Monday, July 8, 2013

In Secret


Tinker:

What secret! There is really no secrets in this world about what people are doing in the dark that we don't know about. After the age of reason all of us know just about all of what people are capable of doing both good and bad. The guilty committing crimes against their neighbor however usually try and plan their crime in secret. Our American government has had a code of silence every since I can remember.

Now lately the American government has the American TV network in their hip pocket giving the TV networks access if they of course maintain the self same code of silence come hell or high water.


We the people like a married devoted spouse is the last to know about all the cheating that has been going on behind our backs. The grapevine has a code of not wanting to be a snitch. How do you like those apples America?
-----------------

America's Reaction to the Atomic Bomb

There is no secret of the atomic bomb. ... The co-pilot of the Enola Gay, Robert Lewis wrote in his diary shortly after his .
-----------------

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

Meet The Chief Justice Of America's Secret Supreme Court

Fisa Court

-----------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html?_r=1&
The New York Times

U.S.

In Secret, Court Vastly Broadens Powers of N.S.A.

By

Published: July 6, 2013 41 Comments
WASHINGTON — In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation’s surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.


Readers’ Comments

The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long, reveal that the court has taken on a much more expansive role by regularly assessing broad constitutional questions and establishing important judicial precedents, with almost no public scrutiny, according to current and former officials familiar with the court’s classified decisions.

The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.

Last month, a former National Security Agency contractor, Edward J. Snowden, leaked a classified order from the FISA court, which authorized the collection of all phone-tracing data from Verizon business customers. But the court’s still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order, the officials said.


“We’ve seen a growing body of law from the court,” a former intelligence official said. “What you have is a common law that develops where the court is issuing orders involving particular types of surveillance, particular types of targets.”

In one of the court’s most important decisions, the judges have expanded the use in terrorism cases of a legal principle known as the “special needs” doctrine and carved out an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a warrant for searches and seizures, the officials said.

The special needs doctrine was originally established in 1989 by the Supreme Court in a ruling allowing the drug testing of railway workers, finding that a minimal intrusion on privacy was justified by the government’s need to combat an overriding public danger. Applying that concept more broadly, the FISA judges have ruled that the N.S.A.’s collection and examination of Americans’ communications data to track possible terrorists does not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment, the officials said.

That legal interpretation is significant, several outside legal experts said, because it uses a relatively narrow area of the law — used to justify airport screenings, for instance, or drunken-driving checkpoints — and applies it much more broadly, in secret, to the wholesale collection of communications in pursuit of terrorism suspects. “It seems like a legal stretch,” William C. Banks, a national security law expert at Syracuse University, said in response to a description of the decision. “It’s another way of tilting the scales toward the government in its access to all this data.”

While President Obama and his intelligence advisers have spoken of the surveillance programs leaked by Mr. Snowden mainly in terms of combating terrorism, the court has also interpreted the law in ways that extend into other national security concerns. In one recent case, for instance, intelligence officials were able to get access to an e-mail attachment sent within the United States because they said they were worried that the e-mail contained a schematic drawing or a diagram possibly connected to Iran’s nuclear program.


In the past, that probably would have required a court warrant because the suspicious e-mail involved American communications. In this case, however, a little-noticed provision in a 2008 law, expanding the definition of “foreign intelligence” to include “weapons of mass destruction,” was used to justify access to the message.

The court’s use of that language has allowed intelligence officials to get wider access to data and communications that they believe may be linked to nuclear proliferation, the officials said. They added that other secret findings had eased access to data on espionage, cyberattacks and other possible threats connected to foreign intelligence.

“The definition of ‘foreign intelligence’ is very broad,” another former intelligence official said in an interview. “An espionage target, a nuclear proliferation target, that all falls within FISA, and the court has signed off on that.”

The official, like a half-dozen other current and former national security officials, discussed the court’s rulings and the general trends they have established on the condition of anonymity because they are classified. Judges on the FISA court refused to comment on the scope and volume of their decisions.


Unlike the Supreme Court, the FISA court hears from only one side in the case — the government — and its findings are almost never made public. A Court of Review is empaneled to hear appeals, but that is known to have happened only a handful of times in the court’s history, and no case has ever been taken to the Supreme Court. In fact, it is not clear in all circumstances whether Internet and phone companies that are turning over the reams of data even have the right to appear before the FISA court.

Created by Congress in 1978 as a check against wiretapping abuses by the government, the court meets in a secure, nondescript room in the federal courthouse in Washington. All of the current 11 judges, who serve seven-year terms, were appointed to the special court by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and 10 of them were nominated to the bench by Republican presidents. Most hail from districts outside the capital and come in rotating shifts to hear surveillance applications; a single judge signs most surveillance orders, which totaled nearly 1,800 last year. None of the requests from the intelligence agencies was denied, according to the court.
-----------------
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
---------
---------
--------------http://www.theblaze.com/

‘Religion, Morality and Knowledge’: Michelle Malkin and David Barton Reveal the Darker Side of Education Reform
Watch

‘Religion, Morality and Knowledge’: Michelle Malkin and David Barton Reveal the Darker Side of Education Reform
“We don’t analyze, we don’t think, we don’t process. We just receive.”

--------
Ted Cruz’s Father Delivers Epic Speech Touting Patriotism and Lambasting Obama’s ‘Socialist’ Inclinations
Watch

Ted Cruz’s Father Delivers Epic Speech Touting Patriotism and Lambasting Obama’s ‘Socialist’ Inclinations
“You can’t understand a loss of rights unless you’ve experienced it.”
------------
Guess How Much Money Fmr. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs Has Made Giving Speeches Since Leaving White House?
Watch

Guess How Much Money Fmr. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs Has Made Giving Speeches Since Leaving White House?
“…a journeyman flack who struck gold with the right patron and wound up talking at the lectern at 1600 Pennsylvania.”
---------------------
Tinker:

The real reason some soccer fans go to see a soccer game - They are just waiting for the chance to kill somebody like this referee.

---------------

Soccer Insanity: Brazilian Fans Storm Field, Stone Referee to Death — and You’ll Be More Shocked by What Else They Allegedly Did to Him…and Why

Jul. 6, 2013 7:52pm

SAO PAULO (TheBlaze/AP) — Police say enraged spectators invaded a soccer field, stoned the referee to death, and quartered his body after he fatally stabbed a player.

The Public Safety Department of the state of Maranhao says in a statement that it all started when referee Otavio da Silva expelled player Josenir Abreu from a game. The two got into a fist fight, then da Silva took out a knife and stabbed Abreu, who died on his way to the hospital.

The statement says Abreu’s friends and relatives immediately “rushed into the field, stoned the referee to death and quartered his body.”

Brazilian Soccer Fans Stone to Death Referee Otavio da Silva, Then Allegedly Decapitate Referee, Place Head on Stake in Middle of Field    After Ref Fatally Stabs Player Josenir Abreu During Fist Fight (Credit: YouTube)
Local news media say the spectators also decapitated Silva and stuck his head on a stake in the middle of the field. Police have arrested one suspect.

The incident occurred last Sunday, according to Deadspin, and reports have surfaced today.

More from Deadspin:

They reportedly tied up the referee, beat him, stoned him, lynched him, and then quartered him. When they finished, they cut off his head and placed it on a stake in the center of the field.

So far, just one man, 27-year-old Luis Moraes Souza, has been arrested for the crime, and authorities are searching for two more. Valter Costa, the chief of police in Maranhão’s town of Santa Ines, spoke in a statement. “Reports of witnesses have indicated some people that were in place at the time of the fact,” he said. “We will identify and hold accountable all those involved. A crime will never justify another. Actions like this do not collaborate with the legality of a state law.”

If you must, here is a link to a video showing da Silva’s body, decapitated and all, after he was killed. But, we’re warning you, it’s extremely gruesome.
-----------------
http://www.lauraingraham.com/

Lie of the Day

If the bill passes, anyone who wants to try to cross the border illegally will have to go over an 18-foot steel pedestrian fence... ...Now there are simply no more legitimate excuses to vote against this bill.

- Sen. Chuck Schumer......

More Lies
-----------------------------
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/07/sunday-morning-liveblog_n_3557374.html

TV SoundOff: Sunday Talking Heads

Hola, my Sunday morning ponies, and welcome once again to a summertime edition of the Sunday Morning Liveblog of the Political Chat Shows, in which I court an existential crisis by watching some of the most terrible televised misadventures ever set in front of cameras. My name is Jason, and I'm back after a week away, before another week away, and I appreciate your patience.

Next week, I will be seeking asylum in Toronto, Canada -- home of Saint Alanis and the good people of the Great White North. There may be terrible Sunday morning chat shows in Canada -- covering the reeves and ridings as the Prime Minister copes with Bloquistes and Pequistes and Adequistes, as Canadians relax on the Chesterfields and eat poutine and wonder why these shows can't just be chucked in the BFI bin or down the garburator -- but I am not going to watch them, sorry.

At any rate, today's trial will consist of staring into the void that is Meet The Press, which has invited the Fink Tank Bros of the New York Times -- David Brooks and Thomas Friedman -- to jizz their Aspen Ideas about Egypt all over out televisions. It is, I think the last Chris Matthews Show, after which I have no other outlet for an occasional 30 minute show than to watch THE MCLAUGHLIN GROUP. Should I start watching that again? Register your strenuous objections or unabashed approval by sending me an email. As it turns out, my bureau chief, Ryan Grim, is now on that show pretty regularly, and I'd love to start giving him a hard time.

By the way I am pretty sure that every time he appears on THE McLAUGHLIN GROUP, he is always really, really high. This is just one more thing he has in common with Eleanor Clift.

Anyway, the drill, it is known by you. Have fun hanging out in the comments as I watch this plainspoken jerks mumble and prattle. Drop me a line, if you like. Follow me on Twitter if you have random bits of unintelligible natterings. Visit my Rebel Mouse page for fun reads, especially this week's Sunday Reads section.


FOX NEWS SUNDAY

John Roberts, sporting an aggressively aquamarine tie, is substituting for Chris Wallace today, lending the proceedings a sort of "Generic Inflatable News Anchor" feel to a space that's typically filled by Wallace's archness. He'll be joined by Senators Bob Corker and Jack Reed to talk about Egypt. Then Rick Perry is here to mansplain how things are going to be for women in Texas. He'll do so not wearing a military-style beret, so it will seem like we are getting freedom and democracy right as compared to other places.

First, there is a brief recap of the Asiana Airlines flight that crashed at San Francisco's airport yesterday. The latest details are that the "black boxes" were recovered in tact, and it is the opinion of most of the professionals conducting the investigation that so many people walked away from the crash. Two people, sad to say, did not, but apparently their official causes of death are being investigated. Also, the NTSB will be out on the runway at SFO for at least another week.

Smash cut to Egypt and those latest developments, which include more protests in Tahrir Square and more threats of violence between the pro-Morsi faction and everyone else. Also, there is some dramz within the internal wranglings of the transition whatever-we're-doing, where officials who recently advanced the idea that Mohammed ElBaradei -- who you might remember from his work as UN nuclear inspector -- was first appointed to serve as Prime Minister, then that was walked back, and even now as I type this that story continues to morph. Just remember, you have to go through the Articles of Confederation before you get to the document that counts slaves as three-fifths of a person, and then there is a long time where you have to basically untangle that mess, too.

Okay, let's talk to Corker and Reed about this.

Corker is in Afghanistan and Reed is in Rhode Island, so we are cautioned that there will be a satellite delay in our conversation with Corker, and we need to be on our guard for Reed to start referring to a water fountain as a "bubbler."

Is Corker worried about a further escalation of violence? "I think there's no question," he says, but says that "our role" should be a sort of calming agent, urging the military to "move through the civilian process" and asking the Muslim Brotherhood to be mature about the fact that they've been voted off the island, if not democratically. "Our role right now should be one of applying calm," he says. He notes that there is a "lot of frustration" with Egypt right now, but the more people who urge a lowering of the temperature, the better.

Reed says that there are many factions in Egypt that are willing to listen to the United States in that regard. He says that the primary problem with Morsi is that he worked very hard, in office, at driving up the levels of citizen exclusion, instead of inclusion, and that no longer fits with the mainstream of Egyptian politics.

Is the Obama administration, who has thus far studiously avoided taking sides (while also fairly clearly not exactly mourning the end of the Morsi government), handing this well? Corker notes that there in Afghanistan, you have a situation where all the things that we might have liked to see occur have not occurred. He points out that the reality of geopolitics is that just because America wants something to happen, doesn't mean that it's going to. He once again recommends that calm be urged, and reminds that the sort of work that he and Reed do on a daily basis is simply work to see our national interests preserved and protected. And calm, in the immediate sense, is in our short-term interest, the preservation of treaties and agreements is in our long-term interests, and "at present I'm not sure what else the United States can do other than to be a calming voice" both in Egypt and "the neighborhood."

Roberts notes that the administration has refrained from calling this a coup and correctly notes that the reason they've avoided using that term is because the vagaries of various laws would preclude us from sending aid to Egypt under those circumstances. That said, there are some Senators -- McCain and Leahy -- who want precisely that: no more aid. Reed says that what's happening is a very unique situation -- the military is aiding the population of Egypt in a popular uprising. Nevertheless, it was still an uprising -- popular though it may be -- against an elected government.

Roberts points that out. Reed says that there are a lot of strategic issues at play, beyond what's happening with Egypt's government, that factor into the thinking where aid is concerned, including trade agreements and counter-terror activities. "I think we have to be very careful in suspending aid," he says, adding that he'd simply hold the military to a hard and fast timeline leading to the "hopefully quick" emergence of a new democratic government.

Roberts asks Corker, "Was it a mistake to rush to throw Mubarak overboard?" I'm not sure who is the implied maker of the mistake, here. As Corker already explained, some matters are beyond our control to manipulate, and the Egyptians had obviously tired of Mubarak, and understandably so. Corker says that sometimes countries move too quickly in one direction or another, but he sees this as an opportunity for the United States to work with the Egyptians. May as well quit peeping the rear view mirror, anyway.

Roberts jumps to a discussion of the Affordable Care Act, and whether or not the employer mandate delay imperils the bill. I can answer that: ha, no. That's what Reed answers. Brian Beutler reports:


It’s an undeniable fact that the so-called “employer mandate” is poorly designed and creating real challenges for businesses and workers alike. When critics of the law cite the delay as evidence of an implementation “train wreck,” in other words, they’re being tendentious, and thinking wishfully, but there’s a kernel of truth to it.But if the employer mandate snafu were as bad and as symptomatic as Republicans would have you believe, they’d treat it as vindication — a cause for celebration. As we and others have reported, though, the employer mandate exists at the margins of the law’s core functions. The decision to delay it for a year sidelines one liability that would have harmed the law’s rollout, robs Republicans (temporarily, but during an election year) of a legitimate public critique of the law’s real-life effects, and ironically strengthens the state-based insurance exchanges, which are the must-work components of the ACA.

There's widespread willingness to just scotch the employer mandate, but you aren't going to get cooperation to do so unless the GOP gets to scrap the entire bill. So, it's all a non-starter.

But it's not a big part of the bill.

Roberts suggests that the "employer mandate" works with the other "economics" of the bill as if it were all one big Cirque de Soleil routine, but Reed is all, "No, that is not how this works."

Would Corker support simply repealing that slim part of the bill? Corker would not, because he believes in the Cirque de Soleil argument. Corker also claims to be concerned about the way employers will move employees from full-time to part-time to avoid having to give them health care. If that behavior was restricted to the teensy number of employers affected by the mandate, though, that would be WONDERFUL! But as it turns out, employers have been steadily rooking their employees in that fashion whether they are subject to the mandate or not. In fact, that practice has been pretty widespread for many years -- years predating both the Affordable Care Act and the Obama administration.

Maybe Corker hasn't noticed? He has been livin' it up in the Gilded City for a while, so that's a possibility. But I reckon he wouldn't go too far out of his way to curb those practices anyway, so that was just some concern-trolling.

Corker/Reed is probably where today's discussion of Egypt is going to peak today, though, so be glad for small mercies.

Tomorrow is "What Is Rick Perry Gonna Do Next" Day, in Texas, but today, he's just here to talk about his fondness for TRAP laws and footbinding, because he's a tease.

Will he run for Governor? Perry won't say. Is he bothered by polls? No. Is he excited about passing laws that further chattelize women? You betcha.


What is he doing the second time around, though, to ensure that someone like Wendy Davis doesn't just do things like "think" or "talk about stuff" or especially "continuing to use her voice to make noises long after a majority of state Senators have decided whether they'd be willing to pork her or not." In fact, in this special session, it will be harder to mount a filibuster, as Dana Liebelson explained at length a few weeks ago:


Here's how it works: Under Texas law, the governor can call as many "special" 30-day voting sessions as he wants, to deal with one or more specific pieces of legislation of his or her choosing. During these special sessions, only a simple majority is needed to put a bill to vote, instead of the more commonly used two-thirds majority. The two-thirds rule, as Jones explains, generally "keeps the GOP from moving too far to the right" during the regular voting process.In the special session that just ended, the abortion bill did not reach the state Senate floor until the final day, thanks to stalling maneuvers mounted by Texas Democrats. This meant that Davis only had to filibuster the session for the final 11 hours of the session it took to kill the bill. But Jones predicts that an identical bill introduced in a new special session would have more than enough support to pass in the state House and Senate. And it could hit the Senate floor weeks before the session ends. With the Legislature's tough rules about filibusters—a lawmaker using that tactic must remain standing and on-topic, and resist the urge to go to the bathroom—it would be impossible for a person to filibuster the measure for that long. Jones says that he expects Perry to call another special session to deal with the controversial abortion bill: "I therefore expect legislation similar to SB 5, though perhaps with some modifications, to reach Gov. Perry's desk in July."

Perry says that what happened previously, was "mob rule," the way a mob of one person had to stand there and speak until she needed a back brace. Roberts actually side-eyes that contention, and Perry is forced to say that it was really just Texas citizens making their voices heard that was "mob rule." Apparently, Perry has met very few people from this place called "Texas," or he just has mobs that he prefers over ones that he doesn't.

Anyway, Perry's pearls were totally clutched over the whole matter. He is very shocked at the way people had opinions. Chances are, people in Texas will not be allowed to have that many opinions any more.

Roberts plays Perry that clip of Perry slagging off Wendy Davis for being a single mother, and asks if he regrets his comments -- and whether or not he thinks he'll come to regret having said those things if he runs for president again. Perry, playing the thick-o, says that when he said Wendy Davis hadn't learned anything from the experience of being a young, single mother, he was paying her a compliment. You would have to be a deeply sad sell-out to take that as a compliment, but such people exist, and there's a good chance that Perry is typically in the company of those types.

As for whether he thinks it will harm a future presidential bid, he doesn't say. I will give him credit for honesty, though -- Perry quite clearly wants to shut down abortion clinics and curtail women's rights and he doesn't pretend otherwise. There are a lot of supporters of the bill that disingenuously insist that what they are doing is "keeping women safe" and "improving the workplace/safety standards at abortion clinics," and Perry at least doesn't sit there and pretend that's what this is all about. That is at least refreshing, in the same way that a glass of battery acid can be refreshing, relative to a glass filled with week-old egg yolks and scorpion poison.

Oh, ha! Looks like I spoke too soon, because now he ACTUALLY IS talking about how this is all about keeping high standards of excellence at Texas abortion facilities. Fie on me for giving Perry even a tiny bit of credit, I guess.

Wow, that coin flipped rather quickly. Must have been some mob rule.

Roberts does deep into the electoral skullduggery, asking Perry if he's simply freezing the gubernatorial field for Texas AG Greg Abbott to run for the statehouse, but Perry, having signalled that he'd be coy about that topic at the outset, remains coy now. Similarly, he won't discuss specifics about future Presidential ambition. Roberts throws some shade, citing a bunch of polls that indicate that Senator Ted Cruz is now the Texan that Tea Partiers love the most and want to see run for President. Perry's got nothing but platitudes to offer in response.

And he's basically mixing his messages on the abortion issue -- he simultaneously wants to curtail abortion AND make it safer. The guy always had a way with an internal contradiction. If the planet was ever attacked by a cloud of Space Cognitive Dissonance, I'd definitely fire Rick Perry out of an ion cannon to combat that threat.

Perry, having just finished platitudinizing about how "the hard work is in the statehouse" is asked by Roberts, "Well, if that's true how come you are heading down to San Antonio to talk about your political future?" Perry says, "People can multitask well." I mean, "people" can "count to three" well, for the most part. In this case, that was a fitting question.

At any rate, Perry offers to help Roberts figure out how to drive from Austin to San Antonio, and Roberts is like, ha ha no thanks.

[More liveblog is coming in a moment. While you wait, check out my Rebel Mouse page for this week's Sunday Reads.]
----------------
Sports
-----------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_State_University_Tiger_Marching_Band
The Golden Band from Tigerland

On game day the band makes its way through campus toward Victory Hill and Tiger Stadium.
------------------
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Louisiana State University Tiger Marching Band
Lsubandpatch.png
School Louisiana State University
Location Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Conference Southeastern Conference
Founded 1893
Director Roy King
Members 325
Fight song Fight for LSU
Website www.bands.lsu.edu

Led by the drum major, the band takes the field for its traditional pregame performance.
The Louisiana State University Tiger Marching Band (also called The Golden Band from Tigerland or simply the Tiger Band) is known by LSU Tiger fans and foes alike for the first four notes of its pregame salute sounded on Saturday nights in Tiger Stadium. This 325-member marching band performs at all LSU football home games, all bowl games, and select away games and represents the University at other functions as one of its most recognizable student and spirit organizations.
------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiZoYQSqu-A

LSU Pregame from the field...

------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2hHe9POkBU
Lsu Tigers - Mike the Tiger
------------------
http://wn.com/1958_lsu_tigers_football_team
------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NB5WvmKAcdI

Forever A Tiger - LSU Experience 2013

------------------
http://www.lsusports.net/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=5200&ATCLID=205714941

Photo by:Hilary Scheinuk, LSU Athletics Student Photographer

SEC Unveils 2013 Football Schedule

BATON ROUGE - Seven home games, including Southeastern Conference contests against Auburn, Florida, Texas A&M and Arkansas in Tiger Stadium, highlight LSU's 2013 football schedule, which was released by the conference office on Thursday. 

The 2013 LSU schedule features eight conference games - four at home and four on the road - as well as four non-conference contests beginning with the season-opener against TCU in the Cowboys Classic in Arlington, Texas on Aug. 31.

Other non-conference games for the Tigers in 2013 include the home opener against UAB on Sept. 7, Kent State on Sept. 14 and Furman on Oct. 26. LSU has never faced Kent State and Furman in football, while the UAB game will be the first between the teams since the 2000 season. 

The Tigers open SEC play on Sept. 21 against Auburn in Tiger Stadium. LSU hosts Florida on Oct. 12, Texas A&M on Nov. 23 and Arkansas on Nov. 30 to round out the SEC home schedule in 2013. The Texas A&M game will be the Aggies' first visit to Tiger Stadium since 1994.

The Tigers replace South Carolina on the 2013 schedule with Georgia as LSU travels to Athens, on Sept. 28. It will be the first regular season meeting between LSU and Georgia since 2009. LSU also faces Mississippi State (Oct. 5) and Ole Miss (Oct. 19) on the road in 2013. 

After an open date on Nov. 2, the Tigers return to Tuscaloosa, Ala., for the first time since the 9-6 overtime victory during the 2011 season on Nov. 9. Another open date follows the Alabama contest on Nov. 16 before the Tigers close out the regular season with back-to-back home games against Texas A&M and Arkansas. 

The SEC Championship Game is scheduled for Dec. 7 at the Georgia Dome in Atlanta. 

2013 LSU Football Schedule
Aug. 31 TCU in Arlington, Texas
Sept. 7 UAB in Baton Rouge
Sept. 14 Kent State in Baton Rouge
Sept. 21 Auburn in Baton Rouge
Sept. 28 Georgia in Athens, Ga.
Oct. 5 Mississippi State in Starkville, Miss.
Oct. 12 Florida in Baton Rouge
Oct. 19 Ole Miss in Oxford, Miss.
Oct. 26 Furman in Baton Rouge
Nov. 2 Open
Nov. 9 Alabama in Tuscaloosa, Ala.
Nov. 16 Open
Nov. 23 Texas A&M in Baton Rouge
Nov. 30 Arkansas in Baton Rouge

-----------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooQaBv90lbw

LSU Tigers Pump up 2013

------------------
BATON ROUGE - Seven home games, including Southeastern Conference contests against Auburn, Florida, Texas A&M and Arkansas in Tiger Stadium, highlight LSU's 2013 football schedule, which was released by the conference office on Thursday.

The 2013 LSU schedule features eight conference games - four at home and four on the road - as well as four non-conference contests beginning with the season-opener against TCU in the Cowboys Classic in Arlington, Texas on Aug. 31.



Other non-conference games for the Tigers in 2013 include the home opener against UAB on Sept. 7, Kent State on Sept. 14 and Furman on Oct. 26. LSU has never faced Kent State and Furman in football, while the UAB game will be the first between the teams since the 2000 season.

The Tigers open SEC play on Sept. 21 against Auburn in Tiger Stadium. LSU hosts Florida on Oct. 12, Texas A&M on Nov. 23 and Arkansas on Nov. 30 to round out the SEC home schedule in 2013. The Texas A&M game will be the Aggies' first visit to Tiger Stadium since 1994.

The Tigers replace South Carolina on the 2013 schedule with Georgia as LSU travels to Athens, on Sept. 28. It will be the first regular season meeting between LSU and Georgia since 2009. LSU also faces Mississippi State (Oct. 5) and Ole Miss (Oct. 19) on the road in 2013.

After an open date on Nov. 2, the Tigers return to Tuscaloosa, Ala., for the first time since the 9-6 overtime victory during the 2011 season on Nov. 9. Another open date follows the Alabama contest on Nov. 16 before the Tigers close out the regular season with back-to-back home games against Texas A&M and Arkansas.

The SEC Championship Game is scheduled for Dec. 7 at the Georgia Domein Atlanta.

2013 LSU Football Schedule
Aug. 31 TCU in Arlington, Texas
Sept. 7 UAB in Baton Rouge
Sept. 14 Kent State in Baton Rouge
Sept. 21 Auburn in Baton Rouge
Sept. 28 Georgia in Athens, Ga.
Oct. 5 Mississippi State in Starkville, Miss.
Oct. 12 Florida in Baton Rouge
Oct. 19 Ole Miss in Oxford, Miss.
Oct. 26 Furman in Baton Rouge
Nov. 2 Open
Nov. 9 Alabama in Tuscaloosa, Ala.
Nov. 16 Open
Nov. 23 Texas A&M in Baton Rouge
Nov. 30 Arkansas in Baton Rouge

-----------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooQaBv90lbw

LSU Tigers Pump up 2013

------------------



No comments:

Post a Comment