Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
Harry Hope
http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
11/04/2009
People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
By Tony Hicks
Contra Costa Times
As you know, making a sex tape is a condition of becoming a celebrity.
Even for nice religious girls.
According to TMZ.com, Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million
dollars during her lawsuit-settlement negotiations with the Miss
California USA Pageant, that is, until the lawyer for the pageant
showed Carrie an X-rated home video of herself.
The video the lawyer showed Carrie is extremely graphic and has never
been released publicly.
TMZ obtained the video months ago but decided not to post it because
it was so racy.
In other words, it wasn't that great.
No one is saying who else might've been involved, though TMZ hints the
tape only shows Prejean.
Oh ... can't you go blind from that?
TMZ says Prejean essentially walked away with nothing, though the
pageant will pay about $100,000 to her lawyers and publicist, which is
only a fraction of her bills.
____________________________________________________________
Right Wing Family Values in Action.
Harry
ArmyOfDorkness
"Harry Hope" <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:q044f5h0u1o5vqofm...@4ax.com...
>
> http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>
> 11/04/2009
>
> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>
> By Tony Hicks
> Contra Costa Times
>
>
> As you know, making a sex tape is a condition of becoming a celebrity.
> Even for nice religious girls.
>
> According to TMZ.com, Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million
> dollars during her lawsuit-settlement negotiations with the Miss
> California USA Pageant, that is, until the lawyer for the pageant
> showed Carrie an X-rated home video of herself.
>
> The video the lawyer showed Carrie is extremely graphic and has never
> been released publicly.
>
> TMZ obtained the video months ago but decided not to post it because
> it was so racy.
>
> In other words, it wasn't that great.
>
> No one is saying who else might've been involved, though TMZ hints the
> tape only shows Prejean.
>
> Oh ... can't you go blind from that?
Can I keep doing it until I need glasses?
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
>
>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>
>11/04/2009
>
>People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
Can someone post the "tape"? I need it for research purposes...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
> puked:
>
>> http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>
>> 11/04/2009
>>
>> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>
> Can someone post the "tape"? I need it for research purposes...
Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
Sex with the Pageant judges(all of them)?
Sex with her father, brother, pastor?
Sex with a football team(all at once)?
liberal2
dog.com> wrote:
> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
> > puked:
>
> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>
> >> 11/04/2009
>
> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>
> > Can someone post the "tape"? I need it for research purposes...
>
> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
Tom Sr.
> On Nov 5, 9:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote...
> > Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> > that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
> No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
Ultraconservatives never seem to understand their hyprocrisy.
-Tom Sr.
Poetic Justice
Somehow I suspected she had already had sex.... do I care?
Tom Sr.
wrote:
> Tom Sr. wrote:
> > On Nov 5, 2:53 pm, liberal2 <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Nov 5, 9:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote...
> >>> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> >>> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
> >> --
> >> No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
> > Ultraconservatives never seem to understand their hyprocrisy.
> Somehow I suspected she had already had sex.... do I care?
Thanks for proving as an ultraconservative, you don't understand the
hyprocrisy.
-Tom Sr.
Harry Hope
More a case of ignoring rather than not understanding.
Harry
liberal2
> not infinitely flexible. :-)
>
> As for Prejean ... aren't these winners supposed to
> represent the kinds of women you'd MOST WANT to
> have sex with ? If so, what's all the fuss about
> her having sex ??? Seems to fit the theme. Making
> the best porno tape oughtta be part of the contest :-)
>
> 'Hypocricy' though ... maybe too harsh a charge.
> Just because someone is anti-abortion or doesn't
> think gay marriages are a good idea does NOT
> mean they're blue-nosed puro-talibanites. Only
> mindless ideologues insist that each and every
> opinion one holds MUST fit into one of their
> favorite pre-existing ideological frameworks.
>
> I'm against late-term abortions
Ummmm, so you'd let a fetus kill the pregnant woman? Hmmm, care to
adopt an anencephalic child, or just love playing god with other
people's lives?
> but 101% in favor
> of allowing earlier-term abortions on demand ...
> even for minors, even using govt. money for it in
> some cases. How does that work ? Am I being
> hypocritical ... or am I working from a whole
> different perspective on the situation, one
> unembraced by the few 'official' ideologies ?
"How it works" is that somewhere in that reichtard brain of yours a
decent person is struggling to emerge. Someday you might become human.
r wiley
"Beam Me Up Scotty" <Then-Destro...@Talk-n-dog.com> wrote in message
news:4af2e5e8$0$23642$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
Let's be serious. The only beauty queen in recent years to maintain a successful
career in show business is Vanessa Williams. Williams was fired by Miss America
after pictures of Williams with another woman's tongue in Williams' vulva were published
by Penthouse magazine.
How many people would even know who Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian are if
not for their sex videos?
Who thinks Tommy Lee or Bret Michael would have been given pseudo reality
TV shows if they hadn't co-starred with Pam Anderson in sex videos.
rw
nobody
<libera...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Nov 5, 9:49�am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>dog.com> wrote:
>> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>> > puked:
>>
>> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>
>> >> 11/04/2009
>>
>> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>
>> > Can someone post the "tape"? �I need it for research purposes...
>>
>> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>
>
>No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
Since the story is likely to be false, do you have a point here?
lab~rat >:-)
>On Nov 5, 9:49ÔøΩam, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>dog.com> wrote:
>> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>> > puked:
>>
>> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>
>> >> 11/04/2009
>>
>> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>
>> > Can someone post the "tape"? ÔøΩI need it for research purposes...
>>
>> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>
>
>No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. Or didn't want them to
marry. What does that have to do with normal sex?
Constitutional American
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
>
>
>
> >On Nov 5, 9:49Êam, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
> >dog.com> wrote:
> >> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
> >> > puked:
>
> >> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>
> >> >> 11/04/2009
>
> >> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>
>
> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>
> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>
> I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. Or didn't want them to
> marry. What does that have to do with normal sex?
> --
> lab~rat >:-)
> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
porno sex performances?
lab~rat >:-)
<wesp...@gmail.com> puked:
>On Nov 6, 6:36ÔøΩam, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
>> <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> puked:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 5, 9:49ÔøΩam, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>> >dog.com> wrote:
>> >> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>> >> > puked:
>>
>> >> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>
>> >> >> 11/04/2009
>>
>> >> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>
>> >> > Can someone post the "tape"? ÔøΩI need it for research purposes...
>>
>> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>
>> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>>
>> I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. ÔøΩOr didn't want them to
>> marry. ÔøΩWhat does that have to do with normal sex?
>> --
>> lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
>Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
>porno sex performances?
Uh, was there a porno sex performance? The reason I'm asking is
because no one's seen a tape.
But more directly to the question, I don't know of any religion that
mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Nov 6, 6:36 am, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
>> <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> puked:
>>
>>
>>
>>> dog.com> wrote:
>>>> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>>>>> puked:
>>>>>> http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>>>>> 11/04/2009
>>>>>> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>>> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>>>> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>> No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>> I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. Or didn't want them to
>> marry. What does that have to do with normal sex?
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
> Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
> porno sex performances?
Mine!
Beam Me Up Scotty
> "Beam Me Up Scotty" <Then-Destro...@Talk-n-dog.com> wrote in message
> news:4af2e5e8$0$23642$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
>> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>>> puked:
>>>
>>>> http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>>>
>>>> 11/04/2009
>>>>
>>>> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>> Can someone post the "tape"? I need it for research purposes...
>> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>
>> Sex with the Pageant judges(all of them)?
>> Sex with her father, brother, pastor?
>> Sex with a football team(all at once)?
>
> Let's be serious. The only beauty queen in recent years to maintain a successful
> career in show business is Vanessa Williams. Williams was fired by Miss America
> after pictures of Williams with another woman's tongue in Williams' vulva were published
> by Penthouse magazine.
>
> How many people would even know who Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian are if
> not for their sex videos?
Kim Kardashian has a sex video? I wondered Why I saw that name
splattered on the TV, I saw zero talent when I was scanning the channels
and stopped there once but somehow that person was on my TV screen....
> Who thinks Tommy Lee or Bret Michael would have been given pseudo reality
> TV shows if they hadn't co-starred with Pam Anderson in sex videos.
>
OK... now who didn't have a sex video with Pam?
> rw
>
>
r wiley
"Beam Me Up Scotty" <Then-Destro...@Talk-n-dog.com> wrote in message
I left out Ray-J, Kim Kardashian's sex video costar. VH1 gave him a pseudo reality show.
rw
Constitutional American
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 05:00:12 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
>
>
>
> >On Nov 6, 6:36Êam, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
> >> <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> puked:
>
> >> >dog.com> wrote:
> >> >> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
> >> >> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
> >> >> > puked:
>
> >> >> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>
> >> >> >> 11/04/2009
>
> >> >> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>
>
> >> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> >> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>
> >> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>
> >> marry. ÊWhat does that have to do with normal sex?
> >> --
> >> lab~rat Ê>:-)
> >> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
> >Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
> >porno sex performances?
>
> Uh, was there a porno sex performance? The reason I'm asking is
> because no one's seen a tape.
>
> But more directly to the question, I don't know of any religion that
> mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
>
> Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
> --
> lab~rat >:-)
> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Nothing but everything to do with hypocrisy. Seems Miss Family Values
has a set of values that need a bit of clarification, doesn't it?
r wiley
"lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in message news:ona8f51ansvmif5tb...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 05:00:12 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
>>
>> mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
>>
>> Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
>> --
>> lab~rat >:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Harvey Levin and Perez Hilton share the same enemies list, among other
proclivities.
rw
Jericho
> not infinitely flexible. :-)
Non-sequitor, anyone.
> As for Prejean ... aren't these winners supposed to
> represent the kinds of women you'd MOST WANT to
> have sex with ? If so, what's all the fuss about
> her having sex ??? Seems to fit the theme. Making
> the best porno tape oughtta be part of the contest :-)
No, the winners are not supposed to represent the kind of woman you'd
most want to have sex with. You're thinking of a completely different
contest.
> 'Hypocricy' though ... maybe too harsh a charge.
> Just because someone is anti-abortion or doesn't
> think gay marriages are a good idea does NOT
> mean they're blue-nosed puro-talibanites. Only
> mindless ideologues insist that each and every
> opinion one holds MUST fit into one of their
> favorite pre-existing ideological frameworks.
I don't recall her saying that same sex marriages "weren't a good
idea". I think I heard the word 'abomination' somewhere along the way
actually. She's not a blue-nosed puro-talabanite for being against
abortion or same sex marriage; she's a blue-nosed puro-talabanite for
insisting that everyone's opinion must fit into her ideological
framework.
> I'm against late-term abortions but 101% in favor
> of allowing earlier-term abortions on demand ...
> even for minors, even using govt. money for it in
> some cases. How does that work ? Am I being
> hypocritical ... or am I working from a whole
> different perspective on the situation, one
> unembraced by the few 'official' ideologies ?
Honestly, don't care one iota what you are for or against. But do you
understand what the word 'hypocritical' means. hyp⋅o⋅crite: a person
who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one
whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public
statements. Of course, now that I read this, Carrie Prejean isn't a
hypocrite even though her actions are hypocritical. She actually
believes what she says and just acts the opposite of what she says.
She's really just an idiot, but no one should be very suprised at that
conclusion.
Jericho
Doug Bashford
nobody said about:
Re: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
> <libera...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 5, 9:49�am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
> >dog.com> wrote:
..........snip
> >> > Can someone post the "tape"? �I need it for research purposes...
> >>
> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
> >
> >
> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>
> Since the story is likely to be false, do you have a point here?
Why do you Richbuttlickins just make stuff up!?
You guys really can't tell reality from your desires!?
You guys really can't distinguish the
positive from the normitive!?
Positive and Normative:
http://ingrimayne.com/econ/Introduction/Normativ.html
==========
Carrie Prejean sex tape forced ex-Miss California's lawsuit
settlement: report New York Daily News
A legal standoff between Carrie Prejean and Miss California USA
officials reportedly ended when a Pageant lawyer played his trump
card: a sex tape far more hard-core than the nude pictures which
had previously scandalized her � and in which she had the
starring role.
After being shown the hardcore home video - in which she
apparently engages in a solo sex act - Prejean dropped her
million-dollar-plus demands, TMZ.com reports, and bolted from the
negotiating table. .....snip
Read more:
www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/11/05/2009-11-05_carrie_prejean_sex_tape_forced_exmiss_californias_lawsuit_settlement_report_.html#ixzz0WDRaasQM
=======
The Fall of Carrie �Opposite Marriage� Prejean
Lez Get Real - Bridgette P. LaVictoire - 4 hours ago
11/07/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
There are dozens of statements about how one should not disparage
another, especially when you, yourself, have dirty little
secrets. It�s all about being a hypocrite.
Ms Carrie Prejean, the former Miss California, found out the
hard way that cashing in on your loss by becoming the
spokesperson for a movement to deny people equality can backfire
and badly.
Not only was Ms Prejean�s use of �performance enhancing� breast
augmentation revealed, but Ms Prejean ended up in her own sex
scandal.
...The suit came to an end when a sex tape involving Ms Prejean
surfaced and was aired in court. The revelation has already lost
Ms Prejean a major speaking ...
=======
Like A Bad Boob Job Leaking Silicon, Carrie Prejean's
Sex Tape Will Leak Online
Student Operated Press - Robert Paul Reyes - 5 hours ago
Carrie Prejean has accomplished the seemingly impossible: Male
homosexuals who`ve never seen a straight p*rn movie, are dying to
see the video of the born again hypocrite pleasuring herself.
But fans of p*rn shouldn`t despair, like a bad boob job leaking
silicon, the p*rn flick will surface somewhere on the Web. We
will get our chance to see Prejean as only her gynecologist and
her lovers have seen her.
Maybe Prejean really is an effective evangelist for her faith.
It`s appropriate that Prejean`s sex tape is a solo effort, the
beauty queen only cares about herself. Just like Sarah Palin,
Prejean refused to fulfill her obligations because they
interfered with her own dreams and ambtions. ...
=======
Carrie Prejean Sex Tape: Literally No Takers Whatsoever
hecklerspray - Stuart Heritage - Nov 6, 2009
Because, you see, it turns out that nobody wants to buy the newly
unearthed Carrie ...
=============
Carrie Prejean Sex Tape: Yours for a Bargain-Bin Price? E! Online
============
Why do you Richbuttlickins just make stuff up!?
- Political Economics:
- Socialism: The government/people own the corporations.
- Fascism: The corporations/government own the people.
- Republicans: think the very rich are the backbone of America.
- Democrats: think the middle class are the backbone of America.
- Republicans: think Americans deserve 27th in health care.
- Democrats: think Americans deserve better.
- Republicans: think health care is mostly about defending profits.
- Democrats: think health care is mostly about defending health.
- Republicans: must lie to get people to do right.
- Democrats: must be honest to get people to do right.
- Republicans: fear government but not corporations.
- Democrats: fear both.
lorad
> Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
And so what...?
You seem to miss the point.... that Prejean's loss in a social
contest was caused by her expressing her personal opinion... and her
personal belief being *rejected* by a deviant cross-dressing celebrity
clown.
Personal opinion is domething that I thought 'liberals' (tm)
supported.
I guess personal opinion has dropped off of the 'liberal' list of
civil rights.. eh?
Winston Smith, American Patriot
> not infinitely flexible. :-)
>
> represent the kinds of women you'd MOST WANT to
> have sex with ? If so, what's all the fuss about
> her having sex ??? Seems to fit the theme. Making
> the best porno tape oughtta be part of the contest :-)
>
> Just because someone is anti-abortion or doesn't
> think gay marriages are a good idea does NOT
> mean they're blue-nosed puro-talibanites. Only
> mindless ideologues insist that each and every
> opinion one holds MUST fit into one of their
> favorite pre-existing ideological frameworks.
>
> of allowing earlier-term abortions on demand ...
> even for minors, even using govt. money for it in
> some cases. How does that work ?
After all, the embryos being aborted have mothers (and fathers) who
would most likely support ideologies that you oppose, if not detest.\
And the least likely to abort would populate the nation that would
soon reach voting-majority numbers and put assholes like G. W. Bush
perpetually in office, eh?
Ain't it all lovely?
> Am I being
> hypocritical ... or am I working from a whole
> different perspective on the situation, one
> unembraced by the few 'official' ideologies ?
It's amazing really that your fellow right-wing brethren--the lot of
them---haven't picked up on that exquisite logic nurtured by
ultraconservative hate...or they too would support "abortion of and
for libs."
nobody
<wesp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 6, 7:58�ｿｽam, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 05:00:12 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
>> <wespen...@gmail.com> puked:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 6, 6:36�ｿｽam, "lab~rat �ｿｽ>:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
>> >> <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> puked:
>>
>> >> >On Nov 5, 9:49�ｿｽam, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>> >> >dog.com> wrote:
>> >> >> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>> >> >> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>> >> >> > puked:
>>
>> >> >> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>
>> >> >> >> 11/04/2009
>>
>> >> >> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>
>> >> >> > Can someone post the "tape"? �ｿｽI need it for research purposes...
>>
>> >> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>> >> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>
>> >> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>>
>> >> I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. �ｿｽOr didn't want them to
>> >> marry. �ｿｽWhat does that have to do with normal sex?
>> >> --
>> >> lab~rat �ｿｽ>:-)
>> >> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>
>> >Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
>> >porno sex performances?
>>
>> Uh, was there a porno sex performance? �ｿｽThe reason I'm asking is
>> because no one's seen a tape.
>>
>> But more directly to the question, I don't know of any religion that
>> mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
>>
>> Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
>> --
>> lab~rat �ｿｽ>:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
>Nothing but everything to do with hypocrisy. Seems Miss Family Values
>has a set of values that need a bit of clarification, doesn't it?
That would assume the existance of such a tape. You know darn well
that if TMZ had it, they would have released something of it. Guess
you believe everything you read in the Enquirer as well.
nobody
lab~rat >:-)
<wesp...@gmail.com> puked:
>On Nov 6, 7:58ÔøΩam, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 05:00:12 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
>> <wespen...@gmail.com> puked:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 6, 6:36ÔøΩam, "lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
>> >> <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> puked:
>>
>> >> >On Nov 5, 9:49ÔøΩam, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>> >> >dog.com> wrote:
>> >> >> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>> >> >> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>> >> >> > puked:
>>
>> >> >> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>
>> >> >> >> 11/04/2009
>>
>> >> >> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>
>> >> >> > Can someone post the "tape"? ÔøΩI need it for research purposes...
>>
>> >> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>> >> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>
>> >> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>>
>> >> I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. ÔøΩOr didn't want them to
>> >> marry. ÔøΩWhat does that have to do with normal sex?
>> >> --
>> >> lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)
>> >> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>
>> >Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
>> >porno sex performances?
>>
>> Uh, was there a porno sex performance? ÔøΩThe reason I'm asking is
>> because no one's seen a tape.
>>
>> But more directly to the question, I don't know of any religion that
>> mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
>>
>> Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
>> --
>> lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)
>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>
>Nothing but everything to do with hypocrisy. Seems Miss Family Values
>has a set of values that need a bit of clarification, doesn't it?
Not to me. Are you trying to impose your values on her? She wasn't
imposing her on buttfuckers. She just doesn't think it's right.
lab~rat >:-)
>On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:37:32 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
><wesp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 6, 7:58ÔøΩam, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 05:00:12 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
>>> <wespen...@gmail.com> puked:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >On Nov 6, 6:36ÔøΩam, "lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:53:12 -0800 (PST), liberal2
>>> >> <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> puked:
>>>
>>> >> >On Nov 5, 9:49ÔøΩam, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>>> >> >dog.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>>> >> >> > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>>> >> >> > puked:
>>>
>>> >> >> >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>>
>>> >> >> >> 11/04/2009
>>>
>>> >> >> >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>>
>>> >> >> > Can someone post the "tape"? ÔøΩI need it for research purposes...
>>>
>>> >> >> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>>> >> >> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>>
>>> >> >No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>>>
>>> >> I thought that she just hated buttfuckers. ÔøΩOr didn't want them to
>>> >> marry. ÔøΩWhat does that have to do with normal sex?
>>> >> --
>>> >> lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)
>>> >> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>>
>>> >Just curious...what religion frowns on gay marriage but smiles on
>>> >porno sex performances?
>>>
>>> Uh, was there a porno sex performance? ÔøΩThe reason I'm asking is
>>> because no one's seen a tape.
>>>
>>> But more directly to the question, I don't know of any religion that
>>> mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
>>>
>>> Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
>>> --
>>> lab~rat ÔøΩ>:-)
>>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>
>>Nothing but everything to do with hypocrisy. Seems Miss Family Values
>>has a set of values that need a bit of clarification, doesn't it?
>
>That would assume the existance of such a tape. You know darn well
>that if TMZ had it, they would have released something of it. Guess
>you believe everything you read in the Enquirer as well.
But it was too dirty to be released. Bull fucking shit.
If they had it, AT VERY LEAST they would post still clips that were
censored. Nothing to see here but more liberal lies and slander...
--
lab~rat >:-)
ArmyOfDorkness
"lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in message
news:bu9gf5deomh11m3qk...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:53:07 -0500, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> puked:
>
>>On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:37:32 -0800 (PST), Constitutional American
>><wesp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Uh, was there a porno sex performance? The reason I'm asking is
>>>> because no one's seen a tape.
>>>>
>>>> But more directly to the question, I don't know of any religion that
>>>> mentions pornography directly, maybe scientology?
>>>>
>>>> Regardless, what does that have to do with faggotry?
>>>> --
>>>> lab~rat >:-)
>>>> Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
>>>
>>>Nothing but everything to do with hypocrisy. Seems Miss Family Values
>>>has a set of values that need a bit of clarification, doesn't it?
>>
>>That would assume the existance of such a tape. You know darn well
>>that if TMZ had it, they would have released something of it. Guess
>>you believe everything you read in the Enquirer as well.
>
> But it was too dirty to be released. Bull fucking shit.
>
> If they had it, AT VERY LEAST they would post still clips that were
> censored. Nothing to see here but more liberal lies and slander...
Why did she drop her suit against the pageant?
lab~rat >:-)
<DorkAs...@hotmail.com> puked:
I don't know, seems like you need to post some proof that there's a
video. My guess is that they settled with her and paid her off.
Anything to the contrary? Besides gossip?
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
> I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her
> attourneys table ... to work on the even bigger
> lawsuit against TMZ ? :-)
She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the truth
in court. She got off pretty light, without a suit from the pageant for
fraud.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5914, 1993
293 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term.
Obama: No hope, no change, more of the same. Yes, he can, but no, he won't.
ArmyOfDorkness
"Mr.B1ack" <b...@barrk.net> wrote in message
news:gtrif5dpnt162tdb8...@4ax.com...
> Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>
>>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq...@4ax.com>, the
>>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>
>>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>
>>> I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her
>>> attourneys table ... to work on the even bigger
>>> lawsuit against TMZ ? :-)
>>
>>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the
>>truth
>>in court. She got off pretty light, without a suit from the pageant for
>>fraud.
>
> Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
> all sorts of 'privacy', defamation and theft
> of personal property violations - plus become
> profitibly "infamous" in the process. For
> that kind of cash .....
>
> And I seem to recall Venessa Williams doing
> VERY well after becoming 'infamous' ...
>
> Face it, Prejean is a media victim ... attacked
> as a conveneint proxy for the extreme theo-right
> without the slightest regard for her actual
> beliefs and affilliations. Well past time for
> her to get *even* and make some profit of her
> own off those blood-suckers.
>
Well past time for her 15 minutes of fame to be over. If she just
disappeared no one would notice.
lab~rat >:-)
<DorkAs...@hotmail.com> puked:
Yeah, right. The liberals keep dragging her out, stepping on their
collective dick in the process. This whole lie about a sex tape could
only hurt them more if there was actually a sex tape.
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
> Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq...@4ax.com>, the
>>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>
>>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>
>>> I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her
>>> attourneys table ... to work on the even bigger
>>> lawsuit against TMZ ? :-)
>>
>>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the truth
>>in court. She got off pretty light, without a suit from the pageant for
>>fraud.
> Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
> all sorts of 'privacy', defamation and theft
> of personal property violations - plus become
> profitibly "infamous" in the process. For
> that kind of cash .....
She put herself in the spotlight. There is no "privacy" claim after that.
You cannot beg for the limelight and then hope to recover because it isn't
flattering.
> And I seem to recall Venessa Williams doing
> VERY well after becoming 'infamous' ...
She exploited the extra fame; she did not sue herself rich.
> Face it, Prejean is a media victim ... attacked
> as a conveneint proxy for the extreme theo-right
> without the slightest regard for her actual
> beliefs and affilliations. Well past time for
> her to get *even* and make some profit of her
> own off those blood-suckers.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5915, 1993
Lamont Cranston
> Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>
>>In our last episode,
>><6kugf5tftf00h9biq...@4ax.com>, the
>>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>
>>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>
>>> I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her
>>> attourneys table ... to work on the even bigger
>>> lawsuit against TMZ ? :-)
>>
>>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are
>>telling
>>the truth in court. She got off pretty light, without a
>>suit from
>>the pageant for fraud.
>
How so? TMZ did nothing wrong. Nothing.
Lamont Cranston
LOL -- and denial is a river in Egypt. There is a sex tape.
Lamont Cranston
> convenient as a proxy for the theo-right.
> The media lefties WON'T let her go for
> that reason.
The few lefties in the media let her go a long time ago.
But, she's like something out of a Stephen King novel -- she
keeps coming back. It's the right-wing media that won't let
her go -- fawning morons like Sean Hannity.
lab~rat >:-)
<Lamont....@FogYourMind.com> puked:
Yeah, I hear Glenn Beck was behind the rumor she had a sex tape...
lab~rat >:-)
<Lamont....@FogYourMind.com> puked:
>Mr.B1ack wrote:
Except for the lie about the "sex tape". Which brings up a question,
if it wasn't sex for Monica to suck Clinton's cock, how in the hell do
you think this is a sex tape when someone is masturbating?
Seriously, you guys must have redefined sex so you can tell people you
get it twice a day...
lab~rat >:-)
puked:
>At this point, what's on the tape -- if there is a tape -- is
>immaterial. Indeed, always has been. The issue is hypocrisy. I suspect
>even the Godly are allowed to masturbate but not necessarily record it
>nor preach to others what their behavior should be. When I was young we
>used to say that 90% do and the other tenth are liars.
>
>So, c'mon, dammit! Where is the tape?
If we're gonna do presupposin', perhaps she "found the lord" and the
tape was made beforehand.
Another one xtians use a lot is the fact that they know they're
sinners and want to be forgiven. Just because she (supposedly) made a
tape doesn't mean that she should also be in favor of gay marriage.
Unless you consider a girl masturbating a girl gay, even if it's the
same girl...
Lamont Cranston
> At this point, what's on the tape -- if there is a tape
She admitted that there is a tape.
liberal2
> Jericho <schock...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 5, 2:30 pm, Mr.B1ack <b...@barrk.net> wrote:
> >> "Tom Sr." <tomswiftsen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 5, 9:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote...
> >> >> > Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> >> >> > that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
> >> >> No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
>
>
> >> Ultra-libs never seem to understand that Truth is
> >> not infinitely flexible. :-)
>
>
> Non-research, anyone ???
>
> What the hell do you think the 'progressive' movement
> was founded on anyway ? That people, and truth, were
> infinitely malleable. Tabula rasa.
>
> >> As for Prejean ... aren't these winners supposed to
> >> represent the kinds of women you'd MOST WANT to
> >> have sex with ? If so, what's all the fuss about
> >> her having sex ??? Seems to fit the theme. Making
> >> the best porno tape oughtta be part of the contest :-)
>
> >most want to have sex with. You're thinking of a completely different
> >contest.
>
> I disagree. "Miss <fill-in-blank> is supposed to
> represent the female ideal ... ie, the one you'd
> most like to have your children.
>
> >> 'Hypocricy' though ... maybe too harsh a charge.
> >> Just because someone is anti-abortion or doesn't
> >> think gay marriages are a good idea does NOT
> >> mean they're blue-nosed puro-talibanites. Only
> >> mindless ideologues insist that each and every
> >> opinion one holds MUST fit into one of their
> >> favorite pre-existing ideological frameworks.
>
> >idea". I think I heard the word 'abomination' somewhere along the way
> >actually.
>
> So ?
>
> Opinions vary.
>
> 'Free' country dontchaknow.
>
> >She's not a blue-nosed puro-talabanite for being against
> >abortion or same sex marriage; she's a blue-nosed puro-talabanite for
> >insisting that everyone's opinion must fit into her ideological
> >framework.
>
> Um ... actually .... I never remember her actually
> SAYING that, or even IMPLYING it.
>
> It was the MEDIA who claimed to know what she "really said".
>
> >> I'm against late-term abortions but 101% in favor
> >> of allowing earlier-term abortions on demand ...
> >> even for minors, even using govt. money for it in
> >> hypocritical ... or am I working from a whole
> >> different perspective on the situation, one
> >> unembraced by the few 'official' ideologies ?
>
>
> No point in this conversation then, is there ?
>
> >But do you
> >understand what the word 'hypocritical' means. hyp?o?crite: a person
> >who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one
> >whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public
> >statements.
>
> Ah ... 'politician' ............ :-)
>
> > Of course, now that I read this, Carrie Prejean isn't a
> >hypocrite even though her actions are hypocritical. She actually
> >believes what she says and just acts the opposite of what she says.
> >She's really just an idiot, but no one should be very suprised at that
> >conclusion.
>
> She doesn't seem especially bright ....
>
> However, there's no report of her attempting to secure
> a gay marriage to one of her fellow contestants ... or
> seeking an abortion (early OR late-term). She likes what
> she likes because she does ... and doesn't like what she
> doesn't like "just because". IMHO she's not bright enough
> to even bother trying to fit it into anyones ideological
> framework.
>
> Which means she's not a 'hypocrite' ... just on kind of a
> different frequency .
Duhhhhhhhh????????????? Are you claiming the acts on her sex tape are
considered moral by her church leaders? I mean, if they ain't, and she
demands others be "moral" according to the precepts she's
violating...then yeah, she's a hypocrite. A stupid one, but the courts
rarely consider stupidity to be an reason to forgive a crime. So her
stupidity here isn't a "get out hypocrisy free" card.
Funny how you judge liberals and progressives with standards you
refuse to apply to your own kind.
Catfish Hunter
<Lamont.Crans...@FogYourMind.com> wrote:
> Mr.B1ack wrote:
> > Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>
> >>In our last episode,
> >>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>
> >>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>
> >>> I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her
> >>> attourneys table ... to work on the even bigger
> >>> lawsuit against TMZ ? :-)
>
> >>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are
> >>telling
> >>the truth in court. She got off pretty light, without a
> >>suit from
> >>the pageant for fraud.
>
> > Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
>
> How so? TMZ did nothing wrong. Nothing.
If she was underage as she says, TMZ has purchased child porn.
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
liberal2
wrote:
> In article <8ef1aa1f-de1e-49a7-aab6-9afa05fba...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> liberal2 <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Ummmm, so you'd let a fetus kill the pregnant woman? Hmmm, care to
> > adopt an anencephalic child, or just love playing god with other
> > people's lives?
>
> It's acceptable to kill, or let die, one person to save the life of another.
> That applies to humans after birth, when the circumstances so dictate. Most
> abortions are not when the mother is not in an extraordinary risk. The
> justification for abortion is that we are not legally humans until we are born;
> an abortion is no different than putting down a pet.
>
> I'm not offended by other people's opinions on sexuality or their legal sexual
> activities. I only care when one person's opinion is forced on another.
Fine, but is a cluster of cells smaller than the eraser on a pencil a
person? I say not. Is it equivalent of a pet. No, again. Recall
B1ackwater was referring to late term abortions. They too trouble me.
He left no room for argument, I do. As I can't really know the other
person's mind and situation, I'll leave it to their better judgment.
When a person is ready to use force (whether physical or just legal)
to make someone else, a stranger, do or not do according to that
person's abstract moral code...I say no.
You'll notice, no anti-choice person ever offers a lifetime of support
to the pregnant female (housing, food, medical, education, retirement,
etc.) to not abort a fetus.
Becoming a person occurs slowly, it is the effect experience has on
the development of the brain.
Plus, we don't execute a woman who miscarries. I simply think of an
abortion as a medical miscarriage.
>
> --
> Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be.
> Silver silverware - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
> Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
> Damn the living - It's a lovely life. We support you, Sarah.
liberal2
>
>
>
>
>
> liberal2 <liberalhe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 5, 9:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
> > dog.com> wrote:
> > > lab~rat >:-) wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
> > > > puked:
>
> > > >>http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>
> > > >> 11/04/2009
>
> > > >> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>
>
> > > Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
> > > that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>
>
I have no idea. Nor do I care. The point is in a public forum she
expressed a "moral code," some of which she fails to live up to (down
to?).The effect on her life of her personal failings does not appear
to have any significant effect other than embarrassment. Her "moral
code" as enacted into law affects people she doesn't even know.
> I haven't followed it too closely, but wasn't she penalised for being
> politically incorrect?
Ahhh, "politically incorrect"....The reichtard term for "I wanna say
something nasty and get away with it but those people with a better
moral code call me an ass." Let's just look at it from the view point
of the pageant judges, they thought a "Miss America" shouldn't be a
bigot. Pardon me if I agree.
> It seems stupid to me to elicit an opinion if you aren't
> going to accept whatever that opinion is. Unless it's some asshole asking.
>
> 'Harsher penalties for parole violations.'
Beam Me Up Scotty
> In article <ae44cc05-2f93-43a8...@f10g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> liberal2 <libera...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 5, 9:49 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@Talk-n-
>> dog.com> wrote:
>>> lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:44:41 -0500, Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com>
>>>> puked:
>>>>> http://www.contracostatimes.com/celebrities/ci_13713556
>>>>> 11/04/2009
>>>>> People: Sex tape forced Carrie Prejean to settle pageant lawsuit
>>>> Can someone post the "tape"? I need it for research purposes...
>>> Sex is common, why is it a problem, was it sex with someone or something
>>> that should make us think it was sick and twisted??
>>
>> No, stupid, it was her hypocrisy....you know, "family values"...
Family values? I remember it being a question on Gay marriage.....
even Obama was not for gays getting a standard marriagethat is for a man
and a woman.
Getting Naked and making a video is not connected to Gay Marriage.
getting under aged girls naked and making a videos and showing or
possessing them is illegal..... So the question is whether the video is
illegal to possess and are the people with it breaking laws. If it is
of an under aged girl then she is a victim and not a slut.
> Did she ever express any public opinion before she was asked in a public forum.
> I haven't followed it too closely, but wasn't she penalised for being
> politically incorrect? It seems stupid to me to elicit an opinion if you aren't
Lars Eighner
<ad855416-d394-4cde...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, the
lovely and talented Catfish Hunter broadcast on alt.politics:
If she was underage as she says, she produced child porn.
Yes, kids have been charged for depicting themselves. But that is criminal
law. Neither one of them will make any money from criminal charges.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5915, 1993
294 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term.
Dave Heil
> liberal2 <libera...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Ummmm, so you'd let a fetus kill the pregnant woman? Hmmm, care to
>> adopt an anencephalic child, or just love playing god with other
>> people's lives?
>
> It's acceptable to kill, or let die, one person to save the life of another.
> That applies to humans after birth, when the circumstances so dictate. Most
> abortions are not when the mother is not in an extraordinary risk. The
> justification for abortion is that we are not legally humans until we are born;
> an abortion is no different than putting down a pet.
>
> I'm not offended by other people's opinions on sexuality or their legal sexual
> activities. I only care when one person's opinion is forced on another.
Your view on this topic is quite similar to your ethical view on
Gandalf's theft of copyrighted articles. Apparently, *you* wouldn't
steal a copyrighted article but you only care then my view on theft is
"forced" on another. Is that about it?
lab~rat >:-)
<use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>In our last episode,
><ad855416-d394-4cde...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, the
>lovely and talented Catfish Hunter broadcast on alt.politics:
>
>> On Nov 10, 10:58ÔøΩam, "Lamont Cranston"
>><Lamont.Crans...@FogYourMind.com> wrote:
>>> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>>> > Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq2stdvkghairfkk...@4ax.com>, the
>>> >>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>
>>> >>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>>
>>> >>> ÔøΩ ÔøΩI wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her ÔøΩ ÔøΩattourneys table
>>> >>> ... to work on the even bigger ÔøΩ ÔøΩlawsuit against TMZ ? ÔøΩ:-)
>>>
>>> >>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the
>>> >>truth in court. ÔøΩShe got off pretty light, without a suit from the
>>> >>pageant for fraud.
>>>
>>> > ÔøΩ Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
>>>
>>> How so? ÔøΩ TMZ did nothing wrong. ÔøΩNothing.
>
>> If she was underage as she says, TMZ has purchased child porn.
>
>If she was underage as she says, she produced child porn.
>
>Yes, kids have been charged for depicting themselves. But that is criminal
>law. Neither one of them will make any money from criminal charges.
Kids have been charged with depicting other kids their own age, not
themselves.
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented lab~rat >:-) broadcast on alt.politics:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:22:32 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner
><use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>>In our last episode,
>><ad855416-d394-4cde...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, the
>>lovely and talented Catfish Hunter broadcast on alt.politics:
>>
>>> On Nov 10, 10:58�am, "Lamont Cranston"
>>><Lamont.Crans...@FogYourMind.com> wrote:
>>>> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>>>> > Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq2stdvkghairfkk...@4ax.com>, the
>>>> >>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>>
>>>> >>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>>>
>>>> >>> � �I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her � �attourneys table
>>>> >>> ... to work on the even bigger � �lawsuit against TMZ ? �:-)
>>>>
>>>> >>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the
>>>> >>truth in court. �She got off pretty light, without a suit from the
>>>> >>pageant for fraud.
>>>>
>>>> > � Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
>>>>
>>>> How so? � TMZ did nothing wrong. �Nothing.
>>
>>> If she was underage as she says, TMZ has purchased child porn.
>>
>>If she was underage as she says, she produced child porn.
>>
>>Yes, kids have been charged for depicting themselves. But that is criminal
>>law. Neither one of them will make any money from criminal charges.
> Kids have been charged with depicting other kids their own age, not
> themselves.
OMG! You mean Fox News was lying again?
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510862,00.html>
N.J. Teen Accused of Child Porn for Posting Nude Photos of Self -
Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
Really, you know, it took less than 10 seconds to get Google to cough up
this story and dozens like it about other minors being charged for making
photographs of themselves. Does it ever occur to you to look into something
before pontificating?
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5916, 1993
lab~rat >:-)
<use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>In our last episode, <vhelf5t80k6o82mic...@4ax.com>, the
>lovely and talented lab~rat >:-) broadcast on alt.politics:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:22:32 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner
>><use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>
>>>In our last episode,
>>><ad855416-d394-4cde...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, the
>>>lovely and talented Catfish Hunter broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 10, 10:58ÔøΩam, "Lamont Cranston"
>>>><Lamont.Crans...@FogYourMind.com> wrote:
>>>>> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>>>>> > Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq2stdvkghairfkk...@4ax.com>, the
>>>>> >>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>>>>
>>>>> >>> ÔøΩ ÔøΩI wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her ÔøΩ ÔøΩattourneys table
>>>>> >>> ... to work on the even bigger ÔøΩ ÔøΩlawsuit against TMZ ? ÔøΩ:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> >>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the
>>>>> >>truth in court. ÔøΩShe got off pretty light, without a suit from the
>>>>> >>pageant for fraud.
>>>>>
>>>>> > ÔøΩ Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
>>>>>
>>>>> How so? ÔøΩ TMZ did nothing wrong. ÔøΩNothing.
>>>
>>>> If she was underage as she says, TMZ has purchased child porn.
>>>
>>>If she was underage as she says, she produced child porn.
>>>
>>>Yes, kids have been charged for depicting themselves. But that is criminal
>>>law. Neither one of them will make any money from criminal charges.
>
>> Kids have been charged with depicting other kids their own age, not
>> themselves.
>
>OMG! You mean Fox News was lying again?
>
><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510862,00.html>
>N.J. Teen Accused of Child Porn for Posting Nude Photos of Self -
>Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
>
>Really, you know, it took less than 10 seconds to get Google to cough up
>this story and dozens like it about other minors being charged for making
>photographs of themselves. Does it ever occur to you to look into something
>before pontificating?
I guess I should have been more specific. Has anyone been convicted
of this?
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented lab~rat >:-) broadcast on alt.politics:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:05:58 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner
><use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>>In our last episode, <vhelf5t80k6o82mic...@4ax.com>, the
>>lovely and talented lab~rat >:-) broadcast on alt.politics:
>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:22:32 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner
>>><use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>>
>>>>In our last episode,
>>>><ad855416-d394-4cde...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, the
>>>>lovely and talented Catfish Hunter broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 10, 10:58�am, "Lamont Cranston"
>>>>><Lamont.Crans...@FogYourMind.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>>>>>> > Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq2stdvkghairfkk...@4ax.com>, the
>>>>>> >>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>> � �I wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her � �attourneys table
>>>>>> >>> ... to work on the even bigger � �lawsuit against TMZ ? �:-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the
>>>>>> >>truth in court. �She got off pretty light, without a suit from the
>>>>>> >>pageant for fraud.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > � Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How so? � TMZ did nothing wrong. �Nothing.
>>>>
>>>>> If she was underage as she says, TMZ has purchased child porn.
>>>>
>>>>If she was underage as she says, she produced child porn.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, kids have been charged for depicting themselves. But that is criminal
>>>>law. Neither one of them will make any money from criminal charges.
>>
>>> Kids have been charged with depicting other kids their own age, not
>>> themselves.
>>
>>OMG! You mean Fox News was lying again?
>>
>><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510862,00.html>
>>N.J. Teen Accused of Child Porn for Posting Nude Photos of Self -
>>Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
>>
>>Really, you know, it took less than 10 seconds to get Google to cough up
>>this story and dozens like it about other minors being charged for making
>>photographs of themselves. Does it ever occur to you to look into something
>>before pontificating?
> I guess I should have been more specific. Has anyone been convicted
> of this?
I can't prove that anyone has. There would not necessarily be a public
report of cases tried in juvenile court where often there are options other
than guilty or not guilt on a specific charge and results sometimes cannot be
published. A few of the charges seem designed to encourage cooperation in
prosecuting another person (typically an adult who might or might not have
solicited the photos), or are complicated by factors other than just having
made the photos (such as spamming them).
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5916, 1993
295 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term.
lab~rat >:-)
<use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>In our last episode, <p8tlf5hnnga91e6of...@4ax.com>, the
>lovely and talented lab~rat >:-) broadcast on alt.politics:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:05:58 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner
>><use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>
>>>In our last episode, <vhelf5t80k6o82mic...@4ax.com>, the
>>>lovely and talented lab~rat >:-) broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:22:32 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner
>>>><use...@larseighner.com> puked:
>>>
>>>>>In our last episode,
>>>>><ad855416-d394-4cde...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, the
>>>>>lovely and talented Catfish Hunter broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 10, 10:58ÔøΩam, "Lamont Cranston"
>>>>>><Lamont.Crans...@FogYourMind.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>>>>>>> > Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>In our last episode, <6kugf5tftf00h9biq2stdvkghairfkk...@4ax.com>, the
>>>>>>> >>lovely and talented Mr.B1ack broadcast on alt.politics:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>Says TMZ...'nuff said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> ÔøΩ ÔøΩI wonder if she bolted from THAT table to her ÔøΩ ÔøΩattourneys table
>>>>>>> >>> ... to work on the even bigger ÔøΩ ÔøΩlawsuit against TMZ ? ÔøΩ:-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>She does not want to give TMZ the excuse to prove they are telling the
>>>>>>> >>truth in court. ÔøΩShe got off pretty light, without a suit from the
>>>>>>> >>pageant for fraud.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > ÔøΩ Hey ... she could score *millions* from TMZ ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How so? ÔøΩ TMZ did nothing wrong. ÔøΩNothing.
>>>>>
>>>>>> If she was underage as she says, TMZ has purchased child porn.
>>>>>
>>>>>If she was underage as she says, she produced child porn.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, kids have been charged for depicting themselves. But that is criminal
>>>>>law. Neither one of them will make any money from criminal charges.
>>>
>>>> Kids have been charged with depicting other kids their own age, not
>>>> themselves.
>>>
>>>OMG! You mean Fox News was lying again?
>>>
>>><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510862,00.html>
>>>N.J. Teen Accused of Child Porn for Posting Nude Photos of Self -
>>>Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
>>>
>>>Really, you know, it took less than 10 seconds to get Google to cough up
>>>this story and dozens like it about other minors being charged for making
>>>photographs of themselves. Does it ever occur to you to look into something
>>>before pontificating?
>
>> I guess I should have been more specific. Has anyone been convicted
>> of this?
>
>I can't prove that anyone has. There would not necessarily be a public
>report of cases tried in juvenile court where often there are options other
>than guilty or not guilt on a specific charge and results sometimes cannot be
>published. A few of the charges seem designed to encourage cooperation in
>prosecuting another person (typically an adult who might or might not have
>solicited the photos), or are complicated by factors other than just having
>made the photos (such as spamming them).
In the link it said that the person "may" have to register as a sex
offender. If that were true, then there would be a record of it.
In all reality, you're probably right about it being an ulterior
design to catch someone else or maybe send a message. But I believe
that any story about someone being convicted is an urban legend...