Bad news for gay men: pedophile ring busted
Uh oh, bad news for gay men. At Yahoo News yesterday was a report filled with apocalypse and hyperbole about a pedophile ring busted: “THE HAGUE, Netherlands – Police said Wednesday they have smashed a huge international pedophile ring, rescuing 230 children from abuse and arresting 184 suspects — including teachers and police officers.”
Yes, all the cretins should be arrested, and tossed in jail. I’m not denying that, or pushing exoneration whatsoever. But now this group will join NAMBLA in the pantheon of rhetoric that gay men recruit boys to be gay and that we’re all pederasts. That’s what the poorly reported article is going to do for us millions of decent gay guys. For it’s not going to be limited to the handfuls of cretins, it’ll be extrapolated to all of us, which the article already started doing. But when you start to break down the facts of the article what you get is not what the first sentence reads. What you get is a lot of vague mush. And no straight blogger is going to rip the article to shreds like they do the rest of such mush – for the meme is too conveniently already established in the public mind. So this is a set back. Alas.
Still, let’s look at some of the hyperbole: “a huge international pedophile ring” – with 184 people? That’s “huge”? – maybe. A lot for sure, yet no more than they nab every other time they “smash” rings of hetero kiddy porn voyeurs. I’d say there’s 184 nabbed every six months on Dateline going after girls through the internet, and that’s been going on for a decade now. I’d say it’s no more “Huge” than any other such group of crazies. On the other hand, the Attorney General of Oregon, a Mr. Mohler, is presenting data to the Supreme Court right now that some 750,000 girls are molested annually. And here we have 230 children, mostly boys presumably, in several years, maybe, they think. Of course, heterosexual men are not tagged with the recruiting and pedophile label every time one is caught, but all gay men are tagged. NAMBLA is thrown in my face at so many websites it’s sickening.
Now, the article says: The ring was centered on an Amsterdam-based online forum called boylover.net, which Wainwright described as “probably the largest online pedophile network in the world.” adding “These are very serious crimes on a truly global basis,” he added.
And I think – how whacko is it to set up a website with such an obvious name? Criminals of all types are just some of the stupidest people around. Or did the police set up the site as a lure to get pedophiles? It’s not actually said, so we can’t tell.
But the “probably the largest” is just pure hyperbole and sensationalism. Nearly 2000 Catholic Priest have been nabbed for endangering far more than than 230 boys. And there’s billboards up along I-10 here in Baton Rouge pushing to stop the sex slavery of girls – billboards on a public freeway I’d say means it’s a pretty serious thing, far more on a “truly global basis.” And if you need billboards to stop that I’d say it’s a bit larger than this group of criminals. Maybe it’s the “online” bit, I don’t know.
“Rescuing 230 children from abuse” – were they being held against their will, kidnapped or something? You know, like they find girls in sex rings and brothels and even basements and garden sheds kept and abused? What it that sort? The article doesn’t say how they were rescued. It doesn’t say even where they were rescued. Or if they were merely prevented from accessing the site themselves.
Ah, to ratchet it up the article says later, this ring “had up to 70,000 members.” Oh really? Few websites get 70,000 “members.” The bandwidth alone would be expensive I would think. Maybe 70,000 visits? Could be by the same people over and over again – or, if one innocuously googles “boy lover” – does one get to the site? The phrase “boy lover” itself isn’t terrible, ask a teeny bopper girl. Why, with a name like “boylover.net” I’d say a teen girl would find that site real fast – and then what?
Then there’s the added problem of the Gay-Speak word “boy.” This word is used like heterosexuals use “girls” to refer to quite grown women, and no one thinks a thing of it. Anyone’s wife might say, “Oh, I’m going out with the girls tomorrow night,” or some guy might ask “and how are you girls doing?” of all the secretaries in the office lunch room. But when a gay guy says “boy” – oh boy. We do mean, however, grown ups.
But then it’s said “The three-year investigation code named Operation Rescue uncovered 670 suspects,” which is a far cry from “70,000” to say the least. If at the end of three years they can name only 670 suspects, and arrest only 184, and yet then say 70,000 members – wouldn’t it be “70,000 suspects”? Anyone who went to the site for it’s stated purpose is a “suspect,” right? And wouldn’t that about round up every single pederast on earth already? And why haven’t they done so, if they know of “70,000 members” of the site? Or will they find a lot of teen girls using their father’s home computers to go google “boy lover”?
Then the article says the investigators “identified and safeguarded children in more than 30 countries by arresting people accused of abusing them, said Rob Wainwright, director of the European Union police agency Europol.” And I think, why don’t the police just shut down these sites the minute they find them? I mean, how did the police come across the site? Did they go googling? And if they found it, and can investigate, and it’s a crime, and they can arrest people, why don’t they nip it in the bud? Find a site, arrest the guy before it gets out of hand, no? Sounds more reasonable to me.
How is keeping it up and running during a three year investigation good for any kids involved? Surely the site couldn’t be blocked, could it? So anyone might have wandered in while the investigation was on going, no? Oddly, the article doesn’t even mention if the site is down. Nor does it mention if the site’s “up to 70,000 members” came after the investigation or before. Nor how they “identified” any kids, nor what ages, nor how they “safeguarded children.”
“Those who have been members of the site can expect a knock on the door in the very near future,” – yes, well, it must be hard to round up 70,000 potential criminals and take them all to court.
“In Britain, police said, the children involved were ages 7 to 14.” And then I wonder, how many kids? How were they abused? Did they go to the site themselves? How did the site members get a hold of the boys – or actually – the “children” – if it’s boys, and not girls, why the gender confusion? Were the kids still at home when this was going on? And why didn’t the parents notice the tykes missing from the dinner table while the abuse was done? This is the weird thing about these things, it’s family who abuses kids – almost 90% of the time – and gay men don’t have kids, but we’re blamed for the abuse. Weird.
Wainwright said the website was intended as a discussion forum where pedophiles could “share their sexual interest in young boys.”
Yes, well, and you watched them for 3 three years? How much traffic was there? Again, why are these sites left up to linger? I don’t like government intrusion into the net, but surely there ought to be a law against brazen criminal acts on the net, no?
Europol released parts of online conversations and other posts including a discussion between two suspects, identified only as X and Y, about their attraction to boys wearing diapers.
Y said he had convinced one boy he needed to wear a diaper every weekend from the age of nine to 13. “They were the happiest four years of my life,” he said.
OK, so, this is strange, demented even. Still, though, weirdly, there’s actually TV commercials about boys 7 to 14 wearing diapers, at sleepovers, at bedtime, at camp. They run fairly often, right there among the ads for Chevies and such on nightly TV. And I supposed, if one is demented, one could just look at those commercials over and over again. There’s even websites about “urenensis’ (which is what I think it’s called scientifically.) You know, bed wetting. It must be a big enough problem for Proctor and Gamble to put out Goodnights in multiple sizes. Indeed, at any drug store you can buy diapers from babes to teens to the elderly, in all styles and colors.
On the other hand, was this man in physical contact with the boy for 4 years and no one noticed the steady parade of Goodnights packages in and out the door? Didn’t a parent notice some boy using his allowance to buy the things that are available at WalMart and Albertson’s? Didn’t some adult notice a kid wearing diapers every weekend for four years? Or did he use just one over and over again? Something just doesn’t add up. Oh, I’m sure the cretin said the fantasy – but could it actually of happened? Sounds nigh on impossible.
While the forum did not include child pornography, “computers seized from those arrested have harvested huge quantities of child abuse images and videos,” Europol said in a statement.
OK, my emphasis – no pornography on the forum – which does seem odd for a “huge pedophile ring” no? And while computers were seized – how many? And how much is “huge” amounts? On each computer, or one, or a few? The statement is so vague, as to imply that all the computers had large amounts, and that all suspects had computers seized. And since when do computers…harvest – don’t you harvest things from computers? The English is weird, very weird.
The majority of the 184 people arrested so far are suspected of direct involvement in sexually abusing children, They include teachers, police officers and scout leaders. One Spaniard who worked at summer youth camps is suspected of abusing some 100 children over five years.
Once again – is it only boys they’re abusing? Or was it boys and girls – the “children” is just gender nonspecific. Not to mention – One Spaniard is suspected of abusing 100 kids – and 230 were rescued – are these two numbers related? Where these men arrested abusing their own children? Were these guys married? Live with women, single, gay? What? It’s implied, of course, that they’re gay, but there’s no actual statement they are, for even happily married Baptist preachers are known to go after boys.
Australian Federal Police commander Grant Edwards said suspects arrested in Australia ranged in age from 19 to 84 and used the Internet to “prey on children with anonymity, with subterfuge and with camouflage.” Which is the usual age range of the perps in these rings – but how exactly did they use the internet to get kids? Did the kids find their “highly encrypted website” hidden in plain view with the name “boylover”? Or did the men discussing the perversion go to other web forums and track down boys?
Did the men doing the internet luring of boys pretend to be girls? Or were they upfront about being a man? And really important – if these men pretended to be young boys themselves, but budding gay kids, and they went to an online gay teen forum – of which there are some, believe it or not – could it be said that the boys receiving any internet attention were actually abused? If it’s a 14 year old boy meeting whom he thinks is a 14 year old boy on the net to talk about their boy crushes – is that abuse? Yes, the adult masquerading is morally wrong, criminal, and take him away.
Ah, but what of two real 14 year olds in puppy love? That’s a part of this which will never be mentioned – were the boys “abused” seeking the attention themselves? Oh I know, most people believe it’s impossible. While straight boys and girls go a-seeking each other, there’s this belief that gay boys don’t do any such thing – because they’re not gay – they’re being “recruited” and will soon turn bad all the way. Ah, yah, sure, for as usual, there’s the claim that gay guys both choose to be gay and are lured into it. Not quite logical, but when it comes to gay stuff, logic is the first casualty.
He said the oldest suspect identified by Australian authorities was an 84-year-old man living in Thailand who is suspected of abusing children. And again “children” – boys, or girls too? Not to mention that Thailand has been estimated to have upwards of a million or more “sex-tourists” a year suspected of going there for the kid sex; mostly with girls, of course. Thailand is a hotbed of this sort of stuff. Catching a pedophile in Thailand is like shooting ducks in a bathtub.
Children, Edwards said, “should be able to use the Internet safely, without fear of being approached or groomed by these online predators.”
Ah, “groomed” – groomed for what? Groomed – that’s the code word for “recruited” of course. Though weirdly, again, guys who claim they were abused are straight. For you really can’t abuse a gay 14 year old who is getting into sex too early. He’s seeking it out, but there’s no one guiding him to dealing with it, and they can’t find or are afraid to try to find another gay boy in their schools, and so they go seek some older gay guy to talk to. It’s the most frightening thing for a gay man – a 14 year old boy come to ask questions. Frightening. For if we say a word we’re accused of “recruiting.” It is a problem in our quest to make better gay men for the future, without a doubt.
- Posted in: Uncategorized