Internet awash with child porn, SA study finds
blanca
Suthentira Govender Published:Jan 19, 2008
A new study — the first of its kind into child pornography in SA — has
found that there are more than a million obscene images of children
available at the click of a mouse.
The study, commissioned by the Film and Publications Board, was
conducted by the Human Sciences Research Council amid growing concern
about the multiplication of child-abuse images on the Internet. A
summary of the study, to be released later this year, reveals that the
secrecy of the crime has made it difficult to determine “the true extent
of the problem in South Africa, which may never be known”.
Co-researcher Advaita Govender said some experts estimated there were
more than one million images available electronically and the figure was
rising.
“The crime is generally such a clandestine one it can’t be likened to
other crimes such as murder or robbery where there’ll be a body of
physical evidence to show a crime has occurred,” said Govender.
The research showed that children who were most likely to be involved in
the production of sexually explicit images were those who had
established relationships with the abuser and did not have adequate
supervision.
“Children with Internet and high-end mobile phones are vulnerable to
abuse with this technology,” said Govender.
She said child pornography victims might be susceptible when relations
with their parents were strained, they had low self-esteem and Internet
use was unsupervised.
But researchers were unable to establish the number of reported child
pornography cases in South Africa because sexual offence data was not
broken down.
Iyavar Chetty, senior executive officer of the Film and Publications
Board, said the body was involved with the National Prosecuting
Authority and police on the investigation and prosecution of child
pornography offenders.
Alan Levin, immediate past chairman of the Internet Society of SA, said
service providers were concerned about becoming censors. “What is child
pornography and what isn’t? It’s not something service providers feel
they are qualified to determine,” he said.
joe
to protect the children of course.
j
Laurence Taylor
> Internet awash with child porn, SA study finds
> Suthentira Govender Published:Jan 19, 2008
>
> A new study — the first of its kind into child pornography in SA — has
> found that there are more than a million obscene images of children
> available at the click of a mouse.
>
How can they possibly know? Have they counted them?
--
rgds
LAurence
...Danger, @N@! Off-topic messages! Danger!
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
Laurence Taylor
> On 01 Feb 2008 17:11:10 GMT, xxxxxx...@hotmail.com (XXX) wrote:>> Maybe it is time to stop fighting it and just give in. People like to see
>> children naked and even having sex.
>
> No..*YOU* like to see children naked and have sex with them
Interesting change of viewpoint. The OP referred to "children having
sex", but Brandon only thinks of "having sex with children".
> Child pornography is program *TO* abuse children...
Depends on how you define "child pornography".
> to make profit
> from pandering to the diseased minds of sick sex predators such as
> yourself..
Unless, of course, production is not only legalised but _controlled_,
with safeguards in place to prevent abuse, either of the children or
the system.
--
rgds
LAurence
...We are everywhere! Unfortunately, so are they.
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
Laurence Taylor
>>> to make profit
>>> from pandering to the diseased minds of sick sex predators such as
>>> yourself..
>> Unless, of course, production is not only legalised but _controlled_,
>
> And just whose children do you suggest are fed into this controlled
> system of yours?
I have no idea. I was considering a situation, not looking for staff.
> Perhaps you would like to use orphans ..as in the Russian Mafia
> system?
Not impossible - providing, of course, there were suitable rules in
place. Though of course it would be better if said orphans could be
supplied with food, shelter etc in more, er, mainstream ways.
>> with safeguards in place to prevent abuse, either of the children or
>> the system.
>
> Adults having sex with children ARE abusing them on or off video..
Not all child porn involves adults.
--
rgds
LAurence
...I didn't know it was impossible when I did it
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
Blast from the past
xxxxxx...@hotmail.com (XXX) wrote:
> I have NEVER paid for child porn. There is SO much child porn on the
> internet that is free I can't imagine WHY anyone would pay. But if it was
> legal much BETTER child porn could be made that people WOULD pay for. And
> it could be regulated to ensure that the children wouldn't be harmed.
Well if it were legal, the motivation to pay seems to me to be a desire
to support something you believe in and to make sure the girls and boys
in the videos/pictures are properly compensated. Something current laws
forbid... I still stand by my assertion that ownership and copyright for
all existing material should be handed to the child participants and
right to do with it as they please become his or hers upon their 18th
birthday.
It would be interesting to see how many pay as you go video download
sites would crop up suddenly. A dangerous notion and one crusaders would
be more adverse to than mere decriminalization.
--
BftP
Any law that only affects 'Bad' people will be
used against ANYONE as soon as it becomes convenient.
Blast from the past
Brandon D Cartwright <us...@example.net> wrote:
> Sex with adults DOES harm them..videoed or not
I've Kf'd you so I'll never see your response however... What about the
countless stories I've read and the very large number of people I know
personally who claim it was in fact quite a positive experience for
them? They don't count?
Blast from the past
xxxxxx...@hotmail.com (XXX) wrote:
> Because it would validate their worst fears: that not all of these children
> are "abused", that many of them enjoyed or at least WANTED to participate
> in child porn.
That's not possible children are non-sexual, mindless thoughtless
creatures who lack a future as a human being until 12:59:59 the day
before their 18th birthday.
Laurence Taylor
> In article <fmu6q3djp0e2qgm1v...@4ax.com>,
> Brandon D Cartwright <us...@example.net> wrote:
>
>> Sex with adults DOES harm them..videoed or not
>
> I've Kf'd you so I'll never see your response however... What about the
> countless stories I've read and the very large number of people I know
> personally who claim it was in fact quite a positive experience for
> them? They don't count?
>
mentally unstable, etc.
--
rgds
LAurence
...This version of reality will have certain limitations until you regist
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
ThePsyko
heard Laurence Taylor cry out in
news:13r6eqq...@corp.supernews.com...
> Blast from the past wrote:
>> In article <fmu6q3djp0e2qgm1v...@4ax.com>,
>> Brandon D Cartwright <us...@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Sex with adults DOES harm them..videoed or not
>>
>> I've Kf'd you so I'll never see your response however... What about
>> the countless stories I've read and the very large number of people I
>> know personally who claim it was in fact quite a positive experience
>> for them? They don't count?
>>
> Not to him. He will claim they are lying, have been brainwashed, are
> mentally unstable, etc.
>
>
Much like those who say that about those who are against it...
funny how that works!
--
ThePsyko
Public Enemy #7
**Pissing off the planet, one person at a time**
ThePsyko
heard David cry out in
news:afd8r3h5vqlj02gbu...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:01:05 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
> <us...@example.net> typed furiously:
>
>>On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:47:53 +0000, Laurence Taylor
>><see-h...@nospam.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Blast from the past wrote:
>>>> In article <fmu6q3djp0e2qgm1v...@4ax.com>,
>>>> Brandon D Cartwright <us...@example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sex with adults DOES harm them..videoed or not
>>>>
>>>> I've Kf'd you so I'll never see your response however... What about
>>>> the countless stories I've read and the very large number of people
>>>> I know personally who claim it was in fact quite a positive
>>>> experience for them? They don't count?
>>>>
>>>Not to him. He will claim they are lying, have been brainwashed, are
>>>mentally unstable, etc.
>>
>>So much for your pretext that this is a support group to help prevent
>>pedophiles having sex with children...
>>
> That is impossible when you are here calling people names and trumping
> up false charges which you level at them with no evidence at all.
>
> I often wonder how many children have been harmed because your
> activities on this group have not allowed someone to get the help and
> support they want and need.
>
>>As I suspected all along its mutual delusions where you take it in
>>turns to tell each other you do nothing wrong when you fuck children..
>>
> Since I have never seen anyone here say anything about fucking
> children, other than you or in response to one of your allegations, I
> would day that you are deluded.
You must have an odd definition of fucking then - I think most people
would consider sodomizing your child "fucking" them
>
>>Positive experiences for the kids....right Lawrence?
>>
> Which you would pervert by brainwashing the child into believing that
> the experience was not positive,
>
>>Even performing in child pornography for pedophiles is good for the
>>kids ...right Lawrence?
>
> If the child wishes to perform before the camera then that is his/her
> right. Of course you would probably claim that Bindi Irwin is being
> molested because she loves to perform in front of a camera.
Jack Bird
newgroups and other incest groups alone!
Are these the government officials we should all follow? Seems to me the
laws are being made just to harrass people. Just as the incest laws.
After hearing these video's, I don't think the law makers are so much
for the good people of this country! ThePsyko and others just like him,
need to rethink about where they need to be speaking. It is not in the
incest forum, but in real life, and getting these bad polictical law
makers out of office!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_4wyBGVxug
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2q8MX54M18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zABxagTSExI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laYjyZruZK0
Popa
Brandon D Cartwright wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:34:38 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:13:14 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
>><us...@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 02:58:56 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:39:40 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
>>>><us...@example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:25:40 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:52:40 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
>>>>>><us...@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:07:28 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 14 Feb 2008 17:17:07 GMT, ThePsyko <thep...@itookmyprozac.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>And yet another brainless twit is heard from...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So...you didn't lurk enough to hear David Simpson say sodomizing your
>>>>>>>own child can be good parenting in certain circumstances?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We still await enlightenment as to what those circumstances might be..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Brandon, you do not wish to listen to anyone unless their opinion is
>>>>>>directly in line with yours...
>>>>>
>>>>>That's not true at all..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I notice that *you* have not deigned to respond to my post about your
>>>>>>beloved Perversion of Justice...
>>>>>
>>>>>It's a very long post...When I have read it I might..
>>>>>
>>>>>Off the top of my head the DA who committed suicide didn't do so
>>>>>because of P-J but because he had child pornography on his hard
>>>>>drive.
>>>>
>>>>And he also knew that he was about to become yet another victim of
>>>>Perversion of Justices' brand of terrorism...
>>>
>>>Not really...it was atypical
>>>
>>>He didn't actually go to the sting house. A SWAT Team raided his house
>>>and he knew he was doomed.
>>
>>No shit!! You can read...
>
>
> you are a latecomer ..most of what you posted
> about P-J has already been posted and debated in these pedo groups..
>
>
>
>>Come on, Brandon. As a prosecutor, do you think he had no knowledge
>>that the Perversion of Justice terrorists were involved in and about
>>to begin their so-called sting operations in his jurisdiction??
>
>
> Of course he had no knowledge..
>
> If he did he must already have been suicidal to be chatting with
> children with a view to sex with them..
>
>
>>You really are delusional..
>
>
> No...you miss the point entirely..
>
> The different thing about the Conradt episode was that he
> *didn't* go to the house but committed suicide when the SWAT team
> came for him..
>
> His computer was later found to have child pornography on it..
>
> I guess he figured folks wouldn't share your views on the
> innocuousness of adults fucking children on video for pedophiles.
ThePsyko
Jack Bird cry out in news:47B51D67...@hotpop.com...
> Hey, here is a novel idea, go get the real pedophiles! Let the incest
> newgroups and other incest groups alone!
>
> Are these the government officials we should all follow? Seems to me
> the laws are being made just to harrass people. Just as the incest
> laws. After hearing these video's, I don't think the law makers are so
> much for the good people of this country! ThePsyko and others just
> like him, need to rethink about where they need to be speaking. It is
> not in the incest forum, but in real life
I am...
what are YOU doing about it?
--
Laurence Taylor
>>> I've Kf'd you so I'll never see your response however... What about the
>>> countless stories I've read and the very large number of people I know
>>> personally who claim it was in fact quite a positive experience for
>>> them? They don't count?
>>>
>> Not to him. He will claim they are lying, have been brainwashed, are
>> mentally unstable, etc.
>
> So much for your pretext that this is a support group to help prevent
> pedophiles having sex with children...
Yes ... the two are not exclusive. Just because I am aware that some
children were sexually active with adults, enjoyed the experience and
came to no harm through it, does not mean that having sex with
children is a good idea, for reasons I and others have already
described. It's a matter of putting them at risk, and that is
something I will never condone.
> As I suspected all along its mutual delusions where you take it in
> turns to tell each other you do nothing wrong when you fuck children..
Which I don't, see above. I'll type this slowly so you can understand:
there is nothing wrong in being _attracted_ to children - or anyone.
This is something outside conscious control. But _acting_ on that
attraction sexually _is_ wrong.
Let me see if I can put it in a way you can relate to. Let's say you
fancy, for example, Jennifer Lopez. She turns you on sexually and you
fantasise about shagging her senseless. Nothing wrong so far, as long
as you keep your thoughts to yourself. But if you found yourself stuck
in a lift with her, it would still be wrong to try and grope her,
wouldn't it?
> Positive experiences for the kids....right Lawrence?
Some children found the experience positive, as we have seen. Many
have found it otherwise, and since we can't know which is which, it is
best to err on the side of caution and not do it.
> Even performing in child pornography for pedophiles is good for the
> kids ...right Lawrence?
Is it? You explain.
--
rgds
LAurence
...Tagline thievery... coming up on the next Geraldo!
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
Laurence Taylor
>> So much for your pretext that this is a support group to help prevent
>> pedophiles having sex with children...
>>
> That is impossible when you are here calling people names and trumping
> up false charges which you level at them with no evidence at all.
>
> I often wonder how many children have been harmed because your
> activities on this group have not allowed someone to get the help and
> support they want and need.
That worries me, too. We have had people here seeking help, and some
narrowly avoided being driven away by Brandon and his ilk. Luckily,
they stayed, received help, and thus abuse was prevented and we saved
creating another victim.
It is frightening that some who are driven away might simply go off
and abuse anyway because they see no reason not to. (I have seen cases
where people did indeed offend simply because it was "assumed" they
would anyway).
Also frightening is the treatment these people give to children and
young people. Not long ago an abuse victim was told to kill himself,
and some years ago a boy who had been raped by his father (who was
inside by then) was given a very bad reception. In both cases by the
bigots who claim to be protecting these very children! I'm not sure
which I want to do, cry or vomit.
>> As I suspected all along its mutual delusions where you take it in
>> turns to tell each other you do nothing wrong when you fuck children..
>>
> Since I have never seen anyone here say anything about fucking
> children, other than you or in response to one of your allegations, I
> would day that you are deluded.
He's got it on the brain. Maybe because it's what happened to him.
>> Positive experiences for the kids....right Lawrence?
>>
> Which you would pervert by brainwashing the child into believing that
> the experience was not positive,
>
>> Even performing in child pornography for pedophiles is good for the
>> kids ...right Lawrence?
>
> If the child wishes to perform before the camera then that is his/her
> right. Of course you would probably claim that Bindi Irwin is being
> molested because she loves to perform in front of a camera.
You've hit the nail on the head. *If the child _wishes_*. Children
should not be forced into such things, and of course should be
protected by all the various rights and safeguards that would of
course be in place.
--
rgds
LAurence
...Pardon Me, But Would You Have Any Blue Poupon?
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
RedDog
wrote:
> David wrote:
> >> So much for your pretext that this is a support group to help prevent
> >> pedophiles having sex with children...
>
> > That is impossible when you are here calling people names and trumping
> > up false charges which you level at them with no evidence at all.
>
> > I often wonder how many children have been harmed because your
> > activities on this group have not allowed someone to get the help and
> > support they want and need.
>
> That worries me, too. We have had people here seeking help, and some
> narrowly avoided being driven away by Brandon and his ilk. Luckily,
> they stayed, received help, and thus abuse was prevented and we saved
> creating another victim.
>
Who? When?
TomBa -<NP-f36>-
news:Xns9A44639AFC...@nntp.petitmorte.net:
You are correct, sodomizing one's children is equivalent to "fucking"
them. When David states he hasn't seen anyone *here* advocate this
action, he too is correct because *here* is the newsgroups this message
is posted to (asbl, asgl). Those messages that do advocate such activity
were drawn in by x-posting and responses from groups that are not *here*,
or in the exceptions noted.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken.
--
TomBa NP-f36
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
ThePsyko
heard TomBa -<NP-f36>- cry out in
news:Xns9A45720F4...@66.150.105.47...
David is the one who made the statement. David is "here".
:)
Kashmir
Actually, for the most part, "fucking" refers to a male penis and a
female vagina.
"Sodomy," by definition, involves "the genitals of one person, and the
mouth or anus of another person."
Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross."
~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
~ George Carlin ~
"Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
friendly face
news:mfijr3hrd6raq4co5...@4ax.com:
Actually most people who are Level III RSO's know all about the
difference/similarities of fucking/sodomizing, so why dignify this
inquiry?
Kashmir
<twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
First, just to be a bitch.
Second, since you bring up RSOs, are you *aware* that sex offenders
have the *lowest* rate of recidivism of almost all convicted
criminals??
>
>>
>> "Sodomy," by definition, involves "the genitals of one person, and the
>> mouth or anus of another person."
>>
>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>> --
>> Kashmir
>>
>> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
>> flag and carrying the cross."
>>
>> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>>
>> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
>> guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>>
>> ~ George Carlin ~
>>
>> "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
>>
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood. ~ George Carlin ~
~~ "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile." ~~
friendly face
news:a8sjr3pmrll67svpl...@4ax.com:
LOL. TomBa (who asked to be corrected if mistaken):
"About the "treatment," it was mostly a joke. Perhaps it was because
most of the "therapists" had less education in psych or social
sciences than I had; perhaps it was because their "program" was one
size fits all and aimed at the lowest common denominator (i.e. the
eighteen year old grade school drop out). In any event, I went
through the motions and completed their program with alcolades, but
didn't really learn much that was new nor have my behavior
modified... But I did get a certificate!"
Kashmir
<twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
Which proves what, in regard to recidivism?? *If* he is telling the
truth, then consider this. With a recidivism rate of approximately
12%, that means that there are approximately 9, give or take,
convicted offenders who did NOT reoffend.
And by the way - do you know that he has reoffended? As a point of
FACT, not just as an accusation, or as something like, "Once a
molester, always a molester."
friendly face
news:cu0kr31qml0a0endj...@4ax.com:
yeah, i can believe that there are 9 offenders out there somewhere who
haven't reoffended.
>
> And by the way - do you know that he has reoffended? As a point of
> FACT, not just as an accusation, or as something like, "Once a
> molester, always a molester."
see this is where that self-disclosure thing comes in handy.
as you rightly said, *if* he is telling the truth, the treatment program
(for sex offenders) "did not modify his behavior," indicating reoffense.
but no. i haven't seen him molesting a child since the one he got
busted for (the only way i'd really know for a FACT, i guess), even
though he pretty much told me he has with that statement about not
changing his behavior.
narcissism is a bitch. it makes you tell on yourself.
god, i love that.
Kashmir
<twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
Do not be juvenile, it does not become you. You will start to sound
like Brandon if you are not careful.
>>
>> And by the way - do you know that he has reoffended? As a point of
>> FACT, not just as an accusation, or as something like, "Once a
>> molester, always a molester."
>
>
>see this is where that self-disclosure thing comes in handy.
>
>as you rightly said, *if* he is telling the truth, the treatment program
>(for sex offenders) "did not modify his behavior," indicating reoffense.
And see... This is where that nifty little thing called
self-education comes in handy. Have you ever bothered to research
exactly what sex-offender treatment consists of?
As I read that quote, I took that statement to mean that he does not
engage in the tools that he was offered when he was in treatment. He
would have been taught that if he finds himself alone with a child, he
needs to get away. He would have been taught that if her were feeling
like he had more of his "urges," he should find someone to talk to
immediately. And those persons would already have been in place - it
would have been required, before he was finished with treatment, that
he present to the treatment providers a list of people whom he could
go to. Those people would have met with the treatment people.
I could go on, I suppose, but the point is, not modifying his behavior
simply means, really, that he is not doing anything to try to make
sure that he will not reoffend.
It does not, by any means, mean that he *has* reoffended again. That
being said, I will concede, and agree with you - if he continues to be
this arrogant, he *is* likely to reoffend. And actually, that is the
word I would choose first - arrogant. I do not find him so much
narcissistic as I do arrogant.
Both can be the downfall of a person.
>
>
>but no. i haven't seen him molesting a child since the one he got
>busted for (the only way i'd really know for a FACT, i guess), even
>though he pretty much told me he has with that statement about not
>changing his behavior.
>
>narcissism is a bitch. it makes you tell on yourself.
>
>god, i love that.
See, and now I have to go and be offensive again. You sound like a
von Erck wannabe. And by any stretch, that guy is nothing but a
slimeball. Statements like this make you sound like you are a part of
the vigilante crowd. You may well be, and you may well *want* to be.
But, vigilanteism has no place in what *should* be a reasoned
discussion.
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>"TomBa" is a drunk..who knows what he does in his cups?
Precisely - who knows?? Do *YOU*???
>
>We do know he re-offended sine recall by downloading and uploading
>child pornography and organizing a pedophile ring..
I do not know what the hell you just said, really... "sine recall?"
I honestly cannot make that out.
However, can you *prove* that he has UL/DL CP???
And just what the fuck is a "pedophile ring??" I have never come
across one. I keep hearing about them, but I have yet to actually
find one.
By the way... When are you going to address those posts that you keep
mysteriously trying to ignore, because they contain facts that you
cannot disprove??
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>More to the point is does his Parole Officer know?
No, more to "THE POINT," do *YOU* know? *YOU* are the one accusing
him.
>
>>
>>>
>>>We do know he re-offended sine recall by downloading and uploading
>>>child pornography and organizing a pedophile ring..
>>
>>I do not know what the hell you just said, really... "sine recall?"
>>I honestly cannot make that out.
>
>try since..
>
>As a level three sex offender his release into the community was
>conditional on receiving treatment..as a drunk he was in breach and
>was recalled back to prison.
Thank you - I must have been tired or something - could not figure
that out, and I am usually good at deciphering typos - I make enough
of them myself.
Well, then. It seems to me that the only thing you can say about him
"reoffending" is that he drank when he was not allowed to. That is
all well and good, and if it was a condition of his release, and he
violated it, then it is his own fault he was sent back to prison.
>
>>
>>However, can you *prove* that he has UL/DL CP???
>
>As you have been told that is the job of the prosecutor..and his
>parole officer..
Uhm, no, Brandon. *YOU* said, (and I will correct the typos for the
sake of clarity), *YOU* said: "We do know he re-offended since recall
by downloading and uploading child pornography and organizing a
pedophile ring.."
Now, I have two problems with this. The first is, you just told me
that he was recalled for violating his conditions by drinking. Fine,
but that has absolutely nothing to do with CP.
Second, from the way that you worded this, "...he re-offended *SINCE
RECALL* by uploading and downloading child pornography and organizing
a pedophile ring," to be a bit difficult to swallow. If he has
reoffended *since* his recall, and he is still in prison, (is he? You
have not said) but if that is what you meant, then it is bullshit.
Prison inmates are no longer allowed access to the internet - they
have not been for YEARS.
If you mean that he has done these things *OUTSIDE* of prison, fine.
But again, *YOU* have no evidence of this, you simply accuse him, and
when I call you on that, you tell me that, ""as you have been told,
that is the job of the prosecutor and his parole officer." So, until
*THEY* prove that he has done these things, and since you have no
proof, how can you simply make an accusation???
>
>His news server and ISP will turn over the information readily
>enough..if they haven't done so already..
Yes they will. But that does not change the fact that *YOU* have no
such proof, does it??
friendly face
news:v19lr3pri1tm7b3s7...@4ax.com:
tomba:
"Actually, I peek at CP safely! I'll tell you the complete story later
if
you're interested, but suffice it to say I got burnt once from my
inexperience and have learned from that misfortune. Suffice it to
say for now that all of my Usenet activity is contained within an
encrypted password protected disk volume, and I have a program
(Evidence Eliminator) that destroys tracks that Windows leaves
behind from any/all activity.
My P.O. in one of his inspections of my computer saw the program
name 'Evidence Eliminator' and asked me what I was trying to hide
... to which I just smiled and said "nothing." That didn't stop
him
from confiscating my computer and my personal photography
collection for 'investigation.' I guess they're still
investgating,
because even with contact from my attorney, they still have the
property... :("
BTW, Level 3's are not allowed to have computers at all anyway.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>And just what the fuck is a "pedophile ring??" I have never come
>>>across one. I keep hearing about them, but I have yet to actually
>>>find one.
>>>
>>>By the way... When are you going to address those posts that you
>>>keep mysteriously trying to ignore, because they contain facts that
>>>you cannot disprove??
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It does not, by any means, mean that he *has* reoffended again.
>>>>>That being said, I will concede, and agree with you - if he
>>>>>continues to be this arrogant, he *is* likely to reoffend. And
>>>>>actually, that is the word I would choose first - arrogant. I do
>>>>>not find him so much narcissistic as I do arrogant.
>>>>>
>>>>>Both can be the downfall of a person.
yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>but no. i haven't seen him molesting a child since the one he got
>>>>>>busted for (the only way i'd really know for a FACT, i guess),
>>>>>>even though he pretty much told me he has with that statement
>>>>>>about not changing his behavior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>narcissism is a bitch. it makes you tell on yourself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>god, i love that.
>>>>>
>>>>>See, and now I have to go and be offensive again. You sound like a
>>>>>von Erck wannabe. And by any stretch, that guy is nothing but a
>>>>>slimeball. Statements like this make you sound like you are a part
>>>>>of the vigilante crowd. You may well be, and you may well *want*
>>>>>to be. But, vigilanteism has no place in what *should* be a
>>>>>reasoned discussion.
>>>>>
er, i was just being ironic. irony, i think, has it's place in reasoned
discussion.
it's very disorienting to me that von erk and tomba, being brought up in
the same thread, are basically labelled "slime ball" and "angel" in that
order.
ThePsyko
Kashmir cry out in news:mfijr3hrd6raq4co5...@4ax.com...
It's not called "butt fucking" for nothing.
>
> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
But it is considered such among a majority of the population, despite the
actual definitions of such.
> --
> Kashmir
>
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
> flag and carrying the cross."
>
> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>
> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
> guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>
> ~ George Carlin ~
>
> "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
>
--
ThePsyko
heard friendly face cry out in news:Xns9A488FD1711CAgasolineandbile@
66.250.146.159...
He also went on to rack up additional convictions after his so-called
"treatment"
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Possession Of Child Pornography 3cts 03-17-2000
1 <Name Redacted>
Defendant Kcdc-so Div(auk Djd) 199043871 09-25-1999 Probable Cause
2 <Name Redacted>
Defendant King Co Superior Ct 99-1-05518-3 07-01-1999 Criminal
3 <Name Redacted>
Defendant King Co Superior Ct 99-1-08254-7 09-30-1999 Criminal
4 <Name Redacted>
Defendant King Co Superior Ct 85-1-00661-1 03-06-1985 Criminal
5 <Name Redacted>
Defendant King Co Superior Ct 91-1-03117-3 06-03-1991 Criminal
6 <Name Redacted>
Judgment Debtor King Co Superior Ct 91-9-17987-1 09-04-1991
Judgment
CRIMINAL
http://dw.courts.wa.gov/index.cfm?fa=home.casesummary&crt_itl_nu=S17
&casenumber=99-1-08254-7&searchtype=sName&token=5C1D318C5A030114
Superior Court Case Summary
Court: King Co Superior Ct
Case Number: 99-1-08254-7
Sub Docket Date Docket Code Docket Description Misc Info
- 09-30-1999 ADM01 Case Setting Info
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Ccn: 1145461 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Exp: 03-16-00 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Loc: *jail* 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Int: 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Trial Length; 3 Days 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Trial Set Exp: 03-16-00 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 NOTE
ACTION 39
Possession Of Chld Pornography 3cts 03-17-2000TO
- 09-30-1999 $FFA Filing Fee Assessed 110.00
1 09-30-1999 INFO Information
2 09-30-1999 ORW
LOCS Order For Warrant 100,000 Cash Only
HTH!
(although I doubt it - you seem the type who prefers to put their head in
the sand)
--
Kashmir
<twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
This is not meant to be a reflection on you. But, I have been told in
the past, usually by those who frequent the hackers groups, to which I
am now allowing cross-posting, (actually, I will cross-post these
where ever they were originally posted to, since it seems to be "bad
form" not to), I have been called to task for providing such things
without providing the relevant headers that go along with the post.
To quote one person, from long ago, "Unless you show me the headers,
it's fucking bullshit as far as I'm concerned."
You could well have yanked the quote, and just stored it, but, I am
going to go by *their* rules: I would like to see the headers.
Not at all disorienting, really, considering that there are two sides
here. Why is von Erck so guarded and secretive about *his* life and
past?? What does he want to hide?? And at the same time, while he is
using an alias, he demads complete and utter transparency from those
who work for him. Why all of the secrecy about himself??
I do not label TomBa an "angel." I do not know him, and I have never
communicated with him. I cannot say one way or the other, anything
definitive about him. I just ask for decent evidence before I agree
that he, too, is a slimeball.
Kashmir
wrote:
Would you care to give a link that does something besides returning an
error message??
IE, Firefox, Opera - all the same error:
"The web site you are accessing has experienced an unexpected error.
Please contact the website administrator.
The following information is meant for the website developer for
debugging purposes.
Element S17 is undefined in a CFML structure referenced as part of an
expression.
Resources:
Enable Robust Exception Information to provide greater detail about
the source of errors. In the Administrator, click Debugging & Logging
> Debugging Settings, and select the Robust Exception Information
option.
Check the ColdFusion documentation to verify that you are using the
correct syntax.
Search the Knowledge Base to find a solution to your problem.
Browser Opera/9.25 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en)
Referrer
Date/Time 19-Feb-08 01:53 PM
And yes, I have removed the IP address. I am not an idiot.
Kashmir
wrote:
And... You can cite these?? With a working link?
Kashmir
wrote:
That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we want
them to mean, regardless of their definition.
Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet they
are used interchangeably.
>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Kashmir
>>
>> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
>> flag and carrying the cross."
>>
>> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>>
>> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
>> guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>>
>> ~ George Carlin ~
>>
>> "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
>>
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood. ~ George Carlin ~
~~ "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile." ~~
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Guess you'd better purchase a subscription then.
--
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
I gave you the link. It's subscription only however, which gives you
the perfect excuse to remain ignorant while screaming about "no proof"
Kashmir
wrote:
I have absolutely no interest in doing so.
I do not see you posting the full articles, either...
Kashmir
wrote:
Post the article, then...
Not difficult to cut and paste, is it?
Kashmir
wrote:
>On 18 Feb 2008 I stormed the castle called alt.support.boy-lovers and heard
What, no response??
>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Kashmir
>>
>> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
>> flag and carrying the cross."
>>
>> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>>
>> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
>> guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>>
>> ~ George Carlin ~
>>
>> "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
>>
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood. ~ George Carlin ~
~~ "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile." ~~
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
To my own post? No, I don't talk to myself usually.
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
of course not. Ignorance suits you well.
>
> I do not see you posting the full articles, either...
Why should I? If your history is any indication, you'll just claim it's
not really proof anyway. Besides, whether or not you choose to believe
it really has no impact on reality in any way.
Kashmir
wrote:
Funny how all of the above goes both ways, is it not?
Kashmir
wrote:
No, to this, moron:
>>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>>
>>But it is considered such among a majority of the population, despite the
>>actual definitions of such.
>That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we want
>them to mean, regardless of their definition.
>
>Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
>"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet they
>are used interchangeably.
--
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Learn how to post properly before calling others morons lol
>
>>>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>>>
>>>But it is considered such among a majority of the population, despite
>>>the actual definitions of such.
>
>>That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we want
>>them to mean, regardless of their definition.
>>
>>Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
>>"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet they
>>are used interchangeably.
What's to respond to? I don't use them interchangeably.
I understand that may be difficult for you to comprehend though.
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
>>>>>>7 &casenumber=99-1-08254-7&searchtype=sName&token=5C1D318C5A030114
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you care to give a link that does something besides
>>>>> returning an error message??
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Guess you'd better purchase a subscription then.
>>>
>>> I have absolutely no interest in doing so.
>>
>>of course not. Ignorance suits you well.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I do not see you posting the full articles, either...
>>
>>Why should I? If your history is any indication, you'll just claim
>>it's not really proof anyway. Besides, whether or not you choose to
>>believe it really has no impact on reality in any way.
>
> Funny how all of the above goes both ways, is it not?
Do you even bother knowing anything about who you talk to? Or do you
just assume everybody is the same? --
Kashmir
wrote:
Well, there are a number of posts which have taken issue with
statements made by several people - who stand on the opposing side
from me on the general topic discussed in here.
Have *you* bothered to respond to them?? Have you bothered to try to
dispute them? They are there, with references cited.
I find it odd that *no one* on your side of the fence can respond to
these posts...
Kashmir
wrote:
I did...
Do not blame me if you cannot see the posts...
>
>
>
>>
>>>>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>>>>
>>>>But it is considered such among a majority of the population, despite
>>>>the actual definitions of such.
>>
>>>That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we want
>>>them to mean, regardless of their definition.
>>>
>>>Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
>>>"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet they
>>>are used interchangeably.
>
>What's to respond to? I don't use them interchangeably.
>
>I understand that may be difficult for you to comprehend though.
--
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
>>>>>>>>S1 7
>>>>>>>>&casenumber=99-1-08254-7&searchtype=sName&token=5C1D318C5A030114
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would you care to give a link that does something besides
>>>>>>> returning an error message??
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Guess you'd better purchase a subscription then.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have absolutely no interest in doing so.
>>>>
>>>>of course not. Ignorance suits you well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not see you posting the full articles, either...
>>>>
>>>>Why should I? If your history is any indication, you'll just claim
>>>>it's not really proof anyway. Besides, whether or not you choose to
>>>>believe it really has no impact on reality in any way.
>>>
>>> Funny how all of the above goes both ways, is it not?
>>
>>Do you even bother knowing anything about who you talk to? Or do you
>>just assume everybody is the same? --
>
> Well, there are a number of posts which have taken issue with
> statements made by several people - who stand on the opposing side
> from me on the general topic discussed in here.
>
> Have *you* bothered to respond to them?? Have you bothered to try to
> dispute them? They are there, with references cited.
Apparently I haven't bothered to read them either, or I might have some
idea of what posts you're talking about.
If only you were as important as you wish you were I might actually go
out of my way to read your posts (like I do for some others here), but
so far I just haven't seen anything to justify the effort...
Actually, that's not entirely true... you definitely have some amusement
factor going on...
>
> I find it odd that *no one* on your side of the fence can respond to
> these posts...
--
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Here is the post....
Path:
news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!news.glorb.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.eas
ynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!easynews-local!fe07.news.easynews.com.POS
TED!not-for-mail From: Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m>
Newsgroups: alt.support.boy-lovers,alt.support.girl-lovers
Subject: Re: Internet awash with child porn, SA study finds
Message-ID: <vvmmr39t2cj1v71fc...@4ax.com>
References: <fmu6q3djp0e2qgm1v...@4ax.com>
<none-E5B574.1...@news.giganews.com>
<13r6eqq...@corp.supernews.com>
<l248r312th7ahcb9p...@4ax.com>
<afd8r3h5vqlj02gbu...@4ax.com>
<Xns9A44639AFC...@nntp.petitmorte.net>
<Xns9A45720F4...@66.150.105.47>
<Xns9A48616115...@nntp.petitmorte.net>
<mfijr3hrd6raq4co5...@4ax.com>
<Xns9A495CBBE9...@nntp.petitmorte.net> X-Newsreader: Forte
Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 126
X-Complaints-To: ab...@easynews.com
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly. Date:
Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:45:20 GMT Xref: news.motzarella.org
alt.support.boy-lovers:30109617
What, no response??
>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Kashmir
>>
>> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
>> flag and carrying the cross."
>>
>> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>>
>> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
>> guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>>
>> ~ George Carlin ~
>>
>> "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
>>
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood. ~ George Carlin ~
~~ "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile." ~~
*** end c&p ***
So show me again what part of the post you were referring to?
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>>>>>
>>>>>But it is considered such among a majority of the population,
>>>>>despite the actual definitions of such.
>>>
>>>>That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we
>>>>want them to mean, regardless of their definition.
>>>>
>>>>Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
>>>>"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet
>>>>they are used interchangeably.
>>
>>What's to respond to? I don't use them interchangeably.
>>
>>I understand that may be difficult for you to comprehend though.
>
--
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Here is the post....
On 19 Feb 2008 16:36:20 GMT, ThePsyko <thep...@itookmyprozac.com>
wrote:
What, no response??
>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Kashmir
>>
>> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
>> flag and carrying the cross."
>>
>> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>>
>> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
>> guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>>
>> ~ George Carlin ~
>>
>> "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile."
>>
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood. ~ George Carlin ~
~~ "Lolicon: It has a nicer ring to it than Pedophile." ~~
*** end c&p ***
So show me again what part of the post you were referring to?
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>>>>>
>>>>>But it is considered such among a majority of the population,
>>>>>despite the actual definitions of such.
>>>
>>>>That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we
>>>>want them to mean, regardless of their definition.
>>>>
>>>>Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
>>>>"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet
>>>>they are used interchangeably.
>>
>>What's to respond to? I don't use them interchangeably.
>>
>>I understand that may be difficult for you to comprehend though.
>
--
Kashmir
<thep...@itookmyprozac.com> wrote:
Nooooo...
**HERE** is the post, which it is not my fault that cannot see, moron:
Path:
core-phx-easynews!news-in-01-phx.easynews.com!news.easynews.com!en236!core-easynews!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!easynews-local!fe06.news.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m>
Newsgroups: alt.support.boy-lovers,alt.support.girl-lovers
Subject: Re: Internet awash with child porn, SA study finds
Message-ID: <j4kmr3hva4sipccsi...@4ax.com>
References: <fmu6q3djp0e2qgm1v...@4ax.com>
<none-E5B574.1...@news.giganews.com>
<13r6eqq...@corp.supernews.com>
<l248r312th7ahcb9p...@4ax.com>
<afd8r3h5vqlj02gbu...@4ax.com>
<Xns9A44639AFC...@nntp.petitmorte.net>
<Xns9A45720F4...@66.150.105.47>
<Xns9A48616115...@nntp.petitmorte.net>
<mfijr3hrd6raq4co5...@4ax.com>
<Xns9A495CBBE9...@nntp.petitmorte.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 131
X-Complaints-To: ab...@easynews.com
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:57:32 GMT
Xref: core-phx-easynews alt.support.boy-lovers:166956
alt.support.girl-lovers:29821
That *is* a problem in the U.S. We use words to mean whatever we want
them to mean, regardless of their definition.
Personally, I prefer to stick to strict definitions: Kind of like,
"pedophile," and "child molester." Two different things, and yet they
are used interchangeably.
>
>
>
>
Kashmir
<thep...@itookmyprozac.com> wrote:
Important, no...
Just giving back a little of the same thing that you and your kind
like to dish out so freely...
>
>
>
>>
>> I find it odd that *no one* on your side of the fence can respond to
>> these posts...
--
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Do tell me what my "kind" is?
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Except the content of that which you were questioning my lack of response
to wasn't in the post to which you replied with your "no response to
this" question.
>
> Path:
> core-phx-easynews!news-in-01-phx.easynews.com!news.easynews.com!en236!c
> ore-easynews!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!eas
> ynews-local!fe06.news.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Kashmir
--
Kashmir
<thep...@itookmyprozac.com> wrote:
Heh...
Hate mongering, self-righteous crusaders...
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>A "child molester" is simply a pedophile who has been caught fiddling
>with kids.
Agreed. BUT - a pedophile is not automatically a child molester...
Kashmir
<thep...@itookmyprozac.com> wrote:
Oh, jesus...
You missed the post, or you just chose not to respond...
Give it up...
<Shakes head>
--
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>Looking for a pedophile that keeps their hands to themselves when
>alone with a child is like looking for a unicorn..
Well, then you are looking at a unicorn...
>
>Even 4s00th...your homosexual male pedophile counterpart on
>alt.support.boy-lovers claims to never allow himself near children to
>control his urges .
I do not know who that is, and do not care. I am not a boy lover, and
do not frequent the group. My posts go there, only because *you*
cross post there, and I have decided to follow your example with cross
posting. But I have never visited the group...
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>Perhaps you should..
>
>If you are trying to start a moderated group for pedophiles it's
>collapsed before it began if you can't get a spiritual Doppelganger
>like s400th on board..
It is an *ALT* group, Brandon. All it needs to be created is to put
it on a server, really...
>
>like I said pedos are not a political group and if you already wish
>discriminate based on the sex of the child you wish to sexually abuse
>..what does that tell you?
I am not discriminating. I am simply not a boy lover. I am a girl
lover. That is why I chose this group. The name of this groups is
alt.support.*GIRL*-lovers. Why would I need support in a group where
the discussion centers around loving boys?
>
>It's just a lust driven chimera hiding behind the nebulous idea of
>"support".
I admit to the lust. Why is it so hard for *you* to admit that I have
not, will not, give in to the lust?? You find it impossible to
believe. You are the perfect example of a closed mind.
>
>Networking and exchange of child pornography are what these groups are
>a*actually* about
And you know this for a *fact*?? I do not exchange CP. I do not D/L
or U/L CP. I do not "network," which, I assume, you are adding an
ominous twist to. If by networking you mean that somehow, we are all
here to form a conspiracy of how to find children to molest, please -
stop making blanket assumptions. *I* am not here for anything of the
sort. If, however, you mean "networking" in the sense of talking to
people who share the same feelings and trying to deal with them in a
rational and constructive way, then yes. I am here for networking.
Criminal?? Hardly. I call it more theapeutic than anything else.
The unfortunate thing is that I find myself under immediate attack for
being bold enough to admit to my feelings and seeking an understanding
and safe place to talk about and deal with them, accused of all of the
the statements above that you apply as a blanket description of
everyone who is here for *legitimate* reasons, (according to the name
of the group), and regarded as someone who is a rape waiting to
happen...
"Anarchists, Lunatics, and Terrorists..."
Indeed...
friendly face
news:mummr39hj7e9b3c62...@4ax.com:
it's not an article. it's an email. to me.
kashmir, i figure you must feel very attacked here as an abstaining
pedophile. have you interacted with 4s00th at all? i haven't seen him
around for awhile, but he also abstains and seems to be a very good
person who gets wailed on constantly around here. if you can find him
here or in alt.support.incest, his email address is real. i just think
he might be a good one to get to know.
*4s00th, correct me if i'm wrong here*
i think the handful of abstainers who truly come here for support find
themselves under attack, and naturally lash out. that's what anyone in
their right mind would do. you have to remember, though, that there are
some of us who have been around awhile and have gathered lots of inside
information which disproves their claims to be abstinant or to have done
nothing wrong.
it must be so hard to be in a support group like this and not identify
with others you see as being "ganged up on." after all, if they are like
you, they do not deserve it. so, having a brave and generous heart, you
come to their rescue.
i'm really, really sorry to have to say it, kashmir, but most of the
people in these groups are NOT like you.
please try and get in touch with 4s00th and Laurence Taylor. they are
in you shoes, so far as i can understand, and may be affirming,
welcoming, and enlightening presences for you.
best,
friendly face
friendly face
news:3djmr35c9p37jfabe...@4ax.com:
> On 19 Feb 2008 15:32:19 GMT, friendly face
> <twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
>
>>Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote in
>>news:v19lr3pri1tm7b3s7...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:37:48 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
>>> <us...@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:56:56 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:51:04 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
>>>>><us...@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:07:05 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 18 Feb 2008 22:01:07 GMT, friendly face
>>>>>>><twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote in
>>>>>>>>news:cu0kr31qml0a0endj...@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18 Feb 2008 21:36:24 GMT, friendly face
>>>>More to the point is does his Parole Officer know?
>>>
>>> No, more to "THE POINT," do *YOU* know? *YOU* are the one accusing
>>> him.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>We do know he re-offended sine recall by downloading and
>>>>>>uploading child pornography and organizing a pedophile ring..
>>>>>
>>>>>I do not know what the hell you just said, really... "sine
>>>>>recall?" I honestly cannot make that out.
>>>>
>>>>try since..
>>>>
>>>>As a level three sex offender his release into the community was
>>>>conditional on receiving treatment..as a drunk he was in breach and
>>>>was recalled back to prison.
>>>
>>> Thank you - I must have been tired or something - could not figure
>>> that out, and I am usually good at deciphering typos - I make enough
>>> of them myself.
>>>
>>> Well, then. It seems to me that the only thing you can say about
>>> him "reoffending" is that he drank when he was not allowed to. That
>>> is all well and good, and if it was a condition of his release, and
>>> he violated it, then it is his own fault he was sent back to prison.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>However, can you *prove* that he has UL/DL CP???
>>>>
>>>>As you have been told that is the job of the prosecutor..and his
>>>>parole officer..
>>>
>>> Uhm, no, Brandon. *YOU* said, (and I will correct the typos for the
>>> sake of clarity), *YOU* said: "We do know he re-offended since
>>> recall by downloading and uploading child pornography and organizing
>>> a pedophile ring.."
>>>
>>> Now, I have two problems with this. The first is, you just told me
>>> that he was recalled for violating his conditions by drinking.
>>> Fine, but that has absolutely nothing to do with CP.
>>>
>>> Second, from the way that you worded this, "...he re-offended *SINCE
>>> RECALL* by uploading and downloading child pornography and
>>> organizing a pedophile ring," to be a bit difficult to swallow. If
>>> he has reoffended *since* his recall, and he is still in prison, (is
>>> he? You have not said) but if that is what you meant, then it is
>>> bullshit. Prison inmates are no longer allowed access to the
>>> internet - they have not been for YEARS.
>>>
>>> If you mean that he has done these things *OUTSIDE* of prison, fine.
>>> But again, *YOU* have no evidence of this, you simply accuse him,
>>> and when I call you on that, you tell me that, ""as you have been
>>> told, that is the job of the prosecutor and his parole officer."
>>> So, until *THEY* prove that he has done these things, and since you
>>> have no proof, how can you simply make an accusation???
>>>>
>>>>His news server and ISP will turn over the information readily
>>>>enough..if they haven't done so already..
>>>
>>> Yes they will. But that does not change the fact that *YOU* have no
>>> such proof, does it??
>>
>>tomba:
>>
>>"Actually, I peek at CP safely! I'll tell you the complete story later
>>if
>>you're interested, but suffice it to say I got burnt once from my
>>inexperience and have learned from that misfortune. Suffice it to
>>say for now that all of my Usenet activity is contained within an
>>encrypted password protected disk volume, and I have a program
>>(Evidence Eliminator) that destroys tracks that Windows leaves
>>behind from any/all activity.
>>
>>My P.O. in one of his inspections of my computer saw the program
>>name 'Evidence Eliminator' and asked me what I was trying to hide
>>... to which I just smiled and said "nothing." That didn't stop
>>him
>>from confiscating my computer and my personal photography
>>collection for 'investigation.' I guess they're still
>>investgating,
>>because even with contact from my attorney, they still have the
>>property... :("
>>
>>BTW, Level 3's are not allowed to have computers at all anyway.
>
> This is not meant to be a reflection on you. But, I have been told in
> the past, usually by those who frequent the hackers groups, to which I
> am now allowing cross-posting, (actually, I will cross-post these
> where ever they were originally posted to, since it seems to be "bad
> form" not to), I have been called to task for providing such things
> without providing the relevant headers that go along with the post.
> To quote one person, from long ago, "Unless you show me the headers,
> it's fucking bullshit as far as I'm concerned."
>
> You could well have yanked the quote, and just stored it, but, I am
> going to go by *their* rules: I would like to see the headers.
i would if i could figure out how. the qutes i make tend to come from
private emails from men here that they write to my alts. i mean, i
could post the account and the password, but hen they could go in and
delete everything and all manner of other vile activities. i understand
your skepticism. i am for real. i have no need to lie around here.
perhaps time will convince you of my sincerety.
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And just what the fuck is a "pedophile ring??" I have never come
>>>>>across one. I keep hearing about them, but I have yet to actually
>>>>>find one.
>>>>>
>>>>>By the way... When are you going to address those posts that you
>>>>>keep mysteriously trying to ignore, because they contain facts that
>>>>>you cannot disprove??
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It does not, by any means, mean that he *has* reoffended again.
>>>>>>>That being said, I will concede, and agree with you - if he
>>>>>>>continues to be this arrogant, he *is* likely to reoffend. And
>>>>>>>actually, that is the word I would choose first - arrogant. I do
>>>>>>>not find him so much narcissistic as I do arrogant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Both can be the downfall of a person.
>>
>>yes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>but no. i haven't seen him molesting a child since the one he
>>>>>>>>got busted for (the only way i'd really know for a FACT, i
>>>>>>>>guess), even though he pretty much told me he has with that
>>>>>>>>statement about not changing his behavior.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>narcissism is a bitch. it makes you tell on yourself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>god, i love that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>See, and now I have to go and be offensive again. You sound like
>>>>>>>a von Erck wannabe. And by any stretch, that guy is nothing but
>>>>>>>a slimeball. Statements like this make you sound like you are a
>>>>>>>part of the vigilante crowd. You may well be, and you may well
>>>>>>>*want* to be. But, vigilanteism has no place in what *should* be
>>>>>>>a reasoned discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>
>>er, i was just being ironic. irony, i think, has it's place in
>>reasoned discussion.
>>
>>it's very disorienting to me that von erk and tomba, being brought up
>>in the same thread, are basically labelled "slime ball" and "angel" in
>>that order.
>
> Not at all disorienting, really, considering that there are two sides
> here. Why is von Erck so guarded and secretive about *his* life and
> past?? What does he want to hide?? And at the same time, while he is
> using an alias, he demads complete and utter transparency from those
> who work for him. Why all of the secrecy about himself??
yeah, that, um, irks me (pun intended), but i think it's really all
about protection. he knows he can protect the people who work for him,
and that he can trust them to work for him if he knows about them, but
who's protecting him? i mean, think about the murdered abortion
doctors....
>
> I do not label TomBa an "angel." I do not know him, and I have never
> communicated with him. I cannot say one way or the other, anything
> definitive about him. I just ask for decent evidence before I agree
> that he, too, is a slimeball.
>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sodomy," by definition, involves "the genitals of one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> person, and the mouth or anus of another person."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, strictly speaking, sodomy is not fucking.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kashmir
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> flag and carrying the cross."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a guy nailed to two pieces of wood.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ George Carlin ~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ªºªandcarole
<twistedmotherfuckersforcof...@noon.com> wrote:
> Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote innews:mummr39hj7e9b3c62...@4ax.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 19 Feb 2008 21:39:13 GMT, ThePsyko <theps...@itookmyprozac.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>On 19 Feb 2008 I stormed the castle called alt.support.boy-lovers and
> >>heard Kashmir cry out in
> >>news:e3kmr3dh5suo17nsa...@4ax.com...
>
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>>On 18 Feb 2008 I stormed the castle called alt.support.boy-lovers
> >>>>and heard friendly face cry out in
> >>>>news:Xns9A488FD1711CAgasolineandbile@ 66.250.146.159...
>
> >>>>> Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote in
> >>>>>news:a8sjr3pmrll67svpl...@4ax.com:
>
> >>>>>> On 18 Feb 2008 19:59:56 GMT, friendly face
>
> >>>>>>>Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote in
> >>>>>>>news:mfijr3hrd6raq4co5...@4ax.com:
>
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:34:17 +0000 (UTC), ThePsyko
> >>>>>>>> <theps...@itookmyprozac.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>On 15 Feb 2008 I stormed the castle called
> >>>>>>>>>alt.support.boy-lovers and heard TomBa -<NP-f36>- cry out in
> >>>>>>>>>news:Xns9A45720F4...@66.150.105.47...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>news:Xns9A44639AFC...@nntp.petitmorte.net:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 14 Feb 2008 I stormed the castle called
> >>>>>>>>>>> alt.support.boy-lovers and heard David cry out in
> >>>>>>>>>>>news:afd8r3h5vqlj02gbu...@4ax.com...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:01:05 -0800, Brandon D Cartwright
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:47:53 +0000, Laurence Taylor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>><see-head...@nospam.plus.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Blast from the past wrote:
You should be ashamed of yourself for kissing these
deviants asses. A pervert is a pervert "abstaining" or not.
4s00th is as bad as any shitbag that Dateline NBC
catches regularly.
ThePsyko
hmmmm... lol
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Once you learn how to reply to the post you think you're replying to, let
me know.
Kashmir
<twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
Time can do wonders...
I have to disagree. The number of truly *violent* child molesters -
those who are violent not only towards their victims, but towards
other adults, is relatively miniscule.
In the abortion battle, however, you had the entire overly-zealous,
fringe Christian movement rallying. There are some real whack jobs in
some of those groups. von Erck, I think, has nothing to fear in terms
of reprisal, unless it is when someone tries to sue him.
I could be wrong, but somehow, that just does not really wash with
me...
Kashmir
<twistedmotherf...@noon.com> wrote:
As a sort of general overview, you are correct in this.
>it's not an article. it's an email. to me.
>
>kashmir, i figure you must feel very attacked here as an abstaining
>pedophile. have you interacted with 4s00th at all? i haven't seen him
>around for awhile, but he also abstains and seems to be a very good
>person who gets wailed on constantly around here. if you can find him
>here or in alt.support.incest, his email address is real. i just think
>he might be a good one to get to know.
>
>*4s00th, correct me if i'm wrong here*
>
>i think the handful of abstainers who truly come here for support find
>themselves under attack, and naturally lash out. that's what anyone in
>their right mind would do. you have to remember, though, that there are
>some of us who have been around awhile and have gathered lots of inside
>information which disproves their claims to be abstinant or to have done
>nothing wrong.
And that may well be the case. There are side issues, however, which
IMHO truly *need* to be discussed openly. I began one such discussion
a few minutes ago, in another post. I do not hold much hope for the
outcome of that post, given what I have seen.
For quite understandable reasons, I think, my email address is *NOT*
genuine, obviously. Having openly stated my attraction to young
girls, and applied the label of "pedophile" to myself, I will admit
that no one has *blatantly* told me that I am a child molester.
However, I have had comments like, "A pedophile is just a child
molester who hasn't acted out yet," and - my personal favorite -
"Trying to find a pdeophile who keeps his [her] hand to themselves
when alone with a child is like trying to find a unicorn."
>
>it must be so hard to be in a support group like this and not identify
>with others you see as being "ganged up on." after all, if they are like
>you, they do not deserve it. so, having a brave and generous heart, you
>come to their rescue.
I do not necessarily want to come to the rescue of anyone. What I
*would* like is to be able to carry on a rational discussion about
*all* of the issues surrounding this phenomenon. For instance, if you
were to maintain this kind of tone with me, I would *happily* engage
in a discussion with you about our views on what is an appropriate age
for differing levels of sexual activity for children. Because I do
believe, given my own history, that children *can* make those
decisions, if they are taught *how* to make informed and rational
decisions. I could K/F all of the people that I refer to as
hate-mongers, but that is *not* how I operate. I *want* to see both
sides of the debate. Even Brandon has made one or two quite rational
and relevant responses to me, though they are far outnumbered by his
rantings.
Yes... I lash out. I am a "girly-girl" lesbian, but I have enough of
the butch dyke in me to get really ugly when someone pushes my
buttons. And for the most part, that is what I see here: People
trying to push the buttons of others. No desire for a rational
discussion, which might - just *might* - cause someone to think, and
maybe, not harm a kid...
>
>i'm really, really sorry to have to say it, kashmir, but most of the
>people in these groups are NOT like you.
That may be. And if they are hurting children, I am all for doing
whatever is necessary to make them stop. But when there is an
attitude of, "You are a child rape just waitting for an opportunity"
that flies around, and it is thrown at everyone who does not
immediately agree with the opinions of the "other side," I will defend
those that I see as being persecuted, until it is demonstrated to me
that I am wrong. Once that happens, unlike some, I will admit to
being wrong...
>
>please try and get in touch with 4s00th and Laurence Taylor. they are
>in you shoes, so far as i can understand, and may be affirming,
>welcoming, and enlightening presences for you.
I have seen Laurence a couple of times. However, I have not had any
real contact with him, per se, and I do not know 4s00th.
>
>best,
>friendly face
ThePsyko
heard Kashmir cry out in
Desperate people do desperate things. People have killed themselves
after being outted - imagine what they would do to the person
responsible for outting them if they could?
Look at R.Stevie.Walz.. (or not, he's in the incest group) - he has the
potential to be incredibly violent towards anybody who doesn't share his
viewpoint, and has stated on more than a few occasions that "fundies"
should be shot.
All it takes is one whacko
Kashmir
wrote:
I will agree with that last statement...
However, as a group, pedophiles tend to be secretive, and not very
organized, really. And if, ss friendly face puts it, he can protect
those who work for him if he knows about them, the same would apply to
him: He could protect himself. My point is that by using a false
name, and by being so completely secretive about himself, his past,
and his "doings," he opens himself up to an awful lot of questions
about the legitimacy of his organization and what it *really* stands
for.
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>Being a recipient of regular death threats I can tell you that you are
>wrong..
>
>I am to be hunted down and killed in the street like a dog apparently.
Brandon, you will forgive me for this, (or not, probably), but come
on...
A.) This is usenet, and people make those kinds of threats
constantly.
B.) Unless you are completely and utterly stupid, no one here knows
who you *really* are.
C.) I find it difficult to believe that *anyone* takes you seriously
enough to make a *serious* threat of death against you.
And...
D.) Quite often, your attitude, if not your specific words, makes it
clear that *you* feel that all pedos and child molesters should be
"hunted down and kiiled in the street like a dog..."
>
>
>>
>>In the abortion battle, however, you had the entire overly-zealous,
>>fringe Christian movement rallying. There are some real whack jobs in
>>some of those groups. von Erck, I think, has nothing to fear in terms
>>of reprisal, unless it is when someone tries to sue him.
>>
>>I could be wrong,
>
>no "could be" about it...
>Von Erk is in the business of having pedophiles jailed big
>time..breaking up businesses that profit from child sexual
>exploitation..
No, von Erck is in the business of luring moronic, would-be child
molesters into situations that they should know better than to even
attempt to place themselves in. If you are hinting that these men are
somehow connected to organized crime - the ones who *really* profit
from child sexual exploitation - he would already be dead.
>
>It's fatuous to assume relatives and business partners will not thirst
>for revenge..
Please...
You really ar a paranoid kind of man...
>
>> but somehow, that just does not really wash with
>>me...
>
>somehow I doubt his security and bodyguards will be much interested in
>what "washes with you"
And somehow, I really do not care what washes with whom, particularly
*you*...
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:19:11 GMT, Kashmir <no_...@there.c0m> wrote:
>
>>However, as a group, pedophiles tend to be secretive, and not very
>>organized, really.
>
>And your evidence for the extraordinary assertion is?
>
>http://parenting.ivillage.com/gs/gssafety/0,,qvv1,00.html
>
>
>
>Small groups of militant and highly organized child molesters operate
>worldwide through pedophile organizations, whose members claim genuine
>concern for the welfare of children. Their belief is that sex with
>children is harmless; some even claim that sexual relations are
>healthy for children.
>
> These groups' goals include decriminalizing child molestation and
>lowering the age of consent. The actual number of members in these
>organizations is unknown, though one, the Rene Guyon Society, is
>listed in the Gale Encyclopedia of Associations as having 5,000
>members. Other major pedophile organizations include NAMBLA (The North
>American Man-Boy Love Association) and PAN (Pedophile Alert Network)
>in the Netherlands. Members receive monthly magazines and newsletters
>that include seduction techniques and advice on avoiding detection and
>prosecution.
>
> One group's "Lure of the Month" column gives advice on approaching
>and seducing children. In one month's column, soap crayons were
>praised for their effectiveness: "Children undress themselves!"
>NAMBLA's "Entrapment of the Month" column has alerted members to
>covert government child-pornography sting operations.
>
> In one newsletter alone, NAMBLA correctly identified 10 sting
>operations in five different states. In just three years, NAMBLA
>exposed and compromised four federal sting operations as well,
>including Project Looking Glass, Candy's Love Club, Project Sea Hawk
>and Project Borderline.
>
> Clearly, these organizations have connections. In addition to
>attending pedophile conferences and conventions, some child molesters
>meet via the Internet where they may swap methods, success stories,
>even names, descriptions and images of children.
>
> Customs officials indicate that the anonymous nature of Internet
>communication is quickly replacing the printed pedophile newsletter.
>
>While the average child molester does not belong to a pedophile
>organization, it would be foolish not to take seriously any group
>whose members are committed to sexual activity with children. Indeed,
>pedophiles are often difficult to detect and can be found in the most
>unlikely places.
>
> Knowing this, we must provide our children with the tools to
>recognize and avoid potentially abusive individuals and situations.
Again...
I have made three posts, all of which address the *MYTH* of stranger
danger.
As usual, since those posts disagree with your own opinion, you ignore
them...
--
Kashmir
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the
flag and carrying the cross." ~ Sinclair Lewis ~
I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a
guy nailed to two pieces of wood. ~ George Carlin ~
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act ~ George Orwell ~
Kashmir
<us...@example.net> wrote:
>your dichotomy Usenet/real life is absurd..
>
>If folk are jailed they are jailed in real life..
Please...
How many people are you directly responsible for having incarcerated??
>
>
>>
>>B.) Unless you are completely and utterly stupid, no one here knows
>>who you *really* are.
>>
>>C.) I find it difficult to believe that *anyone* takes you seriously
>>enough to make a *serious* threat of death against you.
>>
>>And...
>>
>>D.) Quite often, your attitude, if not your specific words, makes it
>>clear that *you* feel that all pedos and child molesters should be
>>"hunted down and kiiled in the street like a dog..."
>
>My attitude is overt and quite clear..they should be chemically and/or
>surgically castrated and confined in asylums for the criminally
>insane.
>
>In an ideal world they should be subjected to experimental
>psychosurgery to find a lasting cure for their sick urges but
>misguided ethical principles restrict doctors from providing this
>treatment ..even though it has a 95% success rate..
I repeat: You are utterly devoid of any capacity for carrying on a
reasoned, civilized, and above all, intelligent discussion...
Should I provide you with a link that states the reasons why those
types of punishment have exactly the OPPOSITE effeect that you calim
to profess: Protecting children? If you want, you will have to ask.
I will not post anything to you again that I am reasonably certain you
will ignore because it does not fit your moral code...
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>In the abortion battle, however, you had the entire overly-zealous,
>>>>fringe Christian movement rallying. There are some real whack jobs in
>>>>some of those groups. von Erck, I think, has nothing to fear in terms
>>>>of reprisal, unless it is when someone tries to sue him.
>>>>
>>>>I could be wrong,
>>>
>>>no "could be" about it...
>>>Von Erk is in the business of having pedophiles jailed big
>>>time..breaking up businesses that profit from child sexual
>>>exploitation..
>>
>>No, von Erck is in the business of luring moronic, would-be child
>>molesters into situations that they should know better than to even
>>attempt to place themselves in. If you are hinting that these men are
>>somehow connected to organized crime - the ones who *really* profit
>>from child sexual exploitation - he would already be dead.
>>
>>>
>>>It's fatuous to assume relatives and business partners will not thirst
>>>for revenge..
>>
>>Please...
>>
>>You really ar a paranoid kind of man...
>
>
>you live in lala land..
>
>His organization is responsible for pushing 300 convictions..
>
>He has made many enemies..
>>
>>>
>>>> but somehow, that just does not really wash with
>>>>me...
>>>
>>>somehow I doubt his security and bodyguards will be much interested in
>>>what "washes with you"
>>
>>And somehow, I really do not care what washes with whom, particularly
>>*you*...
>
>Yes..it is becoming quite clear narcissistic game player is the extent
>of your commitment..
--
Kashmir
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act ~ George Orwell ~