Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|Malaysia Airlines 'loses contact with plane'||
|A functional, fashionable smartwatch concept puts Samsung to shame||
|Your observations on Windows 8.1 update 1 (a.k.a. Feature Pack)||
|ASUS' pint-sized Chromebox ships on March 14th for $179||
|South Park: The Stick of Truth||
Posted 09 January 2013 - 14:35
Posted 09 January 2013 - 15:49
Not much "insaner" than the requirement of wearing a RFID chip which helps funding.
Her reasoning is insane but I agree with her actions.
Posted 09 January 2013 - 15:51
Posted 09 January 2013 - 16:04
Think she could have, and should have, won this if she had used a different arguement.
Posted 09 January 2013 - 16:14
Surely there must be some kind of invasion of privacy precedent that she could have used rather than this?
I'm not sure what. Hopefully she doesn't actually believe this, and it was just some grounds to bring up a case by.
It's ridiculous on the whole, though.
Posted 09 January 2013 - 16:17
16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
Posted 09 January 2013 - 17:12
Posted 09 January 2013 - 17:39
Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:51
Posted 10 January 2013 - 03:35
Posted 10 January 2013 - 03:39
So I wonder if she carries a cell phone around too? Considering with a cell phone, they can track you "anywhere" period, and not "just" on campus.
666 is not the number of the beast, that's a long known about error.