Sam Sloan fucks kids; AFAIK Tim Taylor doesn't
politi...@gmail.com
nor does it excuse the poor judgment exercised in publishing the Taylor
article.
But I won't be lectured on sexual mores by a child molester.
Bill Brock
205 W. Randolph, Suite 400
Chicago, IL
politi...@gmail.com
I hear the guy likes to litigate.
Justin
this very serious charge? Or are you just an imbecile that likes to slander
people who's opinions you don't agree with because you are incapable of
intelligent argument?
Justin
<politi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116193610....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
politi...@gmail.com
StanB
"Justin" <Justinbac...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1jUhe.1363084$8l.748937@pd7tw1no...
> Why are you calling Sam Sloan a "child-molester"? Do you have any proof of
> this very serious charge? Or are you just an imbecile that likes to
> slander people who's opinions you don't agree with because you are
> incapable of intelligent argument?
>
Sloan's post 'The Story of my Visit to Chantaburi,
Thailand', which appeared on soc.culture.pakistan, June 25 1999 (easily
found by Google search).
Justin
that story that has the slightest air of "child-molestation". Consensual sex
with a 19 year old woman hardly fits the bill, and in Thialand, the culture
is very different than it is here. There aren't a lot of uptight busybody
idiots like you to pass judgement on someone who has relations with someone
younger than themself.
Justin
"StanB" <stan...@comXXXcast.net> wrote in message
news:5p6dnT6s-Kj...@comcast.com...
politi...@gmail.com
http://www.samsloan.com/maesai-v.htm
BEGIN TEXT
When I first saw this girl, her virginity was being offered for sale
for 2000 bhat. (Around $80 US).
I did not avail myself of this opportunity. I left Maesai, but I was
thinking about this girl. When I came back one week later, her price
had come down to 200 bhat. Her virginity had been sold. I took
advantage of this reduction in price.
A Girl in Maesai, Northern Thailand
I find it difficult to imagine such a nice girl being a prostitute.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For some unknown reason, many people have asked me about this girl, so
I will tell her story.
I made three trips to Maesai. The second trip was the first time I saw
this girl. She was sitting on a bench in a house of prostitution. Her
price was 2000 bhat. (Around $80 US). The reason for the high price was
that she was a virgin.
I could afford $80, but I felt that it would not be right for me to
take her virginity like that and then dump her and leave her, so I did
nothing and went back to Bangkok.
While in Bangkok, I kept thinking about this girl. She was not very
beautiful. In fact, she was the least beautiful girl in the entire
whorehouse. Still, there was something noteworthy about her.
Finally, I realized that it had been a mistake for me not to take her
virginity, for the simple reason that, if I did not do it, an hour or
two later some other man was going to come along and pay the price and
he would probably be even worse than me.
So, with that thought in mind, I went back to Maesai.
When I got back there one week later, I found that her price had
dropped. Her price was now only 50 bhat for one hour or 200 bhat for
the night. I asked the reason, but I already knew the answer. The
whorehouse manager explained that she had been a virgin before and, in
the intervening week, her virginity had been sold.
In addition, not only had her price gone down but she was sitting on
the bottom row of benches. There were three rows of benches. The prices
were different for each row. The most beautiful girls were sitting on
the top row and their price was 400 bhat for the night. Girls of
average beauty were sitting in the middle row and their cost was 300
bhat for the night. However, this girl, because she was not very
beautiful, was sitting by herself on the bottom row. Her price was only
200 bhat for the night, or about $8.
Stated differently, by selling her virginity, she went from being the
most expensive girl in the whorehouse to being the cheapest girl in the
whorehouse.
I paid her price of 200 bhat and took her to my room in the guesthouse
up the river. I started to have sex with her.
Before I have sex with any woman, I always eat her pussy. This is my
firm policy. This performs several functions. It makes her sexually
aroused and causes her vagina to expand. It makes her pussy wet for
ease of penetration. It also gives me time to get a strong hard on
myself.
However, when I tried to eat her pussy, she pushed me away and
resisted. Finally, I realized the reason. She was new at this. No man
had ever done to this to her before. She did not understand what I was
trying to do. She was afraid.
However, I was stronger than she was and, when I finally started
licking on her pussy, she relaxed and everything was OK. Then, we had
sexual intercourse.
The next morning, I was tired. I knew than an employee of the
whorehouse would come early in the morning to retrieve her. They were
going to keep a close watch on her to make sure that she did not get
away.
That morning, I was not really in a mood to have sex with her again. I
got up, but I was just resting. I was just looking at her for a while.
Finally, without me saying anything, she asked me to do it again.
This is what I keep remembering about this girl. SHE ASKED ME TO DO IT
AGAIN.
She did not speak a word of English. I know nothing of Burmese or
whatever language she was speaking, but her nods and her gestures and
it perfectly clear. SHE WANTED ME TO DO IT AGAIN.
It is for this reason that I still often think about this girl. This is
the only girl I ever met in a whorehouse and who, having done it with
her once, she asked me to do it again.
And, of course, I did do it with her again. I ate her pussy. This time
there was no resistance. I came inside her again.
Not long after that, there was a knock on the door. The manager of the
whorehouse had arrived to take her back.
If anybody ever sees this girl, please let me know. I think about her
often. I would like to contact her again.
Sam Sloan
END TEXT
http://www.samsloan.com/burmese.htm
Kindly note the following passage
BEGIN SELECTED TEXT
"A young girl from Burma trying to lure me into a further dalliance
with her
The question is: Would you rather have your daughter living this life
style, working in a whore house, or would you rather have her taking
dope while attending junior high school in America?"
END SELECTED TEXT
If Sam hurries, he can change "junior high school" to "high school" or
(what the heck) "college"
Justin
ass-licking dirty whore. Hiring a prostitute does not make you a
"child-molester". The charges against Sam Sloan are frivolous slander and
completely untrue. What part of this are you not comprehending?
<politi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116306960.3...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
politi...@gmail.com
Lend him the money for the legal proceedings at a very high interest
rate, to be repaid by the judgment he is virtually certain to be
awarded. If you're sure you're right, that's your course of action.
Rock and roll.
Justin
where is your "proof" that she was "molested"?
You're just another mental weakling that is incapable of cogent argument
with Sloan, or probably anyone else, so you resort to slandering and
concurring with the slander of others.
I don't agree with everything Sloan says either, but I don't go around
making up things about people and slandering them for no reason other than
losing an argument or dissagreeing with their opinions.
Justin
<politi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116314302.6...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
BarbaraVilliers
BarbaraVilliers
StanB
"BarbaraVilliers" <lou...@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116325552.9...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What a repellant post! Enough to put me off sex for life.
With Sam or with everyone? (Of legal age)
politi...@gmail.com
by a collection of Pokémon hentai?
Off to hemorrhage ELO points in Mpls.
--Mental Weakling
Tyrone Slothrop
Justin wrote:
> And where is your "proof" that this young woman was not of legal age?
And
> where is your "proof" that she was "molested"?
I think there is a simple point that can be made perusing Sloan's
website: Sloan implies he has sexually molested at least one 11-13 year
old prostitute and that said act was illegal in the country he was in.
If this just seems to fantastic or complex for you, let me break it
down for you into the following five components:
1. Sam Sloan implies girl was 11-13 at the time
2. Sam Sloan claims she was a prostitute
3. Sam Sloan implies he had sex with her
4. That this was illegal where he conducted this act
5. That this is molestation
1. Sam Sloan implies girl was 11-13 at the time:
http://www.samsloan.com/burmese.htm
American readers would know that "Junior High" refers to persons aged
11-13.
2. Sam Sloan claims she was a prostitute:
The link to the above page is entitled "A young prostitute from Burma
in Maesai, Thailand"
3. Sam Sloan implies he had sex with her:
Note from the title "...lure me into a *FURTHER* dalliance with her."
Why the word "further?" Because Sloan is saying he already dallied
with her. What reasonable person would think that the way to dally with
a prostitute is to work on the Sunday Times crossword together?
4. That this was illegal where he conducted this act:
Here is what the Thai penal code has to say about sex with 11-13 year
olds.
Section 277 of The Thai Penal Code:
"WHOEVER has sexual intercourse with a girl not yet over fifteen years
of age and not being his own wife, whether such girl shall consent or
not, shall be punished with imprisonment of four to twenty years and
fined between Bt8,000 to Bt40,000.
"If the commission of the offence according to the first paragraph is
committed against a girl not yet over thirteen years of age, the
offender shall be punished with imprisonment of seven to twenty years
and fine of Bt14,000 to Bt40,000 or imprisonment for life."
5. That this is molestation:
The American Heritage Dictionary defines "molestation" as:
"To subject to unwanted or improper sexual activity."
illegal implies improper.
Q.E.D.
politi...@gmail.com
Weak, weak, weak!
--M.W.
Justin
Justin
<politi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116342114.6...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Justin
for a mind like yours "Tyrone".
"Tyrone Slothrop" <lttyrone...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116342563....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Justin
Justin
"BarbaraVilliers" <lou...@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116325552.9...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tyrone Slothrop
molested at least one 11-13 year old prostitute and that said act was
illegal in the country he was in."
Since he himself is the one implying this, I consider this implication
more a "self-admission" than a "proof." With a proof, the claim has to
be true whether Sloan wants it to be or not. With a self-admission,
the claim might be false but Sloan wished us to believe it was true.
I think I know the difference between self-admission and proof.
My main point was not to *prove* that Sloan actually committed the act
he implies, but to show that regardless of whether he actually did it
or not, he would like us and the readers of his web page to believe he
did it. His desire exhibits a high degree of moral turpitude.
Vince Hart
his statements would be admissible against him in a court of law as
evidence that he committed the acts he claimed to have admitted. I
don't see any way to intepret his comment about junior high school as
anything other than a comment about the girl's age.
Vince Hart
politi...@gmail.com
WHITE:
1. Nf3 "according to Kramnik" (I do pick up main line of Grünfeld &
Slav)
BLACK
1. e4 - Berlin
1. d4 - QGD Tartakover
Tyrone Slothrop
"proof" than mere "implication". For example, these statements might
be admitted in court, but Sloan could always claim he lied about the
entire thing on his website, for his own reasons, and he had asked
these underaged girls to pose for the pictures only for the sake of
humor. He could also claim that these girls were not underaged and
only look so to Western eyes because they are Burmese and leave the
prosecution to try to prove otherwise.
As I said earlier, whether or not Sloan could be convicted in a court
over his own admissions, the fact that he makes the implied claim at
all on his website still shows him to have a licentious state of mind.
As Bill Brock would say, Sam Sloan would like all of us to at least
think he is a "child molester".
parrt...@cs.com
Tryone Slothrop writes that Sam Sloan "implies" he had sex with a Mae
Sai prostitute.
The truth is 180 degrees the opposite. He "imnplies," indeed
nearly states outright, that he did NOT have sex with the girl.
"Dalliance" means flirting, toying, playing -- not the other thing.
To put the matter right, Sam claims to have had sex with an
older experience female prostitute in Chantaburi.
Thus far, there is not a scintilla of evidence -- absolutely
nothing -- that Sam ever molested a child. None.
parrt...@cs.com
Tyrone Slothrop
parrt...@cs.com wrote:
> Thus far, there is not a scintilla of evidence -- absolutely
> nothing -- that Sam ever molested a child. None.
Then explain this to me -- why is this junior-high school age girl
(Sloan's words) having her picture taken in her bra by Sloan?
http://www.samsloan.com/burmese2.htm
Justin
you can't recall (or never knew in the first place) what the premis of this
thread is? Since it appears that you are, I will explain it to you again,
like I would have to with most pre-adolescents. We were discussing whether
or not there was proof that Sloan is a child molester. Or if he was just
being slandered capriciously. I hope I didn't use too many "biggie" words
that you are having trouble with.
Justin
"Tyrone Slothrop" <lttyrone...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> I think I know the difference between self-admission >and proof.
I don't think you know your head from your gay ass Tyrone. Get an adult to
explain what the topic of a thread is to you in the future and try to stick
to that topic.
Justin
who failed grade 9 so many times she was of legal age before she got to
grade 10.
Justin
"Vince Hart" <Vin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116372185....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Justin
you still haven't got the theme here through your thick skull yet.
The author of this thread refered to Sloan as a "child-molester". I replied
asking the author if he/she/it had any proof of that very serious charge.
End of story. This had nothing to do with court procedures, Sloan's
provocative story telling, the weather in Alaska, etc. Get the idea, or will
I have to attempt to explain it to you a FOURTH time?
Justin
"Tyrone Slothrop" <lttyrone...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116388376.0...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Justin
back when I fuck her in the ass?
Justin
"Tyrone Slothrop" <lttyrone...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116390890.1...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
politi...@gmail.com
her hair back when I fuck her in the ass?>>
Simple: otherwise, she wouldn't feel a thing.
BarbaraVilliers
sex. Incidently the original author is wrong about women always
responding to oral sex. That might be a physical reaction but it does
not indicate sexual desire as such, more likely wishful thinking on the
part of the male involved.
BarbaraVilliers
Tyrone Slothrop
parrt...@cs.com wrote:
> Thus far, there is not a scintilla of evidence -- absolutely
> nothing -- that Sam ever molested a child. None.
You are a good advocate for Sam Sloan. I can picture you in the
courtroom sitting next to the defendant. Even axe murderers have
advocates that vigorously protest claim of guilt.
BUT WHERE IS SAM SLOAN IN ALL OF THIS? WHY DOES HE REMAIN SILENT? WHY
DOESN'T HE JUST COME OUT ONCE AND FOR ALL AND SAY: "I HAVE NEVER ONCE
HAD SEX WITH A GIRL I WAS NOT MARRIED TO THAT WAS UNDER THE AGE OF
CONSENT FOR THE COUNTRY I WAS IN."
Such a simple statement, yet I can not find it in all the archives of
rgcp.
There are generally two reasons to not respond to charges such as are
being made about Sam Sloan.
1) Because they are so absurd as to be ridiculous and not worthy of
response.
2) Because for various reasons, he does not wish to deny the charges
(e.g., they could be true, he wishes people to think they are true, he
wishes people to wonder if they are true or not, etc.)
I think (1) can be ruled out since his webpages are enough to cause a
reasonable person to question if Sam Sloan engaged in sex with girls
that were below the age of consent of the countries he visited.
So then why doesn't Sam Sloan want to deny, once and for all, that he
has never once had sex with a girl that was below the age of consent of
the countries he visited?
parrt...@cs.com
>You are a good advocate for Sam Sloan. I can picture you in the
courtroom sitting next to the defendant. Even axe murderers have
advocates that vigorously protest claim of guilt. BUT WHERE IS SAM
SLOAN IN ALL OF THIS? WHY DOES HE REMAIN SILENT?> Tyrone Slothrop
Tyrone Slothrop improves. He asks a legitimate question, though
predicating it on a false assumption.
I am in no way Sam Sloan's advocate. I never stated my own
beliefs about his conduct. I merely made a simple observation: the
man has been accused of child molestation without a scintilla of proof
proffered.
Indeed, to the extent that the material he presents contains any
"implications," they are that he did NOT have, say, sex with the
Burmese girl in the picture. He wrote of a "dalliance" which does not
involve sexual intercourse.
Still, Mr. Slothrop wants to know why Sam is so signally
silent. Which he is.
Why doesn't Sam simply write, "I've never had sexual
intercourse with a girl under the age of consent in any country"?
If we listen to the critics of Sam, then we must assume, given
their claims that he is a pathological liar, he is not constrained from
writing such a denial because of any sense of primal honesty which
prevents lying.
So why the silence?
In the past Sam has issued strong denials of wrongdoing and
often proven his case. The response has been: he doth protest too
much; he doth denieth too much. That kind of thing.
The main difference between Stan Booz, an ex-marine who indulged
in all kinds of escapades, and Sam Sloan, who founded the Sexual
Freedom League, is that Sam writes about his escapades and Stan
doesn't.
Indeed, when I denied Stan Booz's lie that I recently lobbied
for the job of Chess Life editor, the usual suspects belted out that I
was protesting too much, denying too much.
When I stated that to give up my exceedingly sweet life over here
in Malaysia for Cross-to-Bear, the usual chorus belted out that I was
protesting too much, denying too much.
When I noted how my children attend a demanding British curriculum
private school with elocution (diction and accent)lessons for the girls
so they will speak as did the Queen's Mum and never ever sound like
the hussies Stateside, the usual chorus belted out that I was
protesting too much, denying too much.
So, too, Sam has NOTHING TO GAIN by blanket denial, which is the
only productive form of denial. There will be the usual voices -- the
predictable voices -- shouting that he is protesting and denying too
much. So he can't win.
Smears stick. The awful thing is that the above rhetorical
device arrayed against Sam or myself (two peas in a pod?) is always
effective because you cannot prove a negative. Sam can never prove he
did NOT do something.
All that can be said with certainty thus far is the following:
Sam has been accused of child molestation without a scintilla of proof
offered in support of the charge. He paid prostitutes in the sex trade,
as did millions of American soldiers stationed abroad. If he is guilty
of child molestation, so are they.
parrt...@cs.com
>You are a good advocate for Sam Sloan. I can picture you in the
courtroom sitting next to the defendant. Even axe murderers have
advocates that vigorously protest claim of guilt. BUT WHERE IS SAM
parrt...@cs.com
>What's that say about Larry? Peas in a pod?> Stan Booz
You have the usual trash from Stan Booz.
I am, as I predicted, accused of offering a defense for paedophilism
and child molestation because I stated that Sam Sloan has been accused
of without evidence, let alone proof, being adduced.
That is par for the rgcp course.
One Mark Houlsby from England has decided to turn the discussion
into a courtroom proceeding by using the legal definition of
"evidence." In my Webster's, that is the fourth entry. The second
entry is "something that makes another thing evident." "Evident" is
defined tas "easy to see or perceive; clear; obvious; plain, apparent"
and is said to connote "the existence of external signs" as opposed to
"apparent" which is said to connote a matter that is deduced.
I repeat: Sam Sloan is accused of child molestation without any
evidence or proof being adduced.
Mr. Houlsby's attempt to smear Mr. Sloan by using a courtroom
understanding of evidence can be employed as a tactic against anyone.
By that standard, Stan Booz could be accused of pining for those
Olympic Garden male dancers and committing indecent public acts. The
evidence is that he goes to bars with such creatures cavorting about.
Mind you, employing Mr. Houlsby's standard, it would be up to a court
to decide whether the evidence is probative or admissible. Hogwash.
I made no such harge against Mr. Booz because by the common
meaning of the word "evidence," let alone the word "proof," none such
exists against him.
BarbaraVilliers
I couldn't give a damn who would want to have sex with me. More to the
point why do you feel obliged to make such an immature puerile remark
to an opinion I voiced. Are you a troll? Or just a poor communicator?
BarbaraVilliers
Justin
isn't fair is it Barbara?
Justin
"BarbaraVilliers" <lou...@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116489545.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
BarbaraVilliers
I doubt that you are attractive to either sex, your manners are soooo
common!!!!!
barbaraVilliers
Justin
you are a hideous, frigid, good-fon-nothing, bitch. You know nothing about
me or who finds me attractive.
Justin
"BarbaraVilliers" <lou...@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116515574....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Matt Nemmers
Methinks the infamous Jasonbot has recreated another alias yet
again....
Regards,
Matt
BarbaraVilliers
I think you are right.
BarbaraVilliers
Aurora
By your choice of language it is easy to see why you have to come here
and abuse other people, no woman or man (or any other animal for that
matter) would find you attractive or touch you with a barge pole!
Gary
Justin
poles* Gary. Stop wasting good bandwidth in this chess related usenet and
join a gay/lesbian usenet where you belong.
Justin
"Aurora" <ga...@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116780256.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Aurora
The old adage "it takes one to know one" springs to mind!!
Gary
Justin
"Aurora" <ga...@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116872293.2...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...