US Department of Justice is Watching

US Department of Justice is Watching (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News

Message

iamdownonmyknees -> US Department of Justice is Watching (10/17/2006 1:45:59 PM)
Nothing like an envelope from the US Department of Justice to raise your heartbeat and blood pressure. What could I have done I wondered? My little sites are fairly low-key: no porn. Depending on your response, mostly ramblings on BDSM psychology and aesthetics and my relationship. Or just jabber. But my idea of innocence could is surely the majority’s notion of wickedness. What kind of man likes having stiletto heels ground into his nipples? Turns out to be a subpoena to “testify” before a federal grand jury. (Fear, um, prudence, keeps me from supplying details.) Testimony being supplying information about a few people who left comments on a particular entry on one of my sites. It was a BDSM related story that made the news and was commented on here. (Hence my reason for posting it to this forum.) All I can give them is the IP address the person used. I don’t require any sort of verification or validation or even the use of a handle. Probably useless. Richard

dicipline2 -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/17/2006 2:06:53 PM)
Figures, they are all on a witch hunt since date line has been airing shows like "to catch a predator" etc. half the elected officials we have in the government are pedophiles...so they are the ones who should be watched by the justice department. half of our elected officials need to be booted out on their rearends anyway....

roughleather -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/17/2006 11:04:53 PM)
quote: half of our elected officials need to be booted out on their rearends anyway.... And it looks like that's going to happen in about three weeks. Remember to vote, people.

Kaledorus -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/18/2006 11:12:22 AM)
Whether Democrats or Republicans are elected Big Brother will keep growing. Recall Bill Clinton rammed the Terrorism Prevention blahblahblah Act through Congress using OKC as the pretext, the bill had been written years previously. The politicios all view the Constitution as a piece of paper.

littlesarbonn -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/18/2006 11:22:53 AM)
Well, I was disenfranchised upon returning to California. I registered to vote and was disapproved because "they" could not read the last name of my signature. It is very clear and I've been using that signature for three decades or so. The Army never had a problem with it when they allowed me to serve. The IRS never had a problem with it when they allowed me to pay taxes. I was told to "redo" my signature. The person who wrote the note, wrote it in an almost illegible script that was ironic by its own merits. I resent my registration, and it has not "gone" through the system, so I will end up not voting. Important info: I'm in a strong Republican stronghold that is fighting for its life in my district. I registered as "I choose not to list a party at this time". Our registrar of voters was chosen by the Republican Party members on the board. As a political scientist, I have massive amounts of experience in the study of disenfranchisement. This is EXACTLY how they do it and have done it for many years (from both parties). No one cares either. The Democrats in office don't care. The newspapers don't care. No one even responds about it. The upshot: I won't vote because I can't. Democracy truly in action!

nikkicd10 -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/19/2006 6:42:16 AM)
Being a person who travels for work and pleasure, I am always amazed at our supposed "freedoms". Our government is the only one with freedom of the press that does not allow a large majority of news to be released "for national securitiy" such as coffins of fallen being returned to the USA from Iraq. We have more religion in our politics then other "free" countries and we do not treat everyone "equal" in this country 2 weeks ago, countries in Africa approved marriages for same sex couples, so now Africa is more progressive then the USA in certain areas.

Amaros -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/19/2006 8:53:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlesarbonn Well, I was disenfranchised upon returning to California. I registered to vote and was disapproved because "they" could not read the last name of my signature. It is very clear and I've been using that signature for three decades or so. The Army never had a problem with it when they allowed me to serve. The IRS never had a problem with it when they allowed me to pay taxes. I was told to "redo" my signature. The person who wrote the note, wrote it in an almost illegible script that was ironic by its own merits. I resent my registration, and it has not "gone" through the system, so I will end up not voting. Important info: I'm in a strong Republican stronghold that is fighting for its life in my district. I registered as "I choose not to list a party at this time". Our registrar of voters was chosen by the Republican Party members on the board. As a political scientist, I have massive amounts of experience in the study of disenfranchisement. This is EXACTLY how they do it and have done it for many years (from both parties). No one cares either. The Democrats in office don't care. The newspapers don't care. No one even responds about it. The upshot: I won't vote because I can't. Democracy truly in action! Wonder why this amendment is never enforced? http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.html

thetammyjo -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/19/2006 9:13:47 AM)
A new book that has just come out that looks at the issue of pornography, SM and the legal system some of you might want to wade through (it is bloody huge) is Steven Toushin's "The Destruction of the Moral Fabric of America". In part it details his 1987-1989 legal battle concerning 4 SM movies he made. I just reviewed it for Amazon.com and KinkyBooks.com but you all are the first folks I've mentioned it to. Having taught a class last year on the history of erotic literature and in the history of legal challenges to it, I have to say that there is a difference between how Republicans and Democrats have dealt with the issue in the 20th century. Neither party likes it (imagine that, finding it difficult to like porn when you are running for office?) but at least when Democrats investigate it they listen to experts while Republicans have ignored and misrepresented them. Thus Republican administrations spend much more time and resources "fighting" porn while Democrats seem to pay little legal attention unless charges are brought.

Kaledorus -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/19/2006 9:28:01 AM)
I have noticed that during the Reagan years and the G HW Bush term, that TV was much racier in showing skin and PBS was replete with full frontal nudity and even the "F" word, then Clinton came in and things, especially on PBS, got cleaned up. I just can't figure that out but so it is. Why can't our TV be more like Brazil or Europe's?

thetammyjo -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/19/2006 9:47:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kaledorus I have noticed that during the Reagan years and the G HW Bush term, that TV was much racier in showing skin and PBS was replete with full frontal nudity and even the "F" word, then Clinton came in and things, especially on PBS, got cleaned up. I just can't figure that out but so it is. Why can't our TV be more like Brazil or Europe's? Consider the types of Europeans who came to the "New World" -- not the most open minded and sexually free people in my opinion. Brazil drew from a different group of Europeans as well. Like I said, neither Democrats or Republican like porn but cleaning up their own televions programs and promoting shows that might be argueable less racy is quite different than using the legal system to track down and prosecute businesses and individuals. I also don't think that the amount of sex shown is a solid measurement of how liberal or free, conservative or limited, a country or government is. I think the type of sex, how it is shown and discussed, attitudes toward sex, laws and their enforcement, and type of sexual education may be a better measurement.

Mrtasty -> RE: US Department of Justice is Watching (10/19/2006 11:58:18 AM)
Heck, I think most of the politcal crap or shows about politcal crap, is worse for you to see than any amount of nudity on TV. The documentory "Naked" sort've went into that issue in a way. - Which odly enough was shown in the middle of the day on a news channel that even people with basic cable get, with all forms of (non-sexual) nudity without any censorship at all. (this was in Canada though) I'd suggest protesting about it, but you'd probably be beaten, shot at, killed, or .........gasp labled as terrorists! hahaha

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1816406