Announcement

**NudistGuy47** · 01-20-2006, 03:41 AM

With the Department of Justice's continued fight against pornography, the refiling of the August request to gain access to Google's search records causes me concern. The request is for a week's worth of records on the searches conducted by their users. AOL has already supplied one day's data. The NY times story is under the link.

Google's Record Requested

What are the thoughts from the forum members?

**Guest** · 01-20-2006, 03:50 AM

Shame on AOL for getting involved with such a request! Bush and friends need to realize they don't own the Internet and that they are abusive when they ask for such private information.

**usmc1** · 01-20-2006, 04:37 AM

Facism takes many forms. This is why the discussions regarding stopping Alito and Impeachment down in the Open Conversation forms are so pertinent.

Nudists should be very worried at this turn of events...these people make no distinctions between nudity and pornography. To them they are one and the same. Remember Ashcroft's draping of the bare breasted statue?

Google is fighting back, but should the issue make it to the Supreme Court, and unless Alito is stopped. There the government, not google, will find a very supportive group: Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, Alito, & Kennedy.

Unless Alito is stopped!

Call this number, (877) 851-6437, it is toll-free and they will answer Capital Operator, ask for the office of each of your Senators. If they are Democrats tell the person answering the phone that you urge and support a filibuster to block Alito's appointment. If they are Republican, tell them you urge and support them in not voting for cloture should a filibuster come about.

Additionally, I urge you to contact any representatives of nudist/naturists organizations to involve themselves in this case, as "friends of the court briefs" if nothing else.

It is a chilling intrusion into privacy which puts near dictatorial powers in the hands of government. Republicans would not have wanted the clintons to have such power and Democrats would not want Bush et al to have such power to fish through our private web searches.

Get involved, make that call right now. Put down that can of beer, get up off the couch and call:

(877) 851-6437

**FMII** · 01-20-2006, 08:54 AM

I believe very strongly that USMC1 is right on the money. We all need to get involved. And right now. This is a very serious issue. Our rights and privileged communications, are being seriously threatened.

Get involved.

All the best
FCMII

**nudeM** · 01-20-2006, 05:12 PM

Say what you want, but I agree with the pornography aspects, but that could turn against the nudists as well. I don't entirely agree with the government intruding. It is something that the states should keep track of, not the feds.

The feds are on the right course, but I'm afraid they are getting to intrusive in our lives. I don't see how porn is going to help stamp out the terrorists. There needs to be a way to get 'online pedephiles', but, I don't know what steps one would take, except for federal assistance.

**MJ_KC** · 01-20-2006, 07:43 PM

I don't think that Democrats could even find a candidate that I wouldn't vote for in the next presidential election.

Bush and company are seemingly looking for unlimited search capabilities with very little judicial or legislative oversite. I can't wait for the end of his term in office.

I strongly disagree with the idea that the feds are on the right course with their domestic spying and now their intrusion into what people are searching for on the internet. There does not seem to be anything that the feds won't pry into.

It is one thing when they are searching for things regarding a specific individual, when they have a subpoena, but it is totally different when they just want to go on a fishing expedition.

**Bob S.** · 01-20-2006, 08:30 PM

I agree with MC that this is a fishing expedition. And one that I am opposed to, even if they just limited their focus to illegal pages.

The fact that they want all searches so that they can look through them is a major bother. They are being way too overly broad regarding what was looked up. From there, they could use the info for any purposes.

And why are search terms really useful? They know websites that are troublesome and the way they operate. Since the Government should not be in the business of censoring the internet as they do in some other oppressive countries like China, they have no reason to test the filtering software through subpoenas.

Bob S.

**NudistGuy47** · 01-21-2006, 04:35 AM

Tha basis is what comes up when one searches for a particular item. It is not about the websites they know about, but what one might be exposed to when one searches for a particular subject.

An example is if you searched for naturist info, there will be many sites that have the keyword "naturist" that are pornographic and have nothing to do with the wholesome idea of experiencing nature nude.

For me,it is about choice. If I chose to click on that link, then I know what to expect. As a parent, I believe I should be the responsible parent and educate my children about what is appropriate and what is not.

"May you live in interesting times." A blessing and a curse!

**krcNY** · 01-21-2006, 05:57 AM

quote:
Originally posted by nudeM:
Say what you want, but I agree with the pornography aspects, but that could turn against the nudists as well. I don't entirely agree with the government intruding. It is something that the states should keep track of, not the feds.

The feds are on the right course, but I'm afraid they are getting to intrusive in our lives. I don't see how porn is going to help stamp out the terrorists. There needs to be a way to get 'online pedephiles', but, I don't know what steps one would take, except for federal assistance.

PARENTS!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, but parents today need to be involved in every aspect of their childs lives. I do not think kids should have a computer with unlimited internet access in their rooms. Parents need to be watching what the kids are doing on the internet. Pedophiles are everywhere, but it seems today...the home is most vulnerable.

If we as parents talked to our kids and showed them how to set up a profile properly, the pedophiles wont have much to work with. The parents need to communicate with the kids on a daily basis.

Not yelling at you NudeM...just hit me this morning. The gov't is taking all parental responsibilities on themselves instead of putting the pressure on the parents.

**NudeAl** · 01-21-2006, 07:43 AM

quote:
PARENTS!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, but parents today need to be involved in every aspect of their childs lives. I do not think kids should have a computer with unlimited internet access in their rooms. Parents need to be watching what the kids are doing on the internet. Pedophiles are everywhere, but it seems today...the home is most vulnerable.

If we as parents talked to our kids and showed them how to set up a profile properly, the pedophiles wont have much to work with. The parents need to communicate with the kids on a daily basis.

Not yelling at you NudeM...just hit me this morning. The gov't is taking all parental responsibilities on themselves instead of putting the pressure on the parents.

THANK YOU!!! My God! Why is it none of these people sees the obvious solution? It is the RESPONSIBLITY of the PARENTS to SUPERVISE THEIR KIDS!!!

If this does happen and I fear it will we are a very short step away from having one of our greatest freedoms restricted and repressed. I have parental controls on my kids internet access and the computer is in the family room where we all hang out at so anytime the kids are on the computer we are there. What in the world is so hard to understand? It is not that hard to supervise your kid. If you think it is perhaps you should hire someone to do it for you and not expect the government to do it.

**ncognito66** · 01-21-2006, 07:52 AM

Come on, this is 2006! Parents shouldn't have to be bothered with the responsibilities of parenting. We have the schools feeding our kids breakfast and lunch, providing medical checkups, and just generally babysitting all day without actually teaching much. And they can't hold them back a year because it creates low self-esteem.

The filtering software is supposed to stop my children from seeing anything inappropriate, so I can concentrate on more important things, like finding out which show Paris Hilton is going to be on next!

My child wouldn't think of lying to !Yahoo and saying she's 18 when she's not, and if someones child did, the government should be ready to stop her and provide for her safety.

And if she wound up meeting someone online and getting pregnant, the government will provide an abortion and not bother telling me so it won't disrupt my life in any way.

It takes a village to raise a child, Remember? (and foot the bill). I don't have to do it anymore!

Life is good!

**puffledud** · 02-01-2006, 01:22 PM

Vermont,

I liked your comments. What a laugh. Now, if we could only get the government to give birth to the children for us what a world it would be!

Aloha.

**curmudgeon** · 02-01-2006, 04:53 PM

I think the point of the data request is to determine whether the filters that parents install in good faith to limit their children's access to internet material that they find objectionable are indeed adequate for that task. This is certainly beyond the capabilities of most parents themselves.

This issue has been raised in the context of supporting the need for a particular law. If the filters are inadequate, what parents, govt, ISP's, filter designers, or whoever should do about it should really be a separate question. I suspect that a law is not the best solution. The Can Spam law does not seem to have significantly reduced my junk mail. On the other hand, it really makes me feel good when these big time spammers get hit with gazillion dollar fines.

**WNYjoe17** · 02-01-2006, 05:45 PM

There is only one problem:

What makes you think that just because they claim the issue is for child porn (or national security, or anything else) that the gov't will
A) mean that
B) Stick to it
C) Not find additional ways to invade our privacy

So much of what Bush does is wrong and illegal.
I don't get why more people don't recognize that

Joe

Announcement

Google Search Records Requested

Google Search Records Requested

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment