Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception
- Dummheit-Dogmen
- Assisted Suicide & Right to die
- Irrationale Drogenpolitik
- Kinderpornografie-Hexenjagd
- Kreationismus
- Men's Rights & Feminism
- Menschenrechte
- Political correctness
- Prostitution
- Rassen & Intelligenz
- Religion & Atheism
- Sexualität Minderjähriger
- Umgangsregeln – Gewohnheiten
- Ungesunde Lebensweise
- Verbrechen ohne Opfer
- Vorbildliche Lösungen
- Wirtschaft
- Wissenschaftsirrtümer
- Wissenschaft
- Drogen
- Humor
- Uninformiertheit
Beiträge getagged mit Sexualverbrecher
Child Porn entrapment of webmasters, blog authors, email recipients and any web-browsing citizens
Verfasst von admin unter Kinderpornografie-Hexenjagd am
Child pornography makes it easy to entrap any citizen. Child pornography laws that severely penalize anyone for mere inadvertent possession of so called child porn (which may consist of 15 year old fully clothed adolescent girls dancing and gyrating -[Knox vs. USA -- Copine scale]).
As the antifeminist incessantly points out, any man or boy that ever browsed any porn site may have potential child pornography pictures on his computer or his web browser cache. Now that "The Simpsons" cartoons can be called child porn, anyone can be subject to child pornography stings.

And if s/he does not have child porn on the computer, that can be easily remedied. CP can be sent via spam emails, or the person can be entrapped to accidentally access it. No more need to frame someone by planting a pound of cocaine in his or her car. Just entice him to unknowingly visit a child porn site and his life is over.
Child pornography possession is a strict liability crime 2 3 4 5 6. No intent, no knowledge is needed. Setting someone up is the perfect crime. And the entrapped’s property can be confiscated.
Dangerous entrapment of webmasters and blog authors | Inquisition21
The new form of entrapment is clever and deadly. A dissident has to be both reasonably successful in his activities and a danger or embarrassment to the police to be worth ‘taking out’. If he is reasonably successful, it means that he is being read over his web site and perhaps in spin-off media reports and is exposing facts which are embarrassing or even dangerous for the police. This in turn makes it likely that he has one or more professionally-managed web sites hosted by a server which provides him with daily statistics over a control panel. If, in addition, he is a good writer or employs good writers, traffic to his site will grow as will the number of links from other web sites. These links will come from two sources: from simple lists of ‘recommended’ web sites or from mentions in text, such as articles or in forum-type comments. If the link is a hyperlink, which is likely, it will show up in the daily statistics every time a reader of the remote web site page clicks on it, so that on a daily basis, perhaps after a 24 hour delay, the number of visiting readers from other web sites shows together with the URL of the sites and the number from each site that clicked each day. This web site, for example (inquisition21), has the good fortune to receive hundreds of such visits from hundreds of other web sites each month, some repeating every day or week and some new each day or each few days. [...]
The web site www.jagforums-1.com is in fact set up with images of child pornography to entrap the innocent activist editor who is simply trying to see what new visitors to his web site are saying about his site. He makes one click on the hyperlink in the stats and he has images of little girls being involved in illegal activities, or whatever, on his screen. And even after he deletes them, unless he runs special clearing software, which takes knowledge and time, they are still on his hard drive. If the police are in cohorts with the criminal webmaster who has carried out this entrapment, they can raid before the clearance is complete.
Let us now examine some especially perverse aspects of this situation, and this editor can assure the reader that this is coming from one with very direct and personal knowledge of this situation, both as related to this web site, which has been attacked, and to the many individuals it tries to represent. First, it is virtually impossible to report this crime, for several reasons. [...]The biggest problem, however, is that you cannot safely say that you were the object of an entrapment attempt because, when you innocently clicked on the link, child porn appeared on your computer screen. This writer cannot even say here that it happened. It gets worse. If it is apparent from a brief look at the images that real children are being exploited in the course of this entrapment (although it is recognized that in most cases old images are used), one cannot report this crime. If anyone thinks that this is not so and that the police will welcome him as an innocent witness that person is naive. The seizure of one’s computers and exposure in the media are the very least of the certain consequences.
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Zum Rest des Beitrags » »
Child Porn entrapment of webmasters, blog authors, email recipient... » continues here »
Old geezer perverts marry jail bait. Sexually liberated Cougars marry young men.
Verfasst von admin unter Humor, Men's Rights & Feminism am
We do have loop holes in our sex offender laws. Obviously, Hugh Hefner preying on a woman 60 years younger is a perversion. This is just disgusting. We need laws against that. Sex or marriage with anyone more then 3 years older or younger should be a felony. That is, if the older party is male, of course. Sexual liberation of Cougars, of the protected class "female" may not suffer consequences for their actions. May be, in this case, a 21 year old young man is taking advantage of a 51 year old woman who is unable to consent due to her irrational attraction?
Or at least violation of the "half age plus 6 years" rule should be made a felony. So 84 year old Hugh Hefner could not abuse any woman younger then 84/2 + 6 = 42 + 6 = 48 years, or would be punished for statutory rape of a 47 year old, incapable of consenting to sex with an old geezer like Hugh Hefner. He should be in jail for objectifying women in Playboy Magazine, anyway.
Our sex offender laws are not being enforced. Anyone that has illicit sex with rapes an under 18 y old minor in California needs to get tried and arrested. Yes, that includes minors too, in California two 17 year olds are not allowed to have sex with each other. That, finally, would allow us to imprison a few million men in California, and only a few women (because in couples, men tend to be the older one of the two).
He 84 y, she 24 y (60 years age difference)
Love really must be blind — at least, for 84-year-old Hugh Hefner’s new twenty-something fiancé. Playboy Playmate Crystal Harris, 24, told ‘Entertainment Tonight’ she hardly recognizes the 60-year age gap between herself and her husband-to-be.
‘I don’t notice the age difference with Hef at all,’ Harris said. ‘If anything, I have to keep up with him!’ Harris said Hef’s energy level often surpasses the blond bombshell, who was Playboy Playmate of the Month in December 2009 NY Daily News
But the 83-year-old Playboy publisher took his tried-and-true May-December romance to a whole new level when he started dating then-19-year-old twins Kristina and Karissa Shannon, in 2008 [83-19= 64 years difference] The girls went on to star in ‘The Girls Next Door,’ but the media mogul and the Shannon twins parted ways in early 2010, so Hef could focus on his other blond girlfriend, 23-year-old Crystal Harris.
Don’t miss our articles on
-
Actor Dough Hutchinson (51) married Courtney Alexis Stodden, 16 year old child. We suspect he is a child rapist.
-
Michel Temer (70), new Vice-President of Brazil was 63 when he married Marcela Temer at age 20. Borderline Pedophilia or healthy human sexuality?
Women Cougars marrying young men is sexual liberation
When a repressed class violates old norms and robs the cradle, then this is sexual liberation, very different from horny perverted men marrying young women. Go girl, liberate yourself and all women from age restrictions!
When Madonna and her ten-years-younger husband, Guy Ritchie, called it quits in 2008, the eternally youthful material girl wasted no time rebounding with an even younger boy-toy. Madge started dating 23- year-old Brazilian model Jesus Luz in 2009, and the pair has been spotted all over the globe since.
Ick Factor: Jesus’ mother is 14 years younger than Madonna. NY Daily News
The Cougar queen
Hulk Hogan’s ex-wife, Linda Bollea, takes the cake as the cougar queen. Linda, 51, and her 21-year-old boyfriend Charley Hill, started dating when he was only 19! But the duo’s matching platinum ‘dos aren’t the freakiest thing about this relationship …
Ick Factor: The Hogan kids, Brooke and Nick, are 21 and 19, respectively. In fact, Charley is a former classmate of Brooke’s.
Read more: NY Daily News
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Zum Rest des Beitrags » »
Old geezer perverts marry jail bait. Sexually liberated Cougars ma... » continues here »
Judge John Reilly forced to apologize for differentiating nerd’s groping from sexual assault
Verfasst von admin unter Men's Rights & Feminism am
OTTAWA – John Reilly, a retired judge and Liberal candidate for the Alberta riding of Wild Rose, was forced to apologize Thursday for suggesting in a radio interview that not all sexual offenders should be incarcerated.
Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff called an Alberta candidate’s comments on sexual offenders "disgraceful,” but said he has accepted Reilly’s apology and he’ll continue to serve as the party’s candidate for the riding.
Alberta Liberal candidate John Reilly apologizes for remarks on sexual assault
The "sexual assault":
she goes, gets into bed naked, he goes up, he’s thinking he’s going to be able to, that she’ll probably agree to have sex with him, he fondles her privates, and she wakes up and tells him to go away, and he goes away. They report it, he’s charged with sexual offence, he has digitally penetrated her,
Judge John Reilly interview
Most likely the defendant did not stick the entire finger in there but just passed the limit with one phalanx. Also he was ill advised and probably admitted the penetration before getting a lawyer’s advice. Of course, the women would always be believed anyway
Now this does not look like a habitual predator, the judge is totally right.
But, this is an example how powerful the feminist language distortion is. Call some behavior "rape" or "sexual assault", and the perpetrator is to be crucified. If you told it by the real name, "fondling the privates of a naked girl while sleeping at a party", that would not cause the feeding punishing frenzy in the interviewer and the populace. You can notice this in the strong reactions of the interviewer in the written and his aggravated tone in the audio transcript.
Former judge John Reilly’s interview with The Rutherford Show Transcript
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Zum Rest des Beitrags » »
Judge John Reilly forced to apologize for differentiating nerdR... » continues here »
Julie Carr performed oral sex with baby daughter: 17 years jail; filmed it: 20 years. Too harsh compared to 4 years for baby killer?
Verfasst von admin unter Kinderpornografie-Hexenjagd am
Is our sex obsessed society punishing sexual child abuse too severely,
compared to serious bodily harm to children?
Julie Carr Performed oral sex with baby daughter: 17 years jail; filmed it: 20 years.
Compare: killing baby: 4 years; causing permanent brain damage: 2 years.
We will be attacked now with untrue accusations of "promoting child abuse". Which, of course, we are not doing. We don’t say Julie Carr should go unpunished.
Warning: not safe for children. Do not continue reading if you are easily offended.
We try to avoid explicit language, but even CNN uses some semi-explicit language
We are wondering what is less damaging to the infant:
- a mother licking baby in the wrong places. (17 years in jail) plus 10 years supervision plus life long sex offender registration
- physical abuse: violent shaking of an infant causing permanent life long brain damage (2 years jail). Or killing infant (4-5 years in jail). No registration in murderous-nanny-registry to prevent future work as nanny.
No, we are not condoning either behavior. We don’t think it is normal, healthy behavior. Sorry for questioning conventional wisdom and asking taboo questions.
If we suggested killing Julie Carr vigilante style, to mete out a death sentence, or 4 life sentences without parole, that would be acceptable.
But suggesting to even think about lower sentencing for certain kinds of child sexual abuse, is a no-no. We have been warned that this would be dangerous. We hope we will not attract vigilante threats.
But, our sense of justice, our sense of scientific curiosity compels us to ask these questions: Are some licks in inappropriate places really warrant much longer jail terms then violent brain and spinal cord trauma? What kind and how much damage is being caused in the infant by mom licking in inappropriate places? No, we don’t promote or condone such behavior.
And how many other so called "child rapists’ did not do more then Julie Carr? (Did we mention that we don’t condone this behavior, but are opposed to misleadingly call fondling and licking "rape").
Woman sentenced after streaming sex abuse of daughter over webcam|CNN
[Julie] Carr used a webcam to deliver four live videos of herself performing oral sex on her youngest daughter, according to the documents. The videos were sent to Nicholas Wilde, then 19, in West Midlands, England, whom Carr had met on an internet dating site, the documents said.
Woman sentenced after streaming sex abuse of daughter over webcam|CNN
We were surprised that the crime was labeled correctly:
"oral sex on an infant" and and not the usual "rape of infant".
In case you don’t know, any sexual activity, like kissing or fondling with a minor is defined as "rape". Probably it would sound too weird and incredible to write "Mother raped infant daughter". If it were perpetrated by a man, certainly the headline would read "Man raped his infant daughter". And everyone would imagine the guy having committed more atrocious acts then licking a baby’s privates. (No, we don’t approve of this!)
Compare this headline: Former Army Major Daniel Woolverton Sentenced For Raping Baby. Whereupon Human-Stupidity provokingly asked "What kind of rape"? (No, we don’t condone Woolverton’s behavior).
We did not want to be sexually explicit, so we refrained from the graphic terminology CNN used in this case here. But we suspect Woolverton probably engaged in similar activities as mother Julie Carr, like oral sex and manual indecent touching. In Woolverton’s case, we can not know, due to modern misleading language definitions of rape.
We will be crucified for this. People will falsely accuse us of condoning sexual abuse of children. We do not condone Woolverton’s or Julie Carr’s behavior..
Rather our message is 2 fold
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Zum Rest des Beitrags » »
Julie Carr performed oral sex with baby daughter: 17 years jail; f... » continues here »
"Once Fallen" Derek Logue über Sexualverbrecherregistrierung
Verfasst von admin unter Sexualität Minderjähriger am
Leider ist der Eintrag nur auf English verfügbar.
Kinderpornografie!? Familienfotos von nacktem Baby in Badewanne: Eltern verlieren Job, US$ 75 000 Rechtsanwaltkosten, Kinder weggenommen
Verfasst von Devils Advocate unter Kinderpornografie-Hexenjagd, Sexualität Minderjähriger am
Leider ist der Eintrag nur auf English verfügbar.
13-jährige gleichzeitig Sexualstraftäter und Opfer
Verfasst von Devils Advocate unter Sexualität Minderjähriger am
Leider ist der Eintrag nur auf English verfügbar.

Recent Comments