Leaderboard

I am so sad and angry about this and the entire situation. Originally I thought Snowden did the wrong thing but I have to say that as more things come up and I see how the US and related intelligence agencies are acting, I am convinced now that he did the right thing. I am literally disgusted about all this and slowly (perhaps not that slowly) the US is losing its way and standing as a leader in issues related to freedom, democracy and human rights. A very sad period we are going through without a light at the end of the tunnel yet.

Both guys are hot, esp. the first one for me! Damn! I'd liked to have done more than massage, if possible!

Angela Merkel, the queen of Europe As Germany gears up for elections next month, Daniel Johnson explains how a dowdy chemist has fashioned herself into one of the world’s most respected – and influential – politicians Angela Merkel on the election trail last week. If there is one word to characterise the German Chancellor, it is decency The Telegraph 9:59PM BST 18 Aug 2013 Angela Merkel is riding high. As she returns from holiday to hit the campaign trail for the German elections – making a swing today through the south-east – she is not only her country’s most popular leader for a generation, but arguably the most respected politician in the world. How has this unflashy East German scientist – who disdains glitz and glamour to the point that when she wears a new dress in public it draws comment – succeeded in scaling the heights of international politics? There is a mystery about Mrs Merkel: she succeeds by being a woman seemingly without mystery. Unlike the Iron Lady, she rarely uses her feminine qualities to beguile men or impress women. Her natural habitat is not the public platform; she doesn’t tweet or text about anything and everything in the news. Intensely private, she comes across as unpretentious and incorruptible. That is why Silvio Berlusconi, as vain as Mrs Merkel is modest, did not know what to do when they clashed, except to whisper sexist obscenities behind her back. Next month, on September 22, Germany goes to the polls in what has become virtually a referendum on Mrs Merkel – and she is on course to win a third term of office. Her Christian Democrats are polling at around 40 per cent, twice as much as the Social Democrat opposition. It should be enough to win by a landslide, but under Germany’s proportional representation system, she will still need a coalition partner. The Free Democrats, her present allies, are struggling to cross the 5 per cent threshold to stay in parliament, but Christian Democrats will probably use their second preference votes to keep them in government. Assuming Mrs Merkel can forge a coalition of some sort, she will boast a record matched by only two of her postwar predecessors: Konrad Adenauer, who restored respect for the Germans, and Helmut Kohl, who reunited them. Though Adenauer created her political creed, Christian Democracy, and Kohl was Mrs Merkel’s mentor, they were both patriarchs in a patriarchal society. Their 59-year-old successor has turned her satirical nickname of “Mutti” (“Mummy”) – she has no children – into a badge of honour. Sensitive to history in a nation understandably suspicious of charismatic leadership, she has cultivated an unthreatening, homely, even dowdy image that delights voters but infuriates her (mainly male) colleagues and opponents. Her style is in some ways more like the Queen’s than Mrs Thatcher’s: she has a no-nonsense manner, but is rarely divisive and never dictatorial. As her enemies have found, however, she is definitely not to be underestimated. On the world stage, she owes her clout not just to the country she represents – although Ingolstadt, where she speaks at a rally today, is the home of Audi, a potent symbol of Germany’s industrial prowess. Nor is it entirely down to her lacklustre rivals for the leading role, even though Barack Obama’s mishandling of Egypt and Syria has already left him looking like a lame duck, Vladimir Putin seems to relish playing the pantomime villain, and the hapless François Hollande is even more unpopular than his predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy. No, the truth of the matter is that, if there is one word to characterise Angela Merkel, it is decency. The daughter of a Lutheran pastor, she comes from the tradition that gave us the sacred music of Bach, Handel and Brahms. She stands for a Germany that shoulders its responsibilities as primus inter pares in Europe. On the world stage, she does not carry a big stick – the German military has not covered itself with glory in Afghanistan – but her integrity, intelligence and insight lend her words weight. When Mrs Thatcher spoke, the world listened. So it is with Mrs Merkel. In an interview last week, for example, she gave notice that the EU might have to “give something back” to nation states. What this might mean was left deliberately vague. But for a German leader, hitherto seen as an arch-federalist, to talk openly about restoring powers to national governments is unprecedented. It suggests that something is finally stirring in the eurozone’s undergrowth. What brought about this change of heart? David Cameron’s promise of a referendum on British membership was one of the factors. Another, which she explicitly mentioned last week, is the crisis in the Netherlands. Coalitions in Holland come and go but, unlike the British and Germans, the Dutch have yet to see their economy revive. Having had their liberal consensus rent apart by the loss of control over their borders, they have no appetite for “more Europe”. The Germans are keen to keep their neighbours in Holland as allies in their wrangles with the Latins to the south. If the price of Dutch support is a limited repatriation of powers from Brussels, Mrs Merkel will stump up. The third factor in Mrs Merkel’s calculus is an unfamiliar phenomenon: German Euroscepticism. Up to half of all Germans would ditch the euro and stop bail-outs tomorrow, polls suggest. This tide of opinion has given birth to a new party, Alternative for Germany. Mrs Merkel is determined to crush this upstart – she has noticed the damage that Ukip is doing to the British Conservatives – and her method is to steal its clothes. The trouble is that Europe is stuck with the euro and all that goes with it. The markets have been calmer since the Germans underwrote the European Central Bank’s promise to do “whatever is necessary” to prevent the continental banking system from collapsing. And some of the invalids are out of intensive care: Greece, for example, claims that it is on course to balance its budget this year, not counting interest and repayments. Yet the underlying problems of the eurozone have, if anything, become more acute as the gap widens between the Latin mendicants to the south and the Teutonic knights to the north. German exporters have done rather well under the single currency, having accumulated a trillion-dollar surplus with the eurozone, but the German taxpayer has had enough of equally astronomical bail‑outs. The continuing malaise of the Mediterranean nations has reinforced migration towards the more dynamic economies of Britain and Germany, which is putting pressure on public services and welfare budgets – hence the unaccustomed spectacle of Iain Duncan Smith visiting Berlin recently to make common cause with the Merkel government against the European Commission, which is trying to stop the British refusing migrants easy access to benefits. For Mrs Merkel and Mr Cameron alike, immigration and welfare have risen to the top of the political agenda, with voters poised to punish politicians seen as a soft touch. Of course, as in Britain, the German Left see things differently. For them, the big issue in this election is cyber-spying, with anti-American conspiracy theories emerging from the Snowden affair and wild comparisons made with the Gestapo and the Stasi. For a few years an internet protest party, the Pirates, briefly captured many of the young with promises of free downloading. But it has now sunk without trace, and Mrs Merkel is trusted to safeguard civil liberties by the great majority of Germans. Indeed, she was able to showcase not only her respect for individual freedom but her solidarity with the Jewish people, by rushing through a law to permit infant circumcision after a German court criminalised this ancient ritual. Dealing with the Nazi past, in fact, is another area on which she never puts a foot wrong: she is supportive of Israel, though not uncritically so, and insisted on the sale of submarines that have given the Jewish state a powerful new means of defence, especially against Iran. If Mrs Merkel does win a third term of office next month, she is likely to become Europe’s longest-serving female head of government. As such, she is a role model for women everywhere. Her statesmanship also bears comparison with the two grand old men of German politics, Helmut Schmidt and Helmut Kohl. The latter, her old boss, held office for a record 16 years, and she would quite like to beat him. True, she’s been in office for eight years already, but she still has the energy to keep going – and having recently raised the retirement age to 67, she has plenty of time to reshape Germany, and Europe, before she departs the scene. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/10251271/Angela-Merkel-the-queen-of-Europe.html

Met this Gayromeo model this week end in Prague. Lovely lad. 19 years old. Always smiling. Recommended ! His sexy smile announces the whole program ...

Today I went to see the movie The Spectacular Now, which has some good reviews. I hated it. The boy in it was selfish, but more importantly, he was a lush. His girl dumps him and he takes up with a nice girl, giving her her own engraved flask. It's all downhill from there. But I wondered if I would have liked the movie more if the actor was cuter. He plays a charming character, but I wasn't so charmed. Now we all know that cute guys have the advantage when it comes to being charming because we are so willing to be charmed with them. So this movie, I think, would have worked better if differently cast. That's my opinion. And your opinion? Is Miles Teller cute enough to charm you in a movie?

http://beastsofman.tumblr.com/post/58660048405/alexander-skarsgard-frontal-on-true-blood-season-6

I've found a lovely selection of gorgeous twinks from whom to choose during my October trip to Barcelona and Madrid and many spots in between! Madrid seems to have a bigger and hotter selection on Rentboy than Barcelona. I'll post some links later. I'm looking forward to input from those who may have sampled the wares.

The boys wanted to go to the soccer game when Barcelona was in town. It was a huge deal for them as they both love soccer and they love Barcelona. I told them to go buy some tickets at Ticketmaster and they did. They were lucky they did as they both told me of issues at the game with fake tickets and people paying for 2nd hand tickets, getting ready for the game and then not getting in. Imagine that: face tickets in Thailand! A true shocker isn't it? They wanted to go really early and they spend most of the afternoon there walking around doing whatever guys do at these events. I didn't ask many questions. But, I did notice a few too many photos of girls. They said the entire crowd had to go through 1 small little door and it took forever to get in. They both thoroughly enjoyed themselves and it made me happy to see them smile and laugh so much that night. They did tell me that a small bottle of water was 80 baht inside. They took a few pics and said it was OK for me to post there here in case others want to see what the games are like in Thailand. They took mostly video of the day but I was able to find a few pics. Enjoy.

http://www.rentboy.com/Listing.aspx?lid=168338 http://www.rentboy.com/Listing.aspx?lid=73096 http://www.rentboy.com/Listing.aspx?lid=233830 http://www.rentboy.com/Listing.aspx?lid=386844 http://www.rentboy.com/Listing.aspx?lid=387226 http://www.rentboy.com/Listing.aspx?lid=376625

I don't get the disaapointment, it could grow to a healthy 6 1/2"or 7" and much more important is if he knows how to use it and can reach one's magic prostate. And on the chowing down front, like ny Daddy always said, more than a mouthful is wasted, You know, sometimes it is just nicer to have them sit on your face, non? Yours IHOP akaFavelaDweller

The room and amenities are quite nice. Low lights and candles and music would enhance the entire experience if they were lacking.

thank you!

SAD yes... My fantasy is Dead... funny how a small cock can End a party !

Any chance she was born of at least one US parent while they were in Germany and that she would be available in 2016? How have we sunk to the point that, " Greece claims it is on track to have a balanced budget this year,....not counting interest and repayment of debts" makes any sense? Best regards, RA1

Greenwald Partner falsely detained as Terrorist: How to Create a Dictatorship Posted on 08/19/2013 by Juan Cole How to turn a democracy into a STASI authoritarian state in 10 easy steps: 1. Misuse the concept of a Top Secret government document (say, the date of D-Day) and extend classification to trillions of mundane documents a year. 2. Classify all government crimes and violations of the Constitution as secret 3. Create a class of 4.5 million privileged individuals, many of them corporate employees, with access to classified documents but allege it is illegal for public to see leaked classified documents 4. Spy on the public in violation of the Constitution 5. Classify environmental activists as terrorists while allowing Big Coal and Big Oil to pollute and destroy the planet 6. Share info gained from NSA spying on public with DEA, FBI, local law enforcement to protect pharmaceuticals & liquor industry from competition from pot, or to protect polluters from activists 7. Falsify to judges and defense attorneys how allegedly incriminating info was discovered 8. Lie and deny to Congress you are spying on the public. 9. Criminalize the revelation of government crimes and spying as Espionage 10. Further criminalize whistleblowing as “Terrorism”, have compradors arrest innocent people, detain them, and confiscate personal effects with no cause or warrant (i.e. David Miranda, partner of Glenn Greenwald) Presto, what looks like a democracy is really an authoritarian state ruling on its own behalf and that of 2000 corporations, databasing the activities of 312 million innocent citizens and actively helping destroy the planet while forestalling climate activism http://www.juancole.com/2013/08/greenwald-terrorist-dictatorship.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+juancole/ymbn+%28Informed+Comment%29

David Miranda: 'They said I would be put in jail if I didn't cooperate'Partner of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald gives his first interview on nine-hour interrogation at Heathrow airport Jonathan Watts in Rio de Janeiro The Guardian, Monday 19 August 2013 16.30 EDT Glenn Greenwald, left, meets his partner, David Miranda, at Rio de Janeiro airport after he finally reached Brazil following his nine-hour detention at Heathrow – an experience that has changed Miranda’s view of Britain. Photograph: Ricardo Moraes/Reuters David Miranda, the partner of the Guardian journalist who broke stories of mass surveillance by the US National Security Agency, has accused Britain of a "total abuse of power" for interrogating him for almost nine hours at Heathrow under the Terrorism Act. In his first interview since returning to his home in Rio de Janeiro early on Monday, Miranda said the authorities in the UK had pandered to the US in trying to intimidate him and force him to reveal the passwords to his computer and mobile phone. "They were threatening me all the time and saying I would be put in jail if I didn't co-operate," said Miranda. "They treated me like I was a criminal or someone about to attack the UK … It was exhausting and frustrating, but I knew I wasn't doing anything wrong." Miranda – a Brazilian national who lives with Greenwald in Rio – was held for the maximum time permitted under schedule seven of the Terrorism Act 2000 which allows officers to stop, search and question individuals at airports, ports and border areas. During that time, he said, he was not allowed to call his partner, who is a qualified lawyer in the US, nor was he given an interpreter, despite being promised one because he felt uncomfortable speaking in a second language. "I was in a different country with different laws, in a room with seven agents coming and going who kept asking me questions. I thought anything could happen. I thought I might be detained for a very long time," he said. He was on his way back from Berlin, where he was ferrying materials between Greenwald and Laura Poitras, the US film-maker who has also been working on stories related to the NSA files released by US whistle-blower Edward Snowden. Miranda was seized almost as soon as his British Airways flight touched down on Sunday morning. "There was an announcement on the plane that everyone had to show their passports. The minute I stepped out of the plane they took me away to a small room with four chairs and a machine for taking fingerprints," he recalled. His carry-on bags were searched and, he says, police confiscated a computer, two pen drives, an external hard drive and several other electronic items, including a games console, as well two newly bought watches and phones that were packaged and boxed in his stowed luggage. "They got me to tell them the passwords for my computer and mobile phone," Miranda said. "They said I was obliged to answer all their questions and used the words 'prison' and 'station' all the time." "It is clear why those took me. It's because I'm Glenn's partner. Because I went to Berlin. Because Laura lives there. So they think I have a big connection," he said. "But I don't have a role. I don't look at documents. I don't even know if it was documents that I was carrying. It could have been for the movie that Laura is working on." Miranda was told he was being detained under the Terrorism Act. He was never accused of being a terrorist or being associated with terrorists, but he was told that if – after nine hours – his interrogators did not think he was being co-operative, then he could be taken to a police station and put in jail. "This law shouldn't be given to police officers. They use it to get access to documents or people that they cannot get the legal way through courts or judges," said Miranda. "It's a total abuse of power." He was offered a lawyer and a cup of water, but he refused both because he did not trust the authorities. The questions, he said, were relentless – about Greenwald, Snowden, Poitras and a host of other apparently random subjects. "They even asked me about the protests in Brazil, why people were unhappy and who I knew in the government," said Miranda. He got his first drink – from a Coke machine in the corridor – after eight hours and was eventually released almost an hour later. Police records show he had been held from 08.05 to 17.00. Unable immediately to find a flight for him back to Rio, Miranda says the Heathrow police then escorted him to passport control so he could enter Britain and wait there. "It was ridiculous," he said. "First they treat me like a terrorist suspect. Then they are ready to release me in the UK." Although he believes the British authorities were doing the bidding of the US, Miranda says his view of the UK has completely changed as a result of the experience. "I have friends in the UK and liked to visit, but you can't go to a country where they have laws that allow the abuse of liberty for nothing," he said. The White House on Monday insisted that it was not involved in the decision to detain Miranda, though a spokesman said US officials had been given a "heads up" by British officials beforehand. The Brazilian government has expressed grave concern about the "unjustified" detention. Speaking by phone from the couple's home in the Tijuca forest, Miranda said it felt "awesome" to be back. "It's really good to be here. I felt the weight lift off my shoulders as soon I got back. Brazil feels very secure, very safe," he said. "I knew my country would protect me, and I believe in my husband and knew that he would do anything to help me." http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/david-miranda-interview-detention-heathrow

AOL is still around? Tim Armstrong's tantrum reveals the anomaly that is AOLThe CEO's brutal firing of a Patch staffer lays bare the stress AOL is under as it fails to answer the big existential questions Michael Wolff theguardian.com, Monday 19 August 2013 10.45 EDT The Huffington Post's Arianna Huffington and AOL chief Tim Armstrong, in happier times in 2011. Photograph: Alicia Canter for the Guardian For a generation of media folk recast as digital strivers, AOL remains as evocative a brand as Google – except for polar opposite reasons. Google became the harbinger of an industry going up, and AOL of one going down. In 2000, AOL, then the world's foremost digital company, bought Time Warner and, in short order, ruined that company and helped precipitate the end of the first stage of the digital revolution with an across the board share price wipeout. Out of those ashes, Google would rise. AOL, however, is still around, occupying a pained and awkward place in the digital world. Last week, its CEO, Tim Armstrong, threw a tantrum that again prompted questions about where AOL might be heading, and about the peculiar nature of its efforts to get there. That is, it has been heading in the wrong direction for so long, why would it continue to think it might ever find the right one? (In the short memory department, BusinessInsider called Armstrong's tantrum "one of the most bizarre sequences in AOL history". More bizarre than having lost $163bn in value?) The moment at issue last week had to do with Patch, an effort to create a national local or micro news network, that, surprising to almost no one – except perhaps Armstrong himself – has come to grief. In one of those company-wide retrenchment or downsizing conference calls that are like the cruel ceremonies that accompany the defeat of nations, Armstrong, as he admonished his troops and cast great blame on the waters, was distracted by someone with a camera. In a sudden, whiplash spasm of anger, Armstrong publicly fired the camera wielder, a senior Patch employee, on the spot. This opened up several windows into the state of AOL. The first let the world see directly into the company's culture: headquarters employees gathered around and sitting on the floor, and a CEO sounding like an angry headmaster. Digital companies often work with disproportionate numbers of young people, many in their twenties, many credited with much brilliance, and we tend to see them as a lucky group (free food, lax dress codes, etc). But suddenly, in the permanent and viral record of the Armstrong tantrum, it was possible to see the other side of this vaunted status, when the kids are not performing so well: it's an infantilized and demeaning world. These aren't professionals, who, even in extremis, command a certain degree of respect and human-resource ritual; these are children being upbraided and punished. Then, there is the window into Armstrong himself. He has always been one of those odd figures in the digital world, always straining for and never quite attaining legitimacy. He's not a founder, in a world where that is the sine qua non of leadership and status; nor is he an engineer or developer, with that valuable currency. Armstrong is simply a salesman, an advertising guy – someone apart from digital culture and understanding. A fungible Joe. Armstrong got his CEO role because nobody else with legitimacy wanted it, and because he hoped, on the basis of pure ego and ambition and desire, that running a public company, even a discredited one, would by some miracle give him that authority stature. Frst, of course, he has to hold on to his job, an effort of exertion and fire-extinguishing that might not necessarily bring out his best side. Indeed, lashing out at the photographer had the ring of personal embarrassment. He knows what he looks like. And then, there is Patch. Adding to the discomfort, Armstrong himself founded Patch. Then, worth a raised eyebrow, he got AOL – often a buyer of last resort – to acquire it after he joined the company as CEO. In other words, for all that Armstrong may reprimand his young staff and bawl out a nearby photographer, Patch is all on him. I don't know anyone (who has ever given Patch a moment's thought) who has regarded it as anything but preposterous. Nor do I know anyone among the myriad people who have cycled through its staff who hasn't been aghast at how dysfunctional it is. And I don't know anyone in the digital business who believes that local news has, at this time or in the foreseeable future, any mathematical way to success as an advertising model. Local news is a low CPM business (that is, ads are bought on a per thousand views basis) and low CPMs demand mass audiences. So, again, what exactly was the thinking here? And then, there is the window into the raison d'etre of AOL itself, which was opened up once again by Armstrong's public display of temper. Patch is just one more odd lot piece of the mishaps and happenstance and aborted strategies and nutty legacy that have left AOL with the wherewithal to continue but not to get any place. It is no longer a technology company or, in any significant sense, part of the digital world. AOL is, the company sometime maintains, an ad-driven digital media company – in a world where no such thing has ever proven to be successful. Its one foot forward has been the acquisition of the Huffington Post, which, while hardly a financial advance, nevertheless made AOL one of the more important news outlets in America. Unfortunately for Armstrong, almost since AOL's acquisition, Huffington Post founder and namesake Arianna Huffington has rather openly been planning for its exit, with Huffington and Armstrong operating as parallel entities within AOL. So, now, what happens to AOL? That's one of those peculiar existential questions that could have been asked about the company at any point since 2000. It exists, practically speaking, by no one's design or intentions. It goes on because it exists, but without any real hope that it will ever exactly justify its existence. It is led by people who, no doubt, would prefer to be leading something else. The same goes for most of the people who work there; they do so only by default. AOL is a historical mistake. It's only surprising that more people don't lose their cool there. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/19/tim-armstrong-tantrum-patch-aol

What would it take to convince you? They are not stupid -- they are evil.

sweet-lad19 He does not live in Prague and comes by train to Prague if you are interested in him

The founding fathers, having participated in the struggle against arbitrary power, comprehended some eternal truths respecting men and government. They knew that those who are entrusted with power are susceptible to the disease of tyrants, which George Washington rightly described as "love of power and the proneness to abuse it." For that reason, they realized that the power of public officers should be defined by laws which they, as well as the people, are obligated to obey; a truth enunciated by Daniel Webster when he said that "whatever government is not a government of laws is a despotism, let it be called what it may." Sen. Sam Ervin

A middle-aged couple had finally learned how to send and receive texts on their cell phones. The wife, being a romantic at heart, decided one day that she'd send her husband a text while she was out of the house having coffee with a friend. She texted: If you are sleeping, send me your dreams. If you are laughing, send me your smile. If you are eating, send me a bite. If you are drinking, send me a sip. If you are crying, send me your tears. I love you. The husband, being a no-nonsense sort of guy, texted back: I'm on the toilet. Please advise.