WTF was she googling that for at work !?!?!?!?
1 posted on
08/01/2013 5:45:23 PM PDT by
11th_VA
To: 11th_VA
Stupid woman.
With the American Stasi in full gear, paranoia is not paranoia; it’s just good survival thinking.
2 posted on
08/01/2013 5:47:44 PM PDT by
ChildOfThe60s
(If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
To: 11th_VA
Heck, I googled that from work when I heard about the Boston Bombers - as a way to retort liberals who thought it was another McVeigh.
And gee, I bought a backpack from Amazon on-line in June.
The point is, that kind of two-point data-driven investigation is stupid and a waste of time.
3 posted on
08/01/2013 5:50:21 PM PDT by
dirtboy
To: 11th_VA
“While a PRISM-backed system, or Google itself, tracking user activity wasn’t the cause for this specific incident, the fact is that Google does comply with law enforcement to hand over user data.”
BS. I thought that was the whole Snowden fiasco? That Yahoo, Skype, Microsoft, CrApple, facebook etc left a backdoor open for the govt to snoop on citizens?
4 posted on
08/01/2013 5:53:19 PM PDT by
max americana
(fired liberals in our company after the election, & laughed while they cried (true story))
To: 11th_VA
And the employer discovered the search within one day ? Not likely.
To: 11th_VA
Did you read the article you posted? It was the husband who searched at work.
10 posted on
08/01/2013 6:00:46 PM PDT by
upchuck
(To the faceless, jack-booted government bureaucrat who just scanned this post: SCREW YOU!)
To: 11th_VA
WTF was she googling that for at work !?!?!?!? She didn't want it tracked to her home 'puter!
11 posted on
08/01/2013 6:01:03 PM PDT by
null and void
(You don't know what "cutting edge" means till you insult Mohammed.)
To: 11th_VA
WTF was she googling that for at work !?!?!?!? I thought that's what smartphones were for.
17 posted on
08/01/2013 6:16:53 PM PDT by
Zhang Fei
(Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
To: 11th_VA
The employer might have called the cops but he didn’t make them take it seriously.
19 posted on
08/01/2013 6:22:14 PM PDT by
TigersEye
("No man left behind" is more than an Army Ranger credo it's the character of America.)
To: 11th_VA
She said she googled the pressure cookers, while her husband googled the backpacks. So, I’m guessing it was a company laptop that she also used at home.
To: 11th_VA
Once was transferring data files off a computer from a woman who had the left the company
Came across file called DIVORCE
Letter to her lawyer about what a louse her husband is
How many times drunk, how many times slapped her around...
Made great reading before deleted it......
24 posted on
08/01/2013 6:36:22 PM PDT by
njslim
(St)
To: 11th_VA
Uh-huh..sure thing, yep , I believe that.
27 posted on
08/01/2013 6:47:20 PM PDT by
PhiloBedo
(You gotta roll with the punches and get with what's real.)
To: 11th_VA
What seems to be missing from this article is the word “allegedly”.
It will be interesting to see what the response to this assertion by the Suffolk PD is, from the supposed former employer, from the husband, and from the wife.
28 posted on
08/01/2013 6:50:59 PM PDT by
Zeppo
("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
To: 11th_VA
Can we get up a pool for when that p******* c******s will only be available at flea markets?
31 posted on
08/01/2013 7:01:41 PM PDT by
arthurus
(Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE http://steshaw.org/econohttp://www.fee.org/library/det)
To: 11th_VA
“WTF was she googling that for at work !?!?!?!? “
More like why was she being SWATed by an ex employer?
33 posted on
08/01/2013 7:16:16 PM PDT by
PLMerite
(Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson