Re: OT: You're being watched etc.
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2003 12:08 pm
?Erm ... Mr Gadd has just been deported from Cambodia (having already been chased from Vietnam I understand). A country not exactly famous for it child protection laws!?
Yes, Gadd will have been deported not because he actually ?did anything? in Cambodia. They deported him because he is famous and has become a pariah. They?re just running with the international mob on this one. Because almost everyone else is baying for his blood they probably thought it prudent to go with the flow. After all, Gadd is of no importance to Cambodia in general so they could afford to stick the metaphorically boot in and say to the international community ?Hey, look at us being tough on paedophiles.? Thus they earn international brownie points at virtually no cost to the Cambodia state and it distracts attention from other aspects of Cambodian life which western nations might turn their noses up at.
?Looking promotes the publication of this material, after all if no one looked then there would be no income for the those who produce such material (unless I'm wrong, and child abusers are an extremely charitable bunch who are happy to give away their wares to all and sundry?
Your right to suggest that if none looked than obviously there would be much point in publishing it. But censorship is never the answer. After all the need and desire to view this material would still be there. It would be much better to bring this out into the open and confront it ? and ask the question ?Why do a lot of geezers fancy very young girls.? It?s only after you have examined this question with biologists and psychologists (not politicians and newspaper editors) can you come to a rational conclusion and hence forward a possible solution.
I believe your wrong to suggest that money motives the vast majority of people in the Paedophile sub-culture. The vast majority ? like Glitter himself ? collect and swap pictures simply because they get a huge buzz out of it. Paedophile entrepreneurs are very few and far between ? although reading the tabloids you could be forgiven for thinking that there was one on every street corner.
?Speaking as a fully fledged card carrying Guardian reader I wouldn't bother counselling recalcitrant smokers, I'd just shoot the bastards and be done with it?
Fair enough. I can dig a dude who speaks his mind even though he takes an opposite view. I?m not a smoker myself but I do believe that if you are consenting adults and you are not directly interfering with anyone else then you should be able to do pretty much what you like ? That?s right, I?m a Liberal!
Officer Dibble.
Yes, Gadd will have been deported not because he actually ?did anything? in Cambodia. They deported him because he is famous and has become a pariah. They?re just running with the international mob on this one. Because almost everyone else is baying for his blood they probably thought it prudent to go with the flow. After all, Gadd is of no importance to Cambodia in general so they could afford to stick the metaphorically boot in and say to the international community ?Hey, look at us being tough on paedophiles.? Thus they earn international brownie points at virtually no cost to the Cambodia state and it distracts attention from other aspects of Cambodian life which western nations might turn their noses up at.
?Looking promotes the publication of this material, after all if no one looked then there would be no income for the those who produce such material (unless I'm wrong, and child abusers are an extremely charitable bunch who are happy to give away their wares to all and sundry?
Your right to suggest that if none looked than obviously there would be much point in publishing it. But censorship is never the answer. After all the need and desire to view this material would still be there. It would be much better to bring this out into the open and confront it ? and ask the question ?Why do a lot of geezers fancy very young girls.? It?s only after you have examined this question with biologists and psychologists (not politicians and newspaper editors) can you come to a rational conclusion and hence forward a possible solution.
I believe your wrong to suggest that money motives the vast majority of people in the Paedophile sub-culture. The vast majority ? like Glitter himself ? collect and swap pictures simply because they get a huge buzz out of it. Paedophile entrepreneurs are very few and far between ? although reading the tabloids you could be forgiven for thinking that there was one on every street corner.
?Speaking as a fully fledged card carrying Guardian reader I wouldn't bother counselling recalcitrant smokers, I'd just shoot the bastards and be done with it?
Fair enough. I can dig a dude who speaks his mind even though he takes an opposite view. I?m not a smoker myself but I do believe that if you are consenting adults and you are not directly interfering with anyone else then you should be able to do pretty much what you like ? That?s right, I?m a Liberal!
Officer Dibble.