[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Its time to have a discussion about how black people are destroying Carnival Cruise Line Biden's Campaign Announces $50M Media Blitz In Battleground States Amid Health Questions Paul Joseph Watson Putin Responds to Trump Wanting to End the War in Ukraine! | Buddy Brown Candace Owens Talks on Israel Five Basic Holocaust Facts, Falkland tensions explode as Argentina 'rejects illegal British action' in the Islands Democrats Pull Plug on Joe Biden After Horrible Interview NYC tosses requirement to treat babies aborted at 24 weeks as 'human remains' for burial, cremation A Gang More Dangerous Than MS-13 Is Coming Into America [VIDEO] Bette Midler Suggests Biden Arrest Republicans, Allow FBI to Use Deadly Force to Regain Democrat House Majority Balcony with single mattress listed for nearly $1K a month Bidenomics: 27% of Americans Say They Skip Meals Due to Rising Cost of Food Moderate Pezeshkian wins Iran presidential election | REUTERS Israeli Generals, Low on Munitions, Want a Truce in Gaza An Israeli air base is a source of GPS spoofing attacks, researchers say. Etna volcano in Sicily has huge eruption! Stromboli volcano on Eolian Islands has red alert issued Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano Is Found Guilty of Schism and Is Excommunicated by Pope Francis Poll: Donald Trump Leads Kamala Harris By More than He Leads Joe Biden TREASON: Biden administration has been secretly flying previously deported migrants back into the U.S. Map of All Food Processing Plants That Have Burned Down, Blown Up or Been Destroyed Under Biden Report: Longtime Friends Of Biden Disturbed, Shocked He Didnt Remember Their Names New York City Giving Taxpayer-Funded Debit Cards To Over 7,000 Migrants Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker Opens More Migrant Shelters in Chicago Ahead of Democrat National Convention CNN doctor urges neurological testing for Biden Nashville Trans Shooter Left Over 100 GB Of Evidence, All To Be Kept Secret Who Turned Off The Gaslight? Head Of Chase Bank Warns Customers: Era Of Free Checking Is Likely Over Bob Dylan - Hurricane [Scotty mar10] Replacing Biden Won't Solve Democrats' Problems - Look Who Will Inherit His Campaign War Chest

All is Vanity
See other All is Vanity Articles

Title: Attention 4um Members
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://none
Published: May 4, 2008
Author: me
Post Date: 2008-05-04 22:40:24 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 18737
Comments: 655

I have to be honest, I'm completely distressed at what's happened to this forum. The fighting and the distrust between those for and those against Obama has gotten to the point where, in my opinion, it's destroying the forum. What's the point of having an open free speech venue when everyone is bozo'ing everyone else?

When I read my mission statement and what Freedom4um was created to be, I don't even recognize the place anymore. There will be changes made in the near future as I decide what is best for the continued growth of this forum.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 381.

#208. To: christine, all (#0)

I don't even recognize the place anymore.

You have disruptors here.

The bozo use is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. It allows freedom of association. I use the filter to make the latest comment pages useable for me. Like for example, in the morning, Kamala posts lots and lots of informative threads. They aren't breaking news or necessarily news I want to read right then, so I filter them out. I ban from my view the proven stupid and spammers and disruptors and those who get their panties in a knot over Obama. I even banned cynicom once or twice because he made me want to pull my hair out.

Mudboy Slim and VRWC are the same disruptors here that they were in the other forums. FOH is a disruptor as well. And there are operatives. They're more difficult to weed out. People can filter them or not.

People should know that Private Mails are not secure. It sure was distressing to see Neil (Webmaster) jump in on that one thread accusing people who weren't supporting Obama to be akin to murderers. And he was uncharacteristically rude. Who knows if it's Neil or not or where he's really coming from?

So yeah, you have problems here. Banning the obvious trolls is entirely appropriate. What seems to be happening is a hijacking of the forum by Obamaphiles and operatives using the filter to limit their discussion group. But what harm does that do unless there's lots of 'em? No real harm...I mean how many times can you post rah-rah Obama?

If the others like Jethro Tull and peppa would use some restraint from baiting them and keeping those threads alive, some of the crap would die down. People here are intelligent enough to see who's who and what their agenda is.

I suggest to do nothing but the bare minimum. The trolls are showing themselves and those paying attention can adjust accordingly.

angle  posted on  2008-05-05   8:32:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

People should know that Private Mails are not secure. It sure was distressing to see Neil (Webmaster) jump in on that one thread accusing people who weren't supporting Obama to be akin to murderers. And he was uncharacteristically rude. Who knows if it's Neil or not or where he's really coming from?

Neil, this is the first I have heard of this (and of course I haven't read every thread that has been posted here). Is it true that you accused people who don't support Obama--which most certainly includes me but then I don't support ANY statist whore as anyone who knows me already knows--to be akin to murderers? I find that pretty hard to believe and if you said that I would like to hear your explanation. As I said in the only other post I have made to this thread I consider you a friend and that is why I find it hard to believe that you would even think such a thing, let alone post it.

My own personal disclaimer: I see some people here who don't seem to like each other for one reason or another and it is distressing to me because I like all of them. For instance, I like Peppa, FOH and Neil. I think they are all good people. But because I like all of them doesn't mean they all have to like each other. I won't be like Rodney King and ask if we can't all just get along because I know that, human nature being what it is, that we probably all can't "just get along." But all of you who don't like the others so much, or to put another way, if your dislike is so intense, the bozo filter is a good option. You don't have to see what someone has said if you don't like them and it may make your time here more enjoyable.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2008-05-05   10:32:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/re...8060&Disp=50&Trace=on#C44

#44. To: RickyJ (#41) Of the 3, I prefer Obama take it. The USA is screwed no matter which of the 3 wins. Given that, it makes sense to prefer the one that is least likely to start WWIII and otherwise end the imperialism. I know its probable that Obama won't bring all the troops home, but Cain will increase imperialism and bombing.

As a country, the USA has deeply injured the world and it's a national obligation to right that wrong as much as possible. For us to try to safeguard our 2nd Amendment rights at the expense of lives of innocents worldwide doesn't fly in my book.

Again, since the USA is gonna die anyway no matter which of the 3 it is, the least we can do is die alone and let the rest of world be. I won't vote for Obama as it's much more beneficial such as it is to vote for Ron Paul or Bob Barr, but that's my position and preference.

Pinguinite posted on 2008-04-15 14:40:51 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#50. To: Pinguinite (#44)

For us to try to safeguard our 2nd Amendment rights at the expense of lives of innocents worldwide doesn't fly in my book.
At the expense? How do you figure?

the least we can do is die alone and let the rest of world be

Go ahead, I'll preserve my right to live and live free. Sounds like you're drinking the koolaid neil.

angle posted on 2008-04-15 15:04:45 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replies to Comment # 50.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#56. To: angle, (#50)

Go ahead, I'll preserve my right to live and live free. Sounds like you're drinking the koolaid neil.

If you believe in your moral right to preserve your legal right to a firearm surpasses the rights of others to live, then guess what....

YOU are no different than the NWO elite!!!

Because that's exactly what they say. So maybe you and JT can put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Pinguinite posted on 2008-04-15 15:34:23 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply

Here's the thread that changed the way I viewed Neil. It's not just one post. It was post after post when regular people who like Neil were questioning his statements. It just got bizarre.

angle  posted on  2008-05-05   12:51:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-05-05   13:30:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Pinguinite takes the position that if we have to give up some ground on the R2KBA issue in exchange for not dropping bombs on some other population, then that's a sacrifice he's willing to make.

*Thank you* Ghost. I guess I've never really seen anyone contrast the value of a important but relatively abstract "Constitutional right" with real life killing and dying with is not abstract at all.

Seems funny things happen when you do. Get accused of all kinds of stuff. I cannot fathom how any sane and moral person could possibly disagree with the a statement that basically says that it's wrong to kill innocent people to secure a 2A right, or any other comparatively abstract right. It blows my mind. (No pun intended).

Pinguinite  posted on  2008-05-05   14:23:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

since innocent people could never pose a legitimate threat to gun rights in the first place, i agree that killing innocents under the guise of 'protecting rights' is nonsense since such a scenario could not exist and is not valid. (I am not referring to a war that meets the stringent standards of the just war doctrine in which innocents are killed, that's a different topic.)

Another aspect is that there's no doubt that some of these do-gooder gun grabbers are well intentioned. their conscious is clear and they believe they are doing the right thing.

you want to see such an example? look at this 'health inspector bitch and how she with the pigs protection violate this guys right. they ended up seizing the guys home as a result of this violation of his rights. yet look at her, the socialist %$#@!. her conscience is 100% clear.

would you say defending your land against such 'benevolent' intruders is wrong? this video is amazing.

Artisan  posted on  2008-05-05   14:54:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

would you say defending your land against such 'benevolent' intruders is wrong? this video is amazing.

I believe this guy had his property condemned and he was forced to vacate.

http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/07-04-06/discussion.cgi.77.html

Ray Kirkus
CALLING ON THE INDIANA MILITIA
Sun Jul 2, 2006 10:17

Mr Flatt,

This is formal notice and request:

I am calling on the Indiana Militia to assist and restore constitutional government in the Laporte County Indiana Courts and within the Sheriff's office. You have seen the video. NOW this kangaroo court moves forward while the previous order is still under appeal and then my jury demand is denied!! These clowns are OUT OF CONTROL AND HAVE RUN AMOK! The property has been ordered vacated by Judge Baldoni based on absolutely "no evidence" and no facts; no water or soil samples and a 5 minute inspection which was ordered unlawfully and still under appeal. all based on a dry rotted 4" pvc pipe that discharges nothing but is simply a drain tile. The appeal fact alone prevents both the court and the health dept from moving forward. However at the last hearing, Baldoni denied me a jury trial and proceeded summarily anyway, then ordered my son out of his home by midnight. Enough is enough, this is a formal call calling on your organization and requesting its assistance to restore the Indiana Constitution and arrest Judge Baldoni for sedition and treason and to arrest Sheriff Arnold for failure in performing his duties while viewing an offence in his presence and doing nothing. Where is your line William, or do you keep redrawing it as these criminals do more and more damage to the people of Indiana? If you are not the one in charge, please forward this email to the ones who are. THIS IS AN SOS and A FORMAL REQEUST OF THE INDIANA MILITIA TO DEFEND THE PEOPLES RIGHTS AS SECURED BY THE INDIANA AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS

IN LIBERTY,
Ray Kirkus

IF we do not hang together on these issues, then we will most assuredly hang seperately.... Ben Franklin

IN LIBERTY,
Ray Kirkus

IF we do not hang together on these issues, then we will most assuredly hang seperately.... Ben Franklin

His reading of the 4th differs from that interpretation of the Supreme Court on what constitutes an unreasonable search.

http://laws.findlaw.com/us/359/360.html

U.S. Supreme Court
FRANK v. MARYLAND, 359 U.S. 360 (1959)
359 U.S. 360

FRANK v. MARYLAND.
APPEAL FROM THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE, MARYLAND.
No. 278.
Argued March 5, 1959.
Decided May 4, 1959.

A Baltimore City health inspector seeking the source of a rat infestation discovered evidence of such an infestation in the rear of appellant's home, and, having no search warrant, requested appellant's permission to inspect his basement in the day time. For refusing such permission, appellant was convicted and fined for a violation of 120 of Art. 12 of the Baltimore City Code, which provides that, "Whenever the Commissioner of Health shall have cause to suspect that a nuisance exists in any house, cellar or enclosure, he may demand entry therein in the day time, and if the owner or occupier shall refuse or delay to open the same and admit a free examination, he shall forfeit and pay for every such refusal the sum of Twenty Dollars." Held: Section 120 is valid, and appellant's conviction for resisting an inspection of his house without a warrant did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 361-373.

Affirmed.

Benjamin Lipsitz argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

C. Ferdinand Sybert, Attorney General of Maryland, and James H. Norris, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for appellee. With them on the brief were Hugo A. Ricciuti and W. Thomas Gisriel.

A brief urging affirmance was filed for the Member Municipalities of the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers, as amici curiae, by Joe W. Anderson, Roger Arnebergh, John C. Banks, Alexander G. Brown, Nathaniel H. Goldstick, William N. Gurtman, Claude V. Jones, Ralph S. Locher, Walter J. Mattison, John C. Melaniphy, Barnett I. Shur, Charles H. Tenney, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and S. White Rhyne, Jr. [359 U.S. 360, 361]

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.

Acting on a complaint from a resident of the 4300 block of Reisterstown Road, Baltimore, Maryland, that there were rats in her basement, Gentry, an inspector of the Baltimore City Health Department, began an inspection of the houses in the vicinity looking for the source of the rats. In the middle of the afternoon of February 27, 1958, Gentry knocked on the door of appellant's detached frame home at 4335 Reisterstown Road. After receiving no response he proceeded to inspect the area outside the house. This inspection revealed that the house was in an "extreme state of decay," and that in the rear of the house there was a pile later identified as "rodent feces mixed with straw and trash and debris to approximately half a ton." During this inspection appellant came around the side of the house and asked Gentry to explain his presence. Gentry responded that he had evidence of rodent infestation and asked appellant for permission to inspect the basement area. Appellant refused. At no time did Gentry have a warrant authorizing him to enter. The next forenoon Gentry, in the company of two police officers, returned to appellant's house. After receiving no response to his knock, he reinspected the exterior of the premises. He then swore out a warrant for appellant's arrest alleging a violation of 120 of Art. 12 of the Baltimore City Code. That section provides:

"Whenever the Commissioner of Health shall have cause to suspect that a nuisance exists in any house, cellar or enclosure, he may demand entry therein in the day time, and if the owner or occupier shall refuse or delay to open the same and admit a free examination, he shall forfeit and pay for every such refusal the sum of Twenty Dollars." [359 U.S. 360, 362]

Appellant was arrested on March 5, and the next day was found guilty of the offense alleged in the warrant by a Police Justice for the Northern District of Baltimore and fined twenty dollars. On appeal, the Criminal Court of Baltimore, in a de novo proceeding, also found appellant guilty. The Maryland Court of Appeals denied certiorari. The case came here under a challenge, 28 U.S.C. 1257 (2), to the validity of 120 to determine whether appellant's conviction for resisting an inspection of his house without a warrant was obtained in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Health Code of the City of Baltimore, of which 120 is an important part, deals with many of the multiform aspects of hygiene in modern urban areas. A vital portion concerns the hygiene of housing. Typical of the content and method of enforcing its provisions is the section requiring that "[e]very dwelling and every part thereof shall be kept clean and free from any accumulation of dirt, filth, rubbish, garbage or similar matter, and shall be kept free from vermin or rodent infestation." Baltimore City Code, Art. 12, 112. If the occupant of a building fails to meet this standard, he is notified by the Commissioner of Health to abate the substandard conditions. 1 Failure to remove these hazards to community health gives rise to criminal prosecution. Ibid. The attempted inspection of appellant's home was merely to ascertain the existence of evils to be corrected upon due notification or, in default of such correction, to be made the basis of punishment.

We have said that "[t]he security of one's privacy against arbitrary intrusion by the police" is fundamental to a free society and as such protected by the Fourteenth [359 U.S. 360, 363] Amendment. Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25, 27 . Application of the broad restraints of due process compels inquiry into the nature of the demand being made upon individual freedom in a particular context and the justification of social need on which the demand rests.

The history of the constitutional protection against official invasion of the citizen's home makes explicit the human concerns which it was meant to respect. In years prior to the Revolution leading voices in England and the Colonies protested against the ransacking by Crown officers of the homes of citizens in search of evidence of crime or of illegally imported goods. The vivid memory by the newly independent Americans of these abuses produced the Fourth Amendment as a safeguard against such arbitrary official action by officers of the new Union, as like provisions had already found their way into State Constitutions.

In 1765, in England, what is properly called the great case of Entick v. Carrington, 19 Howell's State Trials, col. 1029, announced the principle of English law which became part of the Bill of Rights and whose basic protection has become imbedded in the concept of due process of law. It was there decided that English law did not allow officers of the Crown to break into a citizen's home, under cover of a general executive warrant, to search for evidence of the utterance of libel. Among the reasons given for that decision were these:

"It is very certain, that the law obligeth no man to accuse himself; because the necessary means of compelling self-accusation, falling upon the innocent as well as the guilty, would be both cruel and unjust; and it should seem, that search for evidence is disallowed upon the same principle. There too the innocent would be confounded with the guilty." Id., at col. 1073. [359 U.S. 360, 364]

These were not novel pronouncements to the colonists. A few years earlier, in Boston, revenue officers had been authorized to use Writs of Assistance, empowering them to search suspected places, including private houses, for smuggled goods. In 1761 the validity of the use of the Writs was contested in the historic proceedings in Boston. James Otis attacked the Writ of Assistance because its use placed "the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer." 2 His powerful argument so impressed itself first on his audience and later on the people of all the Colonies that President Adams was in retrospect moved to say that "American Independence was then and there born." 3 Many years later this Court, in Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 , carefully reviewed this history and pointed out, as did Lord Camden in Entick v. Carrington, that

". . . the 'unreasonable searches and seizures' condemned in the Fourth Amendment are almost always made for the purpose of compelling a man to give [359 U.S. 360, 365] evidence against himself, which in criminal cases is condemned in the Fifth Amendment; and compelling a man 'in a criminal case to be a witness against himself,' which is condemned in the Fifth Amendment, throws light on the question as to what is an `unreasonable search and seizure' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment." 116 U.S., at 633 .

* * *

Inspection without a warrant, as an adjunct to a regulatory scheme for the general welfare of the community and not as a means of enforcing the criminal law, has antecedents deep in our history.

* * *

Affirmed.

nolu_chan  posted on  2008-05-05   19:10:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#494. To: nolu_chan (#381)

Thanks, that is interesting and good to know. Not that their position cant change, but that they have ruled on the matter.

Artisan  posted on  2008-05-06 06:47:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-05-06 10:07:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]