“The fight over Channel 10 is partly a matter of revenge — Netanyahu wants to make them pay for what they did to him,” argued Nachman Shai, a member of Parliament from the opposition party Kadima, a former news executive who helped set up Channel 10 a decade ago. “But it is also part of a three-front struggle — over the courts, civil society and the media. The right wants to control every institution. Freedom of expression is at risk.”
===========NH:
xref: concern expressed here today about social networks wanting more and more control: though you can lie about any address or college you choose you now MUST pick a street or a college from whose list. Though you can sign p for whose service for free you MUST have a pride of peole go by whom you are not allowed to be “too friendly” with; xref: “don’t handle the merchandise unless you are going to buy it,” but these are people, not ‘merchandise’…
What else?
It turns out LinkedIn’s profile system where you can list up to three web sites, let you make several clicks and see first hand what who has to offer, and get an email address that way, if who wants to display one.
The first person who researched however was not at any of the boards of directors he claimed to be.
In the world of tweets and other pressures to condense expression, is a blurb enough for you to decide? Should you have the right to make random selections? You do, but you must go looking for whose web [whewww heww] site links to find an email address or phone number. LinkedIn is not going to provide that for you – yet.
If you don’t have time …whewww hewwwww] to do that, do you have time to con act the person? er, contact, contact he person. Need an audible tone also. Slave architects expect us to look at this screen all the time… Nuance? Start chime designer?
Facebook might let us list outside web sites. Or does it? This is why it’s a $300,000 bill to find the balance that let’s who let who all know about a hot stock in five characters, or let’s one person have 5,000 characters of time to get creative together…
The WSJ.com comments area is really regressive, arbitrary, unfair, and like Harvard College HUP [^] and Administration offers no reasons why, nor any checks and balances. Indicative of a deeper institutional mental illness than the phone tapping scandal, Mr. Murdock. cc: Barrons.
What else? Ate. How are you?
After eating thoughts. Owe prayers yet. Stayed up for two days. Alhum / Hallelu [….very low rpm. Barely audible]
xref: you J ll. Also xref: you Patr… [thn/] And who else got some subliminal suggestions in today..
Filed under: former news, freedom of expression, hot stock, member of parliament, opposition party, random selections, Uncategorized
waterworldeden4 