Just one example of the vile filth found via Google.
Search for “tiffany teen” if you want more!
A Nassau County legislator filed a lawsuit Thursday claiming Google Inc. generates “billions of dollars from the pornography trade and illicit profiteers.”
The lawsuit by four-term legislator Jeffrey Toback (D-Oceanside) calls the Internet search engine the world’s largest distributor of child pornography, claiming that child porn is part of the company’s business model. Google “continues to put its economic gains ahead of the interests and well-being of America’s children,” the lawsuit, filed in Nassau State Supreme Court alleges.
Representing Nassau County tells me the odds are good he represents the Mafia directly. Apparently, the number of “independents” profiting from porn has finally upset them enough to attempt legal action. The Mafia has owned American porn for decades.
Not much different from the Mafia-controlled ILA and their pet legislators initiating the “fightback” against East Coast container ships being unloaded by a firm from Dhubai.
Patriotism and protecting your children continue as reliable tactics when fighting for control of ignorant minds.
What lobby bribed this guy to go after Google, sounds fishy to me. And hasn’t that girl been around for a while now? Isn’t she Tiffany mid-twenties by now?
Eideard always has the best conspiracy theories. What fun it must be to think this crap up all day!
“And hasn’t that girl been around for a while now? Isn’t she Tiffany mid-twenties by now?”
I guess you don’t have much experience with photography. While people age, the images in the photos do not age. Thus, if you take a picture of a teen, that picture will remain one of a teen forever. I know it’s shocking, but even when she reaches 100 years old all of those “tiffany teen” pics will still feature teens!
And just to clear up some other misconceptions, photographs do not steal your soul!
#4 – Exactly. Suppose we could say the same about google having secret recipes, and all the Chefs in the world should sue their ass. Stoopid.
On another note though, something I was instructing a group about – if you shut off Safe Search, and use your imagination in a google search, you can come up with some stuff that is best viewed in the privacy of your basement.
But, like most lawsuits these days – absolutely idiotic and pointless
Yes the congressman is mobbed up as they say.Google him if you are interested.
And here I thought Usenet as the largest distributor of child pornography…
Just for the record, tiffany teen was at least 18 when she started, probably even older. She does look young, but it was never child porn…
Let’s keep this stuff off the internet! Too many freaks use interest in this stuff to get off on child torture. Somethings are left better unsaid.
Jim
They should sue this site for distributing lame pornography.
“tiffany teen” search results: Samples of child pornography? Not really. Rather rapid aging resulting in MILFs.
Eideard : can’t agree more. in chicago, an adult book store owner went BOOM in his car some years back after refusing to pay up to the mob collectors that are bloody everywhere in this town. i swear to go i say the Sopranos walk into a strip club i was at, gold chains, open shirts, free girls, and all the trimmings, like they owned the place. they didn’t. they’ll just kill people if they don’t 1) get paid and 2) get free everything. and let’s not think about just how deep the mob is into the recording industry…
two problems with people complaining about kiddy porn on the web.
1. why are they searching for it?
2. if they aren’t searching for it, how do they know it exists? gut instinct? like smoking out witchcraft, they just know?
actually three problems.3rd one is, kiddy porners DO NOT show up on the web. if you accidently run across one, it’s the FBI. RUN AWAY.
and tiffany was never kiddy porn. she’s been around for years. god help us if they find out about casey and the others. just nice legal girls being photography subjects. what’s wrong with that? it’s french postcards all over again.
A lot of this could be eliminated if a “.XXX” TLD domain name extension were adopted. To bad there is so much resistance to this logical solution to the problem. This stuff could be easily filtered out. There is just too much money at stake in the online porn business and our politicians and technocrats are being bought off.
I would I bet hard money this “Tiffany” is well over 18. There is no law saying that a 22 year old can’t appear to be 14. Heck, I remember photo shoots like that in Playboy back in the 70’s and 80’s.
It sounds to me that this is a lawsuit designed to make lawyers rich (“the lawsuit seeks an unspecified amount of damages”).
From the article:
Toback, self-described as “not the most computer-literate guy…”
That kind of explains it all, doesn’t it?
The case is going no where except for Toback’s paying for Google’s lawyer. He has no case. Federal law exempts ISPs and Search Engines from liability for web content. I believe it was Yahoo that last year went up against the same problem and had the case thrown out.
Now, why have none of the wrong-wing nut, anti-lawyer cases called this a frivolous suit? One post out of 16 mentioned it.
And just to clear up some other misconceptions, photographs do not steal your soul!
well, there goes my excuse. Drat !!!
This article combines child pornography with the whole separate issue of children accessing pornography. I have noticed the legislature making such nonsensical combinations as well.
The internet is a pull media; if a child pulls down adult material then that is their prerogative and they should deal with any subsequent ramifications. After all, philosophically, if they are old enough to want to pull it down aren’t they old enough to see it? There has been no demonstrable evidence that images of naked people cause any psychological harm… these recent search engine subpoenas are further evidence of how evangelical’s sexual insecurities are being used to curb other’s freedoms… let’s let this dog die.