And the Witch Hunt Continues.....

Curtis of BoyChat fame says

"what the witchhunt seeks to prevent is consensual sex and erotic love between a boy and a man"

And Jan Kruska says

"States across the country are now lifting the "staute [sic] of limitations" on sex crimes. I think it is safe to say they [sic] most of us can now start shitting our pants"

I thought that was a pretty interesting statement. She said it in her article titled ...AND THE WITCH HUNT CONTINUES And what do you know? Jan is on a witch hunt herself.

We talked about her attempt to slander Anti's with her fabricated accusations of child pornography. But Jan made other accusations that I'd like to address as well. Specifically her statements revealing her bigotry and religious intolerance.

We all know how those who oppose us consistently state that our mission is based upon Christian Fundamentalism. So I'd like to refer you to a post we did about this very thing way back when. Located HERE we discussed the fact that AZ is not a political group nor a religious group. Our members come from a diverse background with the common thread being the fact that we all oppose pedophiles. We don't talk about religion because it has no bearing on this topic. The hatred and scorn that society feels towards those who prey on children crosses all lines. It's universal.

Jan Kruska in her pathetic attempt to expose anti's made this statement:

"almost without exception: each Perverted Justice member is either an Atheist or a Wiccan/Pagan"

I can't for the life of me figure out where she got that except that the innocent person she attacked, exposed and defamed is Wiccan. This person who is not a member of PeeJ nor a member of AZ. Yet the question begs to be answered, so what if they were? The pedoheads jumped right on it too

taf-kat

"Was enjoying the read until the atheist bit - I'm an atheist, and I wouldn't like to thing [sic] that being one is a term of abuse per se"

CrimsonVampire

"Whats wrong with this? Whats wrong with being an Atheist or a Wiccan/Pagan? They make it seem like a bad thing. Most Witches are very loving and kind people"

Baldur

"so I am not surprised to find that both PJ and GC have a large number of Atheists and Wiccans. Both groups consist of people who are not exactly in the majority"

Theo

"That bit caught me off guard too. Mostly because it's such a bizarrely irrelevant thing to bring up"

Spherious

"ROFLMGOPMP rollingonfloorlaughingmygutsoutpissingmypants....."

Scapegoat

"It would seem to me that bringing up to the religious persuasions (or lack thereof) of PJ members at the end of the article is simply an ad hominem. If the allegation is true, though, it might make those that believe the death of religion will necessarily lead to the liberation of boylovers think twice"

Dylan Thomas

"It's a shame the reporter used a word-choice that makes it sound like the religion itself matters"

JamieB

"While this particular article is awfully written, I don't think it's doing us any good to try to distance ourselves from such articles - as the saying goes, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em!". Specifying that they're all wiccans and pagans is, I agree, logically irrelevant to the debate"

Enochian

"Quite frankly, Ms. Rogers' piece was so rambling and tried to connect so many unrelated things, that it closely resembled the nonsense disseminated by Peej itself"

King of Hearts

"So what you're saying is.........it's a witch hunt"

A witch hunt? Oh no, see Jan went back and doctored her article. Now it says

"Other discoveries are that almost without exception: each Perverted Justice member is either an Atheist or a Wiccan/Pagan (giving Wiccans a bad name because theirs is a very peaceful religion)"

*Head Snap*

What was that? It sounds to me as though Jan found out that it wasn't cool to disparage someone's religious beliefs simply because she's prejudiced against it herself. It appears to me that Jan is trying to placate the pedo community while maintaining her position of 'fire into the crowd and perhaps you'll hit the right person' She's saying here that it's wrong for Anti's to be Atheist, Christian, Jewish, Wiccan or any other religion because SHE thinks it would make other Atheists, Christians, Jews or Wiccans look bad to have a common belief. She tried to fix her mistake and made it worse.

And she DARES to claim others are ignorant, hypocritical, and bigoted?

"Native Americans, Salem “Witches”, African Americans, Homosexuals, and now Sex Offenders. While people cannot change their skin color or perhaps their sexual preference ALL have suffered or are suffering from the same irrational hate. A hate born of ignorance and fear. What does this say about us as a society?"

You tell us Jan. You tell us why you singled out a completely innocent person. A person who has never been involved with this issue and proceeded to accuse her of downloading child pornography, “intimidates, threatens and harasses her chosen victims”, “uses photographs of children to entice men” and lastly, the coup de tête of your malicious attack: “conspires to commit blackmail, harassment and intimidation, slander whereby she encourages others to commit fraud, cyberstalking, physical harm and murder to those she targets”.

You tell us why you made those wild, hysterical allegations of Anti's being lesbians, Wiccans, making yarn art, being adopted or even fat considering how tolerant you are. To use your words, Jan, "perhaps stupid has indeed been telling dumb dumb what to do" eh?

Meet Ku Klux Jan

Graphics courtesy of Jacey

Mocking, Bashing and Blaming

Amazing as it may seem I was recently asked the question "How do you talk to victims of sexual abuse?"

The person who asked was an attorney and activist for sex offenders. In fact, it was none other than Margie Slagle of the Ohio Justice and Policy Center.....a sort of mini ACLU.

Now we all know that Margie is ignorant about the real facts regarding sex offenders, and we all know that she has aligned herself with people who are clearly dangerous propagandists and liars. Jan Kruska, for example, who believes that the sex offender registry should be abolished along with long prison sentences, life sentences, the death penalty, civil commitments AND age of consent laws. Or, Tom Madison of SoClear Media Productions whose chief operating officer Jackie Sparling said

"The sex offender laws affect ALL sex offenders. We all know that. Therefore whether you or your loved one was charged with CP, got caught in a Romeo/Juliet type situation, or was charged with sexual assault/rape doesn't even come into play with our organization"

So, we've established the mindset. What we haven't talked about is the numerous emails Margie has sent me. From her first contact in which she lied about her purpose for reading AZ, to her accusations that I didn't know how to spell pedophile, to her attempts at intimidation and manipulation, and even blaming me because she didn't know how to navigate this blog, her attempts to harass sex abuse victims and undermine their meeting in regards to victim issues all the way to her blatant mockery of someone she believed to be a victim of child sexual abuse, point clearly to what she in fact really is. Evil.

You see, Margie told me that I didn't "walk in the path of the Lord" to which I responded:

"What would the path of the Lord entail? Telling people to put liquid latex on their face to try and deceive authorities? Registering thousands of fake email accounts to over burden the system, waste tax payer dollars and keep people from being able to do their jobs......as part of a 'fun and games' thumb your nose at society sort of thing perhaps? Maybe it's ignoring the fact that there are thousands upon thousands of young children brutalized every year, for which they carry the scars forever only to have a nitwit say 'oh but there are worse things in life, let's think about the offender's rights' Take your condescending crap elsewhere you wouldn't know 'path of the Lord' if he jumped off the trail and said BOO."

That's when she pulled out the big guns. Yeah Baby. The old victim mockery trick.

"The path of the Lord is not contained in any of your ramblings. Obviously someone hurt you, and tragically it seems that your own mother allowed someone to hurt you. Perhaps it was someone she brought into your life or maybe she simply ignored other signs and failed to protect you. Perhaps she was so neglectful that you were forced into the state system."

Personally I think it appears that Margie has dyslexia or some other learning disability. Perhaps she simply has a low IQ and was ignored in school and her mother failed to teach her. But obviously her own mother dropped her on her head then tragically failed to seek treatment for her.

Now, six months later, she's claiming that wasn't mockery, oh NOooo, that was genuine concern!! NOW she tells me that she's ignorant about such things and says "I am not sure how to speak to a victim of sexual assault" And since the answer is so simple, so elementary, we'll save that for last and instead talk about things you DON'T say.

Jan Kruska:

"While sexual abuse is despicable there are indeed things that are much worse in life. Most children do not die or become permanently disfigured as a result."

Shirley Lowery:

"Parents are passing their warped views on to their children. Children are taught that anything inappropriate that happens to them is the fault of someone else."

Zman aka Michael Gregg:

"Why can't we let the police do their job, and let PJ geeks get real jobs? They could be protecting the country with their hacking skills or something, yet they want to go after defenseless child predators instead of OSAMA, terrorists or other hackers!"

CoolRich:

"If a victim does not go on with their lives, they are lost forever. If they allow hatred to control their lives, then they are, at best, no better than the one who perpetrated a crime against them."

Derek Logue:

I've noticed they're REALLY proficient at playing the victim role.

pedo-ken:

"I send a clear message to these stupid assclowns: It ain't the awful memories or humiliation that fucked you up; it's pure lack of self-support. You ain't dead, you ain't a paraplegic, and you're still alive"

turtle:

"there is ALOT more wrong with our nation than just child molesters. when ones life ends up shity(mostly due to neglect and poor decision making skills)its always easier to find a scapegoat than it is to take responsibility for your own fuckups."

Nickless:

"Who knows for sure whether Couey did or did not do that poor little girl a favor?"

Gerber:

"I had a pic at one time ,wish i still had it, its called the Adam Walsh Bear,its a pic of Adam with a baseball suit and bat and his head is on a spring,kind of like a bobble head doll and at the bottom of the pic it says,,Includes spring loaded head.Search party not included."

The question Margie asked was stupid. The answer is simple: You speak to them the same way you do anyone else.

Facts According to Jan

Originally posted on August 20, 2006

Jay Baskins, see HERE, tells us about this little thing called A FACTOID, which he defines as:

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

Does that sound familiar? Jay has an entire list of common factoids and he proceeds to dispel them one by one. So shall we.

Factoid #1:

The "pedophile" is set apart from most men because he finds children or adolescents sexually attractive.

Jay states that the ACTUAL fact is:

A study of randomly selected "normal" men at Kent State University (Hall, G. N., Hirschman, R, and Oliver, L. 1995) discovered that "20% of the current subjects self-reported pedophilic interest and 26.25% exhibited penile arousal to pedophilic stimuli that equaled or exceeded arousal to adult stimuli."

I don't know about you all but I've become rather weary of this continued FACTOID that keeps crawling out of pedovores mouths.

The result of this study WAS NOT that 25% of all men had a pedophilic attraction to children. The result was that these particular subjects had a higher than average arousability level. Meaning they could get turned on at the drop of a hat. In the authors OWN analysis of his study he stated various reasons, some of them being the high attrition rate when men found out about the penis straps they would have to wear all in order to get paid $40, to the fact that the author removed subjects from the study himself due to them not having a high enough arousability level to suit his purposes.

NOW, whether or not this was a valid and reliable study, is completely beside the point. The point is that the pedophiles, misinterpreted the results based upon that one sentence in the abstract and have used it so many times that they all believe it.

In other words Hall's study has become a FACTOID.


Now let us see who has bought into this.

Well we know that BlueRibbon the infamous Dad-beater and perver of his little brother's friends spread this around everywhere totally misinterpreting the data.

And now


WA LA


Jan Kruska of 'I'm not a pedophile' fame is just eating this pro-pedo propaganda up. And even linking to it!


What is wrong with you Jan? Those pesky pedophiles just keep getting in your way, don't they? I, for one, wonder why.

Jan said

"Anyone claiming to be a pedophile or that having a sexual preference for pre-pubescent children is "normal" or "acceptable" or engages in that type of behavior is SICK. I would be the first one to string the bastard up by the balls and cut his throat."

So my question is WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE IT'S NORMAL?

Unspinning the Spin

Who said this?

"While sexual abuse is despicable there are indeed things that are much worse in life. Most children do not die or become permanently disfigured as a result"

And

"Think of the child within the sex offender who is still hurting"

Jan Kruska said it, who else?

Jan, a board member of SoClear defined her purpose

"made it her mission to educate the public on the truth behind the headlines: To cut through the hype and spin to bring you the facts, un-tethered by political bias, affiliations, or agendas"

So that is what we are going to do. We're going to cut through the hype and spin....Unspinning Jan's spin.

We all watched her bimbo-headed temper tantrum over the last couple of weeks. We watched her flap and scramble attacking uninvolved individuals and stating unequivocally that they are guilty of sex offenses against children. No if's or maybe's about it from Jan. No, she stated it as fact.

Let's start right here with an article she wrote for American Chronicle. Since she's accusing AZ of belonging to Perverted Justice, and since she's mixing and matching her information however she sees fit, I believe it calls for some commentary, don't you?

She says that a report has been filed with the FBI and the CyberTipLine accusing PeeJ members of downloading child pornography. It quickly made it through the pedophile community who, having a warped mentality anyway, took it to mean it was true. So, I just want to take a moment and clear something up, you know so that we're all SO CLEAR

Jan Kruska is the only person who has made this asinine accusation

I could also report Jan to CyberTipline and the FBI for downloading CP

• If I did that, it would be true that I did make the report


• It wouldn't make it true that Jan did it however just because I said it

Jan, having claimed elsewhere that AZ is a blog belonging to PeeJ makes a rather bold statement in this article of hers.

Some interesting quotes gleaned from their websites include: “PRETEND to be child advocates” and “Don’t go posting a cp (child porn) pic somewhere to offend people, only to have your ip (address) logged and have yourself arrested. Learn the ways of staying anonymous online.”

Well that just sounds horrible, doesn't it? If Anti's are saying those sorts of things. And Jan obviously wants you to believe it's true, she repeated it on her website and made the words giant sized red bold to make sure everyone sees it. So by George, I'm gonna make sure they see it too.

Because, you see, Jan took those words right off of AZ. Yep, she got it right here

Words straight out of the mouth of a filthy pedophile.

Words that we were discussing.

Words that were referenced with a link to the author.

The quotes Jan used were found on AZ

You can read pedophile remarks on Anti Blogs

• Jan is either blind
  


• Or Jan is maliciously spinning the truth.

She's written an entire article about it, and she's trying to make sure everyone sees it. She has reported people to the FBI claiming that they download child pornography......based upon a pedophile she found us quoting and analyzing on AZ.

That's what unethical journalists do. They spin. And they spin. And they spin.

HT to Jacey for graphics!

Jan's Truth

Jan is upset over her own truth.

Jan set out to destroy us and she pointed the finger at the wrong person. Poor Carolyn!

Watch Jan the fluff n stuffed get puffed and qwack up!




We're sending it ALL back around!


Enjoy!!

Who is this woman?

Who is Jan Kruska, AKA Amanda Rogers, AKA Jan Gustafson, AKA Jan Nelson? We wrote about her here We wrote about her activities regarding sex offender reform and her ideas about sex offenders.

Jan of course is angry about being exposed and says she's worried about her own children being humiliated because of this. But once again that is just another step in the blame game.

SHE is the only one to blame for her activities. And why does she want to protect her own children while throwing everyone else's literally to the wolves?

Her advocation of sweeping reform which would essentially abolish all punishment for child molesters AND even remove laws which make their activities illegal can be seen as nothing less than child endangerment.

Jan likes attention and she has definitely made the news now. Check it out and read for yourself about her other activities. Does anyone remember what happened the last two times a new wiki entry was released at Corporatesexoffenders.com? I do, we wrote about them here and here
What is Jan's reaction to this you might wonder? Well, this person who calls herself a REFORMED sex offender....has lashed out at an innocent person in her haste to take down Stitches.

She's made herself a webpage outing someone as me. She's digging into her personal life. She's doing this with malicious intent to bring harm to this person. Tell me Jan, how does it make you feel to be gloating over exposing someone's LEGAL activities, especially when that person had never even heard your name before. When that person was not in any way involved in anti-pedophilia activism or Absolute Zero United for that matter.

I messaged Jan not once, but twice telling her she had the wrong person. The person she's attacking has contacted her also. All to no avail. So you may ask yourself why? Why would Jan try to wreak havoc on an uninvolved party this way? I suppose we could give the easy answer that she's obviously not very bright. This is thoroughly documented already in her prolific writings and frenzied hatred for child advocates.

We saw her sarcasm, her mocking hostility toward parents of brutally murdered children. What else is she capable of? But I think it goes even deeper than all that. Jan has her head set on it, you see. It doesn't matter if the info is accurate or not. Jan believes it, and to Jan that's all that matters. She's cognitively distorted, and in her attempt to rip up someone's life she's hurting herself far more than any of us ever could.

Besides the uninvolved person she has attacked, Jan is going to have to live with the damage she has caused this person, this person who is not me. This person who was out busy living life unaware of people like Jan. JAN is solely responsible for her own actions.

I called Jan a Fluff n' Stuff. Jan proved it was true.

Fluff n' Stuff

Amanda Rogers, as she likes to call herself, describes herself as

a freelance investigative journalist from Phoenix,AZ.

She is a human rights, civil rights, and child safety advocate, as well as a political ball buster. Amanda is the author of numerous articles and video blogs. Her articles and editorials have been published in news magazines both nationally and across the globe

Amanda writes for American Chronicle, an online tabloid type website. She's also on the board of SoClear a pro sex offender rights organization which describes her this way:

Fed up with the barrage of blatantly unconstitutional and ineffective legislation regarding sex offenders and so-called "child protection", Ms. Rogers has made it her mission to educate the public on the truth behind the headlines: To cut through the hype and spin to bring you the facts, un-tethered by political bias, affiliations, or agendas. It is only through truths, however painful, infuriating or embarrassing that real discussion on these issues can begin and effective changes be made.

Amanda believes that society is demonizing sex offenders. She believes we are mistreating them. She believes we are thus endangering children. She is an activist. Her issue is to reform sex offender laws. She supports the petition we wrote about HERE.

Amanda claims that that only 3% of sex offenders recidivate. She bases that on the 1994 DOJ report regarding recidivism rates of sex offenders. Then, in typical Lindsay Ashford style, she subtracts the number of those offenders in that study who were reconvicted within a 3 year period from 100% and erroneously concludes that it must mean 97% of sex offense cases are committed by someone never before convicted of a sex crime. WA LA She's using this insane conclusion to promote abolishment of sex offender registries, life imprisonment sentences and age of consent laws.

When we very helpfully pointed out to her that studies done over a much longer period of time found that the offender didn't typically start to re-offend until 5 years post release from prison, which would actually make this DOJ statistic a moot point, she very typically deleted our comments and proceeded to harass a CSA survivor. Wouldn't want people to know the truth now would she?

Amanda wants this

Abolish all provisions of state and Federal sex offender registries.. There should be no internet or other public posting of the identity, photograph, address, workplace or personal information of any offender

Whose side is she on again? She believes you don't have a right to know that Joe next door raped a 5 year old child.........when you have a 5 year old child.

She also makes note, as do all these activists that there are very few sex crimes committed by those on the sex offender registry and in some insane twist of logic concludes that WA LA we don't need one. Whereas I'm saying it may just be working. In cases where the offender was registered but they weren't adequately followed by law enforcement, she concludes that we are wasting money on the SOR, whereas I believe we need to invest more money into it and ensure that all agencies have the staff and resources they need.

At one point she becomes so bold as to say that the reason for widespread under-reporting of child sexual abuse is because people know that bad stuff is gonna happen when they report it. For example prison sentences, SOR, possibly the breadwinner being removed from the home. Whereas if there were no punishment for sex offenders and it wasn't something required by law to be reported, well then the victim could just gently guide the offender on down to the corner therapist and WA LA problem would be solved. She doesn't understand sex offenders much does she?

I should say not. But I would like to ask her why she blames Adam Walsh's mother for the actions of the man who cut off Adam's head. And why she blames the family of Christopher Barrios and the entire system for the actions of the gruesome twosome who raped and murdered him while that hag looked on getting her jollies.

"Little Christopher paid the price for this ill thought out legislation with his very life. It is the opinion of this writer that lawmakers have just as much blood on their hands as the Edenfields themselves"

She refers to Mark Klass, Mark Lundsford, John Walsh as the flock of vultures. And addressing the issue of Megan Kanka (Megans Law) and the man who raped and murdered her (a convicted sex offender) she says that law enforcement knew he was dangerous and yet they let him out anyway. Well oh me oh my, if you really feel that way Amanda, why do you support doing away with all life imprisonment sentences for sex offenders? Why?

Why are you addressing the parents of murdered children with scorn and hostility in your voice? Why are you trying to dig up dirt on them? You wouldn't be the judgmental type now would you? You wouldn't be one to try and legislate morality now would you? You wouldn't make a statement like: "The common thread with all of these cases is that the parents were living less than, shall we say, good moral lifestyles....." And why are you blaming everyone, everyone for the deaths of Dylan Groene, Jessica Lunsford, Megan Kanka, Adam Walsh, Carly Brucia, and Danielle Van Dam except the men who actually committed the acts? Yes, Amanda, as parents we have to take care of our children, but when you said:

"This world is not your babysitter"

All I could think was........Am I my brother's keeper? And in this case, Amanda, yes yes yes I am. When it comes to children we all are. If you don't agree then I would imagine you perhaps have ulterior motives for this cause of yours?

Amanda believes that teenagers are the victims in this modern day hysterical witch hunt. To solve that problem she supports this:

De-criminalize all consensual sexual activities among teenagers

She draws no line. A 19 year old 11 month and 29 day old person would be exempt from being prosecuted for having sex with a 13 year old and 1 day old child. Oh! But she did use the word consensual. As if she believes the 13 year old is capable of making a rational decision about sexual activity with the 19/20 year old. I guess she does believe it.

But on the other hand she DID say she was against pedophiles and so I'm just scratching my head here. WTF? Because you see what this petition says is

Stop public vilification and demonization of sex offenders. Oppose the use in the media or by public officials of obviously pejorative language with regard to offenders. Use of the term "pedophile" should be extremely limited and accurate. Children should be defined as persons under the age of puberty.

Ok, there is the definition of child that she supports. But then how do you explain this?

Support broad sex education for children, and empower them to make their own decisions and stand up for their rights

THAT right there is an advocation for abolishment of age of consent laws, and the typical pedophile movement's modus operandi. Turn it on the child. Make THEM responsible for what the adults want to do to them.

And like we said before, this reform petition is about removing all punishments for sex offenders, placing the responsibility for CSA on the child, and removing restrictions for pedophiles. I think Amanda's a malicious LIAR whose attempts to manipulate public opinion with false propaganda are on the lines of reckless endangerment.

And they call us ignorant and uneducated? Well, Amanda did. But then I think she has more hair than brains. In fact I just call her fluff n' stuff.



Jan Elizabeth Kruska describes herself as

a freelance journalist from Phoenix, Arizona U.S.A.

She is the author of numerous articles, live concert reviews, and musician interviews which have been published both nationally and internationally. Jan also does live concert photography which helps to bring the stories and reviews together for both readers and fans.

Please see her website for more information and concert photos at http://www.rhythmnation.biz

Jan Kruska is a registered sex offender herself you see. Jan is Amanda. Jan has ulterior motives behind her numerous pro sex abuse articles, and her website and her organization of the rally in Miami and her support of this horrendous excuse for a petition that claims it is "part of the effort to support the happiness, well-being and freedom of children"

I did find it quite interesting that this petition which states:

We call on those who agree with us to sign our Call publicly, with full disclosure of real identity

And Jan did that. Yes indeed she did. The strange thing is that she also signed Amanda's name. You know, the Amanda who doesn't even exist?

I don't know about you, but I would sort of think that a reformed sex offender wouldn't stoop to lying now would they? And if they did.....which activities of theirs should we believe in and which ones should we question? As for me I don't believe anything she has to say.

Graphics provided by Jacey