On Sun, 11 May 2008 09:02:03 +0930, David <farookdas@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Sat, 10 May 2008 16:02:35 -0700, Brandon D Cartwright
><user@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> typed furiously:
>
>>On Sun, 11 May 2008 04:42:39 +0930, David <farookdas@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 10 May 2008 13:54:15 GMT, "Pedo Pedant"
>>><Pedo.Pedant@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> typed furiously:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 27-Apr-2008, Brandon D Cartwright <user@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: *****uous pedophile burnt his baby
>>>>
>>>>Of course, there's a rather large inaccuracy right away. What,
precisely,
>>>>made this man a paedophile considering he held her captive from when
she was
>>>>18 to when she was 42 and tried to "recreate his own family" with his
>>>>daughter? I'd agree with mentally instable, possibly a ***ual
omnivore
>>>>(since he did abuse her when she was younger as well), but I suggest
you
>>>>learn what paedohphilia means. Oh, and that merely in the text you
state it
>>>>was a dead baby rather than a live one isn't, by any chance, to skew
>>>>reception of the post? Then again, maybe you enjoy posting on the
level of
>>>>the tabloid press.
>>>>
>>>>PP
>>>
>>>That's Brandon. He tries to sensationalise everything by using the
>>>word "pedophile" as often as he can and especially in situations where
>>>it does not apply.
>>
>>Has there EVER been a re****ted rape of a child that you didn't condone
>>and minimize?
>>
>I do not and never have condoned any rape of a child. I merely object
>to your misrepresentation, exaggeration and sensationalising of every
>incident.
>
>That he was an abuser and inhumanly kept his daughter locked up is
>not, and never has been, under dispute.
>
>It has never been suggested by anyone, other than you. that the man in
>this story was a "paedophile". In point of fact it must be obvious,
>even to you, that he does not fit the profile of a "paedophile" since
>he did not stop molesting his daughter as she grew secondary ***ual
>characteristics and became pregnant. This would turn most
>"paedophiles" off as you have been told repeatedly. It is also fairly
>obvious, to me at least, that he did not start to molest his daughter
>until she started to display those secondary characteristics at the
>age of eleven.
what is "fairly obvious" to you is criminal insanity in the eyes of
the decent and sane...
You do know he also raped his offspring by his poor daughter?
EVIL AND A COWARD
http://blogs.notw.co.uk/carole/
JOSEF Fritzl, who caged his daughter in a dungeon for 24 years, who
fathered seven children by her and who raped his own grandchild, says:
"I'm not a monster."
Course he's not. His daughter asked to be repeatedly raped, as did his
grandchild. They really enjoyed living in a windowless dungeon. Oh
yes, and Fritzl was just being big-hearted when he incinerated the
body of a baby (his baby) who died because it needed but didn't get
medical attention after he left his daughter alone for three days
following the birth.
"I'm not a monster. I could have killed them all and no one would have
been any the wiser," said Fritzl.
I suspect for every one of the children forced to live in that dank,
dark cellar, death would have been preferable to what happened to them
at the hands of this bloated pervert.
Yes, he could have killed them all. But it might have been better had
he put his balls to better use—and found the courage to kill himself.
Save Austrian taxpayers the price of a trial.
--
http://www.ncmec.org/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=3084
There are those who maintain that there is a distinction between viewing
child ****ography and molesting a child.
This is another fallacy. Viewing these images is often the first step in
the timeline that eventually leads to the ***ual victimization of a child.
Dr. Andres Hernandez, Director of the *** Offender Treatment Program at
the Federal Correctional Institution at Butner, North Carolina, has
treated several hundred inmates who were convicted of child ****ography
crimes.
He conducted a study which found that 85% of child ****ography offenders
had, in fact, committed contact ***ual crimes which were unknown to law
enforcement. Dr. Hernandez asserts, that, while there needs to be further
study, his observations indicate that “[child ****ography] offenders are
far more dangerous to society than we previously thought.”[1 ]
This is sup****ted by another study, published in the Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, which suggests that child ****ography offending is a stronger
diagnostic indicator of pedophilia than is ***ually offending against
child victims.[2]
It is also known that images of child ****ography are used in the
victimization of children to desensitize them to ***ual exploitation. They
are key to the grooming process used by offenders to break down a child’s
natural inhibitions and defense mechanisms.
Let me close by reminding you what the Supreme Court held in the Ferber
case:
“The value of permitting live performances and photographic reproductions
of children engaged in lewd ***ual conduct is exceedingly modest, if not
de minimus.”
The value of our children is not de minimus. They deserve the best
protection our laws can provide.
Thank you.
1 Statement of Dr. Andres E. Hernandez before the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy and Commerce, United
States House of Representatives, September 26, 2006.
2 Seto, Michael C., Cantor, James M. and Blanchard, Ray, “Child
****ography Offenses Are a Valid Diagnostic Indicator of Pedophilia.”
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 115, No. 3, 2006.
TESTIMONY OF CAROLYN ATWELL-DAVIS
Director of Legislative Affairs
THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED CHILDREN
for the MARYLAND SENATE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE
March 7, 2007
|
