We Have the Facts

"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?"

jean A SOSEN Staff Member:

"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."

fallenone:

"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".

Just Another Foot Stomping Blame Gamer

Sex offender activists have their own way of manipulating statistics. They do not care that it's true or not. We've been through this many times and I honestly don't know why the brilliant minds among them haven't yet figured it out. Perhaps they're too busy calling us "ignorant" and blaming others for their own bad behavior. Blame Gaming.

This is the fact plain and simple. A DOJ recidivism report done over a period of 3 years is not an accurate reflection of true recidivism. Nor does the DOJ recidivism report address the percentage of new sex crimes committed by either an RSO or a non-RSO.

But the new Washington study does. Yes, not including sex offenses that only result in probation or other penalty, ONLY counting those that result in prison 19% of all NEW sex crimes are committed in Washington state by someone who is ALREADY on the registry.

Now let's listen to Karl Hanson himself explain about recidivism:



Let's let Tom explain how it really works shall we? And how to get people to care and be understanding and sympathetic and empathetic, considering how ignorant we all are I have a feeling it won't go over very well. But that's me.




Dr Gene Abel concluded from a study of over 16,000 men, that 95% of all child molestations are committed by pedophiles.

Gene G. Abel, M.D. is a full professor of Psychiatry who has taught at several medical schools, including Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. Dr. Abel is currently affiliated with Emory University School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine.

Dr. Abel, who has been a research scientist in the field of sexual violence for more than 30 years, is at the top of his field, both nationally and internationally.

Ken Lanning said:

Most preferential child molesters spend their entire lives attempting to convince themselves and others that they are not perverts.

Gene Abel said:

Pedophilia is the most significant cause of child molestation.

Gangs of Thugs

Absolute Zero has been focusing heavily on RSO activists for the past 9 months. And while I think it's obvious to everyone here just exactly how devious and heartless those people are, there may be a question as to just what exactly that may have to do with an anti-pedophile blog.

Is there a difference?

In RSO activism and pedophile activism?

If there is, I've yet to find it. Their rhetoric is the same as the pedophile activists - the only difference is that the RSOs try to put disclaimers on theirs by stating "We don't support pedophiles!" while supporting pedophiles.

As if no one would notice.

The CEO of Sosen for example signed that pro-pedophile petition which called for the abolishment of virtually all restrictions and punishments regarding sex offenders AND calls for the abolishment of age of consent laws for prepubescent children. When confronted with this Sosen claimed ignorance and the woefully stupid statement that "there are no pedophiles in our group". Apparently they believe that because they can't see them they don't exist -- And yet, they can't see ME -- does that mean I also don't exist?

What it all boils down to is this... those people will say ANYthing whether or not it's true, whether or not they believe it. They will stab their own supporters in the back to get what they want. When all is said and done they have a "ME ME ME" mentality. So while they do understand that they need each other they would be more than willing to throw their brother under the train if it suited their purpose at the time. They react thoughtlessly, and impulsively and if they are ever sorry for one second for something they've done, they would never admit it, they would never express remorse. Jan Kruska is a fine example of this one. She's done more to hurt sex offender groups than any other single person or group of persons combined.

There are approximately 600,000 registered sex offenders in this country. Of those there are only a handful that are activists. Of the activists there are only a handful that are sex offenders. Why is that? Because they have their enablers doing the dirty work for them. These co-dependent mousy women whose lives depend on 'standing by their men' whether it's their spouse or their child, they will rationalize for them. Minimize their crime. Blame the victim. Bash the victim. Mock the victim. They'll lie, they'll cheat, they'll even steal. They'll try to find ways to rip off the system, and the taxpayers. They'll call you ugly names and accuse you of being ignorant and uneducated. They'll say you're a professional victim. Or in the case of Cheryl Griffiths, she'll just call you "disgusting" "scum sucking idiot" etc etc etc

So, no, not all activists are RSO's. Some are family members and some are in it for seemingly altruistic motives. Think Margie Slagle, Sarah Tofte, Niki Delson. Their thinking is just as distorted but without the same motivations present. It's no less dangerous, it's no less outrageous, and it's no less supportive of pedophile causes.

Sometimes these activists say things like "these sex offender laws should only apply to the ONE PERCENT of RSO's who are truly dangerous" The question that begs to be answered then is "who do they consider dangerous"? Obviously not those repeat offenders deemed at high risk of re-offense at Coalinga Hospital. After all, they rallied to get them released.....against the advice of experts. And where do they get that one percent figure? Well, they SAY that the majority of registered sex offenders were convicted for consensual sex, or for drunken mooning or for peeing behind a bush. Well that may or may not be true, but if it is, I've yet to see someone charged for peeing behind a bush and put on a sex offender registry. And if it HAS indeed happened, it's not one of THESE people we're discussing. No, their offenses are far worse than that.

This is what I think. I think they need to stop blaming society, the government, parents, and the victims for what they think is unfair and look to themselves and try to find what's missing.

Perhaps instead of blaming, minimizing, rationalizing, bashing, mocking, lying, cheating and deceiving they should tell Lee Lee to take care of her other children before they turn out the same way. Perhaps they should tell Linda that it's not appropriate for her to ask for donations considering her welfare fraud conviction. Perhaps they should tell Tikibug to stop posting on pedophile websites. Perhaps they should look long and hard at exactly who they are involved with and the projects they're undertaking on their behalf. Perhaps. And yet, perhaps is a word too big for these people. Perhaps has possibility. These gangs of thugs have none.

HT to Jacey

Obligations and Boundaries

Have you ever noticed how similar the rhetoric of sex offender activists and pedophile activists is?

I have. I've noticed it a lot.

Of particular interest is their mutual desire to abolish age of consent laws. We don't need to ask why, we know why, don't we? Instead, let's talk about their reasoning.

On the one hand you have the pedophile group who say that children should be able to make their own decisions. We have Unico who says:

"There exist sexually-active 4-year-old girls who enjoy vaginal intercourse. What you or I think, is irrelevant to that fact.

Even first-time vaginal intercourse can be enjoyable, when preceded by several months of stretching

Anybody who would obstruct a prepubescent person from her inherent right to choose to have sexual intercourse is neither a true youth liberationist nor human rights advocate.

Access to sex education specific to prepubescent people should be mandated."

And here we have Lindsay Ashford being interviewed on the radio. What does he say about that issue?

Scott: Do you think that a 5 year old grasps what's going on well enough to be able to consent to sexual activity?

Lindsay: A 5 year old understands friendship. A 5 year old understands affection.

Scott: So can a 2 year old?

Lindsay: A 2 year old understands pleasure.

Scott: So they can consent to sex?

Lindsay: They can consent to pleasurable activity

Scott: Can a 6 month old do that?

Lindsay: I'm sure that 6 months old also have nerve endings and understanding and an understanding of what is pleasurable to them, yes

Scott: So a 6 month old can consent to sex

Lindsay: A 6 month old can consent to activity that it finds pleasurable

What does the petition we've talked so much about say? The one Jan Kruska and so many of her activist associates signed?

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

It then goes on to define 'children'

"Children should be defined as persons under the age of puberty."

And yes, many RSO activists signed it. So where do you draw the line? As far as age of consent goes? Is it 18? 16? 14? And with the age of consent law in place whatever that age is, what do you do when someone breaks that law? Slap them on the wrist? What I DO know for sure, is that the activists who are pushing for abolishment of age of consent laws and abolishment of punishment and registration for sex offenders were NOT convicted of having teenaged consensual sex. Their crimes were far worse than that and they are further exploiting children by trying to argue that the very RARE case of teenagers who end up on the registry is representative of their entire population. The vast majority of teens who find themselves convicted of a crime are not on the registry because of a consensual act. They may be listed as statutory rape, but you can bet your bottom dollar that it was a plea deal that gave them that listing.

Furthermore, if the crime was a felony charge, and the offender plead guilty and accepted a plea deal reducing the conviction on the books to a misdemeanor. Does that mean their crime was less than when they committed it? Absolutely not. The actual crime remains the same, but their legal maneuver reduced their penalty.

Let's look at an example of the propaganda. Jan Kruska said last year on a podcast with Tom Madison, that 95% of those on the registry are not dangerous people. She says they were convicted for things such as drunken mooning, or children "playing doctor". Does anyone know where she got this made up "fact"? Or how about Tim from Sosen, who says that 73% of all offenders on the sex offender registry committed their crimes against someone who was over the age of 18, while the fact is that 87% of victims were UNDER the age of 18. Why does Tim say that 40% of offenders were under the age of 18 upon conviction while the true number is that less than 10% were minors? Why would these people lie to you in an attempt to bring about social change?

Here are a couple of things you can do besides just hit and miss searching on a registry. Go to the Illinois sex offender registry and download it in entirely into an Excel document. Sort and resort by the information that's on there. Say for example the age of the offender at the time of conviction along with the age of the victim. It's quite interesting. Did you know that the average age at conviction was mid thirties?

Georgia is another state that allows you to download their registry although it doesn't list the age of the victim. What you'll find is that the average age at conviction was 32 years old. You'll also find that less than 10% of those registered in Georgia were under the age of 20 at conviction. And in fact, at the present time in Georgia there are only 39 offenders under the age of 20. Even more interesting is the fact that 4 months ago there were a total of 70 teenaged sex offenders in Georgia. If these new laws are soooooo "draconian", if they are sooooo over broad, why is that number going DOWN instead of UP?

It's because it's not true what they say. It's also not true when they say their primary interest is child safety, and a desire for the laws to be 'effective'. The real truth is they are all pissed off sex offenders who don't want to accept responsibility for their actions. Tom Madison proved that when he rallied to gain support for releasing violent repeat sexual predators from their court imposed civil commitment. His primary interest was certainly not safety, his concern was the sex offenders wasting their time and the cost to non-sex offenders. LOL Well he DID say that after all.

And let us not forget one of the ring leaders of the RSO activists. Jim Freeman, co-founder and executive director of SoHopeful. Read more about that HERE, read also how Cheryl Griffith tried to cover it up.

And while you're at it, read what Dr. Gene Abel had to say from a study he did which included 16,109 adults who admitted sexually molesting at least one child.

40% of child molesters, who were later diagnosed as having pedophilia, had molested a child by the time they were 15 years old. An estimated 88% of child molesters and 95% of molestations (one person, multiple acts) are committed by individuals who now or in the future will also meet criteria for pedophilia. Pedophilic child molesters on average commit 10 times more sexual acts against children than nonpedophilic child molesters.

There may be innocent people imprisoned for murder who truly are innocent. But we don't lobby to abolish all laws regarding murder as a result. The same is true for sex offenders. ***IF*** these activists motives were truly about teenagers, THAT is what they would be addressing. But they are only further exploiting kids to further their own agenda. Very, very few teenagers are convicted for having consensual sex, it is rare, and it is the exception. But adults convicted for manipulating young teens is far too common. We understand this completely. They don't.

Graphics courtesy of Jacey

Jim Freeman was honored

Who is Jim Freeman you may ask. You may wonder why everyone will be talking about him. Along with his user names. His pedo porn name of Mystikal, and his RSO sex offender defender names "Mystik" and "Mystikwarrior"

Not too long ago we asked a very important question.

"Who are these men"?

We wrote about men who preyed on children. We wrote about child molesters. we wrote about rapists and child pornographers. We wrote about men who wanted to look at images of children, toddlers and infants being sexually abused, sometimes sadistically.

We know they're out there looking for it. They come here everyday looking for some of the most bizarre things like

• pedo san francisco playgrounds
• nude nine year old girl lolitas geting raped
• hiding child porn
• grown men fucking preteen
• 5yo porn pics
• little boys erection pedo
• outragious preteen forced fuck pics
• childs rape pics
• underage kids illegal incest rape force
• grooming twelve year old preteens free pics
• free xxx photos of old men and little boy sex
• pedo fucking hard
• i fantasize about forcing a girl into sex
  

And now, men like these have been busted in what has been called the "most sophisticated child pornography operation in recent memory". 12 Americans were indicted for "participating in a global child pornography ring that distributed more than 400,000 pictures and videos of children engaged in sexual activities." Children drugged and unable to do ANYTHING. Completely at the mercy of sick freaks. WHO will DARE to even attempt to defend this I ask you?

"The 12 men were charged with engaging in a child exploitation enterprise; illegally posting notices seeking to receive, exchange and distribute child porn across state lines; and obstructing of justice. Several also were charged with producing the pornography — meaning they had contact with the children who were exploited"

One conversation went like this:

“This one may offend here, so a word of caution, these girls are heavily drugged,” Roy, known as “Nimo,” wrote on July 10, 2007, according to the court documents. “Not much action to speak of, the girls are (sic) to (expletive deleted) up to move, or resist. Three girls, the first one being the youngest, around 8 or 9 yo.”

At the forefront of these men is none other than Jim Freeman. The executive director, legal director and co-founder of SoHopeful. A sex offender activist group where Tom Madison, Shirley Lowery, David Coffman and other pro-sex offenders got their start. I can't help but wonder why Cheryl Griffiths wants to bury this story. Didn't she claim that children's safety was her top concern?

"I can only pray that this is some kind of misunderstanding or government "fix". No matter what it is, this could hurt all of us (groups and individuals) greatly. In my opinion, the best thing we could do is to not post anything about it in our groups about this at least about his connection to any RSO groups."

Google James Freeman's names, especially those baby raper defender names and read what he had to say. The very things all the RSO activists say. The very things all the pedo activists have to say. Read especially his commentary about the reason Christopher Barrios was raped and murdered. And while you're at it, watch out for Zman, you just never know where that little freak will pop up next. While you're reading, keep in the back of your mind that Jim's activism related to getting himself off the SOR. Watch him spin statistics to excuse his behavior.

"very few registered offenders have been clinically diagnosed as pedophiles. As a 'class', sexual offenders have the second-lowest recidivism rate of all criminal offenses"

Then look where he is today.

HT to Jacey for graphic

There are worse things in life

What do these men have in common?



Kenneth Stone


Corey Saunders


David Flavell

Before I answer that question, I'd like to go back a moment to the petition we talked about HERE. Alex Marbury and Paul Shannon want to reform sex offender laws. I'm sure you'll recall. Some of the things they called for was abolishment of age of consent laws and requiring children to be responsible for their own abuse. They also want to abolish the death penalty and life sentences. They want to abolish the sex offender registry and ban you from knowing if your neighbor is a convicted child molester under great penalties to you if you should find out. But they also want to abolish civil commitments. Because after all they've served their time. Haven't they? And according to Alex and Paul these changes are the only things that will keep people safe from sexual offenders.

Alex and Paul recently sponsored a rally to gain support for releasing violent sexual predators deemed at high risk to re-offend from their civil commitments. We didn't talk about this rally, because, well we wanted to see how it would go without our commentary. And one of the main speakers Tom Madison of SoClear Media Productions didn't want anyone to find out, which is comical really when you think about it. Have a rally to gain support but only let those who already support you know about it. Chalk one up for The Anti's.

If these people had a valid counter-argument for our opinions they would have WANTED us drawing attention to it. Nor would Alex and Paul make statements such as this

"Because a previous demonstraton in Ohio by sex offenders and their families was harrassed by bigots, you should be prepared for this possibility."

"Ask any friends you tell about this to keep the time and place of the rally confidential."

Hmmmm, harassment which consists of writing counter opinions and peacefully counter demonstrating. Seems to me these guys are flat out un-American. Not to mention whiney victim cryers. If we speak out about their rhetoric that makes us vigilantes. But of course we already knew this wasn't the brightest of the bright, eh? It's just merely another form of blame gaming which goes hand in hand with their distinct brand of mental illness.

Nevertheless, the rally went as planned. Very few people attended of course, mainly those who had a loved one confined at Coalinga State Hospital for violent sexual predators. And we didn't even have to hijack this rally for it to be an utter failure. Hey! Our strategy proved once again to be right on.

One of the attendees said that her loved one was confined there due to a sexual offense he committed while on parole for another sexual offense but then stated "He's no different than any other criminal, he's served his time". That's an example of an enabling apologist in denial.

These guys want out. They've tried lots of ways. They've held hunger strikes, seemingly oblivious to the obvious continued mentality of using manipulation as a tool. They refuse to accept treatment and they call the hospital a 'concentration camp'. I don't know about you, but if they want to hold a hunger strike I say more power to them. I'll put my support behind that, sure. Who do they think they are? What kind of sexual offenders would say "If you don't let me outta here I'm gonna quit eating"? My opinion is that it's the type of sex offenders who should be civilly committed to the Coalinga State Hospital for sexually violent offenders at a danger to re-offend. But, that's me.

Tom Madison disagrees however. From KMPH

But registered sex offender Tom Madison says, he doesn't think the extra treatment is worth the sex offender's time or the taxpayer's dollars.

"They simply want to get on with their lives, but the fear and hysteria is in the stratosphere today," said Madison.

Rather than talk about the predators that society is currently safe from - those being held at Coalinga. I think we should talk about violent sexual predators who were released from prison "after serving their time" - and despite evidence that they were still dangerous and likely to re-offend - were NOT civilly committed as requested. Let's talk about 3 of those. Released by the same judge. Judge Moses.

First up we have Corey Saunders, with previous convictions for rape of a child with force and assault and battery of a child, Judge Moses didn't believe the evidence that he was at a high risk of re-offending. No, he said, Corey hadn't re-offended in 7 years. Ignoring the fact that he was in prison during those 7 years. Corey raped a 6 year old boy in the library shortly after release.

Then we have David Flavell, who "had been arrested and convicted on a variety of sex offenses between 1996 and 2003, including masturbating in public, threatening children and brutally beating and attempting to rape a woman in Methuen. That 1996 attack took place just hours after he’d been arrested for masturbating in a department store." Judge Moses refused to commit him, he didn't believe he was dangerous. No, not David. He was arrested in January for peering into a womens restroom stall. "Flavell was carrying a backpack with three pairs of work gloves, a ski mask and a roll of duct tape and had put a magazine rack outside the ladies room to make it appear it was out of service"

How about the latest case of irresponsibility committed by Judge Moses. Kenneth Stone "In separate incidents in 1989, 1991 and 1995, Stone was convicted of indecent assault and battery on a person 14 or older and in May of 1991 and again in October of 1991 he was convicted of assault with intent to rape." Now in February, after Judge Moses ruled he was fit to be returned to society, Stone has been arrested for raping a man......less than three weeks after the Judge let him go free.

The issue

At issue is a state statute which allows the district attorney to petition to have sex offenders who’ve completed their criminal sentences declared sexually dangerous and civilly committed much the way a person deemed a danger to himself or others may be committed to a psychiatric hospital.

ABC Channel 6 news did an investigative report on Moses on Feb. 7, in which reporter Jim Hummel analyzed 42 sexually dangerous person petitions in Bristol County in the past seven years. Of those, judges granted the petitions half the time, Hummel reported.

Moses was the only judge who released every offender who came before him, a total of six, including Stone, Saunders and Flavell

THOSE are men who should have been civilly committed. Those are men just like those in Coalinga Hospital that Tom Madison feels we don't deserve protection from because

• A. It's not fair to the offender
• B. It costs too much money
  

Funny thing about that is, the only people complaining about how much it costs are sex offenders. Those of us who aren't sex offenders - 99.8% of the population....are more than willing to pay the price. Although, if they want to argue COST, I'd be more than happy to lobby for the death penalty for child molesters. Conviction.....appeal.....execution. That would certainly solve the problem of sexually violent deranged individuals. It'll save us money and they can't re-offend! I suppose one might say

"There are worse things in life than being on a sex offender registry"

or perhaps they might say

"There are worse things in life than being confined in Coalinga State Hospital for the sexually violent predator"

That logic is good enough for me because after all Jan Kruska says:

"While sexual abuse is despicable there are indeed things that are much worse in life"

Graphics courtesy of Jacey

The Rest of the Story

Originally posted October 15, 2007.

We've decided that since we've been talking about Jan Kruska so much here lately, that we should go ahead and tell the rest of the story so we can move on. We've hinted at things she's done, and in some cases outright accused her of harassment, cyberstalking, blackmail, threats and libel. And you know, if I hadn't been seeing these things myself I don't think I would have believed them. So I'm going to show you some of it now.

You see, it all began when we wrote about the sex reform petition and the outrageous things it was calling for. One of the stipulations on that petition is

We have made a conscious decision not to seek out the signatures of sex offenders

So we were just trucking along doing what we do and checking out all the signatures when lo and behold we ran across one of them on YouTube. We left comments which were rational and informative correcting the erroneous statistics Jan had quoted. She didn't take to criticism very well. She deleted our comments and retaliated by visiting our very own Violet Leaves' video and mocking her. Tsk, tsk, we can't have that now. We won't have that. Anyone who doesn't immediately understand why should pay a visit to Violet's blog sometime. Read what this woman has to say. Violet is a hero and she's speaking for all those unable to speak for themselves. I admire her strength, determination, and very clear understanding of the issues. She deserves our utmost respect.

Phase 2 of the Jan fiasco was when we wrote about her viewpoints. We wrote about her signing that petition. Jan thumbed her nose at the rule that said she couldn't sign it.

Jan signed it anyway.

Not once but twice.



We talked about the fact that Jan herself was a registered sex offender, not from finding it on a registry but from Jan's own testimony before the Arizona state legislature. We gave the link for reference. It's readily available public information. But in Jan's view this was illegal. Yep she even said so. Within hours of this post we entered Phase 3 with this message through YouTube


And this one
And this one
You see, Jan believed I was someone named Carolyn. And when I told her I wasn't Carolyn, using all her powers of logic and reason she concluded that "it proved I admitted it" ~Sigh~

She then proceeds to add a page to her website about Carolyn, adding her full name, home address, telephone number and the statements that Carolyn is guilty of "conspiring to commit blackmail, harassment, intimidation, encouraging others to commit cyber stalking, physical harm and murder" She put out her own APB warning and states that Carolyn "persistently downloads child pornography and uses photographs of children to entice men" Well, let's just take a look at it shall we?

No, she didn't block out the identifying information, I did.

You see, Carolyn is not an Anti. Carolyn is not a member of AZ. Carolyn has never been involved with this. She was a random person in the crowd that Jan hit in her frenzy to get revenge.

Carolyn had Jan's entire website shut down. Twice.

Jan responded with an image of an assault rifle and claims that we were endangering her life. For the life of me I've never figured out how blogging about how stupid she is endangers her life. But, you know Jan when she gets something in that head of hers.

Here we enter Phase 4

It began with comments on AZ. Posted from Jan's own IP address.

You see, Jan "in her haste to look like an idiot" found someone on MySpace named Esther. Esther used a nickname the same as someone who commented on AZ. Once again, she hit a person in the crowd. She didn't get the reaction she expected so she came back again always linking us to the things she'd created.
Well, let's just take a look at that, shall we?


"WE ARE URGING ALL READERS AND SUPPORTERS TO CLICK ON THE IMAGE BELOW AND FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS LISTED"

Now let's see where that link takes us.








Ah, yes. Of course.

"She has links on her own MySpace page to erotic homosexual child pornography images!"

"Esther is a very sick woman. I urge everyone to report her to their local FBI field Office"

"EVEN IF "ESTHER" DELETES HER MYSPACE PROFILE AND YOU ARE UNABLE TO VIEW IT, REPORT HER ANYWAY"

Interesting not only because we don't know this poor woman who fell into Jan's grasp, but also because we turned her MySpace upside down. She's just a woman who blogs occasionally. Seems to have a lot of friends including her favorite radio station, a PETA activist, and a gay nephew (adult) who had some gay (adult) erotica on his own page. Once again, Jan doesn't know the difference between a child and an adult. Neither apparently does Shirley Lowery. You see, this is one of the things we do. It's one of the things all of you should do. If anyone sees child pornography you shouldn't be twiddling your thumbs, you should be making a report to CyberTipLine ASAP. Shirley has an agenda and a motive however

Phase 5 begins. Shoot-into-the-crowd-Jan intensifies her efforts. Not only does she make this blog


"Petra Lunatic is currently under investigation in Arizona for her continual online harassment, threats, and defamation against a wife and mother of four. Inciting violence against an innocent woman and her children."

And this because Petra wrote about the Fluff 'n Stuff story on her MySpace.




Oh but it gets better. Why, we've hardly begun.



On the one hand it seems that what we have here is a failure to communicate, but that's hardly the case. The day after she left us the "Absolutely Busted" message she called Susan, the web designer we hired to design our blog template. She accused her of owning this blog. When she was informed that wasn't the case that she'd never had anything to do with it well, Jan Kruska, true to form as ever, threatened Susan with legal action if she didn't reveal the names of her customers, she threatened to hold her responsible for what her customers did. Oh yeah. And sure enough she did. Lookie here


"If you have been wrongfully attacked, cyberstalked and terrorized by this woman and/or her friends on Absolute Zero, give her a call and let her know what's on your mind!"

"Porn Producers"

"Susan is the creator of Absolute Zero United!"

"This information has been verified and a link will soon be added which includes her audiotaped confession"

"Susan is very worried right now and she has good reason to be. She and her pals have broken MULTIPLE laws for which she and her friends can and will now be held criminally and civilly liable. POOR SUSAN!"

"She doesn't want to rat out her "friends" over at Absolute Zero and that's a shame because now she alone will bear the brunt of what they are all collectively responsible for"

"What goes around comes around"

"THEY, (meaning those you and your friends have targeted whether rightly or wrongly) now know who YOU are and WHERE YOU LIVE. How does it feel?"

Interesting that just last night Jan AKA azrockhoundz left this comment on YouTube

Either someone told her, or she realized herself that she had messed up big time. So she quickly deleted her own comment and in order to not lose her momentum and all she continued on:


Well now, I do believe she's given the word GRACEFUL a whole new meaning. Especially when you consider what Jan and her friend Erika otherwise known as "He-ain't-heavy-She's-my-Brother" had in store for our own Chris Brocious.

When we look back at the websites once belonging to Erika the Mouse, one of which she was selling his body by PAYPAL ONLY, the other was filled with floating animated pentagrams and Satanic music



Does it leave any doubt who was responsible for the page made to libel Chris?

Never mind the emails I received letting me know this page was coming. Never mind the doctored images of my friends she sent me. Or the

"Your worst nightmare is coming true"

or the

"I'm coming for you soon"

emails. Never mind the blog she made mocking the death of Chris Barrios and signing my name to it. Never mind Margie Slagle mocking me or telling Carolyn that she didn't care what Jan did to her because "Jan is hurting more" Never mind Tom Madison dismissing her actions as "a child's game" or Shirley Lowery aiding and abetting.

I want you to look

Look at what this woman has done and ask yourself how she DARES to show her face on YouTube crying VICTIM!

Ask yourself how she DARES to make this statement....just yesterday as a matter of fact

I am a Christian first and foremost. I believe in forgiveness and I believe that there are much better ways of dealing with these issues other than what is currently occurring

Or how Linda Wagner dares to show up on YouTube spouting off insanities

"Sue them all Amanda! Take them to court!"

"If they use your status as a RSO to intimadate you in any way, That is illegal under the law of your state. Also, being a christian, you probably can sue on those grounds because they are interfering with your right to pratice your faith"

Or what about the comment Jan Kruska wrote on that blog she made to try to harass Susan? Oh dear, what was it again?

Better get that Bible of yours out and read it again, I think you missed the whole point of what it was all about. You're a Christian? I don't think so. Can you honestly say that what you're doing is something that Jesus would do? I think not.

The Margie Slagle's, the Shirley Lowery's, the Tom Madison's and Linda Wagner's continue to enable this deranged, sociopathic, criminal. If they truly were her friends they would help her get psychiatric help. She's no longer going over the deep end you guys. She's over the edge.

Mocking, Bashing and Blaming

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jan Kruska:

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

Shirley Lowery:

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

Zman aka Michael Gregg:

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

CoolRich:

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

Derek Logue:

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

pedo-ken:

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

turtle:

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

Nickless:

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

Gerber:

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

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

W.A.S.P. and the Columbus Ohio Rally

Cross Posted from WASP

On December 1st I arrived to a weak opposition. There was approximately 30 (maybe 40 if they were lucky) people who attended SoClears rally. This includes the speakers. I didn't get to hear the speakers though. Even though I was right behind them I couldn't hear much at all except when the Rev. yelled "That is MY son". I guess SoClear didn't want to turn the speakers up so everyone could hear their message, just the small gathering of felons, I mean supporters, that were there.

There were NO legislators or polititians who were bored enough to attend their rally. Even the 16,316 registered sex offenders in Ohio didn't bother to accept SOSEN's personal invitation.

(Well, except for The Fallen One from Cincinnati. This convicted pedophile made it a point to make his presence known.)

First Name: DEREK
Middle Name: W
Last Name: LOGUE

PREDATOR!!!!!

Home Address
2559 EDEN AV #14
CINCINNATI, OH 45219-2282

Physical Characteristics
Gender: Male
Race: White

Quivering lips and crooked teeth

Hair: Black
Eye: Brown
Height: 6'0"
DOB: 10/31/1976

or as we seen him:

So much for Margie Slagles comment to me that child molestors would not be there. But here is Margie (in purple coat) and her lawyer buddies talking to Judy Cornett (Nationally known advocate for victims of sexual abuse). You didn't see that coming did ya Margie?

Tom himself was shaken by her presence. He stammered in his speech and dropped his papers. Here is a sampling of what they were so afraid of:

Click here: The Bleepin Truth TV Show

But we knew there would be other pedophiles there like Betty's husband. The Price's looked like homeless people. Only God knows why she would want to defend someone like him.

This is Betty with another sex offender.

Looks like she "picked" a good one to talk to! LOL

Here is her husband... another "great" pick

There was news channel 4 (NBC), who did a small peice on the news but they must have felt that SoClears message wasn't that important to post it on the web.
The local newspaper the Columbus Dispatch ran an article (section B page 4... basically not important enough for at least sec. B pg1) that SoClear presented their views while ignoring Boo's from the protestors.

( I was the only person who was yelling by the way. I must have yelled a total of 5 times during the 3 hour borefest. I yelled "Cry Me A River, Sex Offender" )

The article presented Tom Madison as a liar when they couldn't find him on the registry. Wouldn't it have been nice to see that Tommy Boy likes teen girls plastered all over?

The reporter went on to say that the opposition showed little sympathy, and quoted a woman as saying that sex offenders should have no rights at all.

Then SOSEN members took it upon themselves to try to dig up information on this woman and plaster it all over the web. Were they hoping some crazy sex offender buddy would go after her? Way to go SOSEN! I've been in contact with this woman, and things don't look good for you! Can you say LAWSUIT?

This woman didn't even know your websites or groups even existed let alone contact you in the first place, yet you choose to attack her because of a comment in the newspaper. Now who is acting like a vigilante? I would like to thank SOSEN and Mike for the new WASP member!

There was also a rumor started that the only reason BACA was there was because they were "misrepresented" by WASP. Does this look like BACA doesn't want anything to do with me?

Oh yeah... and as far as someone from the protest leaving our side and telling the teen she was sorry about her brother, and taking some of your information...... DUH! Thanks for the information. Here is a pic of my sister (in black coat) getting your free information! Thanks sis!

Did you happen to notice on the back of the Human Rights Watch book you handed out that they said 25% of adults reoffend? Didn't see if they had a stat for juveniles because I have better things to do than read that junk, but that kinda blows your 3.5% stat now doesn't it?

I would just like to point out that Sex offenders wives are UGLY! That is probably why they defend them, because they can't get anyone else! Isn't that right Jackie and Linda?

I would also like to say to the photographer from “various small newspapers”…

Hey! I’m still waiting for those photos! I’m also sad that I missed the opportunity to meet Jackie, although I don’t want her John Hancock. I’m also sorry I didn’t get to see my “buddy” Mike. I made a special poster for him. Here is a pic just for you!

SoClear and SOSEN are deluding themselves if they think that lawmakers are going to take them serious. The entire organization consists of sexual abusers of children and their families (except for Ali... but she is on the wrong side of the fence if she wants to help her brother). (Other than Ali) I didn't see one person there that was convicted for urinating in public or a Romeo and Juliet situation. Do you really think they are gonna leave the wolf in charge of the sheep?

I think I am done dealing with these people. They are a waste of my time because they are no real threat.

Be Proactive, And Not Reactive !

Women Against Sexual Predators

Anything you say may be used against you

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."

But Jenn aka Forlorn would have you believe that men who view those types of images should be given a slap on the wrist. After all, the viewer didn't commit an act of violence, and well it's pretty much a victimless crime isn't it? Of course Jenn would say that, her brother is entering federal prison in January on child pornography charges. He's so depressed, why he's absolutely suicidal.

"they can get through prison... can they truly get through everything else that's done to them? can they recover fully from losing everything they had?"

Jenn, like other blame gamers tends to gloss over the reality of what child pornography really is. Perhaps she stays in denial because she's not strong enough to face it. I imagine that would be hard to do. Facing the ugliness of what your loved one did. The problem is that Jenn has decided she's going to be an activist. Oh yes, she's just getting started. Why she even says "i have made up my mind on the issues based on facts". Jenn is making the same mistake the blame gamers and the pedoheads have made....she's not being honest.

For example, in her mile long, book length essay she left in a comment here - there's little gems to be found. Like this one:

these people can't help who they are as a result of genetics, but science and medicine can make strong attempts to set right what nature made wrong

some people are not born with the ability to refrain from acting out on thoughts or making bad decisions.... that can happen with severe clinical depression and other mental illnesses.... when the rest of us are 'firing' normally, they aren't capable of it.

But I have to hand it to her, she does attempt to explain her reasoning

if your neighbor writes bad checks constantly, and you accidentally over draw your account just one time, would you like to be told you can never write another check again because your neighbor screwed up so much that they don't trust anyone writing checks again?? it isn't right or fair, is it?

We're talking about sexual abuse of children Jenn. How dare you compare that to writing a bad check?

i certainly do not condone child or adult rape or child molestation. i just know that there are reasons why people make bad decisions when it comes to doing something like this... and that those reasons need to be addressed and fixed.

i don't think prison or constant civil punishment is the answer. we know that violent sexual offenders, that is, predatory violent offenders, are the minority of sex offenders. should we really continuously punish ALL of them?

Why is it acceptable to imprison someone who commits an act of sexual violence, but it's not acceptable to imprison the man who abuses his victims by manipulating and grooming them? I wonder why Jenn would feel that victims of this type of abuse aren't damaged to the same extent as the person who is violently abused? Does she not understand that the effects can actually be as bad or worse? Well, obviously not. And she obviously feels that looking at children being sexually abused is a crime not worthy of consequences. She asks the blame gamers their position on the issue

"i am very unclear about the position of SO advocate groups on CP offenders. are they including this group in the 'low-risk, non-violent' category in their fight to change SO laws?"

And gets a response from Jackie Sparling, Chief Operations Officer of SoClear Media Productions explains

"As SO Clears Chief Operations Officer, let me assure you that while we in no way support any groups such as NAMBLA, or anyone who believes that having sex with pre-pubescent children is right, we do not delineate between each "sex crime" and determine which person or person(s) we wish to repeal these laws for.

Whether you or your loved one was charged with CP, got caught in a Romeo/Juliet type situation, or was charged with sexual assault/rape doesn't even come into play with our organization. We are interested in helping to create SOLUTIONS, not more problems."

I found that interesting since that's not what Tom Madison has said. But we knew he was a liar didn't we? Read more about men who use child pornography HERE and HERE. Or take a look at Julian Dennis Godwin aka Harvardphd123 of Roar for Freedom. Or Johnny Ray Lee or Andrew Spedden. It seems lots of these activists have had and do have a problem with child pornography.

Dr Seto says

people are likely to choose the kind of pornography that corresponds to their sexual interests, so relatively few nonpedophilic men would choose illegal child pornography given the abundance of legal pornography that depicts adults

And what do these men look at?

• 83% had images of children between the ages of 6 and 12
• 39% had images of 3 to 5 year old children
• 19% had images of toddlers or infants younger than 3
• 92% had images of minors focusing on genitals or showing explicit sexual activity
• 80% had pictures showing the sexual penetration of a child, including oral sex
• 21% had child pornography depicting violence such as bondage, rape, or torture. Most of these involved images of children who were gagged, bound, blindfolded, or otherwise enduring sadistic sex

According to the Crimes Against Children Research Center

We found 40% of the cases involving CP possession in the N-JOV Study involved dual offenses of CP possession and child sexual victimization detected in the course of the same investigation. All of these offenders had identified child victims. An additional 15% both possessed CP and attempted to sexually victimize children by soliciting undercover investigators posing online as minors. When these cases of attempted child sexual victimization are counted, 55% of the CP possessors were dual offenders

Forlorn says that this is minor. Forlorn believes her brother received an unjust sentence and shouldn't have to go to prison for what he did. But there's more. She also believes

throughout history, we had emotionally prepared our young daughters from birth for the task of taking on marriage and a family, and we set them free when their bodies were sexually mature enough to do it. today, their bodies are sexually mature enough, but they are not emotionally prepared to take on those tasks

we expect people to be able to control their responses to 'eye candy' stimuli.... of course they should. but again, the sex drive is a very powerful tool. very powerful. and what was right several hundred years ago is no longer right now... morality has changed, but the human body has not caught up with that.

That sounds very much to me like Shirley Lowery claiming Jesus was a pedophile and having sex with prepubescent children is perfectly normal.

If these people want to be activists, if they want to reform sex offender laws, they need to be honest. No twisting of statistics, no lying, no outrageous and defensive statements for men who have committed horrible crimes against children. They should clean up their act or they will get nowhere fast.

They wanted attention. These blame gamers did. Now they have it. All eyes are upon them, watching and waiting for their next move, their next lie, their next act of twisted propaganda. Anything they say can and will be used against them.

Graphics courtesy of Jacey