Basking in the Radiance of Madness

Demosthenes AKA Jacob Detring was once one of the loudest, most aggressive and radical voices at GirlChat...until he started making enemies from his own "brothers and sisters"- as he referred to them.

I admit it's rather nice to tick off the names of some of those on my personal top ten list of filthy pedophiles. It makes me happy. It makes me smile. But I'll smile even bigger when the other 7 are revealed. Can you guess who they are? MY list may not match your list. I guess we all have different reasons, eh?

* Winston Smith
* Dylan Thomas
* Demosthenes

Jacob was so easy to despise. From his history of making scathing flames directed at his own, to the scathing flames directed at us, to his support for giving drugs to little girls to prevent them from going through puberty, to his frequent puffed-up diatribes, support for child pornography and calls for Revolution - Demosthenes was impossible to ignore.

Who could forget this?

"Shame? I am very proud of who and what I am."

"I make no excuses or apologies, nor do I hold back."

"Most of my life, the one thing that I always seemed to have going for me when nothing else did was my linguistic ability, my ability to dance and play with written (and sometimes spoken) word. Being my, to me, singularly most outstanding gift, I worked and honed it until it could also be my most potent weapon."

"Violence and force can spurn people to a desired action, but words can make those same people to take the ideal behind that action into their heart and make it their own. As has been said many times throughout history, words are power.. and I very much enjoy being powerful."

Of course he also said this:

"modelling pictures are legal, and "feeling up" your LGF may not be but if it is desired and accepted by her then there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. We all know this, whether we dance around the "brake no law" stance or not"

And:

"We are all that stands between children and a world where innocence of any kind can not exist. Yes, innocence can thrive when we are involved with a child, even when that involvement becomes sexual. We are children's last hope, and they are our salvation"

And:

"You want to know how I overcame some of those obstacles that are dominating your psyche? I did it by letting sanity go and basking in the radiance of madness. Sanity is an illusion."

Jacob Detring believed that children needed to be taught about sex - by having sex with adults, otherwise they would become dysfunctional adolescents, then dysfunctional adults. Like him.

He thought people would believe him when he said:

"My only goal in all of this is to create the system that allows children to flourish and meet their potential. I don't care about getting anything for myself. I'm for the complete sexual liberation of youth, as well, but I don't have any personal gain in mind with it."

After he had said this:

"Trust me.. you don't get away with it and people don't find it cute. The mother of a girlfriend that I did have like that at that age threatened to call the police on me if I didn't stay away from her daughter"

He wanted to be a leader:

"They have agendas, but their battle plan is one of histrionics and fear. Our battle plan would have to be such that they didn't see the effects of it until it were too late for them to do anything about it.

They want someone to label as the leader? I'll take the honor. I'm arrogant enough to enjoy the thought of my name being the one that they curse when the day comes that they realize that they lost their war before it was started. They are so foolish that they don't even take into consideration that in our numbers are some of the most intelligent people in the world.

One does what one must. I have existed in obscurity and shadow my entire life, but I've always known what it would come to if anything were to change. Do I want to be the leader? Desire has little to do with it, as I don't pray for that sort of responsibility. The issue is what one is willing to do. A leader is required for a movement to exist, as such, I will do what I must. I have spent my life existing but not living, and if my life is the required payment for the the world to change, then so be it. Death is something that I have never been afraid of.. living has.

As I have said before, the win against them must be sudden and it must be decisive. We can not fight to merely win the first battle, we must make the first battle the only one by winning so completely that there no chance of the next one."

Jacob abandoned the war and scurried away before attending the first battle. Outwitted I suppose you could say. Or perhaps he just found himself under a boot. Yes, it really was just that simple after all.

"In the end, there is something that I feel for the antis stronger than hate. The strongest feeling that I hold toward those people is pity.

I pity them because they are varelse, and they will never be able to understand the joy that we feel. They will never be able to love children as we do......But that pity will not save them from me when the time comes for me to stand and take the inevitable war to them.

They war against us now and stand basking in their small victories, but they can not conceive of the day approaching when their time will be over and the world will no longer have a place for them. Their hypocritical and disgusting cry is "protect the children", ours will be simply "For the Children!".

"Protect children" is a disgusting cry? Only someone whose sole motivation is sexual pleasure at the expense of an innocent child could say such a thing. "For the children" is pedospeak for "I'm molesting kids for their own good"

But, thanks to Wikisposure's boot perhaps we've now heard the last of Jacob's nauseating pontificating pomposity. When all is said and done he's really no more than what he said he was ..... Jacob Detring is "Pedo by Design"

HT Jacey

Wikisposure Day

We have been very impressed with some of the work done on Wikisposure in the past but they've truly outdone themselves this time. They've taken the Alice Day occasion to expose some very depraved pedophiles. No longer will this be known as Alice Day. From now on, it will be known as Wikisposure Day!

Please preview the new additions below and click the links to read the full Wikis.

FortyOne aka Steven Blair Nichols of Pennsylvania

Around that time i started amassing a huge collection of illegal porn, which i deleted completey the day before i turned 18 - just to be that much more carefull..

I dont share your "ewwwww" feelings about my parents knowing.. Of course im big on incest

Elminster Trueheart aka Keith Cronin of Pennsylvania

There was a girl who was three years old, and she loved me with all of her heart. I couldn't help but love her back. She loved cuddling, kissing and snuggling. I can't count the times I lost myself in her love and we would kiss passionately. I loved her so much it hurt. I never knew what that meant before then, but I do now.

onemilligram aka James Warren Gray of Ohio currently in Egypt

My desire for lg's has been as strong as super glue since I was like 5 or something, sometimes it goes away and I can actually look at a lg for a short period of time and just admire her beauty without the nearly unbearable desire to do something unhealthy. I love my wife more than anything and I love being intimate with her but the thirst, this godamned hunger is never satisfied and that demon inside me wants me to say FUCK IT and do something crazy.

captainzen aka Alexander Baldal of the Netherlands

Now over 60, been comforted by a 12 year old, so heavenly, so divine that I never regret that she was gone, happy instead that I had her love for a awhile. Dont cry over spilled milk.

Demosthenes aka Jacob Detring of Tennessee

That's why I'm staying with..
...the 10 and under crowd for my own in-home modelling shots, they haven't been indoctrinated in "decent, virtuous, and moral" like a 14 year old tends to be. ^_~

Poisontears aka Alia Loren Jacobson of New York

all of my fantasies...
...are violent, and include rape, torture, killing, etc. And in all of my fantasies i am male (well, i guess that facillitates the rape thing.) Oddly enough, in some of my fantasies (in which i am not actually involved) there are two children, one raping and mutilating the other.

Cephaloped aka Daniel Woodward Heath of Ohio

...I was convicted of "illegal use of a minor in nudity oriented material or performance." I did time, was on parole for a while, and have to register as a sex offender....
...they sometimes lump various things together as they did in the law I was convicted under....

D aka David Weiss Richardson of Texas

Let's assume bondage and sodomy consists of lightly tying the child down, possibly drugging him a little so he doesn't struggle, and inserting thin objects (say, a pen or something thinner) into his anus.
While I cannot endorse restraining an infant or inserting objects into his anus without a valid reason (e.g. protect child from harm or take a temperature if he has a fever), it's not "the worst possible scenario" when it comes to child abuse

dragonwhip aka Michael Davidson Baskett of Virginia

If sex could enter into it without any threat of prison, i.e. if whe world were more relaxed about love and sexuality, then I would love to make sweet love to a young girl, tickling her and making her laugh, feeling her warm, soft skin against mine, but all I can do is dream. Sucks, doesn't it?

Fachy aka Ahmad Ali of Maryland

Where I live there are alot of street kids, you find them outside mosques begging or cleaning cars' windows at stop light and so on... my idea basically is to be nice to one of those once, and increase it gradually to achieve some.. ahem... desirable outcomes. Let's examine this in details assuming the GEORGOUS girl I just saw today outside the mosque... she was about 6-7, had the cutest face ever with a veil covering hair, and was selling tissues I think

Greenfly aka Aubrey Eugene Davis of Florida

if you were on death row and instead to a last meal, or got a last sexual explicit act that you could perform on anyone you like at any age. Who would you pick, how old and what would the act be? You can have only one pick, but perform more than one act.
I would go with my 13 yr old 1st cousin once removed, which i still believe is my 2nd cousin, but that's for another post, I would first perform oral sex on her and finish with a traditional Missionary style, me on top.

soulfulsongbird aka Sarah Louise Arney of Texas

I can tell I am in the right place ,I love little girls ,no kiding,they love me back ,the little they are the more they love me .I teach six & seven year olds at church I am in haven when I am with my class ,I am in hell when not with them.I love to see games at school VB ...,i LOVE to see play's at church & school,do we see A trind here If there are little girls somplace look around I am there

Sibelius aka Peter-Gene Budarick of South Australia

Loving children is the ONLY thing that makes this animal, homo sapiens, a human being, and we would want to kill that?! by finding a cure?!

Tamachan aka Bryan McMullon of Canada

When I was fired from my daycare job, I was taken away from someone very special to me. It nearly devastated me, but it crushed her, and there was nothing I could do about it.

toby/tobs aka Thomas Toby Rutan of Florida

my AoA is 6-12 years old

Skull Dander aka Clinton Robert Lambobard of Texas

I would have to say --in all honesty-- that it doesn't matter how young or old the little cutie is, so long as we don't get caught.

Happy Wikisposure Day to all!!!

Alice has once again been rescued from the forces of evil. Thank you Wikisposure!

Remember Winston Smith!

Once upon a time there was this blogger.....

And so begins the story of Matthew Woodward aka Winston101Smith, Debatecrime, Lepidopterist, Nympholepticose and many other names.

You see Matt is a filthy pedophile. Not only that, he's a rather stupid, militant filthy pedophile I had the misfortune of 'meeting' when he decided to make a target of my daughter.

Daydreamer of Oz was a blogger, just a blogger minding her own business and writing her opinions about whatever struck her fancy at the time. She didn't know about people like Matthew Woodward...........a crazed filthy pedophile proud of his perversion. Until she became his target that is. Until he decided to inflict his ugliness upon her -- an unwanted intrusion into her life. Matt changed everything.

He had a plan you see -- He was going to change the world! He was going to do this by pushing himself upon people who didn't want him. When he didn't receive the result he wanted -- immediate acceptance for pedophilia, he would intentionally try to arouse emotional responses from his targeted victims. Those who had encountered pedo terrorists before simply bashed him around a bit and were done with him. Those who hadn't, tried to explain to him why his desires were unacceptable. Sometimes he was met with fury, sometimes shock, sometimes dismay -- but always in the end he was banned.

Not one to accept defeat so easily, Matt would call on his pals at GirlChat to bail him out "I'm under attack!" he'd whine. Winston's pedo-posse would always ride in to save the day -- a coordinated attack. They mistakenly believed they could "open one mind at a time" and it would therefore be worth it.

Winston

I visited a blog by the daydreamerofOz character - who is a female - and I posted something which was not a flame. The next I knew they were up in flames and due to my posting inoffensive messages on other blogs of people who hate us naturally, they all seem to have banded together to form the ridiculous and false site Absolute Zero

Baldur

These blogwars are a good place to get some experience in presenting our arguments, and will also convince a few people to change their beliefs

slvrspun

Even extreme irony, even when it is pointed out right in front of them, even in their non-frothing moments, even under threat of pain or death. Some people are just fucking stupid, and the best responses are to either avoid them and not waste one's own time, or to disable them or kill them.

Enigma

I'm starting to feel like we should stop wasting our time being nice, and just do whatever it takes to win. We need to ram it down their throats and force them to accept us, not plead with reasoned arguments. These people do whatever they're told and parrot whatever they're told to believe. They'd be just as happy to endorse pedophilia if that was the strongest message they were receiving. They have no brains or minds of their own. They want controlling, and it's about time we gave them some.

99% of (non-pedo) humanity is lowlier than slime, once they pass puberty. We are the superior race. There is no negitiating with backward apes. The only way to have the world we want is to shut them up once and for all

Rookiee

we're supposed to be promoting love, not hate. Maybe we should listen more to what the anti-pedos are saying about us rather than just knocking it all off as "well, they hate us, so fuck'em"

ILGO

Rookie, you ignorant slut! ;)

When she (like others have before her) made the decision to make their blogs a one way street accepting only sycophants and rejecting anything said by us or said in our favor whilst joining the campaign to force our opinions off the blogosphere she became an enemy

Stitches77-- I really don't have anything to comment about with regard for her. I think she's mistaken to be so supportive of her daughter without checking into the facts for herself, but that's MOM and she's going to listen to her daughter over everyone else no matter what happens. Can you really blame her?

Winston

She's the bitch that brought up such a whore!!!!!!

Are you reading this, sick bitch????

Demosthenes

Dreamer of Oz is a coward and a bully, too scared of what would happen if she didn't censor us and allowed us to be heard alongside her that she refers to anything that she receives as hate mail.

I must agree on one point, though. Debatecrime does not help our cause. I may be militant, but he is a loose cannon that usually manages to serve the purpose of forcing the rest of us to follow in his wake and clean up the mess. Slvrspun's only problem was taking the last step and adding "or kill them", and Minstrel's only problem was using the word "bitch" to refer to this hate monger

SplinterLife

Trolls usually come to you -- in this case, we came to HER. She obviously doesn't want to hear anything from us, and I think it is smart for all parties involved to oblige her.

LGsinmyheart

Anyway, I believe we should continue to send her comments, as many people as possible, as often as needed. Why???

There are three possible options:

1) She continues to censor us; for which everything she says about us will not be anymore than crying wolf and not showing the evidence. Yes, people can do that for a loooooong time and suceed; but eventually it gets boring for the audience. So the more she claims "hate letters, hate letters, hate letters", the more paranoid and void of arguments she will look, even to fellow antis, and they will desert her.

2) She gets tired and stops the censorship. ===> we win.

3) She gets tired and abandons the project, seeing that we will NOT stop from at least trying to express the truth. I disagree with Minstrel (and Heinlein) in this: often truth needs to be repeated, even over and over. If she only gets fan mail, she might not get tired - if she gets opposition, even if she censors it, her liver is going to suffer a little. And I like the prospect of antis' livers to suffer.

End result whatever happens: we win!!

Debatecrime

She is just a nasty bitch that likes to use the lie that she is being bullied as a weapon against anyone she hates. Much like the way all evil women have been taught to behave.

Demosthenes

Perhaps the most intriguing part of it all is that you posted this hate-group rhetoric on a public blog and really expected nothing but support. I see that you are a mother of 2. I do feel incredibly sorry for your children, and I wish them the best luck in overcoming a toxic home environment run by someone who such a vocal advocate of hate and prejudice.

Very cute that you moderate comments, by the way. Censorship is but a stepping stone along the path to fascist dictatorship. Sieg Heil, madame.

ILGO

We Paederotics have learned from the lessons of history all we really have to do is wait them out -- the fools! Did they really delude themselves into thinking it was only about sex? Projection much? While they and their third spouse are shopping the children back and forth in between busy schedules and big screen televisions we're the ones those children will turn to.

dannywyatt

If your tired of pedophiles imposing themselves on you- deal with it- cause if you can't find a way to suck-it-the-fuck-up then your time will come in which you'll suffer like the little twerp you are.

I'm not a hater, but a hater of haters.

Again if you want to equate me to the likes of a murderer, rapist, terrorist, you name it then expect the same when I come to find your ass.

Winston

let's just catch one and rape the bastard silly with a truncheon and then set fire to their balls, followed by castration and a penectomy torture for an extended period of time. it would make me smirk :>/)

LGsinmyheart

Socrates said that his purpose in life was to be like a mosquito in a hot summer noon: to bother society in the comfort of its self-deceiving lies and wake up its most alert elements. The sleeper gets incredibly annoyed, and chases and chases the mosquito around them. The mosquito, meanwhile, has the wildest fun of their life, with their sound, and biting and standing on the sleeper, and sucking the blood thereof.

Of course, the danger is, sometimes the sleeper kills the mosquito... as Athens did to Socrates...

But I will not stop being the mosquito.

I do have fun doing it, really.

Enigma

I know the antis are assholes and they have an infuriating way of ignoring logic and reason in favor of their own prejudices.

You have created virulent new enemies for us through your lack of politesse.

I am in favor of bringing the battle to the antis instead of letting them bring it to us. I think the best defense is a strong offense. I think we need to attack them in ways that will force them to reconsider their prejudices. But not this way. From my perspective it looks like you, LGsinmyheart, and a couple of others broke away from the pack and decided to do something rash and unplanned, and now it's going badly for you and you're looking for help.

Disengage. You've stirred up the hornet's nest to the point that you're only making it worse for yourself by continuing to jab at it.

Demosthenes

They had some great loss of an adult love as a child, or had it withheld from them completely, and now they are jealous of any child that does have it. The most disturbing part of it all is that while they are actively parading around and shouting about the evils of us, the truth is that they harbor secret hatred of children for having the love that they feel that they deserve, and us for giving it to children whom they wholely undeserving.

As far as playing games with them goes, however.. well, some of us are just watching them scurry around and letting them have enough rope to hang themselves with. When that particular subset of our numbers are ready, the real fun and games will begin.

Baldur

These assholes are lying. Others have discussed this before - even Winston's initial post was polite and informative. These Antis are liars, like all Antis before them - we cannot trust a word they say

Minstrel

As for calling people like that "bitch" and "asshole" and "brainless shit-head" and so on, in messages posted here:

"Words were made for use, and the fault lies in deserving them." - Thomas Paine

Enigma

You might not want to hear it, but you guys are LOSING on Blogspot because the antis have the market cornered on public relations. What can you do to present your side of the story any better? You heard them. They're not interested in debate. Neither is the average Joe who's browsing through

Why not register a non-profit organization called something like American Council for Sexual Values? It's a nice friendly name that sounds like it'd have a message a lot of antis want to hear. Of course, there's no explicit mention of just what kind of "sexual values" this organization would be advocating. Use it as a mouthpiece for studies done by folks like John Money, Judith Levine, Rind et al., and so forth. It's cheap to set up a non-profit organization, and as such, it could receive donations. Those donations could be used to fund political action committees, buy advertising on network television and newspapers, you name it. Nothing blatantly pro-pedophilia, of course. Just press releases such as "Studies show effect of sex during childhood can be positive." and "Correlation found between late age of first sexual experience and trouble with relationships in adult life." Get it into the public's consciousness that way, and that'll open the door a crack.

It's all about appearances. Instead of waiting for them to approve of our naked, honest appearance as we are (hell will freeze sooner), we must make them see us the way we want them to.

Is it dishonest? Yes. Is it manipulative? Yes. Is it mind control? Yes. Is it all the things we accuse them of doing against us? Yes. But we can't say we believe in our cause and then say we have to leave certain options off the table. If we really believe in what we're doing, if we really believe it's for the good of the children, then just as they will use any means at their disposal, so must we. If we want to win, we'll have to do what works, not what's fair or nice.

Love2uall

Daydreamer, you seem to be interested in politics and the injustices that are happening in this world.
I am also.
Please don't close your mind because something is relatively new to you and/or sounds anything other than what you are used to see or think.
Read Girl Chat for a while and you might see some quite interesting conversations there, and you'll also see we, for most of us, if not all of us there, are not necessarilly for sexual exploitation of children.

These are all people who want to claim the title "childlover" or girllover". Would you trust your child around that? Rookiee tried to reign them in, "this is not the way to gain acceptance" but it didn't stop them. They invited us to check them out. We did. We were horrified by what we found.

Enigma

Children can consent to being touched. This is obvious, except maybe to a daydreamer from Oz. If you ask a child "Do you want me to spank you?" she'll say no. Why? Because spanking doesn't feel good. Duh. Of course, most parents who spank their kids don't bother to get their consent in the matter, and even if the child says no, she'll most likely get spanked anyway. Now take a child who hasn't been taught by adults that pleasure is bad and dangerous. If you ask her "Do you want me to fondle you?" she'll say yes (assuming she likes you, of course!). Why? Because it feels good. Duh. If she hasn't been brainwashed with arbitrary ideas of "right" and "wrong," then of course she's going to assume that what feels good is right, and what feels bad is wrong. Makes sense, right? If only grownups could leave well enough alone.

If we're not loving children for self-serving reasons—and I don't believe most of us are—then we're loving them because we feel it's "for their own good." And there we have it: we're in the same boat as their parents. The only difference is that we have different ideas about what's in a child's best interest.

I told Rookiee back in the day

"Cough up Winston and I'll go away. Harbor him and pay the consequences"

Winston, just like Rookiee pushed the wrong buttons on the wrong person. He wanted attention. He should've listened to Rookiee when he said "Be careful what you wish for guys"

Of course, as always, there's a lesson to be learned here. Some might say it would be to not accost strangers on the internet. Some might say pedophile terrorism reached it's peak and we must remain watchful for the latest tactics. Some might say there's no going back after you open a can of worms. Either way - I win, they lose. They need to stay inside their pedo den and keep their filthy pedo mouths shut. And as always, Remember Winston Smith!

Visit Wikisposure to read more about this filthy pedophile Matthew Woodward

Graphics by Jacey

If it walks like a duck......

Hey, remember that crazy Aussie Pedohead we saw on video a few months ago? You know, the one that reminded us so much of Nigel? Well, he just lost an appeal BOO HOO.

His name is Geoffrey Leonard and he's 73. In 1990 he was convicted of sexual assault against two brothers, then 12 and 16 years old for which he served 3 years in prison.

In 2006 he was before the court again charged with possession of 400 child pornography images. He pled guilty.

Then he appealed. Now his appeal application has been dismissed due to the fact that Geoffrey, being the brilliant pedohead that he is....posted an edited version of the statements made by those two boys he molested so many years ago on his website.

Geoff lost his appeal because of it.......and now BoyChat is so very nice to share that site that cost him his appeal.....with others by linking to a mirror site of it. (The actual site is long gone) I recommend you not bother. It's huge and it's nothing more than pedobabble and just as incoherent as Nigel Oldfield, Jd420 and danyfreak. It's actually painful to read so I'll save you the trouble and show you a bit of it here. This is just a small list of Geoffrey-isms:

• The poor kid who reaches 16 and who is innocent faces a life where he will never truly lose that innocence. He will never be truly sexually aware. he will never possess real sexual skill and his sexual relationships will always be difficult. The age of 16 is far too late to start learning about sex.


• If we give kids bread and honey in kindergarten, they will love the stuff from then on......What I am advocating is that, starting in kindergarten, kids should be taught how to masturbate.


• The thing is to catch the kids before their ideas become fixed


• I would go so far as to say that I strongly suspect that most people in our society are child sexual offenders, and that all but the unfortunate few have been sexually abused.


• People in authority do not like sex.


• We are a minority group that behaves sexually in the way that we do because we have no other choice.


• I firmly believe that kids should be taught to have sex from caring and skilled older partners.


• Christianity has attempted to abolish sex


• The ability to have good sex does not come out of the clear blue sky. It has to be learned.


• Sex is complicated.

Geoffrey obviously has issues. Look at a portion of a letter he wrote to one of the boys:

What we did is considered to be the ultimate act of intimacy. God has joined us in an act which at the time seemed a little clumsy & painful but in retrospect was like entering the gates of heaven

And as if that's not enough he posted the boys statements to police about what Geoff did to them. He edited it first of course then left this comment

In addition there were a few charges relating to his 12 year old brother, one instance of oral sex and a couple of instances of masturbation. Hardly monstrous acts. And the whole thing is hardly the crime of the century.

Three years in prison and Geoffrey still has no insight into his own behavior does he? He still has no recognition of the boundaries that exist between people or the realization that....well that he has issues. But it reminded me so much of

28's statement:

Erotic encounters, involving no penetration, should be at worst minor annoyances.

and Demosthenes who thought it acceptable to give drugs to a child to prevent them from going through puberty.....for his own sexual gratification.

Or Abraxas who was oblivious to the psychological discomfort a child experienced when forced to urinate in front of her classmates.

Or Vespucci who cops a feel of a sleeping 12 year old boy

Or Lindsay Ashford who believes 6 month old babies can consent to sex and is attracted to little girls because they are ripe

Or Olive Fweak who thinks message boards keep him from raping children.

Or Jack McClellan who took pictures of little girls and posted them on a pedophile website telling fellow perverts where to find them

Or Zlurker who said

I do not think we need to feel bad about giving in to the charms of beautiful girls. If we do not, then someone else will anyway

Or Nigel Leigh Oldfield who said

You must know, by now, that I will break laws that I view as unjust and I am willing to accept the consequences. And, no, the families, of which you speak would not have a cat-in-hells chance of legal action, even if I had pumped pints onto to their little cherubs (feel free to contact some and let them have my email)

We all view Geoffrey Leonard as a total lunatic I'm sure. Watching him in the video it's hard to believe he hadn't already been committed somewhere isn't it? But are his beliefs any different than all of these other pedo activists that we've had the misfortune of crossing paths with? I'll let you decide and why don't you compare your findings with those of Febri-Chan

with a little editting and dash of commentary to guide the viewers' perception, they take everything out of context and twist every single thing he said to make it sound like the guy is as "batshit" as every should think.......Anyway, the guy didn't seem crazy or evil to me because I know in my gut that he was probably goaded into acting that way by some vulture of a reporter who was patiently and antagonistically waiting for the guy to snap.

Indeed.

Pedofreaks Speak - for Rookieeee

Now Rookieeeee, I have tons of examples I could point out to you, but I thought I'd give you a fresh illustration of the thought distortion that goes on in your community. They/you? are too entrenched in this way of thinking. It's all around you if you'll only open your eyes and see it.

It starts with a news story that captures the eyes of the activist pedovores:

Youth gang rape reported in Milwaukee

MILWAUKEE - It began with a crush, police said, and turned into one of the most shocking crimes in Milwaukee's long, violent summer: an 11-year-old girl was sexually assaulted by as many as 20 boys while a 16-year-old girl she was romantically interested in watched and coached her.

The 16-year-old and a 15-year-old boy have been charged in juvenile court in the alleged attack, which authorities said took place Monday in a house on the city's north side. The teenage girl's 40-year-old uncle might also be charged, authorities said.

The 11-year-old girl told police she was interested in the teenage girl, who looked and dressed like a boy, authorities said in court records. She and two friends went to the teen's house, where the child performed oral sex on three teenage boys, the court records said.

The teenage girl's 40-year-old uncle admitted he also had sex with the 11-year-old and told police that his niece was coaching the child, the records said.

The 11-year-old told police she then went to the basement, where there were about 15 males and "began to choose who she wanted to perform oral sex on," the records said.

The teenage girl told police that the 11-year-old had told her she wanted to perform oral sex on the boys in the house, according to court records. The 16-year-old denied encouraging her.

The teenage girl and the 15-year-old boy were charged with being a party to sexual assault. Torbenson said he will probably seek to have them tried as adults

Now I just wonder what the reaction could possibly be to this story. A story of a young girl, most likely very troubled to begin with, taken advantage of by these guys? What do you think, Rookieeeee, what do you think their reactions would be? Well I'm here to tell you.

d said

Legally, it's gang-rape. In actually, the 11 year old may have not only consented but actively chosen who to have sex with and what to do.

Baldur said

the reporters are trying to incite more mob violence against boys and men who might appreciate such 11 year old girls

the-wolf said

why is this story surprising? An 11 year old can get to be just as jealous of her older lover as anyone else. Is it because supposedly in the girls own words she chose to engage in sex acts and with whom she would have them with? But remember an 11 year old is supposed to be asexual and not have any knowledge of this sort. Like the guy said she was only a baby! Well atleast now some people are waking up to the reality of the situation

kea said

one needs merely to be 'coached' into being the victim of an assault, rather than, say, threatened or forced

hierophant asks

She just wanted to help? What was she to get in return for all those blow jobs?

turtle replies

maybe she was just having fun? or maybe she was seeking the 16yr old girls approval? we are obviously not getting the whole story. they left out the parts that might undo their "victim" story

turtle can't stop he has more to say

if she really did suck 15 boys,that should send them a loud message,but i doubt they will figure it out. the 40yr old will prolly end up being the scapegoat just because they dont want to believe that minors would do this on their own.

Demosthenes says

A full tummy?

BB replies

More protein than a steak dinner!

Moon Dreamer says

didn't you know that 11-year-olds aren't old enough to make decisions? They're too dumb! I really think most adults need to take a long hard look at themselves and realize usually they're the ones incapable of decision

Hierophant says

There appears to be a coordinated effert to mold the public.

AH! So now we get to the heart of the matter! Nevermind that anyone would question a girl that age walking into a room full of, oh say, 20 strangers and giving blow job after blow job...... and NOT question her emotional stability.

Ok, nevermind that Let's focus instead on hierophant's accusation of a coordinated effort to mold the public .... do you really want to talk about that? Because we could if you wanted to.

We could talk about the mission statement that's currently being developed by the pedovore community.

We could talk about the attempts to deceive the public from within that mission statement.....as in.....'NO don't ask for abolishment of age of consent laws first, that will have to come later after we've convinced them to accept us'

Is that what he's talking about, I wonder?

Or maybe he's talking about their little propoganda project of the day, hmmm, maybe that's it. You know the one where they print out little business size cards and leave them around in public places. The ones they call Visual Propoganda Oh the ones they say something like THIS:

FEAR NOT THE ONES WHO LOVE

Most people who are attracted to children are interested in
knowing, understanding, respecting, and valuing children,
rather than simply trying to have sex with a child. This is
sometimes referred to as “love”.

FEAR NOT THE ONES WHO LOVE

and the flip side

WHO ARE THE TRUE ABUSERS?

Most sexual crimes against children are
committed by those who are NOT
exclusively attracted to children.

WHO ARE THE TRUE ABUSERS?

Now I don't know about you guys, but I happen to know those little fact cards are flat out lies. And no, you little pedofreaks I am not speaking from emotion but from intelligence and reasoning. What are you speaking from? What are they speaking from, Rookieeeee?

The Evolution of a Factoid

We've recently been discussing FACTOIDS,

Statement of presumed fact that people believe to be true because they hear it repeated over and over

in our Facts According To Jay series. There's several more to come in this series, but for a nice little intermission, I thought it would be nice to show you the evolution of one.

I recently made this comment

pedophiles quoting Ken Lanning, and Hall and Freund, and even Krafft-Ebing for God's sake .... I could see it maybe if one of them misquoted and took out of context one sentence out of a 160 page document to use in their defense. But when ALL the online pedophile community misquote the EXACT SAME THING, then it most certainly is not an individual mistake, it is a concerted effort to mislead and there has to be ONE person responsible at the heart of it. ONE person who started spreading 'quotes' from academia. And now they all repeat the same thing....with confidence, they say things like 'That's a 'FACT'

Now we're going to get to see it in action. A reporter for The Toronto Star covered the STORY of a newly released research paper regarding Pedophilia Diagnosis. Here's what the reporter had to say:

Much to the surprise of researchers involved, a new study shows that men who view child pornography — but don't commit abuse — are more attracted to children than pedophiles who have actually committed crimes against kids.

Well that seems pretty straight forward doesn't it? Here's some of the things the Girl Chat community had to say....

The Walker proudly proclaims....

Much to the surprise of researchers!

Fabri-Chan replies....

I'm tired of feeling that everyone is stupid and I'm the only one with his head screwd on straight.

Ducky says....

Why don't they just go to a local water park and count how many dudes are there? Simple.

MoonDreamer....

The fact that people who don't molest children are more attracted to them is kind of a hint that most of us aren't child molesters, no? This, coupled with the findings that most molesters aren't pedos makes it pretty obvious what the reality is. Who the hell else would view CP??

Arch....

called MoonDreamer's statement an absurd point and said... your statement "who the hell else would view CO?" isn't much different than saying "who the hell else would molest children?" Yet it's well proven that the second contention is false.

Demosthenes, the great orator says (among other things).....

The common assertion out there is that viewing child pornography increases the chances of acting up desires, while in here the common assertion is that it reduces the chance. Here they are saying that their research indicates that those who view the CP have a stronger attraction than those who act on that attraction.

Well, um, no, that's not what it says at all. Let's clarify this quickly shalll we?

This study was written by Michael C. Seto, James M. Cantor, and Ray Blanchard for The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and University of Toronto. The title is Child Pornography Offenses Are a Valid Diagnostic Indicator of Pedophilia and was published in Journal of Abnormal Psychology 2006, Vol. 115, No. 3, 610–615.

Please notice the title of the article. Let's look at the actual article now.

The present study was conducted to determine whether child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. Clinicians currently rely on three potential sources of information when considering the diagnosis of pedophilia: selfreport, a history of sexual behavior involving children, and psychophysiological assessment. All of these sources have their limitations. Self-report regarding an individual’s sexual interests is the simplest to obtain, but some individuals will deny having pedophilic interests. An individual’s history of sexual offenses, in terms of the number, gender, age, and relatedness of child victims, is informative, but it only approximates the offender’s interests because it is limited to known victims. Psychophysiological assessment methods such as viewing time provide an objective method of assessing sexual interests, but they also can be vulnerable to response suppression.

Our results suggest that child pornography offending might be a stronger indicator of pedophilia than is sexually offending against a child. One possible conclusion being, people are likely to choose the kind of pornography that corresponds to their sexual interests, so relatively few nonpedophilic men would choose illegal child pornography given the abundance of legal pornography that depicts adults. Another possible explanation for the difference between child pornography offenders and offenders against children is that the child pornography offenders were less likely to attempt to suppress their responses to stimuli depicting children (or were less successful in suppressing such responses).

Our results have implications for both clinical and theoretical work on pedophilia because they suggest that child pornography offending has diagnostic significance and may be particularly helpful in circumstances in which the person denies a sexual interest in prepubescent children, or has no documented history of sexual behavior involving children, or in which phallometric test results are unavailable. Whether child pornography offending is associated with a different prognosis than are other indicators of pedophilic interests, such as its relative ability to predict sexual recidivism, remains to be determined

They end with this question:

individuals who collect pornography depicting only girls might be less likely to commit sexual offenses against boys or to show sexual arousal to boys in the laboratory. Given the positive relationships between sexual arousal to children and having multiple child victims, boy victims, and younger child victims (Seto & Lalumie`re, 2001; Seto, Murphy, Page, & Ennis, 2003), and other research demonstrating that these same victim characteristics predict subsequent offending (Seto, Harris, Rice, & Barbaree, 2004), one could predict greater pedophilic arousal—and a greater likelihood of subsequent sexual offenses against children—among individuals who possess more child pornography content, pornography depicting boys, and pornography depicting very young children. We are now beginning a research project designed to test this question.

Now, who is responsible for this? Is it the authors of this study? Who said:

The present study was conducted to determine whether child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia.

Or could it be the reporter for The Toronto Times who said:

a new study shows that men who view child pornography — but don't commit abuse — are more attracted to children than pedophiles who have actually committed crimes against kids.

Does that statement look anything at all like what the study actually said? No, no it doesn't. But since the unethical journalist reworded it in her own words, it was much more appealing to the pedo community. In fact her rewording completely changed the meaning of it. Be aware in the future of this name ROBYN DOOLITTLE because you'll be seeing the pedofreaks quoting her endlessly in support of their contention that pedophiles don't commit crimes against children.

They're already in the process of developing a new factoid based upon it. Apparently this is how they came to rely on Joanne DiLorenzo. When she reported that Ken Lanning believed that 90% of molestations were committed by non pedophiles, in direct conflict with what he has written and repeated over the years, the freaks latched onto it, and it has become like a mantra for them. Let's don't let this happen with DooLittle. Ethics in Journalism?

Twilight 's Brains Fell Out

Twilight said:

I said looking at child pornography is a social taboo, and that that shouldn't be the reason it's illegal.

It should be illegal to try and lessen the amount of CP being made.

I'm thinking that perhaps that was a Freudian slip. I hope.

I agree with the anti-CP laws as long as they're being enacted for the right reasons

Child pornography shouldn't be illegal just because people think it's wrong for adults to view or own, as that would imply that it's being banned on puritanical reasons

While I would have expected such a statement from the militant psychopathic Demosthenes, the nauseating Lindsay, the wishy-washy Todd, the completely-without-a-shred-of-empathy Turtle, the deranged Danny Wyatt, the immature BlueRibbon, the academic-wanna-be Jillium, the I'm-at-war-no-I'm-not-yes-I-am Silent War, the psychotic mathematician olive freak, the I'm-a-writer-who-can't-spell Crake, the everyone-stop-molesting-children-and-collecting-childporn-so maybe we can fake some people off Rookieeeeee, the liar BB, the forgettable JD420, the please-stop-ruining-child-abusers-lives Pedo-Ken, or even the inarticulate, trouble-making dimwitted Debatecrime, but I NEVER expected it from you TWI.

Bignewsday answered you best when he said:

Child porn should be illegal because it exploits and harms children. For this reason, anyone knowingly producing, possessing, or viewing child porn is breaking the law and should be locked up. Whether someone is paying for it should have no bearing on whether or not a crime has been committed.

I'd like to just ask you some questions, why do you think it's wrong to kill? Or do you? Could it be social taboo? Who decides? Who decides what's right or wrong? Who decides how best to have an order to society. Do you believe there should be any laws at all? As a law will necessarily step on someone's toes, maybe there should be none. Maybe we should all live lawlessly and every man (or child) for himself. Perhaps you believe psychopaths should just run rampant. Perhaps you believe that the right of the pervert to inflict himself upon the innocence of our youth and forever change their lives is more important than for children to have the right to not be exploited. Hmmm I do indeed wonder about you.

I personally think you're a victim of the Kinsey era..... the "anything goes and it's ok that we restrained babies and molested them for hours on end because we have a biased reason to do so" mentality.

Or it could simply be that you aren't the same Twilight I met a few months ago. I believe you are heavily influenced by the pedovore community. In one breath you say you agree with something here on AZ and the next you say something so asinine it

Takes Your Breath Away

I told you yesterday to give it a couple of days to think on it, but your youthful impatience got the best of you and you spouted off this nonsense here. You either go put on your thinking cap and think reeeeeaaaaaaaal hard and tell me what's wrong with this picture I'm getting of you. If you can't do that---Don't you DARE come back here and speak one more word, or you will be deleted on sight forever and ever amen.

And by the way, where's your cohort Jillium? His cat got his prolific tongue maybe? Or maybe he's hunched over his computer searching desparately for journal abstracts. Tell him I'm waiting for him.

Charitable Delusions

This blog has covered the on-going Save the Children fiasco within the paedophile community. If you are unaware of these events, here's a brief history:

- Lindsay Ashford and Todd Nickerson gathered donations from the paedophile 'girl lover' community and made a donation to Save the Children in the name of 'GirlLovers Alice Day'

- Save the Children clearly did not pick up on where the money was coming from and sent back a generic thank you note.

- Ashford proceeded to post the thank you note on his site, claiming We are glad that Save the Children, despite the prevailing antipathy against girllovers, has seen fit to accept our gifts and in so doing recognized our commitment to aiding the empoverished children of the world and enabled us to do so.

- A contributor to this blog alerted Save the Children to the situation and the donation was promptly returned.

This situation has caused great angst in the paedophile community. Members of this blog have suggested that paedophiles who want to donate to a charity should make the donation anonymously. This would help children (which they *say* is their real agenda) without causing respectable organizations to turn them away. This suggestion was met with great furor amongst paedophiles. But it seems that, of late, they've reconsidered. However, it's also brought out the paranoid delusions that they're so famous for:


Porcelain carries on like a raving lunatic:

I've thought about donating something, however, I am absolutely paranoid about leaving a paper trail anywhere, especially 'credit cards', given how many people have been assaulted because they submitted a credit card for access.

Are there ways to get donations that do not involve: Postal Services, especially the US Postal service, traceable bank transfers, included credit cards, etc.

I once read about using calling cards one can purchase most anywhere, however, if push came to shove, a calling card does have an identifiable amount of information that at least would place a user 'somewhere' in the world, thus, for the paranoid, is to close for comfort.

Why would I worry about a cash donation via the US postal service... well most letters these days are given a tracking number very close to the mail box the letter is taken from, hence, a route, especially in less populated areas, would allow the all pervasive government to narrow a search down considerably.

Am I paranoid, you f--king bet. Some may pass it off as delusional, however, there are too many reports like the one that Taf-Kat posted, were someone has their house raided, because they just may 'know' someone who is suspect.

The news recently has had a number of revelations about how the government, using complient organzations, banking, communications providers, etc. where millions of transactions have been monitored in some way. Perhaps via automatic pattern recognition methods, but just the same, some pattern matches, you are survailed more closely.

But then once the truely anonymous donation has been sent off, how, really does one 'know' that the donation ever really reached the destination, other than say, for GC, when someone posts who has donated recently.

Even in big time organizations, there have been cases of fraud, misuse of funds, etc. and that is with yearly auditors checking the book

Demonsthenes advises:

Straight up cash isn't trackable (unless you're worried about them finding finger prints... so use gloves? :-p)... and just drop it in the mail when you're on vacation (again.. if you're paranoid about finger prints... use gloves :-p). Sure, they'll be able to track it down to the general area that you mailed it from, but that won't matter so much, will it?

Porcelain still isn't convinced:

Paper is very absorbent of environmental elements... US currency is identified by the region it was issued from... licking the stamp or envelope leaves saliva, which can and will be used in a court of law...

When finding a needle in the haystacks, it is beneficial to know which haystack to look at... when finding a radio active needle, ie one that emits, again reducing the number of haystacks that have to be exhaustively searched is beneficial...

Paranoid... no just read the news...

Infinity furthers the advice given by Demosthenes:

Just buy a self-adhesive stamp (no licking)...and use TAPE to seal the envelope...and as Demo said you can mail it from ANOTHER place not near where you live. Wrap the cash in several pieces of paper...or put it in a card. There is just no way they can trace you if you take those precautions. If you were really that adamant about it all...buy a cheap pair of surgical gloves to do all of that, no finger prints. How safe if that?

For the record...most posters who donate to GC do all or most of these things...although some of them do mail them from the state they live...of course those envelopes are completely destroyed, so the danger is non-existent.

And Baldur elaborates even further:

. . . you can also get self-adhesive envelopes now, which do not require licking.

Even if you wish to use traditional stamps and envelopes, you can "lick" the stamp and flap with a wet sponge or a wet cloth. If you're really concerned, use bottled water - though I have yet to hear of the authorities analysing the residue from tap water to deduce the source.

Right. A charity organization is going to raid your house for making an anonymous donation. Keep in mind that these are the guys who keep proclaiming that they're not doing anything illegal. Makes you wonder what they're so psychotically paranoid of someone finding.

Truth in Advertising

After Save the Children returned the donation to Todd Nickerson, Lindsay Ashford advised they should not cash the check. The money would remain in StC account and therefore he could leave his fake endorsement on his website. But Todd took matters into his own hands, and decided to cash the check and disperse the money anonymously without telling anyone where. The purpose being :

There'll be neither bragging on our part nor harassment on the part of the antis.

To make matters worse he then received a LETTER from the State of Connecticut Attorney General's Office

I urge you to immediately remove this press release from your website. Your failure to do so may result in the imposition of civil and criminal penalties.

At which point the bickering started in earnest.

Todd:

It is illegal to post a charity's name without permission.
Hopefully Lindsay will just take it down

Lindsay:

To be honest you brought this upon yourself.
Todd, you were not the organiser of this campaign. I was.
As for your decision to cash the cheque, I am still opposed to that.

Todd:

While you are technically correct -- the money does not belong to me -- I frankly don't give a rip.
This community is rampant with cowardice, small-mindedness and hypocrisy.
If you threaten me, I WILL pursue it legally. I know who you are and I have your mother's phone #.
I am not a trained monkey this community can shoot into alien territory to see if it's safe for humans
If I'd thought for a second that they would throw me in jail because YOU put something on your website that they didn't like, then I would NOT have attached my name to this project.
I see myself as a sailor on board a ship with a captain who was making a very bad decision.
F*** you and the other assholes here. If you cared about your own community you'd think twice before you backed me into a corner of desperation.

piz

This charity thing will have ended up being of no benefit to us whatsoever.

Todd:

I'll be the one they go after, not Lindsay. They can't catch Lindsay -- he can put whatever he wants on his site, and they can't touch him as long as he's out-of-country.

LGinmyheart:

Lindsay is not living in the Empire as of now, therefore they can't get him -- they will gladly get Todd instead.

Minstrel:

It doesn't give him a 'blank check' to do as he pleases with the money we donated

Marco Polo:

You are beyond the pale Todd

Febri-chan:

I trust Todd infinitly more than I trust Lindsay

Enigma:

We lost respect for you after you stole the money.
You should be sued for what you've done.

Myrddraal:

You're on the short list of people at this site I would feel OK about being around a child

Dissident:

If you think Todd is one of the few here who would be safe to have around your kids, I take that as a major insult, especially when you consider how unstable he can be

Demosthenes:

That money is not yours and you have no right to do anything with it that you happen to decide. The people who donated that money did so with expectation......
You have repayed us with betrayal

BB:

I can only recall very few people that I've actually lost all respect for around here and I'm sorry to say I now count you among them.
You're despicable Todd

Baldur:

StC needs to go down in flames

Todd:

Let it be known .... that you and a few others here have made me into an enemy. I expect you will come to regret that.

THIS is StC's TOS. FYI: Save the Children is an INTERNATIONAL organization. Lindsay violated IP laws. He shouldn't be so sure of his untouchability.
He's willing for Todd to take the fall, be sued on civil charges and possibly charged for criminal acts. All so he can keep what he uses as 'endorsement' on his web page.
This is a total lack of integrity and ethics.

And he wants society to accept what he is and believe his dripping-with-saccharine-self-proclaimed-child-lover-I'd-never-harm-them testament??

Get Real Lindsay! You're as fake as a three dollar bill and as transparent as glass.

Demosthenes, the Great Orator

Demosthenes.....who imagines himself like unto the ancient Greek orator and a particularly venomous rejoinder has a lot to say. Oh, but where to begin?

If there's anything that I've learned, it's that those going around trying to convince everyone else are more often than not simply trying to convince themselves that they are right without ever realizing that they even doubt it.

OH, so I suppose that would explain this:

You CAN NOT DO WHAT YOU WANT!!! It's simply not possible. You can NOT separate yourself from paedophile because it's what you ARE. The ONLY thing that you will accomplish with this is declaring yourself to be a child rapist.

And of course there's that:

I always did it for the emotional pleasure more than the physical pleasure. Even today I get more out of that sort of thing emotionally than I do physically. For me, it has always been more about the emotions involved in an intimate situation and sexual exploration than about the physical pleasure involved, though I certainly enjoy the physical pleasure.....perhaps that saying that I used when I was young about being a lesbian trapped in a guy's body had some merit

Lots of quickies:

Molestation is only that if the other person doesn't want it.
I am unapologetic

Am I intolerant? Indeed I am

The majority of child molesters are your people, not mine.

Oh really?

The number of actual molesters (consensual contact does not count) that are paedophiles are very low and it has nothing to do with their being paedophile. If it was an issue caused by paedophilia, then it wouldn't be your people who molested children most of the time.

Shame? I am very proud of who and what I am.

my love for children made me special

What we are is a blessing, not a curse. The curse is what they put upon us.. but their reign is short-lived and our day will come.

...the 10 and under crowd for my own in-home modelling shots, they haven't been indoctrinated in "decent, virtuous, and moral" like a 14 year old tends to be.

These people (and by this I mean the frothing at the mouth, ignorant by choice, hate mongers like Dreamer and her ilk), however, will never see us as equals because they don't have the insight or compassion of base humanity. They are the sub-humans, and the children that they treat as such are better people than they can ever hope to be..

I am able to see a world that they can not conceive of. Some of them hate me for it, others are jealous

You spread lies which are neither supportable by facts nor defendable by morals

Incorrect, but let us continue.....

You hate us because as is human nature, you hate what you fear.

You fear us for a number of reasons, including a lack of understanding (which you are willful in) and the fact that your hate will be your own undoing.

be realistic. an adult in a romantic attachment w/ a child, in which the child may & often does have powerful reciprocal feelings, is in a position to inflict all kinds of harm

i think people shld be asking themselves, if they cannot appreciate the ways in which children may not be emotionally ready for sex, whether they themselves are emotionally ready for it.

I don't deny that it can be harmful or exploitive. My biggest concern is what the source of the harm and exploitation are inside of healthy adult-child romantic relationships. The source in this usually boils down to a lack of understanding and knowedge on the part of the child, and the lack of the adult in the relationship recognizing that problem.

Children are not more easily manipulated or exploited due to some mystical quality of being a child, they are more easily manipulated or exploited due to a lack of experience and knowledge

The current climate of "protecting children" does nothing but set the stage for them to be naive, ignorant, inexperienced, unknowledgeable, and easily manipulated.

We've all heard the stat that 90% of child-molesters aren't even pedophiles.

AoC should be not a blanket law but a case-by-case law. It should be set up as such that when any person can be determined to be physically (read: biologically ready as well as able to do it without enduring physical harm) capable, they are of legal age for penetrative sex. It also need to be written OUT of the law that anything non-harmful short of penetrative sex be illegal.

You bring this war of yours, and yes, I do mean your war, to our doorstep and expect is to go quietly into that good night.

If fifty people told you paper wasn't paper but you knew it was would you shut up and agree it wasn't paper

Nope, the same way we won't shut up and agree that what you want is good for children

I would be over-joyed if an ammendment on the AoC was made responsibly, but if it was just abolished it woud be tantamount to letting loose a monster on all the children (boys and girls) in whose lives I have been an important role.

So, even you Demosthenes, realize that your brothers are a threat to our children?

I must agree on one point, though. Debatecrime does not help our cause. I may be militant, but he is a loose cannon that usually manages to serve the purpose of forcing the rest of us to follow in his wake and clean up the mess.

Finally, the truth.

The Dangers of Pedophilia

We've all heard the horror stories of child abductions and molestations and understand the very clear danger of something like this happening to one of our children. but my interest here is how this gang of psychologically handicapped people, by their mere words I am a pedophile harm society as a whole.

I've read lots of news stories such as a recent one from Australia, in which no one is allowed to take photographs of their children at school functions because of things pedophiles have done. Pedophiles say this is another example of parents hysteria.....but normal people say that it's yet another example of how they have harmed society. They restrict our rights as parents and they restrict our childrens freedoms by their very existence and continued attempts to go mainstream.

Take their recent failed attempt to use the Save the Children organization for example. They think, they say that we don't care for children, or we would just be grateful the money was donated at all. Obviously, they continue to underestimate us. That we could so quickly see through to their real motives must have been shocking to say the least. (Considering how they think we are ignorant, repressed people who require them to educate and enlighten us). So they go on a raging spamming mission of our blog. Yawn. They are so transparent.

But this is an example of why we must never be silent. Stopping their underhanded technique to abuse the good name of Save the Children, was a small victory for children, and yet it was a much larger victory in the scheme of things. When you realize that every step you take in slowing down that growing snowball hurtling down the mountain....takes us one step further in our mission.....Inform.......Expose.....Silence.

Now personally I've had some of these creeps ranting Expose? Expose what? I'm not breaking any laws!
So I will say this very clearly so that the more dense among you sexual deviants reading this will understand........... I want to expose what you are, I want to expose your beliefs, your desires and your evil mission. I want to stop you from attaining your goal.

I understand that you squabble amongst yourself....what is the correct way...blah blah blah. But this is to our favor. Those of you who say you would never harm children, associate yourselves with those that would (and have). You can't even agree amongst your own what is right and wrong. As a group you have no moral compass, there is no cohesive voice. How can you possibly think you can spread a message of love/no harm for children?

I also understand that you don't like me posting your comments here. That doesn't surprise me. I do however have a solution for you. Close your message boards and blogs to the public. Silence yourselves to the rest of the world....otherwise I will continue to use your own words against you. I realize of course that you also post our words in your deviant little holes of iniquity. What you don't realize however is that it doesn't harm us. Our mission is much more damaging to you. Normal people read this blog and they tell others....and they tell others....

Now, the psychopath Demosthenes, if you remember is the one who thinks that if children 'consent' it should be acceptable to give them drugs that would stop their physical development. He doesn't like what happened over Save the children, he thinks he knows why, but then he has lots of strange ideas.

They had some great loss of an adult love as a child, or had it withheld from them completely, and now they are jealous of any child that does have it. The most disturbing part of it all is that while they are actively parading around and shouting about the evils of us, the truth is that they harbor secret hatred of children for having the love that they feel that they deserve, and us for giving it to children whom they wholely undeserving.

(stitches shakes head in disbelief)

Yes, they have lots of ideas about why we stopped their donation. None of them are true, I might add. But this one just takes the cake. Enigma would like to use propoganda to purposefully mislead people in a twisted Machiavellian campaign to raise money and change society's perception by founding a charitable organization with a sinister ulterior motive.

Yes, that's where the battle needs to be fought. In the field of public relations, not public education. The average Joe isn't smart enough to question the sources of most of the information he takes in. But when he knows the information is coming from pedophiles, he's "smart" enough to automatically assume it's self-serving bullshit. So we need to educate indirectly, with or without his conscious cooperation, and in a way that makes the antis look like the freaks. Believe me, it can be done. Anything can be spun the way we want it to look.

Why not register a non-profit organization called something like American Council for Sexual Values? It's a nice friendly name that sounds like it'd have a message a lot of antis want to hear. Of course, there's no explicit mention of just what kind of "sexual values" this organization would be advocating.

Use it as a mouthpiece for studies done by folks like John Money, Judith Levine, Rind et al., and so forth. It's cheap to set up a non-profit organization, and as such, it could receive donations. Those donations could be used to fund political action committees, buy advertising on network television and newspapers, you name it. Nothing blatantly pro-pedophilia, of course. Just press releases such as "Studies show effect of sex during childhood can be positive." and "Correlation found between late age of first sexual experience and trouble with relationships in adult life." Get it into the public's consciousness that way, and that'll open the door a crack.

Is it dishonest? Yes. Is it manipulative? Yes. Is it mind control? Yes. Is it all the things we accuse them of doing against us? Yes. But we can't say we believe in our cause and then say we have to leave certain options off the table. If we really believe in what we're doing, if we really believe it's for the good of the children, then just as they will use any means at their disposal, so must we. If we want to win, we'll have to do what works, not what's fair or nice.

Have they spent so long with distorted thinking that they believe they can get away with this? Only if we let them. Only if we remain silent. We cannot afford to stand back and hope someone else does the work. As for me, I knew very little about this issue before these creeps had a go at my daughter....But now that I've seen....I can't not see. I'm like a duck on a junebug, like white on rice, in fact this is how I look.