I just learned about the unified field in quantum mechanics, it's really awesome and tells how beyond the atomic is the nuclear level, beyond that is some grand unified field, and beyond that is "The Plank Field" or "the unified field" which is scientifically proven to be pure conscious awareness, and is the source of all matter and that intent can shape matter through transendental meditation. Dont beleive me? Look up "Unified Field" on google or youtube and you will be amazed that "god" has been discovered through science not only that but a couple good movies about it are "the secret" and "what the bleep" down the rabbit hole

Because I'm too lazy to make an account, the chick's name is Soya, aka Soyacide. Google, she's not hard to find. Posts nudes on her tumblr as well.

Fellow Perverts,
How do I find out the username of someone I know who uses photobucket? Google and the in-site search for photobucket don't help. I just want to find their profile, not their password. I will be sure to share the win if I find it!

Does anyone else think the little girl from Vazquez Sounds is hot. What would you like to do to her? Look up Vazquez Sounds on Youtube or Google. She covers an Adele song, that went viral. She is amazing.

Today I was talking w/ a buddy and he told me about some woman who got busted at HEB (local grocery store) for prostitution or propositioning an undercover officer or some shit (as I would later find out).. I don't get all the details, all he tells me was that at the HEB near my house a woman got busted for prostitution, the HEB that my nephew happens to walk by everyday after school and sometimes later in the evening goes to get himself snacks or whatever, which is fine until I hear about this! I don't exactly want my nephew walking by an area infested w/ prostitutes. So I google it to find out more, so I google "san antonio prostitutes" w/o thinking twice about it.

Well, couple hours later my better half is browsing around online and I hear "WHAT THE FUCK?!" so I head over to see what's going on only for her to blurt out "why the fuck are you looking for prostitutes in San Antonio??" and then it hits me 'FUCK, I googled for prostitutes in San Antonio' so I automatically give her the ol' "it's not what it looks like" which was not very well received so I go to the tried and true "let me explain" which is the relationship equivalent of saying "don't look down" the first thing they're gonna do is yell and scream, the last thing they're gonna do is let you explain yourself.

Yada yada yada, I TRY and explain to her "but I was only googling for prostitutes in the area out of concern for my nephew.. I'm the good guy!" which was not very well received either.

I'm currently sleeping on the couch posting this from my phone b/c I'm too scared to go in and get my tablet from the bedroom. :(

I know motherless isn't a attack site. I was puzzle why this showed up.. I clicked *this isn't a attack site* or something like that.

What is the current listing status for motherless.com?

Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.

Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 2 time(s) over the past 90 days.

What happened when Google visited this site?

Of the 3740 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 83 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2013-04-06, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2013-04-06.

Malicious software is hosted on 2 domain(s), including ceskeporno.tv/, mfporn.com/.

1 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including crakmedia.com/.

This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS2914 (NTT).

Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?

Over the past 90 days, motherless.com appeared to function as an intermediary for the infection of 1 site(s) including newcamgals.com/.

news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law, CNET has learned.

Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns, according to three individuals who have been negotiating with Leahy's staff over the changes. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.
Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

CNET obtained a draft of the proposed amendments from one of the people involved in the negotiations with Leahy; it's embedded at the end of this post. The document describes the changes as "Amendments intended to be proposed by Mr. Leahy."

It's an abrupt departure from Leahy's earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill "provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by... requiring that the government obtain a search warrant."

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys' Association and the National Sheriffs' Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to "reconsider acting" on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

One person participating in Capitol Hill meetings on this topic told CNET that Justice Department officials have expressed their displeasure about Leahy's original bill. The department is on record as opposing any such requirement: James Baker, the associate deputy attorney general, has publicly warned that requiring a warrant to obtain stored e-mail could have an "adverse impact" on criminal investigations.

Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said requiring warrantless access to Americans' data "undercuts" the purpose of Leahy's original proposal. "We believe a warrant is the appropriate standard for any contents," he said.

An aide to the Senate Judiciary committee told CNET that because discussions with interested parties are ongoing, it would be premature to comment on the legislation.

Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said that in light of the revelations about how former CIA director David Petraeus' e-mail was perused by the FBI, "even the Department of Justice should concede that there's a need for more judicial oversight," not less.

Markham Erickson, a lawyer in Washington, D.C. who has followed the topic closely and said he was speaking for himself and not his corporate clients, expressed concerns about the alphabet soup of federal agencies that would be granted more power:

There is no good legal reason why federal regulatory agencies such as the NLRB, OSHA, SEC or FTC need to access customer information service providers with a mere subpoena. If those agencies feel they do not have the tools to do their jobs adequately, they should work with the appropriate authorizing committees to explore solutions. The Senate Judiciary committee is really not in a position to adequately make those determinations.

The list of agencies that would receive civil subpoena authority for the contents of electronic communications also includes the Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Maritime Commission, the Postal Regulatory Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Mine Enforcement Safety and Health Review Commission.

Leahy's modified bill retains some pro-privacy components, such as requiring police to secure a warrant in many cases. But the dramatic shift, especially the regulatory agency loophole and exemption for emergency account access, likely means it will be near-impossible for tech companies to support in its new form.

A bitter setback
This is a bitter setback for Internet companies and a liberal-conservative-libertarian coalition, which had hoped to convince Congress to update the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act to protect documents stored in the cloud. Leahy glued those changes onto an unrelated privacy-related bill supported by Netflix.

At the moment, Internet users enjoy more privacy rights if they store data on their hard drives or under their mattresses, a legal hiccup that the companies fear could slow the shift to cloud-based services unless the law is changed to be more privacy-protective.

Members of the so-called Digital Due Process coalition include Apple, Amazon.com, Americans for Tax Reform, AT&T, the Center for Democracy and Technology, eBay, Google, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, TechFreedom, and Twitter. (CNET was the first to report on the coalition's creation.)

Leahy, a former prosecutor, has a mixed record on privacy. He criticized the FBI's efforts to require Internet providers to build in backdoors for law enforcement access, and introduced a bill in the 1990s protecting Americans' right to use whatever encryption products they wanted.

But he also authored the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which is now looming over Web companies, as well as the reviled Protect IP Act. An article in The New Republic concluded Leahy's work on the Patriot Act "appears to have made the bill less protective of civil liberties." Leahy had introduced significant portions of the Patriot Act under the name Enhancement of Privacy and Public Safety in Cyberspace Act (PDF) a year earlier.

One obvious option for the Digital Due Process coalition is the simplest: if Leahy's committee proves to be an insurmountable roadblock in the Senate, try the courts instead.

Judges already have been wrestling with how to apply the Fourth Amendment to an always-on, always-connected society. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police needed a search warrant for GPS tracking of vehicles. Some courts have ruled that warrantless tracking of Americans' cell phones, another coalition concern, is unconstitutional.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies already must obtain warrants for e-mail in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, thanks to a ruling by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010.

I'm here because I google-stalked some chick that I was cybering with a few years back. What do you think would be the best way to approach her? I mean, she's on here, so that has to mean she's still as big a slut as ever, right?

After serving 25yrs in the military, most of it in the shit... 3 failed marriages and a drug and sex addiction I decided to move back "home". Or close to it anyway, I don't live in my mother's house, BUT I NEED TOO! My mom, sister and aunt live in a 5 bedroom 3 bath ranch house on 800 acres. I was cutting grass today an found my mom's old phone by the pool. ALL three of these sluts love the BBC! AND ID LOVE TO GET HIGH AND WATCH THEM TAKE MANY OF THEM!! I made the collage on Google photos since mom was awesome enough to forget to sign out

This beautiful unlucky bitch is 21-year-old Andrea Rebello. A nigger broke into her home and killed her. The nigger got himself killed too.

I like jerking off to pics of dead women that make the news. There's another bitch named Nichole Cable that just got killed recently, but that whore is 14 years old so I won't post her pic. But google that shit. She's hot. You can tell she'd swallow cum.

Hi,

I kind of want to hear your thoughts about something that I am kind of insecure about...
I posted this Anonymously because I don't want to attract the "wrong" people. And I please ask for nice comments or thoughts on this... I'm not comfortable with very explicit stuff...
I don't really know how to start...

I'm in my early 20s, I'm a girl, bisexual and like to show myself...

...To be honest, it's not that I show my body or anything around all the time for everyone to see...
I don't dare doing that. I sometimes, when I feel really good or excited(which happens often I'll admit that), I sometimes decide not to wear a bra and then, sometimes, wear something that is just a bit too low cut or too open or I open up my blouse just too much, so it's possible to take a look inside and then I do as if I don't know. But again, I only do this when I am really really excited or very comfortable.

Please notice that I use the word "sometimes" a lot.

Most of the times when I go out bra-less I do wear something more appropriate but I kind of make sure you can clearly see the outline of my boobs under the fabric or like in the summer I love to wear shirts or tops that are tight fit or sleeveless with widecut armholes, so you can see the sides of my boobs. But further than that is out of my comfort zone(maybe hard to believe but it is).
Talking about this gives me somewhat the same warm feeling...

I have an issue admitting to myself that I have this odd behavior ...

A couple of years ago, I googled something like "going out naked in public"(because I would one day like to do that, or something like that but I don't dare to)I had an idea of what I was looking for but was mostly kind of clueless. This site was somewhere in the results. There even are people(men too) that go a lot further than me(this is probably not news to you but for me I didn't know about it and I was feeling very uncertain about the whole situation and didn't dare talking about it). There's a word for it(nymphomania) but I don't like it. There's a kind of negative image to that word and it's too sexually loaded, but that is my opinion...

At work I would never do this, it probably would get me in trouble or get me fired. I wouldn't like that to happen. Inappropriate behavior is not something I would want to be fired for and as a woman you can get a bad reputation very easily.

When I go out and I'm in the mood, I also find it funny and even cute, when I look up and I see the "oh, I've been caught" look on their face and I actually get a kind of kick out of it and it is very arousing and I almost always am blushing too when they look back embarrassed... I'm usually also very careful about when and where I can do it, I only do that when I really like or have feelings for someone or when I'm extremely aroused. Usually guys don't know how to act and girls make me aware of it or give me that look...

It is not really meant to tease anyone but I know it obviously can seem like I do that.
It's part of who I am and I can't help it.

Don't get me wrong, I really like doing this, if I would dare or if it would be possible or acceptable, I would probably be nude all the time.
When I moved in my apartment, the moment mom and dad were gone home, I took it all off and even pulled the blinds all the way up, it was one of the best things I ever felt and it's still the first thing I do when I get home.
I also find it adorable to see the reaction when I invite a boyfriend or a girlfriend over and when I open the door and then I ignore the fact that I am totally naked. I will get dressed when he or she is not that comfortable with it though.

I kind of also want to stress the fact that I don't go around "doing" everybody. I'm not that sexually active. I only do that when I completely trust that person....