"cartman" <ambrosesearle@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>:|buckeye-elo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>:|>
>:|> Anything that is posted on the WWW does not carry with it any
reasonable
>:|> expectation of privacy...
>:|> However, any information posted on the WWW that anyone from the
general
>:|> public can access has no privacy protections or recourse.
>:|
>:|Back when you used to have a soul, you used to sing a different tune.
>:|
>:|Do you remember who said this?:
>:|
>:|"I have a serious problem with anyone who has nothing better to do than
>:|to
>:|try and locate personal private information about anyone on line. I
>:|notice that somebody is posting a name and address of someone else...
>:|To me that is totally crossing the line. Thee is little privacy to
>:|begin with on the net. There are all sorts of invasions of privacy,
>:|even to the point of identity theft in some cases...They have been
>:|known to search out and find the home addresses of those who disagree
>:|with them on the news group. They have been known to post such private
>:|information in the public news group as the name, address, phone
>:|number, wife's name, children's names, address, phone number of place
>:|of employment for both husband and wife if both work along with the
>:|name of immediate supervisor of both. To that they also add the name,
>:|address and phone number of the schools the kids go to. Followed by a
>:|comment like, someone out to straighten these people out... The only
>:|problem is, once posted it can't be taken back and some weird sicko
>:|might decide to pay that family a visit, etc... Why would someone take
>:|any of this so seriously as to try and find out where someone else
>:|lives and post that information in a public forum as a effort to 'get
>:|back at someone' for who knows what? That kind of crap is way out of
>:|line."
>:|
>:|Let's see where the above came from--
>:|
>:|http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s****ts.football.pro.cleve-browns/msg/3992c4e7bbcae7c3
>:|
>:|imagine that??
>:|
>:|You changed you tune when you started advocating the very tactics you
>:|previously condemned. And you do so with a sense of security, because
>:|even though your own personal information about your disability status,
>:|a lot about Judy, your court records, etc. are readily available
>:|through the net, you don't have much to worry about because the kind of
>:|jack-boot thug tactics that you advocate are generally not practiced by
>:|folks like me who agree with every word you said in that citation I
>:|provided above... I don't engage in the practice because, as the old
>:|Jim Allison USED to say, "that crap is way out of line."
Dear Richard Gardiner
Imagine trying to compare apples and oranges.
Imagine being a jerk and liar
You qualify for both
I guess the fact that the following was a legal standard was totally over
your head
>:|> Anything that is posted on the WWW does not carry with it any
reasonable
>:|> expectation of privacy...
>:|> However, any information posted on the WWW that anyone from the
general
>:|> public can access has no privacy protections or recourse.
I guess your fanciful lies that try to bring me into your bull****,
bawling and bellyaching escapes your awareness too.
Well Richie Gardiner have a great weekend
Hey!!!!! There is a neat and interesting series I have started in these
newsgroups. Why don't you join in that? Oh I forgot, that pertains to
history and you aren't about history anymore. You're just about
bellyaching, bawling, crying playing the rule of the jerk ooops sorry,
that slipped out, playing the role of the abused, picked upon, innocent
victim. :O)
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the US and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why
"a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v.
Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
|
