly “illegal” editing of a news report
by her employer, a broadcast news organization. The editing was alleged to violate
a Federal Communications Commission (“FCC&#8221 policy against the intentional
falsification of the news, known as the “news distortion policy.”

[/quote]
page 10


Fox lied

she refused to go along with it

they fire her

the court ruled Fox wasn't allowed to lie and that firing her for not going along was a violation of the whistleblower act

The appeals court ruled the opposite- that fox is right in saying they are allowed to lie, meaning that her termination for threatening to expose them did not warrant whistleblower status


you linked to my evidence for me

 

[CMike]

Link?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I conceed no expertise on these matters. Can you provide some information excluding the commander in chief from making a determination that Fox could be detrimental to his authority and act on that assumtion?

No. Acting on assumptions makes one out to be an ASS. I speak from personal experience as I'm still currently employed by DoD. We have access to the internet on government computers for the conduct of business and to check our email when it's allowed. Several times websites like grainger, mcmaster-carr etc. are blocked for a while due to some code or java app that is being exploited by hackers. Instead of letting the hackers in they block the sight until they develope a security patch and install it. Fox news' website relies heavily on java apps and therefore it's blocked many times as hackers attack that website.

That seems like a lot of tap dancing...most of it backwards or sideways. Am I being an ass suggesting that the OP is in regards as to wether the POTUS has the unchallenged right to determine if Fox gets played or not irregardless of any technical mumbo jumbo?

Do you or do you not conceed that Obama can remove Fox from using armed forces media access to his troops? Yes or no? If not can you state the law or regulation denying him that option?

Try not to get lost opaqueing the question with hackers.

The government can block access to it's computers by any website at anytime. Is that simple enough for one of limited mental capacity to understand or would you prefer a single syllable response next time?

 

[HUGGY]

No. Acting on assumptions makes one out to be an ASS. I speak from personal experience as I'm still currently employed by DoD. We have access to the internet on government computers for the conduct of business and to check our email when it's allowed. Several times websites like grainger, mcmaster-carr etc. are blocked for a while due to some code or java app that is being exploited by hackers. Instead of letting the hackers in they block the sight until they develope a security patch and install it. Fox news' website relies heavily on java apps and therefore it's blocked many times as hackers attack that website.

That seems like a lot of tap dancing...most of it backwards or sideways. Am I being an ass suggesting that the OP is in regards as to wether the POTUS has the unchallenged right to determine if Fox gets played or not irregardless of any technical mumbo jumbo?

Do you or do you not conceed that Obama can remove Fox from using armed forces media access to his troops? Yes or no? If not can you state the law or regulation denying him that option?

Try not to get lost opaqueing the question with hackers.

The government can block access to it's computers by any website at anytime. Is that simple enough for one of limited mental capacity to understand or would you prefer a single syllable response next time?

Any decent hacker can do that. Do you or do you not conceed that Obama can remove Fox from using armed forces media just because he is the commander in chief?

It is obvious that you do not believe Obama is the lawful leader of our troops. What a sad little fuck you are.

 

[bodecea]

Has the world as we know it come to an end yet because FOX, for a time, wasn't accessible to our Navy?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

That seems like a lot of tap dancing...most of it backwards or sideways. Am I being an ass suggesting that the OP is in regards as to wether the POTUS has the unchallenged right to determine if Fox gets played or not irregardless of any technical mumbo jumbo?

Do you or do you not conceed that Obama can remove Fox from using armed forces media access to his troops? Yes or no? If not can you state the law or regulation denying him that option?

Try not to get lost opaqueing the question with hackers.

The government can block access to it's computers by any website at anytime. Is that simple enough for one of limited mental capacity to understand or would you prefer a single syllable response next time?

Any decent hacker can do that. Do you or do you not conceed that Obama can remove Fox from using armed forces media just because he is the commander in chief?

It is obvious that you do not believe Obama is the lawful leader of our troops. What a sad little fuck you are.

Look you terminally stupid ass motherfucker....Obama delegates the authority to act on his behalf down the chain of command. He doesn't sit in the White House deciding which websites he will ban on any given day. Now shut your fucking piehole and put down the ice pipe.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Has the world as we know it come to an end yet because FOX, for a time, wasn't accessible to our Navy?

Of course not....you were or are still in and I'm sure you've heard of ANOC. They are the ones who determine what is seen on NIPR nets and SIPR nets. How can anyone be as stupid to believe Obama sits at his desk saying "Ban Fox News...I don't like Sheppard Smith!!!"