A Long Field to Hoe

Sunday, August 30, 2009

There are some people in society, which believe that children aren't really children or that they're not still in the process of developing mentally, learning about the world around them and who they can and cannot trust. These people talk of children as if they're 'miniature adults' attributing adult-like characteristics to them, in order to justify sexually exploiting them.

Society condemns people who knowingly exploit and take advantage of the naivety of children to satisfy their perversion, and rightly so. The GirlChatters however had difficulty understanding the difference between consenting, similar-aged teenagers exploring their sexuality, and adults who obsess over children, molesting and sexually abusing them.

Silentmist starts off:
What's the difference between a boy having sex with a girl, and us having sex with her?

Is our penis somehow more harmful to her than a boy her own age? Is our tongue somehow going to hurt her in a way I'm not aware of? Are our fingers more dangerous?

In some states there has to be at least a 5 year difference in age for it to be a crime for two people under 18 to have sex. This means a 15yo can have sex with an 11yo, or 16 with a 12yo, etc. Now I'm not sure about most of you (okay, I'm not sure about any of you), but as for myself, my penis didn't get any larger after I reached 14 or 15, so it certainly can't be that I would be "too big" for her.
Even in states which have Romeo and Juliet laws, they have a lower age limit. A 15 year old can't legally (and shouldn't) be allowed to have sex with an 11 or 12 year old child. Despite Silentmists warped understanding of the law, 'Lgsinmyheart' replies:
The only reason why there are laws on minimum ages is to deny body autonomy to the population below those ages. Close-in-age exemptions are only there because DAs know they'd have to put almost the whole country in juve if they actually went through with it - easier to prosecute just the older people.
'Little Girl Lover' explains what he heard in his sex offender treatment program and finishes with a comment:
They will tell us the 8 yr old is neither physically or mentally capable of a sexual relationship with an adult. They will be used for the selfish sexual gratification of the adult.

It's a long field to hoe before this way of thinking changes.
Dissident shares his distorted spin on it too, claiming that it's ok to abuse children, especially if they've already been abused before:
There is no actual scientific evidence that mutually consensual sexual activity between an adult man and a young adolescent girl would cause inherent psychological harm to a girl, but because of our society's attitudes that adults are supposed to be an authority figure to young adolescents and that introducing them to sex (or even having sex with an experienced young adolescent) is some sort of moral breach of decorum, such a serious breach that the police are called in to rectify matters.
Silentmist responds:
This has been my position for many years. I have always said that if it wasn't for societies mythical belief that sex is abhorrent until we reach a "magical" age, there would be NO psychological damage whatsoever.
...echoing a sentiment, similar to that of Reform Sex Offender Laws activist Bob Chatelle:
A child sexually coerced thus experiences that which he or she has been trained most to fear. In a less phobic society, there would be less sexual coercion, because all forms of consensual sex would be acceptable. And sexual coercion, when it did occur, would be less traumatic to the victim.
Society doesn't create the damage that these peoples actions cause and as much as they would deny it: pedophiles do only want to use children to satisfy their sick sexual desires.

Whose Line is it Anyway?

Friday, August 28, 2009

Todays 'Whose Line is it Anyway?' is:
"We live in a culture that honors violence and disdains affection...

...When rape occurs we don't put people in prison for the violence that was committed on the victim we put people in prison for the sex that was committed on the victim."
Who made this comment?

UPDATE: The answer to this Whose Line is it Anyway is:

Reform Sex Offender Laws Activist: Marshall Burns

Only an RSOL'er would regard forcibly raping another human being as 'affection.' With comments like these, Marshall Burns is a hit amongst the sex offender activists.

A GirlChatters Guide: 'How to Insult your Ex and put Yourself Behind Bars'

Monday, August 24, 2009

'Sancho Panza' posted about this news article: "Man who raped stepdaughter has appeal dismissed," which described a man who was sexually abusing his girlfriends daughter:
"A MAN who recommended his partner seek oral sex advice from his stepdaughter because she was "good at it" has had his appeal against his rape conviction dismissed."
'Panza' comments:
This part struck me as hilarious: how to insult your soon to be ex and put yourself behind bars for a long time.
"Hilarious" he says, talking about a 14 year-old girl being sexually exploited. No matter how hard the perverts try to disguise just how little they really think of children, they can never maintain their "childlove" facade. Their ugliness and true intentions always shine through.

"Lgsinmyheart" is quick to jump to the defense of his pedo brethren:
I dunno, but it does sound a lot more like a typical at-family insult taken too literally.


But of course, with enough pressure, you can extract all kinds of lies from anyone and everyone. And it's even legal!!!
I wonder whether he thinks the part in the article about the childs mother witnessing the man raping her daughter was being taken "too literally" too?

In Justice Philip McMurdo's Court of Appeal judgment, he said the young girl's mother first found her husband raping his stepdaughter after drinking "a carton of beer".

"The complainant was on her back with her hands above her head. The appellant's hands were around her wrists. They were both under the doona," he said.

The judgment said the mother chased the husband out of the house with a carving knife, before going back to console her daughter.

The husband then came back the next night and offered the mother $250,000 to "just pack the kids and go", and also declaring that he "loved" the stepdaughter.

When the mother refused the payment, she received about 50 phone calls from her husband, including 27 voicemails, some of which were offensive.

"Ask your daughter how to do a decent head job. She's good at it," the husband said to the mother in a phone call.

'Panza' wasn't the only GirlChatter which found humor in what happened to the 14 year-old girl:

lol.. he opened his mouth first. Well, technically third.
Joey Bishop
Well, if you are going to go to jail for saying something, it might as well be this, I guess. :)
Pedophiles will use any angle they can to gain access to children. As in this case, pedophiles see single parents as an opportunity to gain unsupervised trust and a position to intimidate the child into silence. The comments above reflect their attitude towards both the child and parent which they exploit.

Whose Line is it Anyway?

Friday, August 21, 2009

Todays 'Whose Line is it Anyway?' is:
Like any other sexual orientation, pedophiles just want to fuck like anyone else. Yeah no mystery there, just like adult attracted individuals we just want to have sex sometimes. It doesn't matter if the boy has been a friend for three years or three seconds after we met him at the playground. If the pedophile wants to fuck and the child wants to fuck then so be it. Where is the trauma in that?
Who made this comment?

UPDATE: The answer to this Whose Line is it Anyway is:

Crysta A.K.A. William C. Adamson II

Sex offender and pedophile, William Adamson, posts on BoyChat and is sexually attracted to both male and female children as young as 3 years old. He talks about collecting child pornography:
I began collecting it on disks and even volunteered as a helper in the computer lab so I could have more time and easier access to child porn. I ended up having to go to summer school because of my obsession. After that though I left the child porn behind. I was bored with it and prefered the erotic stories, they took up less space on my floppy disks. But I eventually got bored with that as well. I wanted a real experience with a child.
You can read more about Adamson at Wikisposure

The Right to be Let Alone

Saturday, August 15, 2009

In 1998, the original version of the "Reform Sex Offender Laws" statement, was written up under the name of "A Call to Safeguard Our Children and Our Liberties" statement was formed by:

"A discussion group of about twenty people formed, hosted unofficially by a non-governmental organization. Participants included women who are incest and sex abuse survivors, NAMBLA members, anti-censorship and civil liberties activists, feminists, gay and lesbian people, health-care workers, church activists, peace and social justice activists, academics, and those who work with prisoners."

One of the first signatories on the "Call to Safeguard Our Children and Our Liberties" petition, was a man named Bob Chatelle (shown above), who's listed as a "writer & anti-censorship activist."

Let's take a look at some of the things Chatelle's been writing then, shall we?

From an article of his, titled "The Limits to Free Expression and the Problem of Child Pornography," Chatelle criticizes the gay community for taking a pro-active stance against the pedophile group NAMBLA saying:
Rather than speak out in defense of the falsely accused, we will waste our time insuring that the very few members of the North American man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) will not be allowed to march in "our" parades. We will fight homophobia by promoting sexphobia -- which makes about as much sense as the Anti-Defamation League trying to fight anti-Semitism by promoting racism.
I can't imagine what kind of person would expect that the gay community should have to defend pedophilia, but I guess it's the same kind of person who would also say something as sick as this:
The main idea is rather that children (and I mean the pre-pubescent) are free sexual agents. In child pornography, children are portrayed as willing and eager. This is the idea that people find threatening and wish to suppress. Any parent discovering that his or her child has engaged in sexual activity with an older person (including an older child) would much prefer to believe that the child had been coerced or seduced, and had not been a willing participant in the act.
Chatelles defense of Child Pornography doesn't stop there:
Current legal approaches to the "problem" of child pornography err fundamentally in treating it not as the result of child abuse, but rather as a "cause." Law enforcement therefore ignores production and concentrates on possession, often resorting to entrapment. But materials must never be banned for "giving people ideas," no matter how heinous those ideas might be. A reasonable approach to the problem of child pornography would not involve the surrender of the fundamental rights of freedom of thought or freedom of expression. A rational approach would punish those who harm children, would limit restrictions on possession to cases of crime evidence, and would protect everyone's right to privacy -- "the right to be let alone," which "is indeed the beginning of all freedom."
So according to Chatelle of Reform Sex Offender Laws, it shouldn't just be legal for perverts to posses photos of kids being sexually abused, exploited and humiliated - it's their right.

Chatelle describes NAMBLA's literature as "thoughtful, clearly reasoned, and provocative:"
I have examined some of the literature of a boy-lover organization, the constantly demonized NAMBLA. Much of their literature is thoughtful, clearly reasoned, and provocative -- at least if you limit the scope of their arguments to adolescents as opposed to children. While I disagree with NAMBLA on significant points (primarily their refusal to disavow categorically sexual activity between adults and prepubescents), most NAMBLA members are most certainly not the Monsters claimed by politicians and the media. Because NAMBLA emphasizes the necessity of consent, because it constantly warns of the dire consequences of violating age-of-consent laws, and because it provides a forum for discussion among boy lovers, I believe that NAMBLA has prevented far more instances of child abuse than it may have "caused."
It seems Chatelle shares the same idea of prevention as other people we know. The backwards concept that literature which supports adult's sexually abusing children, somehow deters pedophiles from acting upon it.

In another portion of the article, he blames society for the damage child sexual abuse does:
Actual sexual coercion of children is dreadful--one of the most dreadful and frightening things that can happen to a child. The horror is compounded by the fact that our society is sexphobic and most children absorb this at a very early age. A child sexually coerced thus experiences that which he or she has been trained most to fear. In a less phobic society, there would be less sexual coercion, because all forms of consensual sex would be acceptable. And sexual coercion, when it did occur, would be less traumatic to the victim. Unfortunately, sexual coercion (like other forms of physical assault, including murder) will occur to some degree in any society. No amount of social engineering will ever eliminate forever the problem of evil.
I wonder what kind of society Chatelle envisions where "all forms of consensual sex would be acceptable?"

Bob Chatelle is someone who has been involved with Reform Sex Offender Laws campaign since the late 90's, and even today, a decade after the original statement was published, Chatelle is still listed as a signatory. We look at writing like this with disgust at how someone can be so sorely lacking in ethics and any regard for the welfare for children, however the Reform Sex Offender Laws campaign have actually published an article ("Sexual Fascism in Progressive America") which references the above piece by Chatelle, and this is how they describe it:
See Bob Chatelle's excellent summaries of the impact of the child porn crusade on freedom of expression: Kiddie Porn Panic, 1993; Limits of Free expression & the Problem of Child Porn, 1997
Excellent... says it all - doesn't it?

Never Say Everything

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Michael Melsheimer:
I have known Fred Berlin for more than 20 years. Do you know that he spoke against the reporting law in the state legislature of Maryland when it was first proposed in the late 80's? This was not a popular thing to do. I was with him when he did this.

Berlin says a lot of things publicly, so do people like ourselves. We never say everything.
shy guy:
NAMBLA was founded in late 1978 following a meeting of a group of gay community activists that had rallied to defend the Boston gay community against a media/legal attack by the local DA.

I should note that among the most influential early members was an anarchist ex-minister with a background of anti-war activism and writing as well as activism on economic justice issues
Michael Melsheimer of B4U-Act is the new breed of pedophile activist which attempts to ride the fence between what is acceptable (help pedophiles not offend) and a group of men who get together just to figure out ways to legalize boy raping. The name of his organization upsets the BoyChatters however. B4U-Act implies that Michael wants to help them NOT rape babies. This is unacceptable to the pedophiles. The truth is that Michael doesn't want to stop them at all. He merely wants to infest society with a bunch of crap. He wants the same thing he's always wanted. He just can't say it. He can't say it to us, he can't say it to the mental health community and he can't even tell the pedo groups that he's on their side. We'd find out if he did. He's sneaky that way.

Michael has found the way to sideswipe society he thinks. He's convinced the Baltimore Mental Health Community that he's something he's not. BoyChat doesn't know what to think of him and the Reform Sex Offender Law Campaign is loving him.

Follow along with some conversations from BoyChat. Some brand spanking new, some a little older. The language never changes but his mission is made clear - Nambla didn't work. We must try something new.

Michael Melsheimer:
B4U-ACT is doing great. I recently spoke with a person that had something to do with the starting of NAMBLA. He thought it looked good.
Does Maryland know you show your webpage to old NAMBLA founders for approval?

Does everyone who goes to LifeLine know that your goal for them is to 'eliminate offending?' Or is it your goal? And if it isn't, does Maryland know that too?

Oh what a tangled web we weave....
What exactly DID you acomplish? Your website still states your goal as 'eliminating offending'? How much offending do you think you eliminated (with the gracious help of this unnamed NAMBLA founder)?
Michael Melsheimer:
Your website still states your goal as 'eliminating offending'?
It certainly does not.

The term child molester is not in the B4U-ACT lexicon. We do have in our lexicon the term minor attracted person. B4U-ACT wants to work with any minor attracted person that seeks us out.
It's right on your site!
Here is a sentence from your report to Baltimore Mental Health Systems (22 June 2007)describing B4U-ACT's purposes:
"The report describes how improved communication would contribute to the prevention of offending, the prevention of harm to minor-attracted adults and adolescents, increased understanding by mental health professionals, and more effective and just policies."
But the question now is: why not just say it here too? Why deny it so adamently here at BoyChat? Because it's a lie you made to BMHS? Or, because you don't wish your potential clients here to know that is your goal?
Michael Melsheimer:
The report was dated 2007. It is part of our history, but the passage that offends you is no longer relevant to our site today. I can't change what is in our history and would be dishonest to try. It would be like BC editing their archives. Our site changed in December 2008 because of the statement you quoted.

Be assured you will find no current reference to prevention of offending. You can take that to the bank.
Why don't you post here and now that neither you nor B4U-ACT take a position on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of adult/minor intimacy?

Why not state that it is now NOT the goal of B4U-ACT to 'eliminate offending'?
Michael Melsheimer:
People sometimes say too much and destroy what they really want to do. I have already said a lot and don't want to say anymore.
Do you personally believe that any and all adult/minor sexual interaction qualifies as 'offending' and requires elimination?

Why can't you give straight answers to simple questions? It seems almost a pathology with you.
Michael Melsheimer:
People sometimes say too much and destroy what they really want to do. I have already said a lot and don't want to say anymore.
There is something called "politics", it a game which MM must play.

As things progress the politics change. Soon the word "offending" won't be used at all in b4uacts rhetoric.

Further, sexual activity with minors is illegal. It is irrelevant (to this discussion) whether it should be legal or not, the bottom line is that it is and b4uact must work within that framework. Neither b4uact nor the psychological community not the BL community at large wishes BLs to commit crimes for which they may go to jail.

You need to understand this.....as well as rhetoric and politics.
If MM declared a position on the appropriateness of sexual acts here it may alienate those he works with since he has now taken on an agenda which is not a part of his organization.
What state agency would knowingly give someone money if they knew the effort he was putting into Lifeline/BoyChat?
Michael Melsheimer:
It is important for the MAA community to have contacts in organizations like Stop it Now. They have great influence on the legislative process, and we need to know them and they need to know us. Some of the people that work for these organizations are not anti MAA. It serves our community well to find, know, and work with them
I am all for advocating people break the law, especially when it comes to mutually agreeable activities.
Michael Melsheimer:
I was on the Sally Jesse Raphael show years ago with a NAMBLA person..... He influenced my life tremendously. NAMBLA made a lot of mistakes, but they supported BL's almost before there was anything else. Tom O' Carroll, PIE fame, is also one of my heroes. His book, Paedophilia - The Radical Case, certainly opened my eyes up to a lot of things, just as my travels to SE Asia did.
I ultimatley want to undermine the labels "child" and "adult" so that people will evenutally see a relationship between a 9 and a 29 year old with at least the same lack of concern as a relationship betwen a 39 and a 69 year old.
Michael Melsheimer:
I think that you are right. We do have to go slow and not take on a radical agenda. We could all learn well by what happened to NAMBLA.

As it relates to building bridges, you are right again. There is nothing more important for our community to do. It is the only way we are ever going to be able to get any possible acceptance in the larger community for who we are as human being and what we feel is right for children
Michael Melsheimer:
My organization is not going to say to offend.

I am a BL without regret and will always be a BL without regret. My life as a bl has been terrific. No one could ever make me say otherwise. This is even considering that I spent time in prison.

Our line in the sand has historically defeated us. We need to think about a new one.
Michael Melsheimer:
We need to come together as a community. But there is another choir we need to preach to. That choir is the larger community, and it can help make all our dreams come true. Our problem is that they aren't singing our song . The major job in front of us is to get them to sing it.

We have to be very careful at first as to what we say and do, so we can say do and say more down the road. We need to build bridges and coalitions. This means that we might have to cool it for the moment. Please note that I said for the moment.
Will Robinson:
I am continually amazed at the political skills (evasiveness?) of this B4U-Act organization.

Michael Melsheimer has my vote as one of the smoothest operators I've ever beheld.

Is he a great leader or the new "Tricky Dick" of pedo-politics?
Richard Kramer:
As you may know, B4U-Act is promoting communication between minor-attracted people and mental health professionals. The purpose of these services is NOT to "cure" us of our attraction to minors--we do NOT believe we are sick.
It comes as no surprise to us at Absolute Zero that this was B4U-Act's goal, we've been saying this all along, yet Alex Marbury, the coordinator behind the "Reform Sex Offender Laws" campaign, embraces B4U-Act and even describes pedophilia as an "important discussion" to educate activists on the benevolence of pedophiles.

This is a campaign being supported by sex offenders activists claiming to be "reformed." Groups like SOSEN and individuals like Mary Duval. msdxe3ct78

Whose Line is it Anyway?

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Todays 'Whose Line is it Anyway?' is:
God created two (2) main organs in the human being, One was their brain, the other their sexual drive. Only problem, He only created enough blood to allow one to function at a time.
Who made this comment?

UPDATE: The answer to this Whose Line is it Anyway is:

Tikibug A.K.A. Mary Duval

These 'words of wisdom' could only belong to the bug.

Playing Hard to Get

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Pedophiles equate their sexual attraction to children to being the same as an intimate relationship between two consenting adults. Below are some excerpts from a post made by 'Azure' of GirlChat, titled "One can fall as deeply for a LG as an adult woman?" It's hard to imagine how these thoughts could go through anyone's head when they're around a child, but people who post at GirlChat are not just 'anyone:'
I have seen some others of us mention 'falling in love' with their LGF or BLB (best little buddy - my new term I picked up here!), but I had - until now - dismissed this as just a flight of fancy, turn of phrase, or slight exaggeration.

Not - any - more!
Look at the way he describes his interactions with the child:
Now I've learned to 'play hard to get' things are so much better. I used to be the one that would offer or ask for cuddles, and when I did so she would shy away.
He gets to the crux of his post with:
Then the moment when I realised I felt love for her - true love - and I only realised because my heart broke. You'll excuse me again for not mentioning detail, but I told her something honest that in turn upset her. Before I realised what I'd said, tears were in her eyes and trickling down her cheeks like diamonds. She didn't talk to me again for 2 hours, and during those 2 long hours, as my heart continued to break, I realised that if she was making it shatter in the same way adult women have done, by 'breaking up with me' in this way, albeit as a little friend, then in order to break, it must've been held by her to start with. The emotion and sadness was *exactly* that which I have felt when heartbroken at the hands of an adult woman.
They ignore any distinctions between adults and children, projecting their fantasies onto children. In reality, "Playing hard to get" means nothing to a child whose just playing, she has no idea of how sick and disgusting a person 'Azure' is, or the twisted thoughts going through his head. Yet, he deliberately chooses to ignore reality and instead tries to convince himself that there's something more to her behavior, telling himself he's fallen "in love" with her.

Love has nothing to do with it, he's grooming her, and his posting on GirlChat is all part of rationalizing his behavior.

'Your continued ignorance'

Monday, August 10, 2009

Child Pornography is illegal and for the obvious reasons. Very few people would challenge this, but there are some that do; GirlChat poster 'Stahntii,' is one of these few. He claims that by making child pornography illegal, that it incites pedophiles to commit even more extreme and sadistic sexual acts against kids:
"banning something altogether never depletes curiosity, interest, or demand for it, but rather increases demand and in a more corrupted and abusive manner; a manner that causes for the industry to become progressively more and more barbaric/cruel/sadistic"
'Stahntii' is not alone in this line of thinking (if you can call it that), outside of GirlChat, Mary Duval A.K.A. "Tikibug" once made this remark about 'child erotica' stories being published online which depicted little kids being sadistically sexually abused and tortured:

"Isn't that just horifying?

Now we've got thought police and... you know people. I've had a couple of people say "well... you know, she shouldn't have been writing that."

Well, you know what? She wasn't acting upon it... that's what I'm talking about: we need prevention."
Such ideas for 'preventative measures' and all with the welfare of children in mind.... right?

'Stahntii' lays down with the following reasons why he thinks child pornography should be legalized:
"So then, We should allow the child erotica industry to come "above ground" so that it can be effectively understood, monitored, and regulated. And we should do this primarily so that we can all know that, at the very least, the industry:
1.) is not forcing or coercing any young stars to do anything they don't want to do.
2.) is paying their young stars well.
3.) is not putting their them at risk of acquiring diseases.
4.) is not allowing any activity that causes a them mental or physical damage of any kind.
5.) is not violating their wills and is being regularly treating with respect and dignity."
It's a lot to take in, isn't it?

Especially how anyone can talk about treating children with "respect and dignity" while they're talking about sexually exploiting them. Here's how he finishes up...
The choice is yours. However, your continued ignorance is bringing much pain and suffering to young people globally, every single minute that passes. Would it be so terrible to get over this silly taboo, if it meant that your new purpose was to allow for the most happiness to come to all (young and old). It's that simple.
Criminalizing child pornography doesn't bring suffering and pain to children, it's the sick people who choose to exploit children which do that. And government sanctioned child sexual abuse would only bring happiness to individuals who are depraved and sick enough to enjoy it.

Crossing the Rubicon

Saturday, August 08, 2009

Dec 10, 2003 at 09:08 PM
I am a being of thought,and now of action.
Of necessity I implement plans for the future, and follow them out, and perhaps, this course of action, fed by the madness in my mind and the fire in my veins, shall lead me to my pyrric victory.
--The Shadow of Souls

Eric Hansen aka TriedByConsience aka Shadow of Souls has been saying things like this for years. He's been in and out of mental hospitals and often speaks of creating battlefields and acts of war and gloriously magnificent feats of bravery and intellectual triumphs. He believes his situation to be similar to Jean Valjean.

The Sosenites consider him to be a "Constitutional expert". Eric thinks so too.

He recently increased his rantings and ravings, but what wasn't clear was what his actual plan was. Was he going to attempt suicide again? Was he planning to pull a Walter Howard prediction and become a suicide bomber? Was he going to blow up a court house? Was he simply going to run?

Well yes, it does appear to be that simple, except he wasn't going to run, he was just going to walk straight in, refuse to register as a sex offender, and in a mighty display of mumbo-jumbo psychobabble throw Idaho into a state of shock and awe. Someone apparently failed to tell him that it wouldn't work that way.

Mary Duval, the COO of Sosen encouraged and supported his pre-meditated felony. Anyone with half a brain can see that he needs psychiatric help but Mary is so proud of his bravery that she just can't hardly speak. Yes, she's in awe and says that he's one of the most intelligent men she knows. That is the leadership occurring in the "Sex Offender Support and Education Network".

The issue here is not what Eric planned. Nor is it the hows and whys of it. Many disturbed people throughout history have plotted subversive acts; his behavior should come as no surprise. He's been talking about going out in a blaze of glory for over 6 years now. But Mary, a non-sex offender, in a leadership position - openly and brazenly agitating, condoning, supporting and actually encouraging criminal behavior at the very least is immoral - most likely illegal and completely irresponsible. If she wants to "lead" sex offenders she has an obligation. Part of that obligation is to be aware of who she is leading, dangerous behaviors they may be exhibiting that could put not only themselves but others at risk of harm, and directing unstable people towards the help they need. Did Mary, the COO of Sosen encourage him to get psychiatric help? Did she find appropriate resources for him, for example? Or did she even recognize his instability for what it was? Is she capable of recognizing it?
18-8311. PENALTIES. (1) An offender subject to registration who fails to register, verify his address, or provide any notice as required by this chapter shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison system for a period not to exceed ten (10) years and by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000).
Will Eric go to prison? I doubt it. Once he starts talking the judge will probably order a civil commitment hearing in which case he may be confined for the rest of his life. I repeat: Mary's behavior is beyond irresponsible and I believe exhibits a blatant disregard for the well-being of those she presumes to "lead".

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised by her behavior after her shocking attempts to prevent the sex offenders under the bridge from obtaining housing. Her instructions to them were to say "Hell no, we won't go". Did she lie when she said they were in a desperate situation? Did she lie when she said they needed out from under that bridge as quickly as possible? There are people finding them residences and while that doesn't end the larger problem of "where will sex offenders live" it does help the immediate problem. It's hot, it's filthy and "no human should have to live that way", but Mary would have them stay where they are. Why? Those men - without jobs - without residences - without even running water listen to Mary. They listen to Mary because they believe she has their best interest at heart. But I believe Mary is willing to use, exploit and hurt anyone in her attempt to induce a Revolution through her acts of sedition.

I believe there will have to be another coup in Sosen. The other members there who have honest and legitimate concerns and needs better wake up and quickly. Mary Duval is leading them straight into hell.

As Absolom once said:
In some cases the best way to protect your civil rights is to shut the fuck up.

A Real Cat-astrophe

Some people just have the worst luck, you know?

Case in point:

The Associated Press reports that a Florida man is blaming his cat for child pornography found on his computer.

48-year-old Keith Griffin claims that he was innocently downloading music when he left the room and his evil feline downloaded over 1,000 images of child pornography to his computer.

Now that's some bad luck right there.

Well frankly I don't think - um anyone - is going to believe you, Keith. So, here's my tip for you: make Mary Duval your spokesperson. Don't worry Keith, Mary can handle it - she's got it all worked out. By the time she tells everyone what a 'snot-nosed, teary-eyed victim' and 'evil vigilante troll' that damn cat is, you should have nothing to fear.

Ok enough of the charade. Everyone point and laugh.

The devil will look in my eyes...and be afraid

Monday, August 03, 2009

The Sydney Morning Herald, February the 22nd, 2008:

Queensland's top prosecutor has failed to obtain a criminal conviction against a medical student who offered to give an 11-year-old boy a "penis massage".

Pakistani student Shakeel Mirza, 26, was sentenced to 12 months probation in October last year after pleading guilty to one count of attempted indecent treatment of a child under 12.

A conviction was not recorded after the judge accepted it was a low-level sexual offence and that it was out of character.

I wonder whether the judge would have thought Shakeel's offense was 'out of character' had he known that Shakeel had been posting on BoyChat for years under the screen name 'Greencrystal.' Postings like this...
Sometimes I think I am worse off for having come to BC-being here has made me into a bigger pedophile than what I ever was originally. its like smoking occasionally by myself, and then joinging a group of smokers, and thus becoming hooked on smoking.
Dude..you are far more honourable than me. Waay more. YOu see, if I were a counselor at camp, I would not do what you did..however, i would blatantly try to make friends with some of those boys for my own gain.
Yes, women want it all. Power in bed, power over boys, power over their lives, and to hell with men-

thats an exaggeration, but still.

and then women have the GALL to complain when they get raped.

hell, they deserve it.

After pleading guilty, the judge sentenced Shakeel to 12 months probation and ordered that no conviction be recorded so as not to 'hinder his future employment prospects.' This slap on the wrist did nothing to deter Shakeel, who continues to this day, three years after his original offense, to post on pedophile message boards about his lust for children.
I love boys. Its that simple. Sorry to the world, but hey, the world can go fuck itself- I love boys. i cant help it. I dont think there's a cure of it either.
We are all boylovers.

we are all child molesters.

the difference is simply how we feel on that particular day at that particular time in that particular circumstance..its just one SPECTRUM. And we, as human beings, simply "float" along the spectrum..sometimes we are more BL, other times more Child moester.

I went to see a movie today...schools out, plenty of kids around. I went to take a pee..a 12/13 year old walked in...turned his back to me and faced the urinal..I looked at his neck. succulent, soft...I love hairs on the nape of the neck. I wanted him. I wanted almost every boy I saw today.

And I'm angry. I'm hurt inside. I wanted to grab him, hold him, lick his neck, make him moan...run my hands through his hair, brush my fingers against his soft lips... I WANTED HIM!!!!!!

What the FUCK is wrong with me?

Like Michael Morrow, Phillip Distasio and Roger Keith Bloemers, Shakeel Mirza used a volunteer organization for disadvantaged children as an avenue to gain access to boys. This is where he came into contact with a child he later attempted to molest. Shakeel participated in a therapy program, but a lot of good that did him, he wrote this on BoyChat a week or two ago:

“Everyone time he came in to wake me up he’d either be sucking on my penis or masturbating me, and if I said anything he’d hit me,” said former home resident Brian Wilkinson.

Servers you right you fucker.
Burn. Let the whole bunch of cunts, fuckers, assholes and whatnot pedo bashers fucking burn.

I KNEW someone out there was taking my quota of sex. Now I know where it went *jealous*
And you think that's bad? To give you some idea of how sick Shakeel really is, he once wrote this on BoyChat:
What am I? Whatever it is, it is surely worse than death..but death is not a bad thing..it can be made sweet..the high pitched cries of a tortured child, the agnosied screams as i bite.. mayhaps the devil will look in my eyes..and he will be afraid.. God, you created me. YOu gave me this. I never wanted it, I NEVER ASKED FOR THIS FUCKING TORTURE!! Now You see what i do..see how I live. "You may not love God, but God still loves you" yeah fuck me. Would You feel good if I raped and hurt and killed children?? huh? WOULD YOU FEEL LIKE I HAVE FINALLY SERVED MY PURPOSE IN LIFE?? Thanks a fucking lot for giving this fucking hell to me!! I'm such a bastard..someone should shoot me. IF they can.. You God..grant me peace. amen. Greencrystal
This man belongs somewhere he can never touch another child, someone so bent on justifying pedophilia and sickness is beyond any help available, but instead the Australian judge which sentenced him to probation was more worried about affecting his 'future career prospects.'

'Slip a little powder in his milk'

Sunday, August 02, 2009

Michael John Morrow A.K.A. Michael1016 A.K.A. Michael814 of Grand Junction, Colorado, used to post on many pedophile message boards, from places like BoyBliss and BoyMoment through to GirlChat and more. Morrow used to post about all sorts of things, let's take a look, shall we?

"He is beautiful, 13, sort of small for his age. He showed up at basketball practice in VERY TIGHT (mmmmm) speedos and a sleveless shirt. The speedos I took notice of for obvious reasons...and then, when he removed his sweat suit top, I was mezmerized. His arm pits had just enough hair to set me off (I won't be specific what that means), and I had to challenge him to a one v. one game until the other guys showed up. I got close enough to smell him, and it was even more beautiful that I could imagine."

"Sadly, my favorite boy, a gorgeous 13 year old, moved aobut a month ago, but before that he gave me many pleasureable times."

You see, aside from being a pervert, Morrow (like other pedophiles we know), volunteered as a 'mentor' in an organization set up to help boys "develop a positive self image, a sense of belonging and an acceptance of responsibility for their actions." Hardly the message a scumbag like Morrow would send to child as a mentor, or as a teacher:
I teach a weekly class to middle school kids (ages 12-14) and one another class to the same age group.
Morrow was a pedophile by his own admission:
Word pedophile does not faze me, might as well face up to it, actually.
Thanks to the Wikisposure project, that wasn't the only thing Morrow had to face up to. After Wikisposure volunteers collaborated with Law Enforcement, Morrow was arrested and convicted of possesing 13,000 child pornography photos. He's been sentenced to 84 months (seven years) in prison, but if you ask me, he got off far too lightly.

In the following chat log, he describes an experience he claims to have had with a 5-year old boy which he claims to have abducted while the boy was at school:

WARNING: This may contain triggers
Michael says (4:19 PM): this happened years ago
Michael says (4:19 PM): i was on a trip to idaho
Michael says (4:20 PM): i had cruised this school for two days...i was going to leave the enxt day and i figured, what the heck
Michael says (4:20 PM): i had my popper.s i have a rathter innocent looking car. and i knew that i could pick up this little boy
Michael says (4:20 PM): i had seen h im, looked at his body language
Michael says (4:21 PM): my divorce allowed me to be me
Michael says (4:21 PM): and i wanted this
Michael says (4:21 PM):if he had resisted much, i would not have done it
Michael says (4:23 PM): im safe. it was just a 30 minute thing. and i was headed out of town anyway. i took the boy back to the school
Michael says (4:23 PM): im not sure he told anyone. he may have
Michael says (4:23 PM): it's really he only time ive done anything quite that brazen
This next section of the chat log was said before the one above, but describes the same incident:
Michael says (4:01 PM): he is starting to cry, but i dont care
Michael says (4:01 PM): ive noticed him for weeks
Michael says (4:02 PM): i drive by the school almost every day and JO while i cruise it
Michael says (4:02 PM): he is the one i want...i want to suck him, and fuck him deep
Michael says (4:05 PM): i give him some ice cream
Michael says (4:05 PM): and slip a little powder in his milk
Michael says (4:05 PM): i want him relaxed
So "consensual" and "loving," but we already knew these people were like that. They use children to satisfy themselves. Morrow was never charged nor convicted for this crime, his victim is still out there.

As a final thought, Morrow once commented:
A support group for other boylovers (pedophiles) is very important, and I'm glad having been a part of several.

Rot In Hell, Fat Baby Fucker!

It seems a black flag is flying over at boychat.

AW, someone DIED?

Boo hoo, a child rapist died??

If there's a hell, I hope that Ghost Writer, the serial child molester, burns in it forever. He was a disgusting piece of shit who had many victims over the years, victims who have to live in their own private hell for the rest of their lives. The world was a much safer place when he was thrown in jail in Mexico, and now, it is a much BETTER place.

Fitting that the rapists on boychat call him family. They are all just alike, and I hope they all meet the same end: dead in jail.

Rot forever, Robert Vann Smith. No one will miss you except the criminals on pedophile websites. I, however, will have a nice rum daquiri for the occasion. :)

An Evening Walk

Saturday, August 01, 2009

GirlChat pervert, 'JustAnotherGL' was deciding whether or not to go for an evening stroll:
I was on the fence about taking a walk this evening, but as I sit here an hour or so later typing this piece, I sure am glad that I decided to make the trek! :)
He mentions a girl he'd spoken too while he was out walking:
There is an adolescent girl in my area that I have spoken with on brief occasions over the past year or so. She has a very outgoing, aggressive (but in a friendly/positive way) personality. She also possesses the most beautiful eyes you have ever seen and is petite but athletically built. As we only live 4 blocks apart (and we shop at the same store and go to the same pizza parlor), we see each other on an almost daily basis during the warmer months. As I passed her block today, she and her friend crossed the street to say hi to me and chat a bit. We talked for a bit while she played with her silky long hair. The sun was almost completely down and the streets were deserted. We walked and talked about neighbors, music and cars for perhaps 10 minutes before parting ways with smiles and waves.
And he mocks anyone that would be concerned by his behavior:
At this point, I can just imagine the anti's reading this and screaming, "Oh my God, those children were in imminent DANGER!! That pervert could have done ANYTHING to them!!" Of course, the reality is that they were safer with me at their side than they would be on a dark street alone, but more to the point, they were both very relaxed, friendly and talkative. There was none of the 'fear', 'coercion' or 'luring' nonsense bandied about by soccer moms and online 'watch dog' pricks.
I'll get to this part in a bit, but he finishes up his post with:
I've said this before, but it bears repeating: Even when it is only a 10 minute, impromptu small talk session, a completely platonic 'date' such as this with a talkative and lovely young lass is at LEAST as good as having actual sex with a 'real' woman. (Mind you, I enjoy sex with legal aged females, but I'm sure any of you guys who have had both types of experiences know what I mean! :))
He posts all of this on GirlChat - describing how he found the girl sexually attractive and how the experience was "at least" as exciting as having sex with an adult. While in the middle there somewhere, he mocks how anyone would interpret his behavior as threatening; yet the fact remains - when 'JustAnotherGL' was talking to that girl, he wasn't enjoying it because he was interested in what she had to say, or because of the company, he was enjoying it because he found it sexually exciting to be talking to someone in his "AoA" (Age of Attraction).

Whether he thinks of it as grooming or not, that's what he was doing and that's why "an hour or so later" he's online, bragging about it to his fellow perverts at GirlChat.