Agree, he hasnt refuted it and we have mentioned it many times... must be him. Too many co-inkedunces...
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Liz Purkrabek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > This sounds like Thorne Peters. > > Liz > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of BBDD > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 9:44 AM > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > Subject: Re: Hidden Cameras on Private Property > > > What is with the choice? It is strange to encounter such bigotries in > a group supposedly dedicated to free thought. To a bigot it means one > thing. To a friend I call out, "MY NIGGAH!", to it means quite > another. The site is so named to test those who PRETEND to be free > thinkers. Niggerwise is that highest of wisdoms; the wisdom won > through oppression. It is best you not click on it. You no doubt are > more comfortable in the most narrow view affordable in this day and > age. Knowledge by any name never hurt a truly free mind. > > http://niggerwise.com > > > On Nov 3, 7:11 am, "Liz Purkrabek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What's with the below title? Seems a strange choice for a web address > name. > > I would have a hard time posting something like that unless I were > > illustrating some point. What gives? > > > > Liz > > > > http://niggerwise.com/ > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of BBDD > > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 4:57 AM > > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > > Subject: Re: Hidden Cameras on Private Property > > > > Actually, no you do not. Who ever advised you that was the case is > > entirely incorrect. It is not the case with ordinary photography > > unless sold as a professional shot. You can do with it whatever you > > wish... when the money rolls in the issue arises. Not until. Then the > > right to the model is only to some reasonable portion of that profit. > > Even that is usually superseded by the publics right to know. If you > > have fame, you lose the right and become fare game ~ paparazzi creed. > > > > More especially, it most certainly is not the case with any "crafted" > > painting. Then, even after profit there is no such requirement under > > law. > > > > http://niggerwise.com > > > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > When I do portraits, whether paint or photo, I have to get a model > > release, > > > NO matter where, when, or who. Because of the child pornography > problem, > > > there may be big trouble with anything child related IF the parent > wants > > to > > > make it an issue.... > > > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Jason (Memphis) > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > If a fundamentalist Christian recorded on video/audio statements at > > > > one of our freethought meetings without our consent and then sent > > > > those videos to various employers of MFA members who had known > > > > Christian fundamentalist bosses, would that be a legal, ethical issue > > > > or both? Would the fundamentalist be breaking the law by recording > > > > someone on video without their consent? What if minors at our > meeting > > > > were also filmed?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
