It's not like AnonNews announced they traced the IP address of the poster back to the WBC. Sure. It could have been them. It could also have been just about anyone who has a beef with the WBC. Many people are chomping at the bit to take them down and have tried to recruit 'Anonymous' to do this. But they haven't been successful in the past. For all we know it was the folks from HBGary trying to pick a fight between the two groups to provide ground cover. But again, that is still nothing more than idle speculation.

I don't think Anons will ever do anything against the WBC just because they have no power. WBC may be annoying assholes. But at the end of the day that is all they are. They can pretty much only offend people who allow themselves to be offended.

As ridiculous as that statement from WBC sounds, it actually came from their website. I've seen it and so have many others. The retards really do talk that way.

It's called a government by the people for the people.

I haven't received a reprimand like that.

But think about how you would want to go out? Would you rather be fired for not dishing out a password without verification? Or would you rather be fired for letting hackers into your systems and run amok? One scenario will make you look decent in an interview. The other will ensure no one in town will hire you.

I've gone to bat about foreign workers sharing login ids. I would flat out refuse to reset their passwords. It happened alot. But I was backed up on my stance. They got told to get their act together and they stopped sharing their user ids.

The hard part for Jussi is that he/she got the request from her boss's e-mail account. An account that presumably only the really person would have access to.

It's all fun and games until you visit 4chan and get something preloaded you don't want.

Interesting idea. In that case, perhaps we should send an all lesbian female crew to increase total child bearing potential.

Wouldn't the simple (yet uncomfortable solution) be to create a space chastity belt with extra shielding to protect the gametes during travel. You only need to protect a much smaller area.

And when it comes to failed fetuses, isn't that a self solving problem? Damaged sperm and eggs probably won't make it. But the healthier ones will have a better chance of fertilizing. And so what if you have a larger percentage of miscarriages? That is simply nature sorting life out. All you need are 2-3 healthy babies in the end.

The only way I would agree to "basic income" is if the government required "basic work" in exchange. (Invalids & their ilk except.)

> Being comfortable - is that a 'basic human right' or something?

It's not really so much being comfortable, but being able to freely and openly express my political opinions on my free time, when I am not at work I think should be a basic human right. I don't want to sue my employer. I just don't want to be fired when my political opinions conflict with my employer's political opinions despite the fact that I am smart enough not to bring it up at work.

Yes. I knew that too. I was just wondering if I had any protections from adverse actions of my employer if he doesn't like my federally protected free speech. Being free from govermental oppression due to speech is great. But there is still the unaddressed tier where rich business owners can silence you.

It's great that complaining about work related issues is protected. But, for example, if I want to bash (without liable or slander) my employer's favorite anti-gay-marriage organization on my face book account (or myspace, or blog), it is disconcerting to know that my employer would be free to give me the axe over that.

Am I correct that such speech is not protected in "Work at Will" states?

I didn't think that political stance was a protected class in most "Work at Will" states. As far as I knew, the only thing stopping employers from firing people based on political party was the horrible publicity that might swing back at them.

Sometimes the back streets are a faster way to work. Especially when the interstate is congested. Honestly it's almost a coin toss as to which way is the most efficient.

The problem with that is that if you are working for someone else, as does 99% of the working US citizens, suddenly you have to watch what you say on your own time. I find that incredibly uncomfortable. In fact a large percentage of me speech is throttled because I am well aware that my employer can fire me for almost any reason or for no stated reason at all.

Our life off the clock should be ours to live as we wish. How many of us work for people who have conservative christian leanings? What if that employer is backing some serious overly conservative bible thumping organizations that are trying to limit people's rights and freedoms. I would like to be able to openly protest and fight against those efforts while not at work without fear of being fired.

I thought people who worked in "Work at Will" states could be fired for any reason (or no reason at all, so long as it didn't run up against discrimination laws. I thought Freedom of Speech only applied to the government's control, not private employers.