P Wiki - User contributions [en]

Looking For Porn In All The Wrong Places Revisited

2018-04-27T11:00:24Z

VanHeinig84103:

Just to sum up the case: the Department of Justice asked the [http://lovetantricmassagelondon.co.uk/ xxx cxxx] four biggest search engines, Google, Yahoo, MSN, and AOL, to turn over records regarding a certain amount of searches performed on their respective domains. The feds said they basically needed such records in their ongoing measures to protect children from harmful online content (especially porn). The latter 3 acquiesced, G didn�t. So the DoJ took the Googleheads to court, seeking to force them to comply with its federal order via subpoena. If you loved this article and you would like to acquire far more information with regards to [http://lovetantricmassagelondon.co.uk/ xxx porn free videos] kindly go to our website. I speculated (in my previous entry) that Google would lose in the case, and it did. It must now submit the necessary data to the feds. But not as much data as the feds were seeking. It seems that Google�s initial concerns, namely regarding it�s patrons� rights to privacy and its own right to keep its books private, were taken into account by the judge. I�d also predicted earlier that G�s reticence to divulge the required information would put them in well with porn surfers who highly value their privacy. The reason being that those surfers could rest assured that the search giant was doing everything in its power to protect their collective privacy. But I think I misjudged that placement of trust.According to the latest judgment, the privacy issue may be out of Google�s hands, no matter what measures it�s trying to take to protect its patrons. If the federal government can just walk in anytime it wants to demanding the results of online queries from major search portals, and get its wish, it�s going to instill a bit of mistrust in Google, as well as its biggest competitors (on the part of the I-hope-to-run-for-office-someday-and-I-don�t-want-this-information-used-against-me individual, for example). And G is not even at fault here because it did the best it could under the circumstances. To reiterate, the DoJ wasn�t awarded all that they were asking for in terms of user searches. But in the end , the casual surfer just looking for a little afternoon porn because he�s bored at work just might decide to go to a smaller, more inconspicuous engine in looking for his favorite niche. After all, if you�re not seeking that structured a query, you can search for smut in many places. There are always going to be people searching for it, and if they can do so without putting themselves at risk in this �War Against Pornography� climate, even better.Bottomline, Google - along with Yahoo, AOL, and MSN - loses a few porn-minded visitors; maybe only for the short-term, maybe forever. In the meantime, the smaller portals and directories pick those visitors up, and they can compete a little more with the big boys. And if that�s the worst that comes out of this situation, the Bush administration might�ve just done small online businesses (in this case, search engines) a favor. I ask you, is that so bad?

Trump Breaks Silence Claims No Knowledge Of Porn Star Payment

2018-04-26T18:28:43Z

VanHeinig84103:

The porn actress Stephanie Clifford -- who goes by the screen name Stormy Daniels -- claims she had an affair with Donald Trump more than a decade ago US President Donald Trump on Thursday broke a two month silence about allegations he had sex with a porn star, insisting that he did not pay her $130,000 hush money through his lawyer. After weeks of dodging questions about the alleged tryst, Trump offered a flat "no" when asked if he knew about the payment made in the final weeks of the 2016 election. The actress, Stephanie Clifford -- who goes by the screen name Stormy Daniels -- claims she received the money to cover up a sexual encounter with Trump more than a decade ago. The president's long-time lawyer Michael Cohen has admitted to making the payment, and has accused Daniels of breaching a non-disclosure agreement she signed in return. Last month Daniels told 21 million TV watchers that she had unprotected sex with Trump after meeting at a celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe in July 2006 -- shortly after Trump's wife Melania gave birth to their son. That alleged affair and the suspected cover up presents a legal and political minefield for Trump. Support among America's evangelical Christians -- who make up 25 percent of the population -- was pivotal to his election victory. While the alleged sexual encounter was said to be consensual, the payment to Daniels could constitute a undeclared campaign contribution. Should you loved this short article and you would love to receive details with regards to www [http://lovetantricmassagelondon.co.uk/ xxx] Prno ([http://lovetantricmassagelondon.co.uk/ lovetantricmassagelondon.Co.uk]) generously visit our own web site. Trump insisted he did not know why Cohen made the payment. "You'll have to ask Michael Cohen. Michael is my attorney. You'll have to ask Michael." Asked if he knew where the money came from, Trump told reporters on Air Force One: "No, I don't know." That claim was immediately challenged by Daniels' lawyer Michael Avenatti. "We very much look forward to testing the truthfulness of Mr. Trump's feigned lack of knowledge concerning the $130k payment," he tweeted. "As history teaches us, it is one thing to deceive the press and quite another to do so under oath." Trump had never spoken publicly about the allegations and has repeatedly ignored questions from reporters about the issue, which has dogged the White House for months. Daniels is challenging the validity of the non-disclosure agreement in court, saying Trump never countersigned it -- a claim that Trump's comments on Thursday would appear to support. Such contracts, while legal, have frequently been used by powerful men to hush up affairs, workplace harassment or even alleged sexual abuse. Daniels is also suing Cohen for defamation and has sought to force the president to testify under oath. So far the First Lady has not responded, but her spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham urged respect. "While I know the media is enjoying speculation & salacious gossip, I'd like to remind people there's a minor child who's name should be kept out of news stories when at all possible," she said in a tweet. Advertisement

User:VanHeinig84103

2018-04-26T18:27:41Z

VanHeinig84103: Created page with "I like my hobby Gaming. Appears boring? Not! I also to learn Turkish in my free time. my web-site ... www xxx Prno ([http://lovetantricmassagelondon.co.uk/ lovetant..."

I like my hobby Gaming. Appears boring? Not! I also to learn Turkish in my free time. my web-site ... www xxx Prno ([http://lovetantricmassagelondon.co.uk/ lovetantricmassagelondon.Co.uk])