PDA

View Full Version : Child porn: massive problem, massive denial


Thalia
07-20-2004, 04:14 PM
The first article is backgrpund, the second in today's BBC News.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1232506,00.html

BT PUTS BLOCK ON CHILD PORN SITES

Martin Bright, home affairs editor
Sunday June 6, 2004
The Observer

British Telecom has taken the unprecedented step of blocking all illegal child pornography websites in a crackdown on abuse online. The decision by Britain's largest high-speed internet provider will lead to the first mass censorship of the web attempted in a Western democracy.

The move, previously thought to be at the limits of technical possibilities of the internet and prohibitively expensive, was given the personal backing of BT chairman Sir Christopher Bland at a board meeting last month after intense pressure from children's charities.

Known as Cleanfeed, the project has been developed in consultation with the Home Office and will go live by the end of the month, The Observer can reveal. Other major players in the internet market, such as Energis and Thus, which owns rival Demon Internet, are said to be preparing to block banned sites.

Subscribers to British Telecom's internet services such as BTYahoo and BTInternet who attempt to access illegal sites will receive an error message as if the page was unavailable. BT will register the number of attempts but will not be able to record details of those accessing the sites.

A list of illegal sites compiled by the Internet Watch Foundation, the industry's watchdog, has been available for some time, but until now there has been no way to prevent people accessing them because most are based outside the UK.

The initiative would not have been possible a year ago, but improvements in computer processing speeds means that the company is now able to block websites, offensive pages and even individual images of abuse.

The move is the brainchild of John Carr, internet adviser to children's charity NCH, who wrote to Home Office Minister Paul Goggins last July urging action on paedophile websites after a successful campaign to block internet newsgroups (electronic message boards which paedophiles used to share images of children). Goggins approached internet providers last September to ask them to investigate if it would be possible. At first they were resistant, but BT came back to the Home Office last month to announce early tests of Cleanfeed had been successful.

Blocking websites is highly controversial and until now has been associated only with oppressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia and China, which have censored sites associated with dissidents. But many in the field of child protection believe that the explosion of paedophile sites justifies the crackdown.

'British Telecom deserve to be congratulated on this bold move,' Carr said. 'I expect every other service provider will now look at what they are doing to see if they can achieve a similar result.'

Pierre Danon, chief executive of BT Retail, added: 'You are always caught between the desire to tackle child pornography and freedom of information. But I was fed up with not acting on this and always being told that it was techically impossible.'

***

_http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3908215.stm

EXTENT OF CHILD PORN REVEALED

The scale of child porn use on the net has alarmed watchdogs

BT says it is blocking up to 20,000 attempts each day to access child porn. Its figures provide the first firm evidence of the extent of web paedophilia and BT is targeting the porn with its Clean Feed system.

The Internet Watch Foundation called the figures "staggering" and said children were being abused in order to supply the hardcore images. Police officials said the extent of the online porn problem was "extremely disturbing".

Illegal images

BT said in its first three weeks its new system, which bars access to particular sites, registered nearly 250,000 attempts to view web pages containing images of child pornography. That represents an average of about 10,000 requests each day. Anyone trying to access such a site would be presented with a message reading "Website not found".

Pierre Danon, chief executive of BT retail, said the company was blocking access to hundreds of sites which had been identified by the Internet Watch Foundation. But he said BT did not track those trying to log onto the sites or pass their details on to police. And he said the company had no way of telling how many users were navigating to such sites by accident.

"We don't know their motives or who does it and honestly we don't want to know," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

A BT spokesman added: "It could be that one dedicated pervert is making hundreds of attempts to get on websites each day."

Currently the technology is only blocking BT Retail's 2.5 million internet customers from viewing child porn sites but Mr Danon said the company would make it available to other internet service providers on a non-commercial basis.

Home Office minister Paul Goggins said the figures revealed by BT were "deeply shocking" and he said he hoped other service providers would take up the offer of using BT's blocking technology. He told the Today programme: "Every image of a child that appears on the internet is an image of a child that's abused."

The BBC's Neil Bennett said even allowing for some people making repeated attempts, it is clear thousands of people are trying to see such material daily.

BT is only one of the main service providers in the UK and police leaders are calling on others to block paedophile websites.

Websites assessed by the IWF as "illegal to view" under the 1978 Child Protection Act were targeted by BT.

The IWF keeps a real-time live database which is updated every time an illegal site is found. At any one time there are thousands of sites on the database.

korg
07-21-2004, 08:58 AM
good post..........this is some sickening shit ! now, they should get the death penalty.............starting with all of the priest that have done this !

DanF
07-21-2004, 12:43 PM
I personally greatly approve the blocking of child porno.
This is one "freedom of information" I think the world can do without.

uptown
07-21-2004, 03:12 PM
hi all
to me that would depend on what deffinition of child porn that the govt is using here.

imo there is....
aritisitc nudity

suggestive poses

sexual contact

if it is an artistic picture of a nude child, then i dont consider that to be cp. this article and the govt dont make that distinction between the three classifacations. imo jock sturges, david hamilton, etc. are not cp, but capture essence of preteen beauty.
the govt classifies cp not as something thats sexual, but something that the possesor has in their home or on their computer, and yes the govt has prosecuted men for having pictures of fully clothed preteen girls. but no one is able to tell from the reports of the govt or the media, the both call any picture that arouses the viewer as cp, therefore making it a thought crime. last time i looked thinking is not a crime, molesting is! if it is consenual sex, then its not molesting!


my brother used to bath with my neice up until about the age of 4 or 5, it was then that she started to ask "what is that thing between your legs daddy""why are you different from me". how is ok to bath with her right up until she starts to ask questions? if it was found to be ok to bath with her before the questions, then why not after them? after the questions, you tell her to hide her body and you hide yours with clothes, then what does she learn from that? nudity is bad and wrong. true since their bodies are changing, they begin to become self concious about how they look, but not all children are self concious about their nude body. nude communities have proven that children grow more confident with their sexuality, when seeing adults in the nude. boys and girls alike get to see how adults bodies turn out, breasts are grown, hair is grown. my own experience of seeing a mans penis for the first time was, wow thats huge, will mine get that big.

why is it such a shock to the nude one, when going into
a restroom and finding someone is already there bathing, i must admit if im in the toilet, then i dont carry on conversations, but what about the shower? you are only nude.
"WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING IN HERE, GET OUT NOW", as they cover up their nude body waiting for you to follow their command?

but no one told me that size doesnt matter and who tells girls that breasts size doesnt matter? i will try to do this with my neice when i am confident that she wont run off and tell her daddy, grandmother, etc. that i just talked about her getting breasts.

can someone tell me how sex hurts children? when i was younger (8-11)i had several sexual experiences, with my brother (two years more than me), i was in no way hurt mentally or physically.
considering its not hurtful for a child to experience sex with another child, then how is it hurtful for child to experience sex with an adult? yes adults are bigger and stroger, but i am also bigger and stronger than a lot of wemon my age. does that mean that just because i am bigger that i will go out rape women, no of course not.

if someone after viewing cp becomes a raving foaming at the mouth lunatic, then why doesnt the exact same thing happen when after view playboy, hustler, swank, etc. and then go out and rape women?

how many of you guy have had your sons circumcised? if you have done this then you yourselves have commited child abuse. the foreskin is a protective necessary part of the penis, otherwise boys wouldnt be born with it. if you have done this, then why didnt you do the same thing for your daughter and have the protective skin around her clitoris cut off.

when a woman gets a yeast infection does the doctor start cutting out vital pieces of her, no, the yeast infection is cured. if a boy gets a infection because the foreskin was left right where it should be, then it could also be cured. a woman has the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, give your sons the same right to choose what happens their bodies, considering it is their body and their choice, not your body and not your choice. parents dont own their kids, they are not property. are children minors to you?
i call everything, except something that was created to degrade them.

minor = inferior, of little account, a person of either
sex who has not attained the age at which full civil
rights are accorded, insignificant, juvenile.
Related Word dependent = inferior, piddling, trifling;
junior, lower, average, fair, indifferent, mediocre,
medium, middling, second-rate, undistinguished,
unnoticeable; trivial, unimportant

i do my best to wave to all of the lgs, but really like their smiles(thats what tells me i like me and like being around me), their giggles and laughs are music to my ears.



what do kids go to school for? to learn about history, science, etc. what about sex ed., most adults dont teach children about sex, try teaching children that 100 years and in some cultures today that pedophilia is considered natural and loving. one does not learn about something until they try it, therefore expecting children to automatically learn about sex as soon as they turn 18 is ridiculous.

Frequently, always i have heard people say (those who are against pedophilia)what he claims is the REAL definition of "pedophile". Many of us do it to counter those mainstream, non, or anti definitions, which have gotten under our skin because they invariably use the word synonymously with "child molester". But, on other occasions, pedophiles try to define the word as an absolute acid test for their own community. I hear these people voicing certain criteria that must be met, particular attitudes which must be held, and
defined behaviors that are expected. In order to fit
into their definition of "pedophile", one must meet all
of their conditions. I will submit, these authors are
almost always wrong, as they are not basing their
definition on the entire community, but instead, on only
one pedophile; themselves.

Within every sexual orientation there are variations.
Pedophilia is no different. We are as diverse a group as
SAAs, gays, or anyone else, with just as many forms,
attitudes, behaviors, and blends. I use the word "blend" here purposely, because two sub-divisions of pedophiles are: exclusive and blended. A blended pedophile is one whose pedosexuality shares the stage with elements of one, or more, other orientations. He is not exclusive in his attraction to children, and may even be married to woman within his own generation and have children of his own. The question is, are these blended pedophiles
really pedophiles at all? What is the criteria for
membership into the most hated and reviled group of
people on earth?

I believe that both blended and exclusive pedophiles fit
the definition. All that is required to be a pedo is
that you have a sexual interest, that may or may not be
intertwined with strong emotional feelings as well. What makes a person a pedophile is the degree of attraction, not the exclusiveness of feeling. There is room in one's heart for more than one kind of love. Love is not a nonrenewable resource with a finite supply. It is
infinate and not subject to the Law of Impenetrability.
It does not matter how many other sexual attractions you have. If you are attracted sexually to kids, then you
are a pedophile.

Therefore, it makes sense to believe that we can be
pedophiles and still fall in love with, and marry, an
adult woman. Exclusiveness of attraction does not define the quality of attraction. It does not follow that if
you find children attractive then you must, a priori,
find all others, including adult women, unattractive.
Even if we are exclusive in our feelings, there can
still be an appreciation of the beauty and sexual
desirability of the adult version of our little girls.
We should understand, that our brothers who love both, can still have feelings as strong as we do for little
girls. Their child love is just as valid. The same principle holds true for those who love both little girls and little boys. They are still Girl lovers, but that element of attraction shares their heart with, what could be, an equally strong feeling of boy love. The Law of Impenetrability" still does not apply. Both attractions can, and often do, occupy the same place in ones heart.

There is no limit to the number of attraction bases we
can have. Having more than one does not decrease the
validity of the other(s). Perhaps the reason we have so
much trouble finding a term to describe us, that is
acceptable to the majority, is that there is really no
US. We are a diverse group, with only the sexual
attraction to girls as a demographic construct.
Therefore, the only qualification one needs to be a
pedophile, is that he/she is sexually attracted to
children. The only criteria to be met, in order to call
oneself a Girl Lover, is that one love, and be
physically attracted, to girls.

Attempts to narrow the definition by placing qualifiers
(such as "you can't love adult women and still be a
ped") is like looking at the world through a mirror
instead of a picture window. In a mirror, you see only
yourself; picture windows let you see others as well.
Relationships with little girls are as different from
those with grown women, as a bicycle is from a
motorcycle. Although I personally may not want one or
the other, I can certainly understand why some people
might want both.

all of me...

Vilepagan
07-21-2004, 04:03 PM
Uptown, I suggest you seek psychiatric help...

Overdose
07-21-2004, 04:34 PM
Vile, I second that.

BorgHunter
07-21-2004, 04:39 PM
I'm with you too, Vile...

silverbulletkc
07-21-2004, 04:43 PM
I agree with the posts of Vile, OD, and Borg as well.

uptown
07-21-2004, 05:16 PM
yes i am a girl lover or as you guys would say pedophile. which btw means; pedophile-"ped" means child and "phile" means one that loves or has a strong affinity for, look it up for yourself.
i just dont use that word, because it has been made synonimous with molestor and rapist.

sorry i guess you forgot to back up your claims of me needing psychiatric help with some real proof. i provided my proof above and i was certainly hoping i could get the same from you guys.
btw, in order to understand the above you must read it all, not just the parts you "think" are sickening.

it does no good to talk about something, that goes for anything, without some real proof to back it up. in other words you have to know about this subject in order to make a blanket statement such as this...

****this is some sickening shit ! *****

Proof America wants to have sex with children...

...or I should say: most of the MALES in america
secretely want to screw young girls...

I just got a Spice Catalog in the mail, and the names of
these adult movies had me laughing my ass off and they
are CLEARLY designed to appeal to the lust that american
men feel for young girls (but only if they're 18!!!)

When you read these names, think of them as a pedo and
not as a "norm"...

The babysitter #11, The Younger the Better #3, Teen
Power #5, Young Sluts #12, Teeny Tarts, Teens never say
no!, Kittens #13, Teeny Boppers, Boffing the babysitter,
Hot Young Cherries, Fresh Teen Ass #3, Young and love to
fuck, Itty Bitty Titties.

Those are just SOME of the titles of the movies. I just
think it is SO damn funny that MILLIONS of guys are
getting off on hot, "young" 18 year olds dressing up as
little girls and fucking like crazy and YET they would
be "grossed out" by the thought of actually WANTING that
with a REAL teen girl under 18. Yeah, right! Can you say
denial?

The adult movie industry makes more money than ALL of
the other forms of entertainment combined. BILLIONS of
dollars a year... and they try to find the youngest
looking girls, who are flat chested and have shaved
their pussies. Gee, I wonder why?

The adult industry is a true indicator of how this
society really feels about younger girls. It is deep in
denial about it...as long as the girls on screen are
only PRETENDING to be young girls and they are really
"legal" (or BARELY legal, lol!), then it is ok to
fantasize about them and get off.

It was just all so damn clear to me as I looked thru
that Spice catalog, and I thought you guys might get a
kick out of it. No wonder all the religious moralists
wanna get rid of porn!!! hehe.

- wondering how long it will take for society to
WAKE UP!!!

many people complain about child model sites, but allow their children to go to beauty pagents at 4-10 yoa, i have no problem with beauty pagents, i do have issue with all damn make up being put on young girls faces, its just telling the child; you are not pretty, so we're going to put all this crap on you. imo is only for clowns and any female that puts on make up looks like one.


all of me...

Overdose
07-21-2004, 05:29 PM
Yep, you need help. You can’t argue with insanity…

silverbulletkc
07-21-2004, 05:38 PM
let me introduce you to the Padded Wall Room...it comes complete with 2' thick form on all corners and gives you a comfortable sleep....better than those metal coiul matresses!

And a goodnight sleep in a padded wall room wouldn't be complete without your very own PJ's...the kind that tie around your back and leave you all wrapped up and warm like a hot toasty cinnamon bun! You'll never wanna leave that room!

I suggest taking advantage of this offer and commiting yourself to this one of a kind illustrious bedroom of kings....INSANE kings!