Security software developer Symantec is stating that 13 apps by three developers could be spreading malicious code – Android.Counterclank — among as many as 5 million phones, stealing information from users. But, another security software developer — Lookout Mobile Security — believes it is just “aggressive” advertising. The Guardian has more : The dispute [between the two security firms] indicates the conflict about the difference between malware and “adware” – where software on the user’s computer generates intrusive advertising – has shifted from the desktop, where the line has been blurred over the years, to the mobile platform, and particularly to Android, the mobile operating system which increasingly dominates world sales of smartphones. At the same time, it reinforces concerns that Android has become the target for malware writers who find its open market system, as well as the multiple unofficial Android app markets, an effective way to spread malicious software. Kevin Haley with S ymantec spoke to ComputerWorld stating that the developers involved – iApps7, Ogre Games and redmicapps — don’t seem real. He also describes this as the largest malware attack on Android phones yet that runs unwanted advertisements: Although the infected apps request an uncommonly large number of privileges — something that the user must approve — Haley argued that few people bother reading them before giving their okay. “If you were the suspicious type, you might wonder why they’re asking for permission to modify the browser or transmit GPS coordinates,” said Haley. “But most people don’t bother.” Gizmodo has the full list of apps that could be malicious: Counter Elite Force Counter Strike Ground Force CounterStrike Hit Enemy Heart Live Wallpaper Hit Counter Terrorist Stripper Touch girl Balloon Game Deal & Be Millionaire Wild Man Pretty women lingerie puzzle Sexy Girls Photo Game Sexy Girls Puzzle Sexy Women Puzzle Still, the Guardian reports Lookout Mobile as saying ”we see no evidence of outright malicious behaviour” and that the apps’ actions are “attributable to a class of more aggressive ad networks.”
Excerpt from:
Is There a Massive Malware Attack Targeting 5 Million Android Users?
A Virginia man claimed to be a Navy SEAL to talk his way out of a gun possession arrest on Thursday, and the New York Police Department committed him to a psych ward thinking his claims of elite military status were the rantings of a lunatic. Turns out the guy was in fact an elite Navy SEAL. But as the New York Post put it, telling the NYPD “I’m in an elite military unit, you can’t arrest me,” doesn’t help much when the city’s draconian gun laws are at issue. Twenty-nine-year-old Shaun Day was on a leave from his duty as a Navy SEAL duty when cops nailed him for running a red light in Manhattan, New York on Thursday. NYPD officers searched Day’s pickup truck and found a 9mm semiautomatic pistol and three magazines full of ammo. During the arrest, police claim Day was babbling incoherently and repeatedly claimed that he was an elite Navy SEAL with “top- secret clearance,” but was unable to provide any documentation for police. After getting shipped off to the psych ward, sources told The Post the Navy sent staffers to talk to Day in Bellevue Hospital, where he was undergoing a psychiatric evaluation. According to Gothamist : “He was released [Friday] in their care, and they were going to treat him for post-traumatic stress. All charges against Day have been deferred, and it’s unclear how he was able to prove his status.” So far, the charges against Day of weapons possession and a traffic violation have been deferred. Over the past few months, other out-of-towners , however, including a former marine , have been arrested for illegal gun possession in New York and face years in prison despite pleas for leniency . Editor’s note: The lawyer for former Marine Ryan Jerome, one of those arrested recently, joined The Blaze Editor-in-Chief Scott Baker on Friday’s GBTV ‘For the Record’ program. Here’s an excerpt from that interview:
Your browser does not support iframes.
Original post:
WATCH: S.E. Cupp & Will Cain talk with Tea Party voters about who they would vote for
If you’ve been waiting for a good deal to get your hands on a smartphone, there’s one from AT&T that will cost you all of about $0.01. This deal is for the phone itself and a monthly contract and additional activation fees, etc., still apply, but considering that in most cell phone contract deals, the phone only comes with a measly rebate, one cent is pretty good. Of course, this deal doesn’t apply to all phones, but it does include all Window’s 7 devices, some Android and the iPhone 3GS. Some of the $0.01 deal are only online and they go live on Black Friday at 12:01 a.m. But if it’s not a phone you’re looking for this Christmas, perhaps these smartphone apps will help you find the best deal on what you are looking for. Time Magazine’s TechLand has more : TGI Black Friday: With Black Friday looming, the first thing you’ll want is an app to keep track of all the crazy deals. TGI Black Friday, a free app for iPhone and Android , shows you the most popular and most recently posted deals, and lets you browse by store or by category. For each store listing, the app tells you what time the doors open. It also lets you create a list of your favorite deals, which you can then e-mail to yourself or to your personal Santa. Slickdeals Apps: SlickDeals.net is one of my favorite websites for bargain hunting, powered by savvy shoppers who vote on the best and biggest discounts. Although there’s no official SlickDeals app, third-party apps do a fine job of feeding the latest deals to your phone: SlickDeals Reader for Android (free), iSlick for iPhone ($1) and Slick Deals for Windows Phone (free). You can also point your browser to m.slickdeals.net . ShopSavvy: That “50 percent off” sticker you’re staring at sure looks enticing, but is it really the best deal out there? When in doubt, use ShopSavvy to scan the barcode or type in the product name, and it’ll give you a list of prices at local stores and online retailers. The ShopSavvy app is free for Android , iPhone and Windows Phone . Find more apps for smarter shopping here . Also, if you’re dreading standing in line at Best Buy or Walmart to get deals on larger electronics or a wide array of goods, try Sears. Yes, Sears may not be the hot spot for electronics like it used to be, according to Investor Place, but this could be a blessing in disguise in terms of shorter line length. And this year it will match all other big box stores’ electronic deals. [H/T Slashgear ]
See the original post:
AT&T to Sell Smartphones for 1 Cent on Black Friday
Amazon sent a follow-up email last night confirming that they’d terminated the associates program effective immediately. The number of affiliate retailers is being placed at 25,000 and the effect of Governor Brown’s budget is simply to kill business. And it’s another reason for some to flee the state. See Fortune , ” Will California’s ‘Amazon tax’ cause an affiliate exodus? ” And at Cato, ” California Wants Amazon to Tax Californians .” The article cites the Los Angeles Times , and notes: The natural result of California doing yet more to make the state uninhabitable for business comes at the end of the story. Californians who earned and spent money in California as part of the Internet remote sales ecosystem plan to move elsewhere: One affiliate, Ken Rockwell of San Diego, the owner of a 12-year-old photography website, said he planned to move out of state. “Will it be Las Vegas or Scottsdale or Ensenada?” he said. “It’s a question of where, not if.” See also, Robert Stacy McCain, ” Amazon Goes Galt, Cuts Off California to Avoid Internet Tax in Zimbabwe, U.S.A .” There’s a disgruntled former affiliate, at Fox News, ” An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos On Terminating the Amazon Affiliate Program In California .” It’s interesting but unpersuasive. Taxes disrupt markets, and while affiliates are getting burned, it’s not good business policy to be magnanimous. Competition is fierce. Tax systems vary by state and the U.S. Supreme Court has said out-of-state companies cannot be taxed without actual physical presence at the point of sale. This is not to discount the fairness issue, or arguments that Amazon market share enables it compete in sales tax markets. It’s more than California is simply hostile to business. I’ve noted a couple of times recently how companies and individuals are fleeing the state. Jan Norman’s “Small Business” column at the Orange County Register reports frequently on the uncompetitive marketplace for California firms. (See, for example, ” O.C. manufacturer to move, create 270 jobs in D.C. “) And she has this on Amazon’s decision, ” How do Amazon affiliates lose out? “: If the online retailer has a physical presence in California — such as Walmart or Target, which have been supporters of the new law — it must charge California sales tax from California buyers. But many of these online retailers have no physical presence (stores, warehouses, headquarters etc.) in California. And they have not been collecting California sales tax. Understand that retailers don’t pay sales tax. They collect it for the state or local government entity. Brick and mortar retailers say they are at a big price disadvantage because they have to collect sales tax (as much as 10% in California right now) that online retailers don’t. However, in 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a state could only require retailers with some physical presence (stores, warehouses etc.) within the state’s borders to collect the sales tax. So a California firm that only sells online must collect sales tax for California but not for the other 44 states that charge sales tax (5 states don’t charge sales tax). But an online retailer in Oregon, which has no sales tax, doesn’t have to add sales tax to any of its sales. States have been trying to figure a way around that Supreme Court ruling ever since. RELATED : At Instapundit, ” THEY REALLY DO SELL EVERYTHING AT AMAZON .” EXTRA : At Sundries Shack, ” Clearing the Browser Tabs – Why Does California Hurt Its People Thursday Edition .”
See the original post here:
California’s Amazon Tax Driving Business — and People — Out of State
With the help of the Internet, crime rings have been able to steal tens of millions of credit card numbers each year — plucking them right from the ether in fact. But the FBI’s cybercrime unit is reportedly stepping up its game in pursuit of criminals who buy and sell stolen credit card numbers in an online marketplace. To gain access to the sellers’ inventory, one must be a tried-and-true criminal, complete with references… honestly . NPR reported that Keith Mularski, an agent with the FBI’s cybercrime unit, has had to pose as a rather dubious character in order to gain entree to the online marketplace: To even be able to see this site — to register and get a password here — Mularski had to use an an alias to persuade two criminals already on the inside to vouch for his criminality. It’s sort of the exact opposite of getting two references when you’re applying for a job; rather than vouching for you as an upstanding, law-abiding citizen, you’re getting people to attest to your deviousness. How the site works: In order to sell products on the site, you need to be reviewed. So if I was going to sell credit cards, what I would have to do is provide a sample of 50 cards to each reviewer. Then they would test them out and then write a review back, and say, “XYZ provided me 50 cards and there was a good mix of classics and platinum and business cards and there was a 98 percent approval rating. So now I vouch for him to be a vendor on the site.” This is the central paradox of this marketplace. In order to get in, you have to be a verified credit card thief. But in order to do business, you have to show that you can deal honestly. This one seller is rated A++, so we click on his name. That takes us to another shop, with a pop-up window. We have to agree with the terms and conditions — which explicitly bar both journalists and law enforcement officials. But once the credit card numbers are successfully purchased, then what? How are the numbers actually used? According to Mularski, it’s as simple as printing up a new credit card with some very inexpensive equipment, and, off you go to the mall! Mularski jumps up and pulls open his desk drawer. He pulls out a piece of white plastic with a magnetic strip on it (it looks like a hotel key), and a machine that looks like a toaster for really skinny bagels. The machine’s called an MSR-206. You hook it up to your computer, and swipe your plastic card through it. It encodes the credit card information onto the magnetic strip — like burning a playlist onto a CD. Next you run the white plastic card through another machine to get the raised lettering and the holograms that make it look legit. But this is nothing new. For years, Hackers have been allegedly positioning themselves outside vulnerable retailers with a laptop and simple wifi connection until a customer makes a purchase using his or her credit card. It’s reported that the credit card’s number is then intercepted from the store’s unsecured credit card processing equipment. Simple as can be. Here’s a video from back in 2008 that explains how it’s done. 40 Million Credit Card Numbers Stolen! -8/6/08 by Carter_Flores1585
Visit link:
Is Buying Stolen Credit Card Numbers Really This Easy?
Scroll down for updates…King County Superior Court has closed out our records request as of today… There’s a lot that’s been going on behind the scenes over the past two months since my cousin Marizela Perez disappeared from the University District in Seattle on March 5, 2011. As I mentioned last week, we gathered in Seattle on Mother’s Day for a community fundraiser and benefit concert/auction . There will be another South Jersey fundraiser/bake sale/raffle on May 22. Details here . The Seattle Times has just posted a front-page piece by reporter Christine Clarridge on Marizela’s case and the plight of other families with missing young adults. Read it here . The story provides an in-depth, compassionate, and candid look at what parents go through in cases where the police have not found evidence of foul play. Suicide has been a primary assumption on the part of the police. But the case of young Joyce Chiang — whose death 12 years ago was just reclassified last week as a homicide by Washington police who mistakenly insisted the case was a suicide — shows the dangers of locking into assumptions without thoroughly investigating all leads. And as this Seattle Post-Intelligence article from 2003 on neglected missing persons cases underscores, police “routinely botch or ignore missing-person cases,” ignore the law, fail to use tracking systems, and close cases with little investigation. Here’s another Seattle Times piece from 2006 on the lost and missing. In Marizela’s case, of course, the maddening frustration is that the police have yet to obtain Internet and phone records that would help definitively rule in/rule out foul play and provide potential breakthroughs in figuring out where she might have been heading the day she vanished. I’ve been helping Marizela’s parents push for those records, and in the interest of raising awareness and informing other families who have to face the same uphill battles, am reprinting here my e-mail and phone exchanges with the Seattle Police Department, Google, and the King County Superior Court from March through the present. Subpoenaing Google in particular is key. The police found that she logged onto to her Gmail account in the morning on the day she disappeared, but they have yet to obtain Google search history logs and web history information. Time is really of the essence here because much of the data we are seeking — e.g., the Google search history and cellphone/AIM text messages — are perishable. We are continuing to push the Seattle Police Department to issue warrants to preserve and obtain any and all perishable data from Marizela’s AT&T, Facebook, AOL, and Google accounts before it’s too late. The family already suffered one devastating blow after finding out last week that surveillance video at a Jack-In-The-Box near the intersection where she disappeared is no longer available. The clock is ticking. *** MARCH 31 From: Michelle Malkin [mailto:writemalkin@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:21 AM To: Ogard, David Subject: question from michelle malkin Hi Detective Ogard – I have a quick question. Have you taken any steps to identify Marizela’s IP address and obtain her google search history? Thanks, Michelle — MARCH 31 On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Ogard, David wrote: I have checked into her login info for her gmail account. I did not attempt to check the sites she visited because I am was told by our computer people that without the computer, I cannot see what sites were visited. — APRIL 1 From: Michelle Malkin Date: Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:06 AM Subject: Re: question from michelle malkin To: “Ogard, David” Dave – Your computer people are wrong. If she was logged on to her gmail and had not paused her web history, then Google has her web history records. Can you PLEASE get those from Google and share them with our family? See below. Thank you, Michelle http://www.google.com/support/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=54068 About Web History: Basics Web History offers you more relevant search results and recommendations based on your web activity, providing you with a more personalized experience on Google. When you create a Google Account at http://www.google.com/accounts/NewAccount, you’re given the option to enable Web History with your account. With Web History, you can: • View and search across webpages you’ve visited in the past, including Google searches. Now you don’t have to hunt for things you’ve seen and liked in the past! • Find trends on your web activity, such as your most visited sites and top searches. • Get more personalized search results based on what you’ve searched for and which sites you’ve visited. • See personalized predictions in autocomplete based on what you’ve searched for and which sites you’ve visited. • Filter search results by pages you’ve visited before using the Search options panel. Your Web History is stored on Google servers, so you can view and manage it from any computer by signing into your Google Account. We store information related to the pages you visit, such as the URL, but don’t store a snapshot of the page itself in your account. To access your Web History, visit http://www.google.com/history Learn how to pause your web history or remove items from your Web History. Note: Depending upon whether or not you’re signed in to a Google Account when you search, the information we use for customizing your experience will be different: Signed-in personalization: When you’re signed in, Google personalizes your search experience based on your Web History. If you don’t want to receive personalized results while you’re signed in, you can turn off Web History and remove it from your Google Account. You can also view and remove individual items from your Web History. Signed-out personalization: When you’re not signed in, Google customizes your search experience based on past search information linked to your browser, using a cookie. Google stores up to 180 days of signed-out search activity linked to your browser’s cookie, including queries and results you click. Learn more. — APRIL 5 from Ogard, David to Michelle Malkin , “reports86@gmail.com” date Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:56 PM subject RE: Regarding private search mailed-by seattle.gov hide details Apr 5 (12 days ago) Michelle and Edgar, I have been off for the last four days and responding to emails. I will look into your emails about the Google searches. As for doing a search of Discovery Park or any other park; I am not against any search the family organizes to search for Marizela. At this point the Seattle Police Department is not asking for any specific location be searched without some further indication she was there or information she was going there. As you know, our last known contact with Marizela was on video of her leaving the Safeway at approx 2:19 pm on 3-5-11 heading north. Then, the contact with her cell phone when someone tried to call her at 2:45 pm on 3-5-11. The tower her phone was in contact with is located at approx I-5 and NE 47th and the contact was about 11 o’clock on the tower. The cell phone company is unable to give me a distance from the tower at the time of the contact. I hope this is what you are looking for in writing. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — APRIL 8 from Michelle Malkin to “Ogard, David” date Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:43 PM subject Re: question mailed-by gmail.com Since I have you on the horn… -Any news on the Google search records? -Are you allowed to give Edgar password reset info/access so he can search Marizela’s emails for any clues? Thanks again, MM — APRIL 8 from Ogard, David To Michelle Malkin date Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:12 PM subject RE: question mailed-by seattle.gov Just got a msg from Google. They said it would be like a needle in the haystack. I’m about to call them back now. — APRIL 10 from Michelle Malkin to “Ogard, David” date Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:19 AM subject Re: question mailed-by gmail.com This makes no sense. As I wrote on 4/1, if she was logged on to gmail and did searches while logged on and if she had not disabled her google web history feature (most people don’t), then her google web history will be accessible when you log into her account — and should be very accessible to google without a “needle in the haystck” search. http://www.google.com/support/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=54068 — APRIL 11 from Ogard, David to Michelle Malkin date Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:25 AM subject RE: question mailed-by seattle.gov After I sent this email I called them back and left a msg. I have not spoken to anyone on the phone yet. It has all been msg’s. When I left the original msg their voicemail says that after leaving a msg they would get back to me in 72 hours. And, it took about 72 hours. I have a direct line to someone now and left a msg for her to call me. When she and I talk, I’m sure we will figure this out. — APRIL 18 from Michelle Malkin to “Ogard, David” date Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:19 AM subject Re: question mailed-by gmail.com It’s been a week. What is the status of this please? thanks, michelle — APRIL 18 MALKIN TO OGARD (Re-forwarding previous unanswered email) From: Michelle Malkin [mailto:writemalkin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 10:19 AM – Show quoted text – To: Ogard, David Subject: Re: question – Show quoted text – — APRIL 18 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM subject RE: question mailed-by seattle.gov I have called the person back and still have not heard anything from Google. — APRIL 18 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com To “Ogard, David” Date Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:37 PM Subject text messages mailed-by gmail.com Det. Ogard – Have you taken any steps to identify the persons who sent the last three text messages to Marizela listed on the AT&T records: 3/5 5:45pm Eastern (2:45pm Pacific) 32665177 text/im messaging received 3/5 5:12pm Eastern (2:12pm Pacific) 265082 text/im messaging received 3/5 4:35pm Eastern (1:35pm Pacific 32665176 text/im messaging received These would have been received by Marizela during the very time frame in which she was walking from the Bartell’s to the Safeway and after she exited the Safeway. Can you obtain the text messages from AT&T? See: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/07/tech/main621388.shtml In the United States, text messages had a role in a Medford, Ore., case in which a man convicted of killing his wife had sent e-mail and text messages to terrorize her. In Conyers, Ga., a 17-year-old boy was arrested for investigation of solicitation of sodomy after a 12-year-old girl’s parents complained of sexually explicit messages she had received. In the Bryant case, defense attorneys said text messages were exchanged among the woman who has accused Bryant of rape and two other people – the former boyfriend and a person as yet unidentified – in the hours after the alleged June 30 attack. Four months later, Bryant’s attorneys subpoenaed AT&T Wireless Communications Inc., seeking the messages. The company fought the subpoena, but retained the messages. The company fought the subpoena, but last month state District Judge Terry Ruckriegle ordered the company to turn the messages over to him. He will review them in private to determine whether they are relevant to the case, in which Bryant has pleaded not guilty. AT&T Wireless spokesman Mark Siegel said the company cooperates with law enforcement officials for investigations but refused to discuss its policies on storing text messages. The company’s Web site said messages not immediately delivered are held for 72 hours for more delivery attempts – then deleted. How messages in the Bryant case would be available four months later isn’t known; most likely they were retrieved from an archival storage system. “It’s just a common practice,” said Kagan, the telecoms analyst. “I don’t know an instance where they delete them.” — APRIL 19 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:52 AM subject RE: text messages mailed-by seattle.gov I am not ignoring you, but I am trying to verify my information before I respond. Thanks for your patience. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — APRIL 19 from Pugel, James James.Pugel@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:20 PM subject RE: Call mailed-by seattle.gov Michelle – I met with Det. Ogard last night and we reviewed the known facts of the case. I put hi in touch with one of our detectives on loan to the Secret Service electronic crime squad and they are going to see if he can lend any investigative insight into the case. Hope you are well. – Show quoted text – — APRIL 20 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” , “Pugel, James” , Edgar Perez date Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:59 AM subject Re: text messages mailed-by gmail.com Ok. Getting access to this information is fundamental — and the clock is ticking. These data are perishable (that is, they won’t be archived forever), so time is of the essence. From early on, the assumption has been that there was no foul play. But the text messages and Google search history/email would shed critical light on whether this assumption is correct or incorrect. PLEASE get back to us as soon as possible. Thanks, Michelle — APRIL 21 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:44 PM subject RE: text messages mailed-by seattle.gov I am sorry this is taking so long to get this response. I was rechecking the information that I was given was correct, especially with the information that you provided below. I have talked to ATT and some other people to gather my response: ATT says that text messages are not saved more than 24 hrs at most. Usually, the text information that you probably refer to below came from the cell phone itself, or in cases where agencies have told the carrier that they want the texts ahead of time, ie an ongoing homicide case where they have obtained a warrant to compel the carrier to save the information. The last 3 text that Marizela received do not have complete phone numbers to follow up on. ATT says that either their system did not capture the complete number when it came in. Or, the texts were possibly from / to a computer, or other handheld device. I was told that come carriers have agreements with hotmail, Gmail, etc… where the carriers don’t care or capture the info. That they are just moving data. Depending on the device it may be moved through a “cloud” and I will not be able to recover that info. As for the Google searches. I called and left a msg for Google asking the question of tracking her searches and was told “it would be like looking for a needle in a hay stack”. Although I believe like you pointed out, that if she had logged into her Gmail account, which is essentially like logging into the Google tracking system, and then ran some searches, that it should be recoverable. After I received the msg from Google about the hay stack, I called them back at the number they left me to call back on. I have left numerous messages for them to call me back. I have called the original number and left a message there and await a response. Update, 4-20-11 1105 hrs, Google called me back and after speaking with them they said they believe they will be able to find two things, searches associated with her Google account and maybe Google searches from her IP that were conducted whether she was logged into Google or not. They require a search warrant for the information. And, just to advise you when I wrote a warrant to get the phone records originally, I could not get the prosecutor to sign off on my warrant. I re-contacted ATT and they provided me the info without the warrant that they had said would be required. As for changing her password, I was told their policy is they will not do that without a death certificate. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — APRIL 25 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” , “Pugel, James” date Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:18 AM subject Re: text messages mailed-by gmail.com David, Okay. Thank you for your responses. Follow-up questions: 1) Have you ruled out foul play as a possibility in Marizela Perez’s disappearance? 2) Will you seek a warrant compelling ATT to preserve Marizela’s text messages and any archived messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? 3) Will you seek a warrant compelling Facebook to preserve Marizela’s FB email messages and chat sessions since January 1, 2011 to the present? 4) Will you seek a warrant compelling AOL to preserve Marizela’s instant message texts since January 1, 2011 to the present? 5) Will you seek a warrant compelling Google to preserve Marizela’s Google search history and Google browsing history since January 1, 2011 to the present? 6) Will you seek a warrant compelling Google to preserve Marizela’s Gmail messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? If and when these warrants are obtained, will you then seek warrants to obtain Marizela’s ATT text messages, Facebook email messages/chat sessions, AOL instant message texts, Google search history, Google browsing history, and Gmail messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? Because time is of the essence and as I’ve noted before, the data we are seeking is perishable, can you please respond to these specific questions at your earliest convenience. Thank you. Michelle Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com – Show quoted text – — APRIL 26 MALKIN TO OGARD, PUGEL (Re-forwarding previous unanswered inquiry) from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” date Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 2:22 PM subject Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com ———- Forwarded message ———- From: Michelle Malkin Date: Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:18 AM Subject: Re: text messages To: “Ogard, David” , “Pugel, James” David, Okay. Thank you for your responses. Follow-up questions: 1) Have you ruled out foul play as a possibility in Marizela Perez’s disappearance? 2) Will you seek a warrant compelling ATT to preserve Marizela’s text messages and any archived messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? 3) Will you seek a warrant compelling Facebook to preserve Marizela’s FB email messages and chat sessions since January 1, 2011 to the present? 4) Will you seek a warrant compelling AOL to preserve Marizela’s instant message texts since January 1, 2011 to the present? 5) Will you seek a warrant compelling Google to preserve Marizela’s Google search history and Google browsing history since January 1, 2011 to the present? 6) Will you seek a warrant compelling Google to preserve Marizela’s Gmail messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? If and when these warrants are obtained, will you then seek warrants to obtain Marizela’s ATT text messages, Facebook email messages/chat sessions, AOL instant message texts, Google search history, Google browsing history, and Gmail messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? Because time is of the essence and as I’ve noted before, the data we are seeking is perishable, can you please respond to these specific questions at your earliest convenience. Thank you. Michelle Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com +++++ — APRIL 27 MALKIN TO OGARD, PUGEL (Re-re-forwarding previous unanswered inquiry, all text attached) from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com To “Ogard, David” , “Pugel, James” date Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:18 PM subject Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com ———- Forwarded message ———- From: Michelle Malkin Date: Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:18 AM Subject: Re: text messages To: “Ogard, David” , “Pugel, James” David, Okay. Thank you for your responses. Follow-up questions: 1) Have you ruled out foul play as a possibility in Marizela Perez’s disappearance? 2) Will you seek a warrant compelling ATT to preserve Marizela’s text messages and any archived messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? 3) Will you seek a warrant compelling Facebook to preserve Marizela’s FB email messages and chat sessions since January 1, 2011 to the present? 4) Will you seek a warrant compelling AOL to preserve Marizela’s instant message texts since January 1, 2011 to the present? 5) Will you seek a warrant compelling Google to preserve Marizela’s Google search history and Google browsing history since January 1, 2011 to the present? 6) Will you seek a warrant compelling Google to preserve Marizela’s Gmail messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? If and when these warrants are obtained, will you then seek warrants to obtain Marizela’s ATT text messages, Facebook email messages/chat sessions, AOL instant message texts, Google search history, Google browsing history, and Gmail messages since January 1, 2011 to the present? Because time is of the essence and as I’ve noted before, the data we are seeking is perishable, can you please respond to these specific questions at your earliest convenience. Thank you. Michelle Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com +++++ — APRIL 27 from Pugel, James James.Pugel@seattle.gov To Michelle Malkin date Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 5:37 PM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov Michelle – was there a message from you attached to this? thanks From: Michelle Malkin [mailto:writemalkin@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 12:19 PM To: Ogard, David; Pugel, James Subject: Fwd: ———- Forwarded message ———- From: Michelle Malkin Date: Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 2:22 PM Subject: Fwd: To: “Ogard, David” ———- Forwarded message ———- From: Michelle Malkin Date: Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:18 AM Subject: Re: text messages To: “Ogard, David” , “Pugel, James” — APRIL 27 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Pugel, James” date Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:23 PM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com Hi Jim — Yes, it’s the forwarded message right at the top. I’ve sent it three times since Monday and have received no response. I’ll send it AGAIN: [Re-sent entire inquiry and email exchanges] — APRIL 27 from Pugel, James James.Pugel@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:24 PM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov Understood – Dave and I spoke the day that he received it and I know he is going through the list and trying to accomplish as many of the suggestions as possible. — APRIL 28 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:14 AM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov Michelle, 1) No, We have not completely ruled out the possibility of foul play. Although, with the information of the events leading up to her disappearance, it seems to be small. 2) As for the next four questions: I sent a warrant to Google last week and have been awaiting their response. After receiving their response we will determine how to proceed from there. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — APRIL 28 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” date Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:57 PM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com Det. Ogard, Can you send a copy of the warrant? Thanks much. Michelle — APRIL 29 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Pugel, James” date Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 8:40 AM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com Thanks, Jim – I asked him if we could see a copy of the warrant he apparently sent to Google last week. Any help in obtaining a copy for the family would be most appreciated. Marizela’s birthday is tomorrow by the way. She turns 19. Best, Michelle — APRIL 29 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Pugel, James” date Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 8:43 AM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com P.S. I will be in Seattle on May 8th for the benefit concert for Marizela at UW. If you are in town, I hope you can attend the event. It would be nice to meet you in person. Info: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=166045303451702 Sunday, May 8 · 6:30pm – 9:30pm Location UW Ethnic Cultural Theater 3931 Brooklyn Ave Seattle, WA — APRIL 29 from Pugel, James James.Pugel@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:28 AM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov I check and seed if the affidavit can be released. Yes, I was looking over the original report earlier this week and realized that Saturday will be her birthday. I’ll make every effort to attend the event on the 8th? I couldn’t find the time is starts – do you have it? — MAY 2 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:54 PM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov We would not be releasing the warrant. I believe you can get a copy through the courts though. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — MAY 2 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” date Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:57 PM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com When did you file it and in which court? Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com +++++ — MAY 2 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:59 PM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov The judge signed it on 4-22 and it was in King Co Superior Court. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — MAY 3 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” , jamie.eilert@kingcounty.gov cc “Pugel, James” bcc date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:51 AM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com Detective Ogard – I am trying to obtain your warrant through King County. Jamie Eilert with King County Superior Court is working with me to get a copy. She has been unable to find the warrant in her search of records and needs a search warrant number. I am cc’ing her on this e-mail. Can you please supply the search warrant number? Thank you, Michelle — MAY 3 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin , “jamie.eilert@kingcounty.gov” cc “Pugel, James” date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:25 AM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov The search warrant number is 11-259. But, I doubt she will be able to find anything on it yet. It has not been filed with the clerk, and wont be until the warrant has been completed and then filed. I have not received any info back from Google. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — MAY 3 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” cc “jamie.eilert@kingcounty.gov” , “Pugel, James” bcc date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:30 AM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com Det. Ogard: I don’t understand. You e-mailed me on May 2: “We would not be releasing the warrant. I believe you can get a copy through the courts though” and “The judge signed it on 4-22 and it was in King Co Superior Court.” Is it filed or not? Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com +++++ — MAY 3 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Ogard, David” cc “Pugel, James” bcc date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:57 AM subject Re: Fwd: mailed-by gmail.com Just to be clear: Are you telling me that the document signed by the judge on the 22nd is not a public record? Why do we have to wait for Google to respond to see what exactly you’ve asked for in the first place? Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com +++++ — MAY 3 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to jamie.eilert@kingcounty.gov date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:42 AM subject regarding search warrant mailed-by gmail.com Hi Jamie – Please let me know if the search warrant number that Det. Ogard just e-mailed yields the document I’m looking for…if a judge signed it, as he says, on the 22nd, won’t I be able to obtain it? Why would I have to wait for it to be completed? I don’t understand why I would have to wait. Any help is GREATLY appreciated since my cousin has been missing for two months now and our family needs all the info we can get. Best, Michelle — MAY 3 from Eilert, Jamie Jamie.Eilert@kingcounty.gov to Michelle Malkin date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:48 AM subject RE: regarding search warrant mailed-by kingcounty.gov Hello Michelle, I don’t see the Warrant Number filed that the detective mentioned. I am assuming that the Judge signed the warrant on April 22nd stating that it is okay to do the search warrant but like the detective mentioned, he has not heard back from Google. You will need to keep in contact with the Detective to find out when they file the search warrant so that I can get you a copy. As of right now there is nothing that the Clerk’s Office can do. Keep me posted on the outcome and what you hear from the detective. I am sorry to hear about your cousin. Best of luck finding her. Thank you. Jamie Eilert King County Superior Court Department of Judicial Administration Customer Service Specialist III 516 3rd Ave Rm E609 Seattle, WA 98104 206.296.7863 — MAY 3 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Eilert, Jamie” bcc date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:53 AM subject Re: regarding search warrant mailed-by gmail.com Jamie – Just to be clear: You are telling me that the warrant signed by the judge on the 22nd is not a public record? What if I filed a freedom of information act request for it? Sorry to be a bother. I just don’t understand why I can’t see what exactly the police requested and what exactly the judge signed off on. Best, Michelle — MAY 3 from Eilert, Jamie Jamie.Eilert@kingcounty.gov To Michelle Malkin Date Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:55 AM Subject RE: regarding search warrant mailed-by kingcounty.gov Michelle, That is something that you would need to ask the Detective. The Clerk’s Office only obtains documents that have been filed in the King County Superior Court. He has way more information than we do since we don’t have any records of the warrant number he mentioned. Thank you. Jamie Eilert King County Superior Court Department of Judicial Administration Customer Service Specialist III 516 3rd Ave Rm E609 Seattle, WA 98104 206.296.7863 — MAY 4 from Ogard, David David.Ogard@seattle.gov to Michelle Malkin date Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:55 AM subject RE: Fwd: mailed-by seattle.gov I believe there is some kind of misunderstanding going on… Let’s start from the beginning. You have asked and we have emailed about the possibility of seeing what Marizela had searched for on Google and email. I contacted Google and after playing phone tag with them and trying to figure out what they can provide to me, since they originally told me that what I was asking for was like “looking for a needle in a hay stack”. I wrote a search warrant and presented it to a judge and it was signed on 4-22-11 and sent if off to Google. I requested it be handled on an exigent circumstances situation and they said they would get me the info as soon as they could. I am still waiting for them to respond with the info I requested. When I get the information back, I will then file the warrant with the clerk for King Co. At no point have I said or implied that these would not be available. I have also explained to the Perez’ that there may be some things I learn, that I will not be able to share with them. I do not believe I have anything they do not know about at this time. But, this is an open investigation and there may / will be some things that will not be disclosed. I hope this has cleared up any confusion. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax — MAY 5 MALKIN PHONE CONVERSATION WITH CATHY MCGOFF OF GOOGLE INC’S LEGAL DEPARTMENT McGoff cannot confirm or deny receipt of any search warrant related to Marizela’s case. She cannot answer any specific questions about where the company is in the legal process related to Marizela’s case. In general, she says, it may take up to 10 days to respond. If Ogard secured a judge’s signature on the 22nd, as he says, and if he sent the warrant to Google on the same day, then it has been 13 days today. McGoff could not confirm whether, as Ogard has told us, Google has failed to return his calls related to the case. She promised to red-flag the case if she comes across it. — MAY 12 From Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to “Eilert, Jamie” date Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:01 PM subject Re: regarding search warrant mailed-by gmail.com Jamie – Could you follow up and see if the search warrant I was inquiring about has been filed yet? Thanks much. Best, Michelle — MAY 12 from Eilert, Jamie Jamie.Eilert@kingcounty.gov to Michelle Malkin date Thu, May 12, 2011 at 3:38 PM subject RE: regarding search warrant mailed-by kingcounty.gov Hello Michelle, The warrant has not been filed. The Detective said that he was going to contact me as soon as it was filed. I will contact you when it has been filed. I have been keeping a close eye on this. Thank you. Jamie Eilert King County Superior Court Department of Judicial Administration Customer Service Specialist III — MAY 16 from Michelle Malkin writemalkin@gmail.com to cmcgoff@google.com date Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:24 AM subject Regarding Marizela Perez Hi Cathy – We spoke a few weeks ago about my missing cousin, Marizela Perez. Just wondering if there’s anything you can tell us yet regarding the legal process related to her case — e.g., has the company’s response been completed yet? Thanks so much. Best, Michelle — MAY 17 from Cathy Mcgoff to Michelle Malkin date Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:39 PM subject Re: Fwd: Regarding Marizela Perez Hi Michelle, Unfortunately, I have no updates to offer as policy precludes any confirmation or denial of the existence of legal process received by the company. Under the circumstances, I certainly wish I could provide more information to you. Google complies with valid legal process under U.S. law so be assured that we will respond, or possibly have for that matter, to the appropriate authorities in a timely fashion depending on the scope and accessibility of the data requested. Again, I continue to hope for the best for you and your family during this difficult time. Regards, Cathy — MAY 18 On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Ogard, David wrote: I have been sick since I last saw you and have returned to the office today. I will be going through my emails and phone msgs. Also, I expected to see the documents from Google today, but I have not received anything. I will be contacting them too. Det David Ogard Seattle Police Department Missing Person / Juvenile Runaway Unit PO Box 34986 Seattle, Wa 98124 206 684-5007 206 684-4635 fax *** Update …Sigh. Just received from King County Superior Court… from Eilert, Jamie Jamie.Eilert@kingcounty.gov to Michelle Malkin date Fri, May 20, 2011 at 9:05 AM subject RE: regarding search warrant mailed-by kingcounty.gov hide details 9:05 AM (41 minutes ago) Hello Michelle, I have not heard from the detective regarding the warrant yet. I am going to close out your request that you did with our online records request and have your money refunded per our policy. Once you have the warrant number and all the information you will want to do another online records request. If you have further questions please don’t hesitate to call or email. Thank you. Jamie Eilert
Read the original post:
Finding Marizela: The maddening quest for a missing young person’s online/text info; UPDATED
Pork, the other white meat. The National Pork Board has been using that simple yet brilliantly clear slogan to brand their products since 1987, but when something works too well in this country we tend to want to change it. By their own admission, this was a huge marketing success . Since its inception, The Other White Meat campaign has gained tremendous recognition with consumers. In 2000, a study conducted by Northwestern University found The Other White Meat brand to be the fifth most memorable promotional tagline in the history of contemporary advertising. Top five most memorable tagline and you want to dump it? Yes. Last June the NPB announced they would be looking for a new slogan. After almost ten months of creative brainstorming, endless powerpoint presentations to pork execs, and the required focus group testing, the new slogan was agreed upon and unveiled at the NPB National annual meeting just two days ago. Are you sitting down? Here it is. Be inspired? Seriously? I have to nominate this one for the Bonehead Hall of Fame. The geniuses who first decided that lagging sales of pork were directly tied to their brand identity and not to something like, oh, I don’t know. . . the worst economy in a century, should be made to slop the hogs for a year. It is doubtful that the 82 million pork consumers in America will rise up in anger over this insanity and demand a return to the old slogan. We barely crack 50% participation in off-year elections. And the Pork bosses have already scrubbed much of the old standard from their websites. If you type www.theotherwhitemeat.com into your browser, you are immediately referred to www.porkbeinspired.com , the new site where this explanation awaits: Building on the success of The Other White Meat , which will remain as a heritage brand, Pork Be inspired communicates to the legion of pork fans that pork is delicious, versatile and can stand on its own – there is no need to rely on comparisons with other meats. Pork Be inspired is really about celebrating everything that is wonderful and unique about pork. Sorry Pork Board, the only thing you’ve inspired me to do is shake my head and ask, ‘What were they thinking?’
Read more from the original source:
Will You Be ‘Inspired’ By Pork?
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Dozens of websites have been secretly harvesting lists of places that their users previously visited online, everything from news articles to bank sites to pornography, a team of computer scientists found. The information is valuable for con artists to learn more about their targets and send them personalized attacks. It also allows e-commerce companies to adjust ads or prices — for instance, if the site knows you’ve just come from a competitor that is offering a lower price. Although passwords aren’t at risk, in harvesting a detailed list of where you’ve been online, sites can create thorough profiles on its users. The technique the University of California, San Diego researchers investigated is called “history sniffing” and is a result of the way browsers interact with websites and record where they’ve been. A few lines of programming code are all a site needs to pull it off. Although security experts have known for nearly a decade that such snooping is possible, the latest findings offer some of the first public evidence of sites exploiting the problem. Current versions of the Firefox and Internet Explorer browsers still allow this, as do older versions of Chrome and Safari, the researchers said. The report adds to growing worry about surreptitious surveillance by Internet companies and comes as federal regulators in the U.S. are proposing a “Do Not Track” tool that would prevent advertisers from following consumers around online to sell them more products. The researchers found 46 sites, ranging from smutty to staid, that tried to pry loose their visitors browsing histories using this technique, sometimes with homegrown tracking code. Nearly half of the 46 sites, including financial research site Morningstar.com and news site Newsmax.com, used an ad-targeting company, Interclick, which says its code was responsible for the tracking. Interclick said the tracking was part of an eight-month experiment that the sites weren’t aware of. The New York company said it stopped using the technique in October because it wasn’t successful in helping match advertisers to groups of Internet users. Interclick emphasized that it didn’t store the browser histories. Morningstar said it ended its relationship with Interclick when it found out about the program, and NewsMax said it didn’t know that history sniffing had been used on its users until The Associated Press called. NewsMax said it is investigating. The researchers studied far more sites — a total of the world’s 50,000 most popular sites — and said many more behaved suspiciously, but couldn’t be proven to use history sniffing. Nearly 500 of the sites studied had characteristics that suggested they could infer browsers’ histories, and more than 60 transferred browser histories to the network. But the researchers said they could only prove that 46 had done actual “history hijacking.” “Browser vendors should have fixed this a long time ago,” said Jeremiah Grossman, an Internet security expert at WhiteHat Security Inc., which wasn’t involved in the study. “It’s more evidence that we not only needed the fix, but that people really should upgrade their browsers. Most people wouldn’t know this is possible.” The latest versions of Google Inc.’s Chrome and Apple Inc.’s Safari have automatic protections for this kind of snooping, researchers said. Mozilla Corp. said the next version of Firefox will have the same feature, adding that a workaround exists for some older versions as well. Microsoft Corp. noted that Internet Explorer users can enable a private browsing mode that prevents the browser from logging the user’s history, which prevents this kind of spying. But private browsing also strips away important benefits of the browser knowing its own history, such as displaying Google links you’ve visited in different colors than those you haven’t. “It’s surprising, the lifetime that this fundamental a privacy violation can stick around,” said Hovav Shacham, an assistant professor of computer science and engineering at UC San Diego and one of the paper’s authors. Internet companies are obsessed with tracking users’ behavior so they can target their ads better. Uproar has prompted the Federal Trade Commission to propose rules that would limit advertisers’ ability to track Internet users to show them advertisements. The “Do Not Track” tool the commission is proposing could eventually take the form of a browser setting that tells advertisers which visitors are off limits; such a setting, though, wouldn’t necessarily block history sniffing. History sniffing is essentially a side-by-side comparison of Web pages you’ve already visited with Web pages that a particular site wants to see if you’ve visited. If there’s a match, users likely would never know, but the site administrators would learn a lot about their audiences. For instance, a popular porn site was checking its visitors’ histories to see if they’d visited 23 other pornography sites, and the code used on the Morningstar and NewsMax.com sites looked for matches against 48 specific Web pages, all related to Ford automobiles. Sites can carry on this kind of inspection very quickly. Grossman said modern programs can check as many as 20,000 Internet addresses per second.
Read the original:
Visited Porn? Web Browser Flaw Secretly Bares All
Linkmaster Smith – a.k.a Smitty at The Other McCain and the conserva-sphere’s babe-blog aggregator par excellence – will soon deploy to Afghanistan. Word has it that a new hipster, Wombat Socho , will be taking over the honors. Apparently the Wombat’s still getting up to speed on the ways of the RSS feed, although Ruby Slippers indicates temporary workarounds are available for non-Wordpress bloggers – so as not to miss out on the festivities. (And no doubt Opus_6 will be pleased!) And number of the Linkmaster’s friends paid tribute: Common Sense Political Thought Cubachi DaTechguy Fishersville Mike Hillbilly Politics SI VIS PACEM Obi`s Sister Little Miss Attila The Lonely Conservative Mind Numbed Robot No Runny Eggs No Sheeples Here Point of a Gun Piece of Work in Progress Proof Positive The Prudence Paine Papers Red State Eclectic Right Wing News Stark Raving Love Suzy Rice SWACgirl That Mr. Guy theblogprof The Camp of the Saints Troglopundit really brought the love . The Conservative Pup Dustbury The Frugal Cafe Left Coast Rebel Parc Bench Red State The Minority Report Pirates Cove Uncoverage WyBlog And other well-known regulars include the veteran William at Pirate’s Cove , as well as Bob Belvedere and Irish Cicero , plus The Real United States . Theo’s been on fire lately , so don’t miss that. And bonus blogging from Jimmy Bise, ” Clearing the Browser Tabs – A Sunny Sunday Edition .” ********** And be sure to visit some of the other friends of American Power : * Another Black Conservative . * Astute Bloggers (Honorary). * Blazing Cat Fur . * The Blog Prof . * Bob Belvedere . * Classical Liberal . * Daley Gator . * Kathy Shaidle . * Left Coast Rebel . * Maggie’s Notebook . * Mind Numbed Robot . * Not a Sheep . * Pirate’s Cove . * POWIP . * The Other McCain . * Reaganite Republican (Honorary). * Right Klik (Honorary). * Saberpoint (Honorary). * Serr8d (Honorary). * Snooper’s Report (Honorary). * Stormbringer . * Theo Spark . * Washington Rebel . * WyBlog . * YankeePhil . * Zion’s Trumpet . BONUS : Don’t forget Instapundit . And drop your link in the comments to be added to the weekly bikini roundups!
Read this article:
Korean Air Rule 5 – Special Linkmaster Smith Farewell Edition!
