What I or anyone else thinks about what is posted in the members only not for everyone forum is a different topic, and is irrelivant to the fact that James Bushart, Home inspector, from Cassville MO, is in violation of the section of COE posted below…It is clear that his only concern is publicly causing harm to those whom he disagrees with…
The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any act or practice that could be deemed damaging, seditious or destructive to … fellow InterNACHI members
There is simply no way to accurately comprehend the barbarity of abortion
without being exposed to the photographic evidence which so clearly
demonstrates that abortion is a brutal act of violence.
To those who mock abortion as nothing, they have no idea what they are saying.
I am deeply offended by the murder of innocent children and have simply posted
the reality of what some take so lightly.
Considering other photos people post, and others enjoy, of bestiality, sodomy,
nudity, and heads up their ars… it sounds shallow that these people have any right
to censor me… or call it porn (which is just a way to hype and slander).
NFE means NOT FOR EVERYONE
This is a members-only forum that contains threads that are not for everyone. These
may include messages with religious themes, political views, crude humor, or other
content that some might find objectionable.
Don’t read NFE if you don’t like the content. Simple.
It is obvious that James is twisting what I posted and seeking to turn it into public
damage to me by slanting and calling my post kiddie porn. I know that he is good
friends with Joe Farsetta and I doubt Joe will stop him from taking our private debates
in NFE and turning it into a public cause to damage me. This issue is COE violation Joe.
Joe,
Correct James for this COE violation and I might be inclined to listen to you.
The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any act or practice that could
be deemed damaging, seditious or destructive to … fellow InterNACHI members
I would interpret this to apply to exposing the 4 year old daughters of NACHI members to child snuff porn, as well. So far, there has only been one. Hopefully, there will not be more.
You are a sick bastard who collects and shares photographs of nude and mutilated dead children with other sick adults and you disguise it as a “political statement”, IMO.
Since you are proud of your work…you should have no objection to my continuing to help you share it with the public.
Mr. Farsetta,
When you contacted me regarding Burkeson’s posting of animal porn I told you contact Jim and see if he would do it because at the time I had reported a post from Kevin Pierce of Christ Giving the finger. Jim was in support of leaving that pic.
You never responded and the post remained.
While I find the pic that John posted in the “Baby Killer” thread started by Joe Burkeson disgusting I saw no reason to have it removed without John’s agreement as it made a salient point.
The fact is the thread would have died in obscurity except for James Bushart’s beating the drum in the public area of the board in his continuing and unprofessional vendetta against John.
Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.
Just a couple of thoughts for you to think about while you attempt to apply your pseudo-christian judgments upon others:
This thread isn’t Googled. It’s members only. Your continuous (and humorous) references to where I live and work in your inane ramblings does nothing…you pudgy azzhole from St. Peters, Missouri.
The thread that your pal polluted with his pornographic photo depicting a nude dead child…with full view of genitalia and mutilated limbs…was not started by him and had to do with an exchange of comments on the floors of Congress. No one choosing to read it can be prepared to view the disgusting image of the nude child provided from the collection of your friend.
If the photo is as relevant and correct as you perverts claim it to be, why have you not shared it on the other home inspection related message boards?
Read John McKenna’s response to Foxe Smothers after he complained to him about the exposure of this smut to his 4-year old daughter and then tell us what your granddaughter thought about it when you shared this photo with her.
How is it disparaging to congratulate someone, publicly and in the public domain, for a post they have expressed pride and satisfaction with which – according to them – is suitable for children?
Then STFU.
James is obfuscating again.
This thread is googled and is damaging to john IMO:ain
For anyone with at least one active brain cell who might be reading this…This thread…the thread you are presently reading…is NOT googled, and it is this thread that I am referring to in my message to Nahrgang. Jeez.
Bye.
Which misses the point entirely.
You have attempted to damage John in the thread I posted moron.
Well?
Don’t you guys have any work today??
Thanks for speaking out.
Until a complaint was referred to me by Nick, I had simply avoided that thread in disgust as, obviously, many others have. That was my first preference.
Smothers’ 4-year old daughter’s exposure to child snuff porn is a result of that attitude.
Following that crime, a couple of these pornographers actually advised that they share photos from their collections with their own children. They think that children benefit from seeing nude dead babies as if, somehow, this will positively affect their choices as adults.
These perverts need more than counseling, IMO, but it would be a good place to start.
So now liable is part of your MOA. The burden of proof is on you to now prove that I (or Mike) have shared any photographs of anyone or anything.
Another clear violation of the COE.
Bushart, you being a member of ESOP is a vile stain on the reputation of this organization.
So in your own words: “STFU”.
Let me nahrgang this down for you so that you might be able to understand.
The post you cited was to McKKKenna. Not to you.
I have proven that he shares his child snuff porn by providing a link to the child snuff porn he has chosen to share. Your personal decision to include yourself along with this provider of child snuff porn to minors (he not only placed it where it could be viewed by a 4 year old girl, but then justified it on the thread) is your own decision, and I have no burden to prove that your personal confession is true.
My suggestion to you is to stop digging yourself into the holes that you intend for others.
Mark,
You are off base here. The base argument is whether the photos are out there for the general public to see. They are not.
You and others argue that the photos are therefore protected.
Jim made a public post whereby he congtatulated John McKenna (albeit sarcastically) on posting the images.
Jim’s post was not seditions or damaging.
Subsequent posting from both sides of the fence have followed the all-to-familiar path.
The issue remains constant: some believe that all images are protected in NFE. I maintain that they are not.
Jim used the word pornographic to make a point, which is that Nick deletes what is, in his opinion or the opinion of others) pornographic.
As to COE violations, I can argue from both sides. I can argue that Jim disparaged John, and be successful.
I can also argue that John disparaged the entire organization by posting what he did.
Why not throw both out of the org?
John and Jim take a hike.
Is everyone happy now?
I know I feel a whole lot better…:roll:
This argument solves nothing. The comprimise is for John to be allowed to continue posting his personal views, sans the graphic images. The comprimise is for Jim to delete all references. The comprimise is for all parties to let this thing die, concentrate on our businesses, and concern ourselves with what really matters in this organization.
I remine everyone oof something important: Not For Everybody is not a free-for-all, anything goes forum absent of a need for common sense.
We can all agree on that one.
And, for the record, I dont agree with everything Jim Bushart does or does not do.
I also dont agree with everything Mike Larson writes.
The difference comes down to how Mike and I interact with each other. I think that, even though we oppose each other with regard to this particular issue, we respect each other’s opinion. He’s on the ESOP with others. I havent told him to sit down and shut up just because I happen to disagree with him.
He thinks I am wrong. I am cool with that.
I would have handled things differently than Jim. I’m cool with that, as well.
The comprimises have been put forward. It’s up to the individuals directly involved (John and Jim) to decide where they want to take this.
James continues to imagine that 4 year olds have the capability to view the NFE section.
Considering the content in that section, I would never view that section with anyone including my wife at my side.
To do so is at your own risk.
Perhaps Jim only wants small children to see Christ giving the finger as he was in hearty support of leaving that pic on the public section of the board. And it’s still there.
You lying sack of ****, look at your own post, addressed to me you stated:
“You are a sick bastard who collects and shares photographs of nude and mutilated dead children with other sick adults and you disguise it as a “political statement”, IMO.”
You accused me of collecting and sharing sick photographs.
I expect an apology, and removal of said posts immediately.
As to the photos of Jesus giving the finger (I can think of others, including “Piss Christ”), as well as photos of rhino dicks, soiled panties, album covers (like Metallica’s “Load”, which includes blood and semen)…
why not institute a policy that images of this type are unacceptable anywhere on this message board, including NFE.
Arguing that a 4-year old shouldn’t view the section is an argument of convenience, as on my machine, anyone who clicks on NACHI has member access. This includes my wife and 10-year old.
The site represents the association and its membership.
Either clean it up, or give it an “R” rating.
Put a warning out there for all to see that offensive images exist on the site and that there is a possibility that they may be unsuitable for some visitors.
Access to the site and the ability to post on it is not a right; it is a priviledge.
Still waiting to hear what the sides agree to with regard to comprimise.
In the mean time, many of us have already squared off on the playground.
Joe,
I wholeheartedly agree that not everything in NFE is protected. But again I state, that is a completely different issue that can also be debated.
What I don’t agree with is someone posting lies and innuendo in the public section to harm another member. Sarcasm, motive, and end results are what defines the attempt to harm, not necessarily the words. Bushart twists the truth and outright lies in his attempts to cause harm to those he disagrees with and tries to “STFU” in his words.
“Snuff porn” is illegal.
The photo I posted is not snuff porn, nor is it illegal, nor has interNACHI
removed it. Others do not agree with your opinion here and by the
law of the land.
A perfectly reasonable solution.
This could appear anytime one accesses the NFE section.