Derek Logue is a master of it. And apparently it is the ONLY thing he's mastered aside from blame gaming. Now he presumes to lecture "media hounds" on the proper use of the word pedophile and claims there can be no such thing as a "convicted pedophile". Why? Well a couple of reasons, one is that pedophiles CAN control themselves according to Derek Logue, the convicted child molester. Also according to this wacked-out-victim-blaming-piece-of-shit-cockroach one can't be a convicted pedophile because pedophilia is a medical diagnosis.
Pedophilia is also a common word. It has a common meaning which is "sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object". It's in Websters. Look it up.
A part of semantics is also the study of how words evolve. My contention is that words mean what society decides they mean. "Gay" for example. This is really unimportant though because we all know that "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" and "A pedo by any other name would smell as foul". The name doesn't change what it is.
I recognize that it is important to someone like Derek Logue however because he doesn't want that word associated with himself, despite the fact that he admitted he was attracted to a child. And despite the fact that he molested that child, and then spent years online blaming her and everyone else for his crime while associating with and defending known and admitted pedophiles - he doesn't want anyone to think that about him. He prefers to minimize:
"Very few Registrants are clinically diagnosed with pedophilia"
When we consider the sex offender defender mantra has been that sex offenders are not routinely assessed to determine if they are or are not pedophiles. No registry is going to say "he was a pedophile" and therefore Derek has absolutely no knowledge whatsoever regarding how many offenders are pedophiles and even if he did - that knowledge would be wasted on a fool like Derek.
I generally just shake my head in disbelief at this pathetic and despicable excuse for a man but then he always manages to outdo himself with attempts to lecture people with convoluted statements like this
Stop assuming every registrant is a pedophile and misusing the term. You have done enough damage by misusing and abusing this term.
"You have done enough damage"
Really?
How about this one:
How about a little truth in addressing this issue? Fanning the flames of blind hate and stupidity has not helped matters
Okay, I'll give you a little truth. Derek Logue is nauseating on his best days. He should quit fanning the pain of those who have been devastated by stupid selfish demented pricks like him by saying such profoundly idiotic things. It has not helped matters.
How much are we willing to sacrifice to "save one child?"
Let's ask Mary Duval and see what she has to say on the subject - of saving one child.
Whatever we do it could help our sons. And, you know, it's a huge fight, I mean - It's us against the people and the government and so we must start with education and hopefully educate America
In the end I'm sure Cathy and Lisa agree you know, as long as we save one child it does give me a little peace in my heart. My heart breaks every day but I know if I can save one child - a boy or girl - then you know, at least I've done something good for this country.
She wasn't talking about saving victims of sexual abuse though. And of course, on later shows she mocked the idea of "saving one child" - when referring to victims.
Still. Derek has a complaint about "saving one child". So does Walter Howard for that matter. Check this out. Interesting that Derek is still hanging on the coat tails of Tmax while knowing the man was a member of boylover.net Naturally, Derek Logue wouldn't believe (or wouldn't care) that someone like Walter Howard would go into chat rooms designated for minors. Even if he did believe it deep down in his heart of hearts they need every one they can get. If it saves one pervert that is.
"True victims" of sex abuse... look like, act like, think of, dream of...?
Should I cut myself, freak out, get on drugs, learn to shut up, drown my sorrows with alcohol? Or go on youtube and cry?
The therapy that I received taught me that I had a voice and to use it. I am not ashamed of doing so. Possibly... if "miss Mary" had proper therapy she wouldn't be advocating for registry reform and hanging out with pedophiles and sex offenders.
Sex offenders deserve to have their pictures all over the internet and in magazines. People have the right to know their crimes because they are dangerous and cannot be cured. Sex offenders damage their victims for life and should be held accountable for life.
By the way, there is something both sad and sick about someone who uses a screen name like Logue Hater. Imagine, your whole identity based upon hating someone.
Who made this comment?
UPDATE: The answer to this Whose Line is it Anyway is:
Warped Ohio aka Derek Logue aka Fallenone
Using the screen name 'Warped Ohio' which he adopted in order to mock and belittle a victim of rape Derek left the above comment.
How many people remember the days of Rookiee? He explained best how it all works. How he and his pedo pals didn't lie about what they were, how old they were, or what they were after. The other pedofreaks explain which victims they target. The importance of this study is that it confirmed what we already knew and that many people who don't understand what the dregs of society are up to don't..... The stereotypical image of an internet predator doesn't fit with reality. Take a look here if you have any doubts about that. In fact.....this is what the study said:
“Most Internet-initiated sex crimes involve adult men who are open about their interest in sex,” Wolak adds. “The offenders use instant messages, e-mail and chat rooms to meet and develop intimate relationships with their victims. In most of the cases, the victims are aware that they are talking online with adults.”
and
"most online sex offenders are adults who target teens and seduce victims into sexual relationships. They take time to develop the trust and confidence of victims, so that the youth see these relationships as romances or sexual adventures. The youth most vulnerable to online sex offenders have histories of sexual or physical abuse, family problems, and tendencies to take risks both on- and offline, the researchers say."
We talked about how they choose their victims here
The paedophiles themselves tell us that they specifically target and prey upon disadvantaged families.
How many times have you seen posters here talk about having y/fs from happy, loving homes? Those boys don't need to turn to someone outside the family for support. I have had a couple of y/fs from those sort of homes, but we never had the kind of close friendship I usually develop with kids from dysfunctional familes.
The kids from good homes are just along for the fun, but kids from dysfunctional homes, or no home, want a whole lot more...
Or as Descartes put it:
BLs who have no criminal record can work with boys, but probably not the boys that they would dream of working with. The BLs who have boy-filled lives aren't taking a bunch of adorable boys on fun camping trips in the woods.
They are working with boys who are extremely poor, who have serious physical and/or emotional problems and who are far from being the object of most BLs' fantasies.
Exploiting a Minor is a Major Offense Project Safe Childhood
"And I watched as they invented a whole new problem.....isn't that cool? If you're running out of things to do to sex offenders invent a new problem.......we have internet predators -- oh my goodness -- it's an epidemic -- these internet predators oh my gosh they're reaching their hands right through the screen and grabbing your children. Except that the federal government commissioned studies on the incidence of internet predators and they came up with exactly the opposite of what the government wanted to hear -- that it really isn't that much of a problem -- that mostly it's teen on teen goofing around and that most of the men on the internet are not lying about their age. And the girls who are falling for this are girls who unfortunately come from dysfunctional families and are reaching out to anyone for that love....But that's not what the legislators wanted to hear, so the American Public didn't hear it either."
This suppressed study - available here - and kept top secret from the American public on the world wide web.... tells quite a different story than Cheryl and Derek Logue's distorted interpretations. It says that 97% of solicitations were by strangers, 48% by minors, 24% were regarded as "very or extremely upsetting or frightening" and 49% were not reported. The study also concluded that the offenders only pretended to be teenagers 5% of the time and still "identities are easy to disguise on the internet so the solicitors may not have been the age or gender they claimed to be"
While we know that children who have previously been abused make the easiest targets, Cheryl seems to regard it as acceptable as long as it is they who are the targeted victims.
"most online sex offenders are adults who target teens and seduce victims into sexual relationships. They take time to develop the trust and confidence of victims, so that the youth see these relationships as romances or sexual adventures. The youth most vulnerable to online sex offenders have histories of sexual or physical abuse, family problems, and tendencies to take risks both on- and offline, the researchers say."
Some recommendations include:
"Be clear about why sex with underage adolescents is wrong. Offender and potential offenders need to hear a clear message that nonforcible sex with underage adolescents violates the social responsibility adults have toward youth for objective mentoring and custodianship"
Contrary to Tikibug's assertion that the government has no right to tell someone when they are old enough to have sex, and Walter Howard's claim that children "need to be taught how to love" This study says:
"Youths need candid, direct discussions about seduction and how some adults deliberately evoke and then exploit the compelling feelings that sexual arousal can induce. Even young adolescents should be given basic information about the inappropriateness of romantic advances from adults. This information should include reassurances that it is normal to have strong sexual feelings but wrong for adults to provoke or exploit these feelings, especially with youths who are inexperienced in coping with sexual desire and intimate relationships"
Another key finding;
"A considerable number of online child molesters also possess child pornography and child pornography production is an important element in many cases, including situations where offenders solicit victims to produce sexual images of themselves"
Nationwide, federal prosecutors have indicted 2,289 defendants in online child solicitation and pornography cases this year. But I suppose Cheryl Griffiths would agree with the bold idiocy of Zman when he said
They could be protecting the country with their hacking skills or something, yet they want to go after defenseless child predators
The Justice Department's Project Safe Childhood has launched a new National Public Awareness Campaign. They've produced some amazing videos, not only aimed at educating potential targets of predators but also aimed at those who offend, a very nice warning of the consequences of preying on vulnerable children.
To stop this problem from becoming more pervasive than it is, we need three elements coming together. We need education, we need prevention, and we need enforcement. Project Safe Childhood pulls all those elements together to make sure we are keeping America's children safe.
Robert is a member of Sosen. He's a troubled man from his own account. He is a pedophile who has molested many children though it was never discovered by authorities.
Robert29 was busted for possession of child pornography on his laptop while crossing the border into Canada and is now a registered sex offender who struggles with his desires for children to the point he recently considered castration as an option. He said:
I'm not a DOCTOR but I have told this forum every thing in my life about my sexual problem I have with underage kids and my porn problem. and since 2005 win i got arrested for porn I have been trying everything to get over this problem I'm even on Risperdal and fluoxetine used to treat pedophilia and it helps some I don't have the fantasies and desires like i did before but i still HADE them 2-3 times a week i have not looked at underage porn in over 3 years but i still fantasies about it so i have been looking for something to help me with the fantasies i have looked into castration but i don't think i have to go that far so i started looking for some thing to lower my sex drive and i found this web site about liquorice (licorice) and testosterone and found out that licorice (glycyrrhiza glabra) can lower your testosterone and libido so i ordered licorice supplement from natures way and for just over 2 weeks i have been taking 3 450mg capsules a day and it seems to be helping me with my fantasies for about the past 9 days i have not been thinking of sex like before I'm not saying it must be the licorice BUT that's the only thing i have changed in a month and in 2 weeks ill update the forum on how I'm doing with it
Clearly this was a desperate cry for help, but what's even more alarming is the lack of response or concern he received. Some of his many statements he's made while at Sosen include:
we started to find teenage boys for that we hade sex with about 6 boys we all so hade a computer and i was looking at child porn just about every night
I was never a danger to any child i was arrested back in 2005 for teenage porn i hade on my laptop
i never did anything to a child and i never wont to but do to porn on the net im sentenced for life
I have posted a lot of fax about myself fax that i can prove by people i know and people i new wen i was a teen some are victims these fax can put me in jail for a long time and i have been a member for over 1 year and i have not been arrested
I'm not saying what i did is ok i have done other things with teens the courts don't know about what i am saying for what i was charged with why am i senates for life wen its ok for people on drugs to be around kids
I have ben diagnostic with PEDOPHILIA........some of you wen you did your sex crime that was it a one time thing you never think of doing it again PEDOPHILIA i think of it all the time.
i did report being on yahoo im msn im and paltalk and thay also have all my e-mail addresses so if thay have any problems thay can come and talk to me im not hiding anything
And yet, interestingly enough, when someone did report him to the authorities, he came back to tell them about it and to admit that no, he had not registered all his email addresses. His responses from the old-timer Sosenites i.e. Rod Wagner and Zman were to tell him not to ever let the authorities search his computer again. Only one voice, a new one spoke up to say:
Every time someone reoffends it hurts our cause, not to mention another victim. I hope that you have no anger towards those who "told". Since you are innocent (and even if you weren't), I hope you are grateful to those people who cared enough to say something. At first I was like, gee, you can't talk on this forum without someone telling on you, but then I realized that that is a prison mentality. If someone on this forum prevents a new victim by ratting me out, then that is great. Do it anonymously, but just do something to help us stay straight. And if there are moles on our website who are doing the telling, as long as it is a legit "concern" then I wouldn't be mad at them either. They are trying to stop someone from being a victim at our hands and that is a good thing no matter who it comes from.
Why was the CEO pretend 'child advocate' not addressing this herself? I suppose it's because Sosen is not a 'support and education' network. It is an activist group. Their mission is to change laws. Linda Pehrson:
This is not an offender therapy group. My husband falls into the "grooming" type of offense. Been there done that, bought the T shirt. It is not my job to worry in this group if an offender is lying to himself..That is between him and his therapist we are here to fight the insane hysteria and dracion SO laws.
Successful activists know and understand that in order to bring about change......whatever it may be, you must first change society's opinion of whatever the topic is. Sosenites only believe in ramming victim bashing denial down society's throat and expecting people to love them for it. Here's another example. Robert29 asked the question
how many of you have stopped to think
1 Hade i not got arrested how far word i of gone?
2 How many Victims word i have?
3 word i of STOPPED with out going to jail?
Me I think of these Qs all the time hade you read my story you will see I do have more then 1 Victim and it was more then just cp I never did anything with anyone under 13yo but the porn i was in to was 8-12years old and if i did not get arrested in Canada for cp ill probley have More victims and the ages might be under 13
Robert even further clarified for them what he meant and states that since he's been caught he wouldn't do it again for two reasons, neither of which have any recognition of damage to his victims.
IF you never got arrested do you think it wod of just ben a one time thing or do you think you might of did it more? me yes it was more then a one time thing it went on for about 9-10 years and i know if i did not get arrested it probley wod of went on thear is 2 things that changed me 1 Jail is not a place for anyone to be and i do not wanna go back 2 MY loved one I dont wanna let them down like i did
Robert got a few responses. Derek told him "Could've should've would've", Zman plead the fifth, and nkrso told Robert that he didn't even HAVE a victim at all, it was only child porn that's all. One voice, so different than the usual Sosen mumbo-jumbo interjected... Static. He encouraged Robert to bring this up in treatment and although the precedent had already been set in Sosen for how these things would be handled - 'ignore it or delete it' - he didn't follow normal procedure and let nkrso's statement slide. No he addressed it. As it should be:
Nkrso- It's easy to say that when someone "merely" views CP, they aren't victimizing anyone. But, the truth is that the child is actually being victimized all over again every time the CP is viewed. Your opinion on this is something you definitely want to discuss with your therapist. If you have a good one, he/she will show you how seeing CP that way is actually just minimizing abusive behavior. I'm not picking on you- everyone is at different points on the "treatment path" and I'm just trying to point you in the right direction. It's thoughts like that that make it easier to start down the path toward re-offense.
That was the voice of a man who Derek said never "fit in" at Sosen. Derek is beside himself simply because Static has chosen to voice his opinion here as though there is some vast conspiracy in the works. And yet, I'm gonna play nice and be perfectly honest here. "Static and Stitches" aren't in cahoots. He's simply a man here stating his views, and I'm simply a woman who is listening, sometimes agreeing and perhaps sometimes not. But there's one thing about it, he's not bashing victims of crimes, he's not minimizing or denying on their behalf and he's certainly not whining and moaning about imaginary Nazi's.
He's simply trying to help RSO's in the way that he believes will be most effective. The difference in his way and Derek's way, or Linda's, Tiki's, Tmax or Tom's is that their way has been done for years and it's never gotten them anywhere. Trying to keep non-offending victims or their advocates out of their forum is a sure fire way to assure they'll stay in there, long after they've been bored to tears. It's time to clean up the House of Sosen. It's time to clean up the 'art of RSO advocacy'. It can and will be done or else Sosen will cease to exist. Personally I think it's too late but you never know, maybe someone will wake them up before it's too late.
Every day we read idiotic rants from RSOs/pedos. So much in fact, that we often don't have time to reflect on the little absurdities. This new series will bring you those little absurdities one by one, for your reflection/comments/laughter/outrage.
The inaugural deep thought certainly qualifies as one of the most idiotic things I've seen.....ever!
"My victim was a follower. She acted different away from her sister. Anyways other people got in trouble over her. Today she's either 16 or 17. She has a GIRLFRIEND now. She has the reputation of being wild and of loose morals. A regular Lolita enjoying her illicit relationships...I have at least some buffer in knowing she was corrupt long before I met her."
"I have challenged AZUStitches77’s claim that all sex offenders are rapists or one day will be rapists by asking him to provide factual data to support these absurd statements. To date, AZUStitches has not provided any factual data. Why?"
So speaks the "Truthseeker" SOClear Media's newest and brightest sex offender defender and distorted out of control harassing fool. You may recognize him as ApparitionZ, the guy who hits all the YouTube videos with inane blurbs of nonsense reminiscent of the tactics used by the nodding pedo heads of '07.
Why have I not provided the factual data he requested? Why, it's quite simple. I never said that. Truthseeker, however, DID claim that the majority of registered sex offenders are on the registry for such things as "urinating in public" (that's his favorite argument btw), mooning people, having consensual sex, or in his case "merely looking at a few dirty pictures". That he seems to have absolutely no realization of the seriousness of his crime is great cause for concern regarding the likelihood of him re-offending. After all.....it was just some sexual pleasure at the expense of sexually abused children, wasn't it? He's become the newest sex offender vigilante on YouTube making wild unsupportable accusations and making a total nuisance of himself. Look:
"AZU = Murderer"
"So why do these vigilantes believe public urinators and teenagers having consensual sex should be murdered? Answer : they are scum."
"AZU believes in murdering children for playing doctor. What a sicko!"
"Oh, so you guys murder gay people too, interesting."
"I hear antipaedo used to make his own child porn, be warned!"
"I have proof that vigilantes burned down the home of a former offender in Tennessee and wound up murdering his wife! One of a number of violent attacks by the PJ Cult."
Remember how Zman used to go around to blogs and news sites always repeating "Educate yourself! Visit my blog and learn the REAL FACTS"? Remember that? Well Truthseeker has his own mantra that doesn't even make sense. Taking information from various places he tries to put it together into a new FACT.
"According to the Department Of Justice , less than 8% of sex offenders re-offend and most sexual abuse is committed by someone who is not on a registry which debunks the myth of “stranger danger” in the majority of cases."
Does that statement make sense? Does he understand what he said? Let's listen to the Truthseekers mantra, it goes like this:
Now, let's listen to him explain how news stories are FACTUAL as long as they are on Zman's site.......but not if you just go out and read them yourself of course.
I am a vigilante cult leader for voicing my opinion. That opinion makes me 'violent'. So what does Truthseeker's make him? A ticking time bomb? Not only does he believe that Stitches77 voicing opinions over child sexual abuse is more dangerous that his child molesting pals.....molesting children but he even denies child sexual abuse even exists! NOOOO You weren't abused! Your child wasn't groomed and molested! It's all a myth, an overblown hysterical biased media report to make you think you were raped when you were only mooned. On one of his podcasts he goes so far as to claim the majority of sex offenders are on the registry for urinating in public and demands to know why we aren't putting women on the registry for dressing skimpily at the beach. He says:
There are a variety of reasons why a person would view images deemed as child porn. It may simply be out of research as in the case of Pete Townshend (”The Who”) or to help authorities find the people who produce such materials. Factually, most who only view these images do not go on to hurt anyone.
Completely disregarding:
"Experts have often wondered what proportion of men who download explicit sexual images of children also molest them. A new government study of convicted Internet offenders suggests that the number may be startlingly high: 85 percent of the offenders said they had committed acts of sexual abuse against minors, from inappropriate touching to rape."
Well he does have the facts after all doesn't he? What's a few dirty pictures? I guess he wants to make you think "a few dirty pictures" is nothing really to be concerned about, I mean after all he did it, and look at what a nice guy HE is. Maybe he should have read this:
U.S. criminal investigator Flint Waters works undercover in the war on child pornography. And just like the other 800 licensed investigators working the internet, he goes for stress counseling often. Is it any wonder why? He describes some of the recent things he's found.
"A video of a toddler on a changing table who is penetrated by an adult male."
"Pictures of a young girl, 6 or 7 years old, nude, tied to a chair and being penetrated by a dog."
How dare he try to sugar coat child sexual abuse, or ANY sexual abuse for that matter? These people actually believe that they can and will change people's minds about them by dismissing as insignificant the horror of what it's really like. They call victims "professional victims" while claiming that THEY are victims. "Oh they should just pick themselves up and go on and stop being victims" I cannot even count the number of RSO activists and pedo activists alike who have made that statement, showing clearly that they have no understanding whatsoever of the true effects of being sexually abused and how it differs from other crimes. Tom Madison claims less than 1% of RSO's are pedophiles, a completely made up figure, he either made it up himself or someone LIED to him and he believed it. I tend to think he made it up.
Listen:
Ok, we want the truth. Let's talk truth. He finally said something that was true:
Yes that's true. I did say that the DOJ did NOT report that 95% of all sex crimes are committed by someone not on the registry. I said it because it's true. We've been harping on this for a year now and they cannot get it through their heads.
A recidivism rate does not equal a crime rate. Furthermore that 3.5% recidivism statistic was spread out over a period of three years, it was not an annual figure. It was not a measurement of the percentage of crimes committed. It was a measurement of re-offending. The DOJ report DOES NOT SAY how many people convicted of a new sex crime in any given year are or are not already on the sex offender registry. You cannot take one statistic and force it into meaning something it does not mean.
For example, let's say you have say 1000 men in 2007 that were RSO's that you followed. Let's say 3% of them re-offended. That doesn't mean that 97% of all sex crimes were committed by someone not already convicted of a sex crime. The only conclusion you can factually draw from that scenario is that 3% re-offended and 97% didn't. You can bet that there were other RSO's in that same time period who re-offended after a varied period of time. But the study wasn't measuring them. The recidivism rate released by the Department of Justice does not mean what they say it means. I don't know how many other ways to say it where they can understand. I know they want to believe it, I know they DO believe it, but it's because the only people they are listening to are people who spend their time trying to find some reason, some excuse, some something somebody anybody to blame except for themselves.
When Tom Madison goes on National TV and says the things he says, he makes a fool of himself in more ways than just losing control and acting like a wild and crazy impulsive and angry sex offender. He makes himself look stupid, because he is uninformed. He can't even read and comprehend a DOJ report.
However, occasionally you find a mind that's a notch up from these other guys. Let's pay attention to him for a moment. Vanguard a staff member of Sosen doesn't get it either but I admit he's closer than the others. He tried to help his people out, and I dare say he got nowhere. They didn't want to hear what he had to say and he didn't push the issue. He's well aware I'm sure of how irritable they get when someone disagrees with them. Even Derek got in on it. I'm going to show you the mentality of these people..... the sheer brain power in action. Read for yourself some snippets of their conversation:
blueshift:
"This is some thing i got in my mail today, form eAdvoate I think. This could be a holy grail question and and answer will debunk or limits the ligamancy of the registry. Its a question I have seen asked many times, but never in this way.
"whether the risk of offending For an ex-felon ever becomes similar, or equal to, the risk of offending for someone who has never offended at all? If so, after what period of time since the last arrest or conviction does this occur?"
So when is a former sexual offender's risk the same as the general population?"
"just the fact that the chances of someone not on the registry offending is 95% and someone who is on the registry is less than 5% tells me that a former sex offender's risk is already less than the general population"
oldman_inmaine:
"I pointed this statistical probability out in a local newspaper once while in a conversation with a poster called stitches. They were quite offended at the idea that I would suggest that their own mathematical formula indicated that they represented a far greater danger to the general population than an ex-sex offender.
So yes the next time you get into a heated discussion with some person that is Downing the ex-sex offender just remember the probabilities of that person crossing the tracks in your direction is a little higher than the probability that you may back step and recommit a crime. laughing
Any mathematical geniuses out there?"
flowergirl_1970:
"Harris/Hanson (one or the other or both) out of Canada looked at this and found that the risk reduces to 0% (I think) 15-20years post release"
Vanguard:
"Yes, the general public is 95% more likely to commit a new sex offense. BUT... there are less than a million registered offenders in a county with 300 million people, and there are only tens of thousands of sex offensed committed.
Let's say there are 100,000 registerable sex offenses committed per year. That leaves the following:
5% committed by RSO's, or 5,000 offenses. Out of a million offenders, that makes 1 in 200 offenders commit a new crime.
95% committed by non-RSO's, or 95,000 offenses. Out of 300 million people, that makes 1 in 3,150 non-RSO's commit a new crime.
Therefore, the anti's could use the argument that RSO's are over 15 times likely to commit a new sex offense."
"There is no real way to do this without complex math.
Somehow I think they are coming to that conclusion the wrong way, by counting recidivism as the basis for assuming how many RSOs actually re-offend in the given year. The DOJ study found the number of sex offenders in the study who re-offended was about 550 of 9000 in 3 years, while 3500 or so of the 240,000 NON-RSOs committed a sex crime. That's six times the number of non-sex offenders committing a sex crime as sex offenders, not counting first time offenders"
Well thanks Vanguard and Derek, you see Derek using YOUR numbers you provided from the 1994 DOJ report on Recidivism, you are correct that the non-Rso felons committed SIX times the number of offenses, but what does that mean really? It might be in your favor if there were the same number of criminals being measured. But there weren't. The non-Rso's made up 27 times the number of Rso's. Meaning one out of 16 sex offenders committed a new sex crime and one out of 68 non sex offender criminals did. And if we add Vanguard's calculation into the mix, there were only 1 out of over 3000 that were not any type of criminal at all.
If you want to make a difference pull your head out of the sand, acknowledge that there are seriously damaging crimes committed against people, and that your figures you're trying to pass off as FACT are not fact at all but a manipulation of statistics to try and make them say something they do not say. The Washington study does indeed say that 19% of all new sex crime convictions resulting in prison time the offender is already on the registry. The New York State study that the Reverend Hess child porn sex offender likes to reference also states a low recidivism rate over a limited amount of time. It also states quite clearly that 25% of the men in that study had a previous sex crime conviction prior to the most current offense that landed them in jail. Get your facts straight. You do not have facts. You do not have truth. Tom Madison is uninformed, and you're all acting like imbeciles.
Or, you could always stick with the same old story you've been using and continue to look like pissed off unrepentant victim bashing sex offenders who will LIE and LIE and LIE and are never to be trusted. I kinda think that's what you guys will do. None of you are smart enough to know you got it wrong, and even if you were, there's not a one of you that has the balls to stand up and say "Stitches is right guys, let's go back to the drawing board".
FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOM - NOW!!!! Posted On Sunday, August 10, 2008 at 1:25:00 AM by ZMan!
STAND UP AND FIGHT - FOR YOUR FREEDOM
Imagine with 630,000 sex offenders, not including family, could do?
This is in the words of Zman, the radical, impulsive, brainless registered sex offender activist we've all come to know so well. Yes, folks, he's over on his blog attempting to incite violence. He's encouraging convicted child molesters to gang together and RISE UP against society.
I believe the impetus behind this rash act of his came from one of SoClear Media's newest pissed off sex offenders TMaximus. Listen:
Yes, indeed. Society has reached the breaking point. We're sick and tired of people thinking they can abuse our children and then whine and moan about the consequences. We're sick and tired of liberal wrist slapping judges who won't give an appropriate sentence for the molestation of a child. Yes, we need mandatory sentences. And for the most part, what we need is not residency restrictions or sex offender registries. I believe it is clear from the lack of intelligence and the rampant blame gaming arising from the sex offender community, that what we need is life imprisonment without possibility of parole.
This is Zman's call to fight those who oppose baby rapers
To members of Absolute Zero United, its all fun and games to harass former offenders. Usually I'm all fun and games in taking it back to them. But not today. This is no fucking game. The label of "sex offender" has gotten so serious that people are willing to KILL in order to avoid the stigma. Any troll reading this better think long and hard about this article, because this is not a fucking game, but a matter of life and death
He then goes on to quote, in stupid RSO fashion, an entire news article. Let's sum it up for you.
The complaint tells a chilling story of a disaffected man who had thought about committing a random shooting for the past four or five years and prepared by stashing weapons in the woods.
"Johnson finally decided to execute his plan last week after suspecting that a woman he had recently sexually assaulted would tell her ordeal to police, the complaint said."
Johnson said he lured the woman near the bridge the evening before the shooting, sexually assaulted her and tried to talk her out of calling police. He decided to wait there and kill any law enforcers who arrived to investigate. When none did, he returned home.
He left his home the next day and when he returned, his mother told him police were looking for him. Expecting to go to jail and fearing the label of sex offender, he decided "he had nothing to lose and the only power he had in this life was `to take.'"
Now Derek, believes that when the man started shooting teenagers at random, the government is at fault for being "vigilantes" making laws that he doesn't agree with. This man had already been planning to do something like this for years, why in the world would Derek choose a psychopath to try to make his argument.......that isn't even a rational argument.....and will only do more harm to himself and "his people" than if he'd just kept his mouth shut to begin with. He's impulsive, which is probably why he's an RSO today. If he knew WHY this is an inappropriate tactic for a convicted child molester to use, then he would most likely have enough self-control to have not molested a child to begin with.
And yet the trolls over at Absolue Zero United think its all fun and games? You condemned someone for merely acknowledging the possibility it was inevitable? Well here is proof it is not only possible, not only inevitable, but a COLD HARD REALITY! Do you STILL think this all a fun game, Stitches?
You are quite mistaken Mr. Logue. This is no game. It has never been a game. Right now in this country there are an estimated 27,160,752 ADULT female survivors of child sexual abuse and 12,220,488 ADULT male survivors for a total of almost 40 million ADULT survivors. You want to call up your 630,000 and incite violence against those whose only desire is to protect children from predators? Bring it on, Derek. Bring it on. You aren't doing anything to create empathy to your cause, you are making it worse Derek. This is what people think about those who abuse children.
We think of those powerful words as "belonging" to 12-step programs, but those came after this was written, and these words actually speak to everyone, no matter your beliefs or your troubles. Let's see how they apply to us.
We frequently see activists...those out trying to create change of some sort make some very similar statements.
From the pedophile activists....the now infamous Rob
You will never silence Us. We will fight for our Rights and there is Not a damn thing that you can do about It !
The laws don't work. When will people ever realize no matter how tough on crime, all the zero tolerance, all the registries in the world will not prevent a murder from murdering, a thief from stealing, a dealer from dealing, a user from using, a rapist from raping....
They can't change a damn thing. Paedophilia has existed since the beginning of time and will exist until the end of time. It's part of the mechanism for the survival of the species.
Their 'power' couldn't stop a damn thing... and an entire generation has grown up in a paederotically-integrated (or actually, baby-boy-assfucking) world.
When it comes down to it, these invasive gestapo laws won't stop the rapes, the molestations, and so forth, but only serves to embitter a specific populace which can only serves to further promote this cause
These are completely false statements. Yes there have been pedofreaks as far back as we know of, that doesn't mean we should approve of it and accept it. Nor does it mean that we won't find a cure for it. Lots of research is being done in this area, a lot of new discoveries have been made that at first glance may not appear to be significant, yet I believe they will add up to a cure for this horrible affliction and most likely during our lifetime.
So no, in the first instance we cannot do anything about the fact that pedophiles exist, not us, not you and I. But someone can. In the meantime we can have the courage to confront the issue, the pedophile activism currently underway, the active child predators, we can do something about those things. And we have the wisdom to know the difference between those things as well.
Will there always be crime? Of course there will, that is a given. But we don't sit back and say 'oh well' someone will always do it so it's pointless to make something illegal or to insist on consequences. We can have the courage to change their activism, to make it more honest. We can leave them no out. We can have the courage to stand up for children and do the right thing, we also have the wisdom to know the difference between those things.
The fact of the matter is, we hold all the cards. We (speaking on the broad scale) have sex with their children. And when they arrest us and put us in jail, a zillion more of us are still having sex with their children. And when they get us in therapy and "cure" us and teach us how not to "offend," a zillion more of us still slip through the cracks and still have sex with their children.
And there's not a damn thing they can do about it.
For every pedophile they arrest and put in jail, ten more are fucking their children.
I've said this a million times, Dylan and I always get slammed for it. No one wants to admit the fact that the idea of the "celibate paedophile" is a kite that jut won't fly because it implies we are sexless or without a sex drive something that isn't real. It also tells the world you're a lying idiot if you actually expect them to buy that horse shit, worse still, schizophrenic if you actually believe it yourself.
Masturbation has no known harmful effects on an otherwise healthy child. Even if a child were forcibly masturbated against his/her will, any harm would be minimal and quickly overcome if parents and the law took a sensible attitude toward the "assault"
We can only shake our heads in consternation at the sheer lunacy of these people. It's quite silly of them actually as everyone can clearly see that we CAN do something, we WILL do something and we ARE doing something.
Their responses to our critiques thus far have been anything from complete silence, to the standard pedofreak LAME response
Jesus was a pedophile although his actions were not illegal at the time. Laws have changed but it is not likely that God has changed what He considers to be a sin. He got it right the first time.
If any anti even comes with in spitting distance of me, they will be dead. They will no longer live. I will fucking kill them. So if they want to stay alive they can leave me alone.
I don't advocate wanton violence. I don't believe in collateral damage. But I'm a firm believer in self-defense, and also a firm believer that the best defense against an irrational enemy is to put him down permanently.
The 'life' of 77Stitches_in_the_cunt. I don't remember where I heard that these females could be healed only with a good, extremely strong kick at the snatch.
The reason why AZ and PJ won't post THEIR addresses or show their faces is because they'd have a big-rig through their homes the next day. There are plenty of truckers who'd love to tie those guys on both ends to the DOT bumpers and hit 10th gear. And nobody would ever find them again.
These are all excellent responses. Reactions such as these merely prove they are hysterical nut cases with no clear rebuttal to what we actually said that set them off to begin with. In fact, most times they don't even know or understand what it was we said. They read what they 'think' it says which sometimes leads them to make serious mistakes in their "knee jerk reactions".
When people like this make these outrageous remarks, radical attempts to change society or laws that are absolutely detrimental to children's safety I, for one, will be talking about it. I'll inform everyone I possibly can, I'll shout it from the rooftops if I have to. I WILL be heard, and I'll get others to help spread the message.....far and wide.
And there's not a damn thing they can do about it.
A big HT to OperationSoRoarFul for passing on this juicy comment left by Bennie Walton
Benoliwal, you see is a sex offender activist. Whether following in the footsteps of all the others or whether they are following in his is yet to be determined. The point is what he's saying.
He believes that the problem with people who prey on children is all the fault of the parents and children who go where they don't belong. Bennie instructs us all to "think if you can"
OKAY. We will.
Expressions in one way or another made by parents who can’t and won’t take responsibility for their own children and what they are doing to get propositioned in the first place by strangers on the Internet.
There are sayings of irresponsible parents, vigilantes, and legislators who have taken up the banner of vigilantism.
To get propositioned in the first place? What? Bennie goes on to tell us that if children get on the internet and go to age-inappropriate sites that apparently they deserve whatever they get. If their parents are neglectful or irresponsible parents well it's their fault. WA LA Let's be sure and plant all the blame exactly where it belongs here........the victim.
Who cares about balanced laws and equity, surely not the vigilante, nor the parents who want to blame everyone else for their lack of control over their children? If children, under the age of 13 are propositioned on the Internet by strangers, then the question bares asking, what are these young children doing in places on the Internet where they do not belong? It isn’t the fault of the sex offender, or the pedophile, it is the fault of clueless and weak parents and guardians.
I'm thinking that with Bennie's line of reasoning a few other questions needs answers as well. If a child gets molested in the park, or the restroom or the department store or his coach's car, well what the hell was he doing there in the first place? If a child is molested by his teacher what the hell was he doing being at school? If a child gets molested in his home by a pedo-parent or an uncle or cousin or neighbor or friend of the family, what the hell was he thinking being in the home of a pedophile in the first place? "It isn't the fault of the sex offender or the pedophile"
Granted there are bad parents out there. There are also good parents. And whether a childs parent is good or bad they don't deserve to be molested. And while there are a lot of things you can do to try and minimize the chances that something like that will happen to your child nothing, absolutely nothing is fail proof. We cannot lock our children up inside our homes with dead-bolts and bars on the window. We cannot keep them on a leash no more than 5 feet from our presence. And stupid activists should not be trying to make other people responsible for their own actions. Period.
My victim was a follower. She has a GIRLFRIEND now. She has the reputation of being wild and of loose morals. A regular Lolita enjoying her illicit relationships...I have at least some buffer in knowing she was corrupt long before I met her.
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.
Of course, such activity has been declared illegal in most places and Sugar and Spice clearly states this, but it certainly would not do to have children learning that their parents, schools, churches and lawmakers are lying to them when they say that all intimate touching is ‘bad touch’
I blame whatever is causing this country to forget its values and the constitution itself - I blame the ignorant, uneducated public who by either the poor state of our system of justice, politics, education, and morals, or by their own choice, throw themselves gleefully into the realm of the “sheep mentality” which is becoming so prevalent in our society today
Many young people prefer consciously to have their own secrets. They make their own choices and do not want to be protected. ‘Don’t treat me as a child’, they say. It is their right to have this freedom. The freedom to say no and the freedom to say yes
And speaking of IPCE, I wonder if Jan Kruska has tried to sue them yet for posting her entire article in their newsletter. IPCE: International Pedophile and Child Emancipation. On the other hand. Perhaps she just gave them permission, they do appear to promote the same goals after all.
A community of individuals pledged to fight paedophiles on the web. We are committed to the safety and emotional well-being of all children. This site will serve as a resource for those committed to our fight wherever you may be in the world.
