Jump to content
Paulding.com

Buffalo Joe

Members
  • Content Count

    304
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Buffalo Joe

  1. I bought in this county becasue of the projected growth... and equity.. oh yeah and if I bought in cobb I would have lived in a tiny home and the ability to touch my neighbors house fom my own bathroom window. :)

     

    I was going to make some $ on my house and Move, but I fell In love with PAULDING!

  2. What about if you did google some "adult topic" and then years later the same site/topic has morphed into a child porn site.  Your still listed as having been to or searched for that site. . . Could they come after you and how would you defend yourself?

     

     

    OHOHOH That is an excellent point... especally all of you who are awnsering yes in the "Have you gone to a porn sight" thread thingy.

  3. The person weren't punished...SOAPMOM knows all about what happend...but due to a leaked and botchedinvestigation....they place is still open. Although they have very fewchildren in their care. Idon't know about strong...but it has been along, very long 17 years dealing with problems from my duaghter...very sad at times.

     

     

    The word vendeta comes to mind

  4. The thing is, I heard in story I once saw on TV that most of these websites are hosted in other countries....where our gov't has no jurisdiction.

     

    Personally, I think the gov't is using child porn as an excuse to further violate citizens' privacy.

     

    It is so scary I agree with you on a topic... but I don't like what I have heard here.

     

    If other contries can block our websights why can't we just block theirs? If there are child porn sites out there then get someone who is dedicated to find them and run thier own google searches then block those sites.

  5. Here is my humble opinion, for what it's worth.  IF it's for the protection of children, I think that yes, they should be able to.  IF it's for the war against terrorism, yes, I think they should.  If it's just to snoop around, no, I don't think they should.

     

     

    But that is how it starts a little here a little there.... we loose our privacy... I look at credit reports all day... I tell you you would be amazed to see whats on just that.

     

    Think about it. Once the info is there temptation to look more into it is there.

     

    Most polititions do not start off being crooks... the power corupts..

    Inofrmation like that will do the same... well we just want to know about this... and maybe that. Oh and what about this.

  6. Buffalo Joe:

     

    I suspect they could do the search you suspect, find the location of the servers and porn purveyors, do a little surviellance and then gain a warrant for the server and its logs and follow the IP's.

     

    You're right they're just trying to grab as much power and authority as they can by throwing out the broadest possible nets.

     

    As far as the treason comment, this president, just as the 44 others before him, took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution.  Last time I looked the fourth Amendment, one of the first ten amendments called the Bill of Rights, is a part of the Constitution.

     

    The assertion that he needs no warrant to invade the privacy and search the 'papers and effects' of citizens is a prima facia violation of that amendment.

     

    As far as the threat posed by 'cells' etc. Benjamin Franklin said that "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    Before you rush to defend this president, consider for just a moment that someone you might not like (Consider Hillary) may hold that office and would have the 'expanded' power you seem willing to cede to this president to snoop in your private affairs.

     

    Would you feel comfortable if Hillary were doing the snooping?

     

    I'll be honest, I wouldn't ... not Hillary, not George, not Ronnie, not Dick, not Jimmy, (especially) Not Lyndon ... not nobody.

     

    That's why Al Gore's first words in his speech referenced Bob Barr 'cause our former Congressman, I do honestly believe, is of the same opinion.

     

    This is not partisan politics ... it is a question of law.

     

    pubby

     

    I am not defending this president... I am seriously offended by the privacy rights that have been infringed upon. I like most of what bush has doen and I agree that the power grab could be worse.

    NO I don't want Thrillary to be the one. Ouch. The fact is I don't want any of them doing any of it.

     

    Gore is a goober I am pretty Centered politically. I vote for the best crook... I mean Person for the job.

  7. =======

    First thing, the Dems are more criminal than the GOP, they have just not gotten caught and your wonderful Slick-Willie should have gone to jail for Perjury let alone, he was impeached.

     

    Second, the NSA has little time to worry about what you(and yes, I do know that for sure) did last night with your partner. There are sleeper cells in this country and they want you dead, want you to worship Allah(some moon-God), etc. You should be happy that someone is looking out for you.

     

    Third, several Libs and organizations should be also brought up on Treason charges. Traitors have no place in my government.

     

     

    I have to say wow. I am not a lib or a dem, and I am a bush fan... but acording to the artical they are looking to see what you are doing in the bedroom last night. I agree that the "Die American Pig" Allah's need to be watched monitored and brought down. how does that give the gov the right to say give me your data on 1 million web searches to see who is looking at child porn.

     

    Not that I am a fan of child porn but big brother is taking the easy way out on this one and trying to find out info that could affect people. It was not for looking up how to make bombs to blow up the white house or nuke the GA Dome (although I am not a falcons fan either, It think they nuked them selves this year).

     

    Although the gov needs to stop child porn they shgould take another rout and find a way to block or shut down the sights. If they can't find them then they need to maybe run their own search on google to find them the way they suspect the preditors have found the web sites.

  8. It is total information awareness (Remember Admiral John Poindexter's program?) is the goal.

     

    Yep, Big Brother.

     

    Of course the name of Total Information Awarness has changed and it's here now.  It is called Terror Information Awarness and it is based on secret, warrentless searches ... which is exactly what Big Brother is sifting through every bit of info you create.

     

    http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/

     

    In fact if you're concerned about the creep of bigbrother you might find other pages on this site of interest. http://www.epic.org  and http://www.epic.org/privacy

     

    What I found particularly funny was that link on the front page that goes to the transcript of Al Gore's speech on Monday.

     

    The first words out of Gore's mouth at that speech (according to the transcript?) ... Bob Barr and I don't ususally agree ...

     

    pubby

     

    Thank you sir I browesd through it quickly I will read in more detail I appreciate it.

  9. Exactly.

     

    All of those are the questions that arise with eminent domain.

     

    It is easy to say, "the gov't is taking the land & offering nothing in return." Too easy & it may or may not be true. Let the courts decide with a judge/jury. But keep the legislature out of it. All that does is make it worse because they are being reactionary instead of proactively preparing for the future.

     

     

    Well then so there.

  10. It is precisely the "unreasonableness" associated with this article that makes eminent domain a necessary evil.

     

    If the land is desperately needed but the landowner wants 10x the fair market value, it would be within the purveiw of the gov't to force the sell. Now as far as how that relates to forcing private owners to sell for commercial development, I dunno. That is up to the courts.

     

    I really wish the legislature would stay out of this & let the courts handle it.

     

    My point was not tht the land owner should have an unreasoable request just make sure he can request fair market value. If the land owner was speculating on the growth of the county and had plans for it, then is it fair to force him to settle?

     

    Question who is determining FMV? The county? I ask this question since a tax apprasial on a house is less than what it would sell for is this working hte same way?

     

     

    If the county needs the land for the community, then they should be able to aquire it for FMV. If FMV is determind by a third independant party then I could see the sale being forced.

     

    I also agree with pubby and that is where it goes to court.

×
×
  • Create New...