Slashdot Mirror


Anonymous Asks Activists To Fight Pedophiles In 'Operation Deatheaters'

HughPickens.com writes The Independent reports that hacktivist group Anonymous, in a project named Operation DeathEaters, is calling for help in its fight against international pedophile networks, or what it calls the "paedosadist industry" and has issued a video instructing activists on how they can aid in the operation. The Anonymous project is intended to break what it says is a conspiracy of silence among sympathetic politicians, police and mainstream media to downplay the full extent of the online child sex industry. "The premise behind OpDeathEaters is to expose high level complicity, obstruction of justice and cover-up in the paedo-sadist industry in order to show the need for independent inquiries," says Heather Marsh, an online activist who is helping to co-ordinate the operation and describes herself as an "old friend" of Anonymous. The Anonymous database, which will be hosted on the GitHub online repository, promises to collate cases from all around the world, cross-referencing connections within sub-groups including the police, armed forces, schoolteachers, politicians, media, academics and religious organisations. The database's ultimate purpose has yet to be fully determined, but in the first instance the group says it wants to shut down the child-sex industry by "dismantling the power structure which held it there" and by "educating to create a cultural change".

The group is calling on volunteers to help with the ongoing work, which has been divided into three steps. The first is about collecting "all the factual information," second is to "share that information as widely as possible," and the third step is "to set up an independent, internationally linked, inquiry into all the areas which do not appear to have been investigated properly." Activists point to the muted media coverage given to a recent case in Washington DC in which Michael Centanni, a senior Republican fundraiser, was charged with child sex offences after investigators traced transmissions of child pornography to his computers in his basement. The case was not covered by The Washington Post or the New York Times, and was only picked up by a local NBC affiliate state and The Washington Examiner, a small conservative paper in the city. According to the court filings, Centanni was found in possession of 3,000 images, many apparently filmed in his own bedroom, including one showing a man raping a five-year-old girl who cries "no" and "mommy" while the man says "good baby" and "stop crying," according to one filing.

413 comments

  1. Think of the children! by Slick_W1lly · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are many things Anonymous does which are morally dubious. But, I have to say, I can't really take issue with this vigilantism.

    After all "think of the children!". But uh.. actually, don't. It's kinda disturbing. Or do.. since, it's disturbing, and one shouldn't bury one's head in the sand because.. it's hard to think about.

    1. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except their plan is basically grab everyones private information and make it public and hope that they only find the pedos.

    2. Re:Think of the children! by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sure that they have the best of intentions. The problem is with the underlying assumption that there is some kind of conspiracy.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions

      Once you accept that there is a conspiracy, there is no end to it.

      If they were just interested in cataloguing the various cases then that could be done by scripts and Google news. If something is not getting media exposure then it is more likely to be because of lazy "journalists" than because someone is trying to bury the story.

    3. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The question becomes one of false positives, people's lives ruined, and of course trusting your "justice" to a mob. Who knows what will be planted or won't?

      With police there's no guarantee, they've even been convicted of planting evidence on people they find a bone to pick with. So vigilantes, one imagines, have even less of a problem doing so.

    4. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what sort of due diligence are they going to show? Are they going to investigate facts before they "publish" them to ensure that they are actually true? Or are they just going to through out anything that they can find that they think is damaging?

      This is why vigilantism is outlawed - the people practicing it have neither the skills, the interest nor the inclination to take the time to discern fact from rumor from out-right lies before they act on it.

    5. Re:Think of the children! by davydagger · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Boston Marathon Bomber case comes to mind as someone who had his life destroyed because a few lazy assholes with no burder of proof decided to be judge and jury, and leave the man out to a lynch mob justice

      Given that its most likely that "Anonymous" at this point is mostly government agents now, its going to be real intresting to see who they finger as pedophiles, and if any of these people are actually guilty.

    6. Re:Think of the children! by MikeBabcock · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except that you've given every one of these people a free pass if you hack their computers because the court can no longer prove the data was there to begin with and not just planted.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    7. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if there is actually a media conspiracy, that's how dismantling of this operation can be easily expedited.

      Simply don't wait for Boston Bomber-like fiasco, actively manufacture it. With all the participants anonymous it'd be hella easy for someone determined to ruin some random guy's life (We did it, Redd... er, I mean, Anon!), and then media just needs to notice it (or "notice" it) and the movement loses any credibility it had.

    8. Re:Think of the children! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      There are many things Anonymous does which are morally dubious.

      For example they have already forgotten about their pledge to take down ISIS interweb sites...

      Sometimes I think they are just a bunch of publicity whores, but I haven't yet figured out what it is they get out of making announcments, doing it 1/4 assed, and quickily forgetting what they were doning and moving on to the next great headline grabber...

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    9. Re:Think of the children! by log0n · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ....

      What?

    10. Re:Think of the children! by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Informative

      Reddit was crowd sourcing surveillance and amateur photos taken from the bombing scene. They latched onto one person and started a witch hunt. Turns out the guy had nothing to do with it but now he had a million internet neckbeards and other crazies calling for his head.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    11. Re:Think of the children! by Noah+Haders · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Going to cause a lot of collateral damage to start doxxing people who may or may not be pedobears. It may also be used for vindictive purposes.

    12. Re:Think of the children! by ultranova · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The problem is with the underlying assumption that there is some kind of conspiracy.

      There probably is. Not the purposefully coordinated kind where everyone meets in a dark room somewhere to plot their actions, but the kind where everyone sharing fundamentally rotten values leads to effectively coordinated flock behaviour. For examples of this, look at Catholic Church's recent scandals; but it's hardly the only organization that sets the mask of respectability above the wellbeing of mere children.

      People are trained to pretend they are helpless against systemic injustices from the day they're born. It's what allows those injustices to continue existing. If a child molester takes advantage of this trained response to look the other way, for example if the local cops ignore what "respected" members of their community do with their children, it's a matter of semantics whether that should be counted as a conspiracy or not.

      In any case, there's going to be a lot of pain to go around as this culture of silence runs headfirst into the Information Age, becomes effectively defunct, and forces people to see what's been all around them all this time, whether they want to or not. The world will be better for it, though.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    13. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starting things is easy and exciting.

      Following through when it gets down to actual difficult, quite-likely-uninteresting work is much more challenging. At that point, most of their volunteer assistance drifts off, momentum dies, and the project fades to obscurity.

      That's my bet, anyway.

    14. Re:Think of the children! by Squiddie · · Score: 1

      Anonymous isn't some kind of coordinated collective. Anyone can take on the name, and yes, in the years after the project chanology, this is what likely happened. The kind of things "Anonymous" used to get into was usually just defacing websites or posting flashing signs on an epilepsy forum. They've always been inexperienced kids that don't actually know anything about programming or security. So in a way, it was always about getting attention.

    15. Re:Think of the children! by Nyder · · Score: 2

      Boston Marathon Bomber case comes to mind...

      Yes, that comes to mind to me also, proof that the NSA has been wasting our tax payers money for a decade...

      --
      Be seeing you...
    16. Re:Think of the children! by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I think they are just a bunch of publicity whores, but I haven't yet figured out what it is they get out of making announcments, doing it 1/4 assed, and quickily forgetting what they were doning and moving on to the next great headline grabber...

      That's pretty much how teenagers operate in general.

    17. Re:Think of the children! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Anonymous isn't some kind of coordinated collective. Anyone can take on the name...

      Apperently, almost 100% of those now using the name are glorified skript kiddies.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    18. Re:Think of the children! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much how teenagers operate in general.

      And don't forget those "cool" masks...

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    19. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You trust these criminals to be impartial, and to ensure that all of their facts are accurate?

      Without public accountability, they can easily punish the innocent by mistake, or through malice, with your approval because you believe whatever they say, because you have decided they are trustworthy for no reason other than their doing it "for the children."

      A just cause does not justify vigilantism. And for not already figuring this out, you are an idiot.

    20. Re:Think of the children! by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      Vigilante 'justice' just ends up with lots of collateral damage. Plus, I would think that they would want to go after *child molesters*, not merely someone who is sexually attracted to prepubescent children. Pedophiles aren't necessarily child molesters, and vice versa.

      We don't need more "Think of the children!" witch hunts; our society has too many of those already.

    21. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem is with the underlying assumption that there is some kind of conspiracy.

      There probably is. Not the purposefully coordinated kind where everyone meets in a dark room...

      Indifference versus conspiracy.

      Depending how you count, something like 20,000 children (under 5) die of poverty every day. And there are far more people trained up to do science (science PhDs) than available jobs. They could be finding cures for cancer but instead their talent and education are wasted.

      ...forces people to see what's been all around them all this time, whether they want to or not.

      The people who control the world's economy are certainly aware of poverty and disease. But they would prefer to have the world's economy produce frivolous luxury items.

    22. Re:Think of the children! by Slashjones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There probably is.

      The real conspiracy, if one exists at all, is when freedom-hating scumbags conspire together to rile up with public with claims that we need to stop the pedophiles ("child molester" is a better term) and get rid of all child porn, just so they can push through laws which violate our constitution, our freedoms, and our privacy.

    23. Re:Think of the children! by kenshin33 · · Score: 1

      I'm genuinely curious ? what "someone" had his life destroyed ????

    24. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's what OpDeathEaters has to say for themselves (from the second link in the summary). They aren't about targeting pedophiles directly (although they reference another op which is), they are about targeting cover ups of pedophiles. They also make lots of comments about being against vigilante justice, wanting to collect documentation to present to proper legal channels... but they'll still be collecting a lot of info publicly and could target certain groups over others unintentionally (or intentionally).

    25. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How do you know their "evidence" isn't fabricated?

      How do you know you aren't the target when your wife wants to divorce you, get all your stuff, and take revenge on you?

    26. Re:Think of the children! by aevan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But it's not Innocent until Proven Guilty anymore. It's not even Guilty until Proven Innocent.

      Current climate is: Guilty until we can no longer libel you as guilty, but 'it probably could have happened anyway'. Just check out the turn-around the media and people did after that fraternity thing.

    27. Re:Think of the children! by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually, you can't blame this one on the NSA. Their mission is to observe and alert. In the case of the Boston Marathon Bomber, the Russian FSB (the follow on for the KGB) told the US authorities that these brothers were Islamic terrorists. And the FBI did nothing about it.

      Who's in charge of the FBI? Oh, Eric Holder. Well, that figures.

      What's on second.

      Ida know . . . third base.

      This call for vigilantism looks seriously dubious to me . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    28. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Given that its most likely that "Anonymous" at this point is mostly government agents now, its going to be real intresting to see who they finger as pedophiles, and if any of these people are actually guilty.

      Yup. This sounds more like a government operation.

      Except their plan is basically grab everyones private information and make it public and hope that they only find the pedos.

      No, their plan is grab everyone's private information and make it public and accuse people they don't like (political reasons, whatever the case may be) of being pedophiles.

      Just an excuse for identity theft and robbery, nothing more. The usual "cracker" ethics -- two wrongs make a right.

      This sounds more and more like a government agency. Their tactics "think of the children" stopped working, so now they
      have to take it underground and con a gullible public into thinking this is "grass roots."

      Anyone else find it strange that "light is the best disinfectant" and yet..."anonymous" will not reveal themselves?

      Giant double standard...it sounds more like a government going on a witch hunt than anything else.

      Disclaimer: I have been abused, but have not and will not abuse others. I have read this is a common thing for abusers to be victims themselves, but how could you put someone through it after it has happened to you?

      Also, probably 9/10 of adults I know were molested (by a family member or close friend, is most common), molested someone else, or have similar stories.

      I don't see how this will change much. These go unreported. The common theme is "get over it" and there are statutes of limitations.

      For myself...what does it matter if I tracked down my abusers? I have moved on. Sure, they might go after someone else.
      It is not worth my time and money and energy to track them down. There is no reason to "cover up" anything, but "God"
      is unlikely to care now anymore than when I was a kid. It won't change anything to execute the person responsible.

      They'd be better off convincing people "just because he/she is 16/14/etc. and you get them drunk, does not make it ok"

      It really is a cultural thing, goes far beyond sexual abuse...large groups of people always have and always will do stupid
      things because they can.

      This will change nothing. If you want to convince people that individual lives matter...collectivism is not the way to go about it.

      You embrace godless communism nearly the entire world over (economy & education)...what did you expect would happen?

      This is just another symptom of the disease. To governments the world over, individual lives mean NOTHING. They sure as #$#@$ don't care you were abused.

    29. Re:Think of the children! by nbauman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      http://www.theguardian.com/uk/...

      Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged yesterday.

      Dr Yvette Cloete, a specialist registrar in paediatric medicine at the Royal Gwent hospital in Newport, was forced to flee her house after vandals daubed it with graffiti in the middle of the night.

      The word "paedo" was written across the front porch and door of the house she shared with her brother in the village of St Brides, south Wales.

      Gwent police confirmed that the attack last Friday night was prompted by a confusion over the words "paedophile" and "paediatrician".

    30. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, probably 9/10 of adults I know were molested (by a family member or close friend, is most common), molested someone else, or have similar stories.

      As children, I should add. They are not abusers themselves (that I know of) but this causes all kinds of issues for a lifetime
      (domestic abuse...control issues...yelling...crying for no reason...all that fun stuff).

      The sexual abuse is bad, but what is destroyed is trust. Any contact is aggression.

      Some people...even flock to abusers...they just "wanted someone to hold them."

      There are too many damaged people out there already.

      I won't make any comment on legal ages of things or what constitutes "consent"...but abuse is abuse, regardless of ages involved. It is just as bad a 35-year old taking advantage of a 70-year old. Yes, there are some real nut cases out there. It is a power/dominance thing for many. Almost a physical reaction, a response. I would not go so far as saying "automatic" but many abusers are too far wacked out on drugs, their mind is gone (at least in that instance).

      I would not be surprised, to see a link to poverty either.

      I think their (stated) goals are perhaps lofty, but this will change nothing.

    31. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One mis-identified suspect (the high-school student) was quickly cleared, and he was back to normal a day or two later.

      The other mis-identified suspect (the university student) had actually died about a month before the bombing.

      So although the internet detectives totally screwed up, there were no lasting effects.

    32. Re:Think of the children! by nbauman · · Score: 2

      These assholes at Anonymous are so stupid that they identify people with the same name as the criminals. In other words, they're just as stupid as Homeland Security.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sp...
      Spike Lee retweets incorrect address of George Zimmerman, violates Twitter rules
      By Chenda Ngak CBS News December 13, 2012, 4:03 PM

    33. Re:Think of the children! by rogoshen1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's the problem though. While pedo's make for an abhorrent target, and due process just seems 'too good for them' -- where does the mob mentality end? We have a criminal justice system in civilized societies for a reason (inb4 anti-american snark).

      If the angry mob decided tomorrow that some belief or group membership was wrong, should they be allowed to take matters into their own hands? Pretend for a moment that these were jaywalkers or people with overdue library books.

      Lady Justice is not Heimdall or Janus, for a very good reason.

    34. Re:Think of the children! by nbauman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RTFA, they are collecting official case information, not internet rumors. Don't worry about your nonexistent wife or girlfriend.

      Oh, that's reassuring. They're collecting official unverified accusations, from reliable sources like anonymous reporting lines.

    35. Re: Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your username and contact info has just been added to their database.

    36. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lets face it; Anonymous is composed of a few capable, possibly even moral, individuals and lots of wannabees who just want to hurt people because it's fun to feel powerful. This is going to end badly.

    37. Re:Think of the children! by greenwow · · Score: 0

      > How do you know their "evidence" isn't fabricated?

      If the person they're accusing is a Republican, then the chances are very low that they're not a pedophile. According to a study from Stanford, nearly all Republicans are pedophiles. It is the way of their kind.

    38. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, let's keep spreading the innocent guy's name around the internet...

      Short story: Reddit found a suspected terrorist and started a witch hunt. Turns out he was completely innocent.

    39. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's mighty white of you. Congratulations on being a human being.

    40. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and leave the man out to a lynch mob justice ...

      No, his life was destroyed because multiple television so-called news decided to pipe the rantings of a lynch mob into every household. The problem wasn't "a few lazy assholes", it was dumb arseholes meeting dumber arseholes. In this case, on-line vigilantes saying how clever they were and reporters saying anything to glue eyeballs to their broadcast.

    41. Re: Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comparison of suspected jaywalking and child abuse might have been intended.

    42. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Observe and alert?
      Everything they do is so classified that nobody will ever see it and most of the shit they collect is not worth the time for them to go after whoever for whatever. To top it off it's not exactly legal for them to pass off that information for criminal trials against U.S. citizens. IMO sucking up everything is the wrong way to go about their job and in my eyes it's fucking illegal. They should all be in prison for their crimes against the citizens of this nation.

    43. Re:Think of the children! by kenshin33 · · Score: 1

      no need to say more. thank you good sir!

    44. Re:Think of the children! by cheetah_spottycat · · Score: 1

      I agree! Let's replace our judicial system and its ineffective division of powers with full on witch hunt! I think my neighbour is one, too. Fuck due process, let's burn down his house! Here, want a torch? Or are you with the witches?

    45. Re: Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Other than that everyone should now realize that it could happen to them. So there are lasting effects.

    46. Re:Think of the children! by znrt · · Score: 1

      this is just one instance, one symptom of a wider issue. for you to have a point there should be a justice system generally recognized as such. there isn't, and when justice systematically fails to protect the weak people will start taking issues on with their own hands. sure, bad things will happen, but it's inevitable and the first error is having it let come to this.

    47. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      http://www.theguardian.com/uk/...

      Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged yesterday.

      Dr Yvette Cloete, a specialist registrar in paediatric medicine at the Royal Gwent hospital in Newport, was forced to flee her house after vandals daubed it with graffiti in the middle of the night.

      The word "paedo" was written across the front porch and door of the house she shared with her brother in the village of St Brides, south Wales.

      Gwent police confirmed that the attack last Friday night was prompted by a confusion over the words "paedophile" and "paediatrician".

      Most people that participate in stuff like this vandalism are usually "many bricks shy of a full load"; they are "dim-witted followers".

    48. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're collecting official unverified accusations, from reliable sources like anonymous reporting lines.

      Oh, this quote really reassures me that the "mob mentality" that follows Anonymous will exact justice on actual criminals and not just on people suspected of being criminals. /sarcasm

      So what is to stop people using this as a form of retribution by reporting people they hate to to these lines anonymously, then waiting for the reports to be created, then doxing the target of their hatred?

      NOTHING

      Talk about clueless......

      appropriate magic word: uncouth

    49. Re: Think of the children! by DasDad · · Score: 2

      I suppose this excuse is related to rapists good ol' favorite: "if she hadn't led me on..." Shouldn't the vigilantes have foreseen what media coverage may lead to? Regardless, one of the basic premises of a modern democratic society, is that policework, prosecution and punishment is solely under the jurisdiction of the authorities. Vigilantism is not just illegal, it's also fundamentally undemocratic.

    50. Re: Think of the children! by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Hmmm.. What you're writing fits with my general political persuasion, so: Sounds legit!

    51. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That particular conspiracy is real, in at least a limited case: US State Department memos to their embassy in Sweden, leaked by Wikileaks, specifically advised using the issue of child pornography as an argument for reduced internet anonymity, to prevent unlicensed copying of US-owned movies.

    52. Re:Think of the children! by dinfinity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      when justice systematically fails to protect the weak

      Does it, though?

      Or do people just want to think it does so they can satisfy their innate bloodlust and apply some good old medieval uncivilized mob justice?

    53. Re:Think of the children! by smallfries · · Score: 0

      It happened once. 15 years ago. Stop recycling it.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    54. Re: Think of the children! by DasDad · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You seem to forget, that your self-righteousness collides with logic at one crucial point: Abuse in the Catholic church DID come out, and police have arrested plenty of "respected" pedophiles, like the Republican operative mentioned in this very thread.

    55. Re: Think of the children! by DasDad · · Score: 1

      And your notion that there is a "culture of silence" may be good fodder for the grassroots, but In reality its ultramarxist, puritanical logic falls apart outside of the US.

    56. Re:Think of the children! by Tom · · Score: 2

      Not the purposefully coordinated kind where everyone meets in a dark room somewhere to plot their actions, but the kind where everyone sharing fundamentally rotten values leads to effectively coordinated flock behaviour.

      Which is not a conspiracy. The first rule of searching for the truth is to call things by their proper names. A conspiracy, by both legal and colloquial definition, requires agreement between the parties. Agreement requires communication (not necessarily verbal, but explicit).
      If everyone on the highway drives too fast, you can argue about "everyone sharing [fundamental values] leads to effectively coordinated flock behaviour", but that still only makes it a lot of speeding tickets and not a conspiracy.

      It's important to make the distinction because it changes how to approach the problem. A conspiracy you would try to shatter in a different way than you would tackle a culture problem.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    57. Re:Think of the children! by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It happened once. 15 years ago. Stop recycling it.

      True. But if you read the link, it also happened during public hysteria worked up over a campaign to "name and shame" sex offenders in the past. TFA here is proposing to do this on a much grander scale. Therefore it's a pretty relevant example of the kinds of things that public hysteria over this issue can do if it's not handled well.

    58. Re:Think of the children! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You only have to look at GamerGate to see the standard of proof required by anonymous. This will very quickly descend into doxxing, threats and blog posts presented as "evidence" of crimes against children, punishable by mob justice. Anyone who opposes it will be labelled and SJW. A false narrative will be constructed around anyone they decide to target, and their lives will be ruined.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    59. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      generally recognized as such

      There is a justice system generally recognized as such. It's just very trendy to pretend there isn't, which comes from the typical generational conceit that anything you don't understand must be rubbish.

      The justice system protects the weak - in this case, the weak are those wrongly accused, and the wrongdoers are your mobs. There's a reason it's illegal. But when the mobs get arrested your kind will be taking it as further proof that the justice system doesn't work, because you're fucking idiots.

    60. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once? Vigilante witch hunts rarely result in anything but innocent people being harmed. This happened during that Boston bombing, and it'll happen for as long as there are witch hunts like this.

    61. Re: Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abuse in the Catholic church DID come out

      Eventually. The Church allowed it to continue for a long time, though. Don't be such an ass.

    62. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus christ, there is a whole lot of crazy in that post. They mention that not even the UN or Interpol is too high-up to escape the conspiracy; so why lie and claim you're collecting data only to hand it over to the proper authorities?

    63. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Known extortionists supporting an unqualified witch hunt. Go figure. The new Anonymous is responsible for violating the privacy of more individuals than the NSA.

    64. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "but many abusers are too far wacked out on drugs"

      This idea that sexual abusers are whacked out drug-heads in dirty clothes, lurking around playgrounds or school yards and living in some squalid apartment collecting all manner of degrading pornography is absolute horseshit! There's a fair chance you have stood next a sexual abuser on the train or bus, you wouldn't know it. They are just like everyone else, they have good jobs, cars and often have loving families who they wouldn't hurt or abuse but they have no issue with watching someone else abuse minors because something in their own childhood introduced the a maladjusted idea of what is the acceptable norm for sexual behaviour. It's a psychological problem that requires proper professional psychological treatment, not the local nutjob beating them with a two-by-four after they found some information on the internet!

    65. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You only have to look at GamerGate to see the standard of proof required by anonymous. This will very quickly descend into doxxing, threats and blog posts presented as "evidence" of crimes against children, punishable by mob justice. Anyone who opposes it will be labelled and SJW. A false narrative will be constructed around anyone they decide to target, and their lives will be ruined.

      Don't forget how they'll keep try to link it to other stories to bring it back into attention, as demonstrated here by you.

    66. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if by "the weak", we mean black people shot by cops, or people with disabilities abused by residential institutes and schools, then yes, it does fail to protect the weak. If we mean children, well, that's far less clear.

    67. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ends do not justify the means. (For those who don't understand these sayings) The desired result does not justify the use of any procedure.

      We could just identify a city of origin and then kill everyone in that city. It would (by set theory) kill the pedophile; however, it would be morally repugnant.

      It is important to realize that why Anonymous is doing here is trusting highly emotional people who are willing to devote some portion of their life to stamping out a yet-to-be-convicted person to take a step back and consider if they are even dealing with the right person. Odds are so slim that they will have a moment of reflection that I'd place the odds at under 5%. Rather they will use the "evidence" that Anonymous singled them out (which isn't evidence) to justify their actions.

      We have courts, where the rules are not very flexible but are accurate, with error on the side of allowing people to walk away. It wasn't designed that way by accident, it was designed that way because otherwise we start putting even more people who really didn't perform the acts they were accused of in prison (stop using jail as a synonym for prison, jail == not guilty yet, prison == guilty by a court of law).

      And your last sentence, while meant to be amusing just underlies the entire inability to use reason. Stop spouting nonsense (even in jest) if you want the world to think. People work in patterns, and if the predominate pattern they encounter is knee-jerk reactions, as a population they're knees will jerk just when they should. Throwing up more nonsense just makes it easier to go the magical (non-)thinking path which eventually ends at "the ends justify the means."

    68. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, however, there's more to it.

      Jimmy Saville is now known to have abused lots of people over many years. He used to run a nightclub - the story goes that some lad was being out of order with the ladies, so Saville grabbed him and locked him in the basement. Supposedly, the police chief went to see him to tell him to make it right, whereupon Saville asked him how he's feel if his daughter (who frequented his club) was the victim of this lad's actions. I don't know how true this story is, or how it turned out, but I can fully imagine that the police chief said something like "let the lad go and we'll say no more about it". However, had he investigated, might he have found some abuse going on? Might he have been in a position to stop the years of abuse that followed? We'll never know - because Lady Justice never got a look in.

      If Anonymous uncover stuff like this story, then I'm all for it. Paedos are gaming the 'discretionary justice' that goes on all the time.

    69. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      MAYBE if you stupid limeys would stop breaking the language, we'd have better results...
      how about 'pediatrician' ?
      oh, and get rid of that execrable 'drink driving' idiocy... when you have some DRINKS, you end up DRUNK, you don't end up "DRINK", and if you are stupid, you end up DRUNK DRIVING, not DRINK DRIVING... stupid brits, what, are you 'drink' ? ? ? idiots...
      oh, and your bullshit obsession on saying 'maths' is stupid, too, stop that, also... i went to math class, i didn't go to maths class... 'tards...

    70. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It happened once. 15 years ago. Stop recycling it.

      Do you really think that the educational system has improved dramatically in 15 years? Do you think that people react less emotionally now?

      Seems pretty damn relevant to the article.

      The basic rules of Gravity were discovered over four hundred years ago, and yet we recycle their lessons. The rules of double entry accounting were created eight hundred years ago, and yet we recycle their lessons.

      There is an interest in the younger generations to discount anything old. Might not be a new thing; but, it is distinctly pronounced. It exhibits in small things and large things. Try to get one of them to watch a fifteen year old film. Doesn't matter if it is a classic, one of the best of all time, and much better than "insert franchise here #2". You won't succeed without violating some of their internal code of conduct. That's the people who are going to have a fun witch hunt thinking they are really doing something new and worthy.

      They might catch one of their intended, but they certainly will catch innocent people and do uncalled for harm.

    71. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How exactly do you figure that? Just because you say it doesn't make it true.

    72. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is this Anonymous that they are at? Since you are a non-stupid please clarify. I just see you saying "Leave the pedos alone!!"

    73. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure you mean well, but what you are saying is so retarded it damaged my DNA.

      -no one is saying due process is too good for them.
      -this criminal justice system is a comforting illusion, use it like a snuggy!
      -jaywalkers, overdue library book delinquents, child rapists... you say tomato...

      The world doesn't exist as a thought exercise for you. Sorry.

    74. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pedophilia cannot be treated. The recidivism rate is close to 100%. I'll take the nutjob with a two-by-four over some poorly educated pussy asking the pedo about his feelings and hoping for a breakthrough.

    75. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if by "the weak", we mean black people shot by cops, or people with disabilities abused by residential institutes and schools, then yes, it does fail to protect the weak. If we mean children, well, that's far less clear.

      The above quote is example "A" why we shouldn't let the average clown decide when justice was done.

      "Black people shot by cops" is code words for "Let poor people steal, rape, and murder with no consequences"

      Trayvon Martin was committing a violent crime. Mike Brown committed two or three violent crimes, the last of which caused him to be killed in self-defense. Eric Garner was accidentally killed by his fatass and criminal lifestyle while committing a violent crime.

      You people, the anonymous coward above, need to understand justice only comes by the hand of the state. If you want to change justice, you have to change the state.

    76. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when justice systematically fails to protect the weak

      Does it, though?

      Or do people just want to think it does so they can satisfy their innate bloodlust and apply some good old medieval uncivilized mob justice?

      why don't you ask the children currently being abused?

    77. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Irrelevant. The media, can choose to underreport stories like this, and the people can choose to further investigate them for more mud.

    78. Re:Think of the children! by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      We don't need more "Think of the children!" witch hunts; our society has too many of those already.

      Yeah, when did Anonymous turn into the lapdog of the FBI? Back when Anonymous had actual hackers (before they were busted by the FBI), they went after evil government and corporate shit (think Stratfor). Now....terrorists and pedos?

      They've turned into Chester and Spike.

      "Oh, oh, oh hey, hey FBI, wanna fight the establishment? Ehhh? Ehhh? Government corruption, FBI?! Eh eh?!"

      "Naaaahhh" *SLAP*.

      "Oh, oh, yeah, yeah that wouldn't be no fun no fun...hey, hey FBI, wanna get pedos, FBI?! Ehhhh? Ehhh? Pedos?!"

      "Pedos?! Where...."

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    79. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That and the tendency for crusaders to be closet .

    80. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real conspiracy, if one exists at all, is when freedom-hating scumbags conspire together to rile up with public with claims that we need to stop the pedophiles ("child molester" is a better term) and get rid of all child porn, just so they can push through laws which violate our constitution, our freedoms, and our privacy.

      The correct phrase is probably "convergence of interest" rather than "conspiracy". Convergence of interest is how elites manipulate things, no overt conspiracy is needed. Of course that exists, but convergence of interest is harder to prove. But your comment makes me wonder what is really going on here. Anonymous are ... anonymous. This latest populist vigilantism by "Anonymous" could, for all we know, easily be orchestrated by GCHQ and the NSA (CIA, whoever) in order to further the political cause of erosion of privacy. I mean how do we know who is behind it? If they are truly libertarian or anarchist or whatever, why aren't Anonymous focusing on furthering internet freedoms and exposing government surveillance and failures of democracy instead of this mob lynching party? I wouldn't be surprised that there are abuse cover ups involving powerful people, and that's bad, but are Anonymous really going to target and expose the powerful elite? In what way are they accountable if they get it wrong?

    81. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Authorities seem to have no trouble tracking down and blocking copyright "infringers". So why is it that so many pedo sites go unchecked?

    82. Re:Think of the children! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You don't see the downside of building a public database of child pornography information? No potential downside?

    83. Re:Think of the children! by istartedi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Going to cause a lot of collateral damage to start doxxing people who may or may not be pedobears

      Call me when anonymous starts busting down doors without warning at 3 AM and kills occupants. Call me when they snag people rolling through town who just took out cash to buy a car, and confiscate the money. Call me when they drag people through the court for years, ruining their good name with no real conviction. Call me when they just shoot you on the street even though you're un-armed.

      Those are all things the "real cops" have been doing. When the authorities aren't doing their job, alternatives start to look better.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    84. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, I wonder how many anonymous members are pedophiles.

    85. Re:Think of the children! by gsslay · · Score: 1

      Self appointed vigilantes are never a good thing, that's why you should be taking issue with this.

      Because it's mob justice. Because it presumes guilt without a fair trial. Because each vigilante works to their own personal agenda, which may not exactly be what they claim to be and may not be what you agree with. Because vigilantes have nothing to show they know what they're doing. Because, well, what could possibly go wrong...

    86. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are not common occurences. And there's mostly due process foloowing it in most of those cases. There is no due process with vigilantes. Once a person's name is linked with sexual abuse of children there's not really anything you can do about it.

    87. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, bro, it's very clearly only about ethics in game journalism.

    88. Re: Think of the children! by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Looking at TFA, this guy wasn't a Republican operative. It seems he worked for a company called Base Connect which is currently under investigation for defrauding senior citizens who vote Republican. They'd call in and get donations supposedly towards Republican politicians, and almost none of the money actually went towards those campaigns; instead the company just pocketed it.

    89. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Anyone who opposes it will be labelled and SJW

      Um... no. I'm actually gonna say this entire project sounds like SJWs trying to use the name "Anonymous" to garner free publicity. It's even being run off of tumblr.

    90. Re:Think of the children! by znrt · · Score: 1

      i just highlighted a well known simple fact, that a failing system triggers a response.

      it's pretty amusing that i have harvested so many enthusiastic opinions! seems there is interest in justice after all! however, if nothing changes it will still continue to happen ...

      bottom line is: there is no peace without justice, and justice today is just basic crowd control and the standard means of legitimation of the elite and their atrocities. justice just isn't blind, so it's no justice, and everybody sort of knows it. this isn't sustainable. either we change this fundamentally, once and for all, or we will be just digging our way through hell into oblivion.

    91. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but you can go after the people in the photos/videos who committed the acts.

    92. Re:Think of the children! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I do wish more people realized that cops in the US have serious problems and operate more like big brother than they need to. That said, I don't follow your logic here. "Cops do bad things, anonymous doesn't do and won't do as many bad things, therefore this thing that they're thinking of doing is okay"?

    93. Re: Think of the children! by DasDad · · Score: 1

      In both cases, we're talking about a few hundred people a year. In a country of 300 million, that's not "systematical evidence of failure to protect the weak." Per. Capita its similar numbers that you see in Europe, and tens of times less than you see om South America.

    94. Re: Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you by "failing system" mean "bored 20-something year olds, who want to feel important and morally superior by fighting whatever "oppression" they can get their hands on, without actually getting up from their computer and really do something."

      Then you certainly have a point.

      The response is little more than an Internet echo chamber though, and an example of the likeminded people, from the same socioeconomic background reinforcing eachothers beliefs, and mistaking that for consensus.

    95. Re: Think of the children! by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Neither does it exist as a platform for your faux outrage, sorry!

    96. Re:Think of the children! by davydagger · · Score: 1

      the government crowd sourced footage of the boston bombings to reddit and 4chan, and they found the wrong guy, and the guy got death threats.

    97. Re: Think of the children! by znrt · · Score: 1

      you are correct in that there is no consensus. yet everybody "sort of knows". just like everybody knows there is no god, but many people just want to believe there is, because they feel they need that notion in their lives. justice is a fundamental requirement for society, so we have a hard time accepting our justice is moot, arbitrary and biased towards the powerful, because that would mean our democracy is a lie, and is in danger. people desperately wants to believe in justice. but we do know what it actually is, even if some, just like you, don't want to hear about it.

    98. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what happened once? An atomic bomb was dropped on 6 August 1945. Then it happened again on 9 Aug 1945. That was 70 years ago! Using your line of reckoning (because it is the furthest thing from reasoning one could call it) then we shouldn't be worried about getting nuked ever again. Ya know, that word vigilante is derived from vigilance. If I continue to use your "logic" then if we just stop being vigilant about the world then there will be no vigilantes! Brilliant man! Glad you thought of it......

    99. Re: Think of the children! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Internationally, you see a lot pushed through because of the (supposed) links between the Royal Family and organized pedophilia rings. Anyone with the "protection" of the crown is free to offend with impunity. Or at least that's the theory. And with enough international people in Anonymous, there could be a belief that all the pedos are known, but ignored, as they are too well connected.

    100. Re:Think of the children! by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      This AC is exemplary of the problem.

      It is the mentality of 'each one is one too many', failing to see that completely eradicating all crime is only possible through the most dystopian police state or human genetic modification program one could imagine.

      It is the classic form of guilting the other party into agreeing that no means are too far-reaching to prevent these terrible crimes: "If you don't support all of the 'solutions' I present, you support child abuse!" is very clearly a fallacy.

    101. Re:Think of the children! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      This will change nothing. If you want to convince people that individual lives matter...collectivism is not the way to go about it.

      You embrace godless communism nearly the entire world over (economy & education)...what did you expect would happen?

      Yes, it certainly works better if you let God-fearing Roman Catholic priests do the work.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    102. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SJW's opposed to doxing? That's fucking hilarious considering it's been GG's that have been getting doxed, harassed at their places of work in order to get them fired, swatted, pranked, etc. Zoe Quinn was even part of troll dox group. SJW's *love* doxing and harassing people.

    103. Re:Think of the children! by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      If you want to talk about police not doing their jobs, just look at the UK, at Rotherham - 1400 rapes over 10 years - mostly against young teenage girls. (I think mostly about 11 to 14 yrs old) Many were reported but the local police did more or less nothing. There were two basic reasons identified. -
      - Firstly many of the girls had been coerced or tricked into becoming 'prostitutes' - sex workers, so despite being underage their claims were dismissed automatically by police as untrustworthy..
      - Secondly and maybe worse was extreme Political Correctness, the children were basically all white, the gang who were trafficking them and those who raped them were mostly Asian - and Islamic.
      Then there's a lovely guy called Jimmy Savile who the police protected over claims of abuse made over about 5 decades.. Then there are the police, politicians and businessmen who ran a huge ring abusing children taken in by social care - in orphanages. The list goes on..

      I don't know about America but I have this horrible feeling that the UK police are gradually evolving into Darleks..

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
    104. Re:Think of the children! by istartedi · · Score: 1

      You don't follow my logic because it isn't what I said. It's not my logic. It's just something you inferred. "When the economy is bad, communism starts to look better", is not the same as "The economy is bad. Communism will be better. Join the Party with me".

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    105. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Actually, you can't blame this one on the NSA. Their mission is to observe and alert.

      What kind of freaking fantasy world did you get THAT impression from?? The NSA is *actively cracking* encryption on everything it can get its hands on - whether it's in their "mandate" or not, and even compromising/modifying hardware before it gets delivered!

    106. Re: Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question is not whether this should be done in the this way or not, but rather how this web of complicit politicians and businesspeople will be exposed. There have been many exposés, but none have really succeeded in breaking the stranglehold of big media on them. This is a public database, so collaboration could sort outnthe false positives. In asking for help, they are doing the right thing. Critics should come up with a better plan if there is one!

    107. Re:Think of the children! by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Ah a drive by troll. How refreshing. Today I am bored enough to respond.

      Once there was a Mongol army of such power and ferocity that it came close to wiping out western civilisation as we know it. So you are suggesting we should worry about that happening again? Are you really worried about getting nuked today, or tomorrow? I'm not. But then again I associate the frequency of an event with the risk of it reoccurring. I guess that by your reckoning we should not, and that all events that have ever happened are equally probable in the future, so we should treat them all the same.

      I will now start worrying about herds of velociraptors raging across major cities causing carnage and destruction. After all, it is about the same level of hysteria as complaints that the one-time mob attack of a paediatrician is relevant 15 years after the event.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    108. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you getting your sides mixed up there? The anti-GG crowd was just as bad - they doxxed people and had them fired. A lot of GG'ers got threats too, and everyone who called themselves a GGer was named a misogynist.

    109. Re:Think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not really an accurate assessment of the situation. Normal people could help out with a lot of those things - you can vote for more NIH funding, or give money directly to a lab. You can figure out which charities actually help those starving children, and give money to them. It's just that most of them don't. It's a problem of apathy, not shadowy figures running the economy.

    110. Re:Think of the children! by nobodie · · Score: 1

      "For all intensive purposes, 'whom' is no longer a word. That begs the question, 'who cares'?"
      What the phrase is: "For all intents and purposes" (the problem with a silly mistake is that it makes you look silly and encourages me to either ignore or derogate your entire comment, which is unfair.) I think if you consider the meanings involved you will see how the real phrase makes some sense and your version does not.

      Now "whom is no longer a word." Yes, it is. What you mean to say is that "in my version of English I no longer find a meaning for it" because I can either use syntax to simplify my sentences to where it is not called for or use "who" when "whom" should be used (in an objective position, like in a prepositional phrase "for whom the bell tolls" or "to whom it may concern." Or as the object of a verb "The man whom I called yesterday."

      OK, so I can see that in colloquial English, even I use "who" in most cases for the object of a verb, but when I am writing something for a research paper where it will be read internationally and judged valuable by colleagues around the world whose colloquial English does still use the "whom," then it only makes sense to not disturb their sensibilities by using something that they can accept as standard. Especially because it is still standard in academic writing here in the US.

      So, to put a broad point on the issue of "whom," many people care, and many people who people care about care. So, if you want to be a part of the greater global society you should care too!

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
    111. Re:Think of the children! by davydagger · · Score: 1

      This call for vigilantism looks seriously dubious to me . . .

      something seems a little off about it indeed. That said, if I do happen to come accross a sadomastichtic ring of pedophiles I'll be sure to say something, you know, just in case.

  2. What's a DEA theater? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *nm*

  3. Be careful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Step one, collecting "all the factual information", is very risky. How will activists avoid being arrested for possessing/distributing CP?

    1. Re: Be careful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking hashes and log files to track transfers, not the actual files.

    2. Re:Be careful by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Well If you're Pete Townsend of The Who you can just claim (after the fact) that it's "research" you were doing, no charges brought.

    3. Re: Be careful by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And how are you going to associate those hashes with anything real, unless you have the database of what is real? Law enforcement can work with hashes, because they have a legal exception to actually also have the real images. Anybody else doing this is just a CP owner.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  4. Purpose of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What is the purpose of the Anonymous?

    To catch the pedophiles?

    That's the job for the cops

    If the cops can't do the job, what makes you think those nerds who call themselves "Anonymous" can do anything different?

    1. Re:Purpose of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And how's their fight with ISIS progressing... Haven't heard anything since it was announced.

    2. Re:Purpose of Anonymous by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Someone isn't necessarily guilty of anything just because they're a pedophile.

    3. Re:Purpose of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can't be paid off like cops, judges, juries, etc.

      They can't be paid off to let people go free, but they certainly can easily be paid off to fabricate evidence against people; historically, that's the more lucrative business.

      Of course, Anonymous activities are also likely going to attract perpetrators, either as a deliberate cover, or because they fool themselves into thinking that they are doing good.

    4. Re: Purpose of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They gave up without really doing anything. Just like with the Zetas. You know, those computer nerds are cowards. All of them. All talk and no walk. Their belligerent attitudes are the product of years of deserved ridicule at the hands of better people: the cool kids at school, the popular people, the socially apt, the beautiful crowd they could never fit in with. They're full of rage and hatred mingled with the despair at their pathetic, empty lives. Condemned to an existence made of loneliness and hollow pursuits, they seek a revenge that will never come to pass. When confronted, they will always cower, like the sniveling cowards they are.

  5. Charged /= Guilty by Harlequin80 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know nothing about the particular case that they are referring to. But the fact that it wasn't widely reported is actually a good thing. Being charged is not the same as being convicted. There are too many cases of people being tried in the media and having their lives destroyed when they actually haven't done anything wrong.

    Given people are so fucking stupid they will attack paediatricians thinking they are paedophiles just sums up the wider mobs inability to effectively deal with the information.

    1. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      He pled guilty a couple of weeks ago.

    2. Re:Charged /= Guilty by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Being charged is not the same as being convicted. There are too many cases of people being tried in the media and having their lives destroyed when they actually haven't done anything wrong.

      Yes, and isn't it interesting how the media has looked the other way in the case of Michael Centanni, but is happy to rake someone over the coals any other time? Sounds like the media is completely aware of how damaging the court of public opinion is, and are showing some favoritism towards those in power -- the very people we should be most vigilant about.

    3. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Centanni will be sentenced on April 9. The charge carries a statutory maximum of 20 years in prison and potential financial penalties. Centanni will also be required to register as a sex offender for a minimum of 15 years."

      http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/GOP-Fundraiser-Michael-Centanni-Pleads-Guilty-to-Child-Pornography-287555231.html

    4. Re:Charged /= Guilty by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Funny

      All the same, I'm not sure "Lobbyist Accused of Being Evil" is particularly newsworthy.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So in other words, justice is being served, and a sentence is being delivered that the judge (within the guidelines set by legislators) feels is appropriate to the crime committed.

      There's nothing left for Anonymous to do, except to remind the world that this guy did something bad, and by so doing, perpetuate the shame and embarrassment his friends and family are subjected to. It won't affect the perpetrator himself, because he'll be in prison for the entire life of this "operation".

      Harassing innocent bystanders is what Anonymous does best.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    6. Re:Charged /= Guilty by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Jokes aside, that's about it. The case in question is a bog-standard investigation and prosecution. The only notable twist is the guy's political connections. There's really no reason for widespread coverage.

      This stunt may as we'll be Operation Our Favorite Crime, spreading awareness of Anonymous' obsession with this particular flavor of felony. We'll put it up next to the neckbeard ranting about his favorite video game, and the fat guy touting the virtues of his favorite food. Just like the armchair art critic and the armchair gourmet critic (and the nerd typing Slashdot comments when he should be sleeping) this will accomplish nothing to make the world a better place, but it will give a few individuals a few moments of pride in their hollow awareness campaign.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    7. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So in other words, justice is being served

      That depends. Many people plead guilty to crimes they did not commit. Was plea bargaining a factory here? The sentence seems a bit long for that, but you never know.

    8. Re:Charged /= Guilty by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we're agreed on this one. I kind of wonder if they started the campaign because they think it's some kind of Republican conspiracy, and they want to expose it.

      Also, I am kind of skeptical of someone who is "an old friend" of anonymous, without being anonymous herself.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      If that's the case here, then Anonymous is just making the injustice worse.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    10. Re:Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The story about a mob of people attacking a paediatrician is a HOAX. It never happened.

      This BBC article tells how a simple act of vandalism (spraypaint on a door) was exaggerated into wild stories of a mob physically attacking a woman in the street.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4719364.stm

      ~~~~

    11. Re:Charged /= Guilty by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Given people are so fucking stupid they will attack paediatricians thinking they are paedophiles

      That really is true, btw.
      http://www.theguardian.com/uk/...
      Doctor driven out of home by vigilantes

    12. Re:Charged /= Guilty by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Jokes aside, that's about it. The case in question is a bog-standard investigation and prosecution. The only notable twist is the guy's political connections. There's really no reason for widespread coverage.

      Then, to quote Harlequin80 above, why is it "there are too many cases of people being tried in the media and having their lives destroyed when they actually haven't done anything wrong"? Why isn't every case treated as this one was?

    13. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hypothesis: Pedophilia doesn't exist as a lone-wolf type scenerio.

      A pedophile is just someone with a sexual attraction to prepubescent children, so this is nonsense. And not everything has to be some vast conspiracy in order to exist. There are lone murderers, and there are lone rapists.

    14. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't mean shit though...

      "The federal guilty plea rate has risen from 83% in 1983 to 96% in 2009,[24] a rise attributed largely to the Sentencing Guidelines."

      So basically everybody pleads guilty regardless of guilt.

      If you have ever been accused of anything and dragged through the criminal justice system you'll know they drum up bogus charges that would never stick if you can even afford to defend yourself. They do it in an effort to get you to plead guilty. They don't care about your actual guilt as long as the prosecutor gets a 'win' added to his record. They'll do everything to drain you financially too so you can't actually defend yourself (ie the legal system is too complex for the majority of well educated people to defend themselves let alone those not so well educated). Then you plead guilty as without the ability to pay a legal team (ie it takes more than a good lawyer) to defend an innocent man and millions of dollars for any *real* defence.

    15. Re:Charged /= Guilty by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Why isn't every case treated as this one was?

      Is that a rhetorical question, or do you really not understand the capricious nature of the mainstream news, the primary goal of which is to get views?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re:Charged /= Guilty by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      isn't it interesting how the media has looked the other way in the case of Michael Centanni

      Not really. He's a fund raising hack, not someone of particular note or in any position of power.

      It sounds more like you read "Republican" and went off the deep end with your assumptions than any indictment of the media.

    17. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He pleaded guilty to possession of child porn, as if he had just downloaded some images. If children were really raped in his house that's a pretty good deal for him. But maybe these other charges were unprovable?

      In any case, I generally applaud Anonymous' actions but what they're doing here is unconscionable. It's another witch hunt. They started out fighting paranoid mass delusions (Scientology) and now they have themselves fallen prey to them.

    18. Re: Charged /= Guilty by DasDad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The prosecutor leaned hard enough on him to get a guilty plea, so now you want to investigate his relatives and random associates, eh? Well, it certainly didn't take you long to prove that everyone who warned this may turn into a witch hunt were absolutely right!

    19. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2

      Why don't you tell us how you feel about systemd?

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    20. Re: Charged /= Guilty by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There's nothing left for Anonymous to do, except to remind the world that this guy did something bad, and by so doing, perpetuate the shame and embarrassment his friends and family are subjected to. It won't affect the perpetrator himself, because he'll be in prison for the entire life of this "operation".

      So, mission accomplished? Because how did this guy get this way? It couldn't have have been his family, you know, his upbringing?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Systemd is an order of magnitude more complex than SystemV. It does nothing that SystemV, cron, and friends don't allready do. It's sole benefit is to expose new security vulnerabilities and "catch" wrong thinking male linux users (enemies of the feminist police state)... or hack any linux system that needs to be hacked.

    22. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why didn't he execute the prosecutor. Why does NO ONE in America kill their enemies?
      Death is BETTER than prison.

    23. Re: Charged /= Guilty by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Actually, despite any imaginary conspiracy, the media DID cover it. It made a little blurb in the local paper, as small, local crime stories tend to do. And wasn't really picked up by any national media because there were actual news happening at the time.

    24. Re: Charged /= Guilty by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      That was kinda my point... Anonymous and the OP have leapt off the deep end by assuming it should have gotten greater coverage and that since it didn't that meant there was some vast conspiracy protecting "those in power".

    25. Re:Charged /= Guilty by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Is that a rhetorical question, or do you really not understand the capricious nature of the mainstream news, the primary goal of which is to get views?

      Doesn't that only supports my opinion there is some obvious favoritism going on here? If the primary goal of the media is to get views then why wouldn't they be leaping all over a story about high-profile lobbyist being caught in a child sex ring? They normally like to report alleged pedophiles regardless of how strong the evidence. Why are they letting something so juicy stay under the radar?

    26. Re:Charged /= Guilty by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      If the primary goal of the media is to get views then why wouldn't they be leaping all over a story about high-profile lobbyist being caught in a child sex ring?

      Because it wouldn't get as many views as you think.

      Why are they letting something so juicy stay under the radar?

      Because it's not as juicy as you think.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh get real! He had kiddie porn, there were videos of children being raped in his bedroom. One without the other? Yeah, sure. Apply Bayes law for a second and the chances of him being innocent diminish to practically nothing. Did his family know? Probably not. Did his neighbors? Probably not. Did his coworkers? Probably not. Can those people tell you everything you need to know about someone's social circle? Definately. You want to know who this guy drank with. That's why their contact information is included. Was he in any clubs? Bowling league? What strange extracurricular was he using to conceal his involvement with the production of child porn.

      This guy didn't just download the shit. He knew people. He knew people enough to where he volunteered his bedroom to produce a scene. Who was on film raping the 5 year old? What were their mutual friends on Facebook? That's what Maltego answers.

    28. Re: Charged /= Guilty by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      Actually the answer to that is pretty conclusively answered as a no. As much as the cause of psychological make-ups can be proven.

      Being sexually attracted to children is something that you are born with. In the same was as being heterosexual, homosexual, bi-sexual or any of the other sexuals.

      The difference is that most people who are attracted to children do not act upon those feelings. The scum are the people who do act upon them or feed them material. Potentially this persons upbringing bred in him a sense of entitlement and a disregard for other humans. This then led to him indulging in his desires.

    29. Re: Charged /= Guilty by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Most pedos aren't. There's a difference between being attracted to pre-pubescent children and post-pubescent children. The laws and stigma doesn't recognize it. If you are under 18 or 16 or whatever, you are incapable of consent. That's the distinction point. And no other. So someone who has consentual sex with a 17 year old in Florida is the "same" as someone unconsentually raping a 4 year old.

  6. Anonymous is asking to breach National Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    There were multiple scandals in which government officials from various countries and organizations have been found to be using and abusing their power and abusing children. Here are the few pedophilia scandals:

    United Nations - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-accused-of-raping-children-in-Sudan.html
    Vatican http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/vatican-sex-abuse-scandal/
    Prince Andrews - recent event
    UK politicians https://www.intellihub.com/10-uk-politicians-investigated-massive-pedophilia-ring/
    Latvia - http://www.themoscowtimes.com/sitemap/free/2000/2/article/top-latvian-officials-linked-to-pedophile-scandal/266539.html
    German Green party

    The problem is that if someone will make a serious progress... is it likely that he/she will be called pedophile himself/herself? Will it require for the activists to keep samples of the problematic photos?

    1. Re:Anonymous is asking to breach National Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Prince Andrews - recent event

      What recent event? The one where he is accused of having sexual relations with a willing partner over the age of consent in all the jurisdictions where it is alleged to have occurred? In one of the three alleged occurrences she was even over the age of consent in the jurisdiction where she has decided to go forum shopping!

    2. Re:Anonymous is asking to breach National Security by jandersen · · Score: 2

      The problem is that if someone will make a serious progress... is it likely that he/she will be called pedophile himself/herself? Will it require for the activists to keep samples of the problematic photos?

      It is something that will require careful and well thought through handling, that much is certain; and it will probably involve cooperating with the police. It is not wise to risk looking like you've been sitting on a stash of pedophile materials.

      But I think there is a more fundamental problem, when it comes to pedophilia, which is that it is surrounded by taboos, to the extent that it actually difficult to research. And as long as we don't understand it well enough, we are essentially working blind. For one thing, we don't really know why some become pedophiles, so it is hard to guess what is the appropriate course of action, once you've caught them. Take punishment, for example - is it likely to work at all? And if punishment makes no difference, should we simply lock them up and throw away the key? Would it be better (for society) to euthanise them? Punishment only works if the person being punished accepts that they have done anything wrong and that they need to change their course of actions in order to become part of society.

      Another, probably more important problem is that we still understand too little about why and how being abused sexually as a child is damaging, and that makes it more difficult to help the victims overcome their traumas.

    3. Re:Anonymous is asking to breach National Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For one thing, we don't really know why some become pedophiles

      Some are born that way.

      Would it be better (for society) to euthanise them?

      A society that does such things (which also includes the death penalty) is a barbaric one indeed.

      Punishment (usually prison time) is only means to an end. We mustn't forget that the main purpose of our 'justice' system should be to rehabilitate people, not to punish them as some act of revenge. Instead of referring to everything as an act of punishment, we should refer to rehabilitation, which may involve some amount of punishment like prison time.

      Punishment only works if the person being punished accepts that they have done anything wrong and that they need to change their course of actions in order to become part of society.

      Not necessarily true. Even if they don't believe what they did is wrong, they could want to avoid being caught again and so they refrain from doing it. That doesn't seem like a very good reason, but it is a possibility.

    4. Re:Anonymous is asking to breach National Security by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      I've lost my taste for the death penalty over the years (in my 20's, I would have gladly told you to put any convicted pedophile to death as soon as humanly possible). It's the result of a system that creates criminals only to punish them. That's why I agree with you in theory, but in practice, a lot of the bite gets lost by the fact that the penal system continues to punish, not rehabilitate (you surround a criminal with criminals, the only thing you ever produce is someone who knows how to interact with criminals). And then society continues to punish.

      Not that I can terribly blame society for mistrusting criminals. Again, the penal system doesn't do a good job of rehab. Some criminals return to the cycle of criminal behavior because sometimes, they have no idea what else to do.

      It makes me truly sad that as a society, we're at an impasse when it comes to criminals. You can rehab the hell out of someone, but even the most self-aware criminals know there's not much hope of a regular life for them.

      And no, I have no idea how to fix that. I wish I did, but I suspect there's no money in fixing that problem even if I had a few decent ideas.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    5. Re:Anonymous is asking to breach National Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were multiple scandals in which government officials from various countries and organizations have been found to be using and abusing their power and abusing children. Here are the few pedophilia scandals:

      United Nations - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1538476/UN-staff-accused-of-raping-children-in-Sudan.html
      Vatican http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/vatican-sex-abuse-scandal/
      Prince Andrews - recent event
      UK politicians https://www.intellihub.com/10-uk-politicians-investigated-massive-pedophilia-ring/
      Latvia - http://www.themoscowtimes.com/sitemap/free/2000/2/article/top-latvian-officials-linked-to-pedophile-scandal/266539.html
      German Green party

      I'm wondering what happens to Anonymous when they start screwing around with people with that kind of power. It will be interesting. I'm guessing this "operation", if it even gets off the ground, is going to disappear quietly. Which is exactly what it is not supposed to do. Either that, or it is run by shills and astroturfers for intelligence agencies seeking political noise for the further abolition of privacy.

  7. I was under the impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was under the impression that this kind of thing was reduced to a pretty small problem and that very little new child pornography was being made, and most of it being a bunch of basement dwelling pervs circulating the same stuff made in the 80s and 90s. But maybe there is a higher incidence among networks of people who don't think they will ever be brought to justice. Sounds like conspiracy bullshit though.

    1. Re:I was under the impression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      where the fuck did you get this impression? it smacks of thinking racism doesn't exist because white women watch Micheal Strayhan on TV.

    2. Re:I was under the impression by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the elite pedophile rings are 100% true. It is an epidemic, and it is very, very sad.

      --
      Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  8. This is the one. by Anonanonaon · · Score: 2

    Many top level elites deserve to be dragged from office and put in jail forever.

    And not just for these crimes, but for basically everything which is wrong with the world today.

    But this sort of corruption reveal might just trigger the kind of revolutionary anger needed.

    I hope Anonymous has thought about lots of protection plans, because this will get bloody and dirty fast if they start to pick up momentum.

    Things to look for:

    -FOX News personalities coming up with apologist talking points to defend child predator scum.

    -People believing those points in surprisingly large numbers.

    1. Re:This is the one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More likely:

      "a senior Republican fundraiser, was charged with child sex offences after investigators traced transmissions of child pornography to his computers in his basement."

      So this is marketing for mass surveillance. He's one man, and has been caught by some sort of surveillance.

      So anyone in this group:
      "cross-referencing connections within sub-groups including the police, armed forces, schoolteachers, politicians, media, academics and religious organisations."

      who opposes the current Snoopers Charter the UK is doing that would legalize their surveillance of UK. Will be labelled as being part of this imaginary masonic pedo power structure that secretly runs everything:

      "dismantling the power structure which held it there" and by "educating to create a cultural change"

      Serious? When does this group of power hold meetings? Do they have a handshake to identify each other? Some sort of weener shaking? How do they communicate? A fiction.

      Two things are used to justify mass surveillance, terrorism, make people afraid so they give up their freedom, and pedos, make parents afraid for their kids so they give up their (and their kids) freedoms. Both are designed to produce an emotional response not a rational one.

      So I call this a fluff piece for surveillance rather than a real thing. Is there a law being passed right now? Yes there is:
      https://act.eff.org/action/tell-britain-s-lords-don-t-let-the-snooper-s-charter-sneak-past-you

      "A small group of former police chiefs, defence ministers and intelligence officials in the House of Lords are attempting to sneak in Internet spying provisions into the law next Monday, without any explanation or warning."

      "Their eighteen pages of amendments to the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill would grant the UK government sweeping new powers to compel telecommunications companies to harvest and store data collected on their users, and for police and intelligence companies to obtain and analyze that data without warrants or effective oversight."

      "The Lords' proposals were introduced at short notice, without the usual explanatory notes that would let other peers decide for themselves whether they are appropriate. Britain's House of Lords are expected to consider the new amendments on Monday, leaving them only this weekend to find out just how bad these amendments are."

    2. Re: This is the one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah feminism forever!

    3. Re: This is the one. by Anonanonaon · · Score: 1

      This has nothing to do with feminism.

      It has to do with stopping the psychopaths who see weak people as prey, who rape and hunt undocumented or abducted children for sport. -With cross bows, or running them down in cars.

      It's not about sex with these scary elite creeps. It's about psychological torment for fun, and later, gangland style black mail leverage to keep the system in a state of evil status quo.

  9. Errors by manu0601 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like everyone I think fighting pedopornograhy is a good thing, but what will happen if Anonymous post something wrong about someone?

    1. Re:Errors by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...but what will happen if Anonymous post something wrong about someone?

      If? No...when.

    2. Re:Errors by wisnoskij · · Score: 2

      Well that is the benefit of being Anonymous, 0 accountability.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    3. Re:Errors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like everyone I think fighting pedopornograhy is a good thing, but what will happen if Anonymous post something wrong about someone?

      Fighting the pornography is pointless, it exists, and thanks to the ease of duplicating data and the internet you'll never get it all. the RIAA/MPAA can't keep movies and music off the net, and they throw a lot more money and effort at the problem than the government spends on child porn.

      Fighting the pornographers, that could actually get us somewhere, but involves cooperating with other governments. Not just for investigations, but to change laws. In lots of places their definition of what counts as child porn is different from ours, or the locals are corrupt enough to not care.

      As long as it can be legally created somewhere else, (or the locals bribed enough) we'll never make any real progress quashing it.

      Even if this particular Operation works exactly as they planned (I doubt it), it still won't change the fact that this stuff will still be made in places the US doesn't have jurisdiction.

    4. Re:Errors by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Like everyone I think fighting pedopornograhy is a good thing

      I think catching the rapists is a good thing. Government thugs censoring information should be condemned.

    5. Re:Errors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the beauty of it. Be they innocent or guilty, when someone is doxed hilarity ensues.

    6. Re:Errors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Anonymous" "announces" shit all the time. Nothing ever comes of 90% of it.

      A few reposts on 4chan and a shitty YouTube video are not news. Until they actual do anything, it's a non-story.

    7. Re: Errors by DasDad · · Score: 2

      Sure, nobody has a lot of sympathy for a child rapist. But here's the thing. The vast majority of people who view or trade these images aren't rapist, but tragic individuals who trade pictures with other tragic individuals. And most of them would find the thought of violently raping a child as abhorrent as you do.

    8. Re:Errors by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Producing pedopornographic material requires child sexual exploitation. There are more reason for banning that kind of content than just censorship.

    9. Re:Errors by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Producing pedopornographic material requires child sexual exploitation.

      Producing it, but not merely looking at it. Ban rape (it already is) and go after the rapists.

      There are more reason for banning that kind of content than just censorship.

      Nope. Censoring the videos/pictures is mere censorship.

    10. Re:Errors by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      But you know that some people produce things because others are ready to pay to look at it, right? Remove the demand and the offer diminish.

    11. Re:Errors by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      If you act based on demands, your actions are your own. You can't blame anyone but the rapists for raping.

      Remove the demand and the offer diminish.

      Fortunately, censorship is nigh impossible. You'll have to find another solution... like going after the rapists and encouraging other countries to change their laws.

  10. TEMPORA legalization marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are in the UK, ex Chief Constable Blair, now Lord Blair, is trying to sneak through legalization of TEMPORA. The GCHQ full-take, spy on everyone, most of them Brits and Americans and hand all that data to the NSA.

    http://boingboing.net/2015/01/24/britons-we-have-three-days-to.html

    The NSA gets around limits on US surveillance by having analysts in the UK accessing TEMPORA. But I find the actions of the traitors in GCHQ to be far far worse.

    They've opened all of UK press, politicians, families communications to a foreign power, and we see leaks of phone calls from years back, used to discredit upcoming politicians (UKIP being the latest target) and that suggests the UK is being 'shaped' politically by carefully chosen leaks from this surveillance.

    Sadly it also means that all the politicians you have to convince are there because they fit the wanted political 'shape'. I see a lot of anti-terror stories and now 'think of the children' stories and the timing is very suspect.

    The new amendment would legalize the otherwise illegal TEMPORA mass surveillance program, and the Lord in question must have known about the program when he was a Chief Constable, so he is complicit in that crime.

    1. Re:TEMPORA legalization marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... discredit upcoming politicians (UKIP being the latest target)

      Like they can't do a great job themselves.

  11. Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have 4 kids. Pedophiles are scum. Wait, that's too nice. Whatever. String the scum up, cause them pain.

    On the other hand, if I want to just seriously mess up someones life who's innocent , I just need to 'create' facts and post them on github? Scary.

  12. Re:Just Give Me A List & Some Cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You're exactly why this is a bad idea. You're so blinded by your hatred, you're a useful idiot for anyone who wants someone eliminated based on shakey planted evidence.

  13. biological imperative by swell · · Score: 0

    Mammals, including humans, have a biological directive to protect infants. Even if of a different species. We are programmed. We are easily swayed by this kind of appeal because of that. I am swayed.

    But this particular appeal smacks of conspiracy theory. High ranking, respected people joining in and protecting each other while acting in such a perverse manner? A few Catholics may have done so but this accusation is a stretch.

    As the facts come forth we will know more. If the accusations are true then let the offenders be castrated and tortured to death. I will volunteer to do it with a rusty blade.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:biological imperative by davydagger · · Score: 1

      yeah, they are like, high ranking and everything. High ranking people never do bad stuff that would require them to step down, or go to prison. Only low ranking people do. I think he's jealous of their success, or whatever phrase they use when someone accuses someone high ranking of crime or social misbehavior

    2. Re:biological imperative by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 1

      It cannot be anything but a conspiracy

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

    3. Re:biological imperative by Slashjones · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am swayed.

      I'm not. I grow tired of people treating adults as if their lives are worth less than the lives of children, and I will not sacrifice our fundamental liberties in exchange for 'safety' from bogeymen, even if that safety is real. Freedom is what's important.

      As the facts come forth we will know more. If the accusations are true then let the offenders be castrated and tortured to death. I will volunteer to do it with a rusty blade.

      There's absolutely no accountability or standards of evidence. Even if they are true, though, by revealing that you support the death penalty (and torture), you've revealed yourself to be a mere barbarian ruled by their emotions and desires for vengeance.

    4. Re:biological imperative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Mammals, including humans, have a biological directive to protect infants.

      Most so-called "child porn" doesn't involve infants, it involves sexually mature persons who happen to be under some arbitrary, country-dependent age limit, and for a straight male to be attracted to a young female who has just reached sexual maturity is a strong biological drive. Our legislation on child protection and child porn has little to do with biology, statistics, or reason, it has to do with fear mongering and hysteria over a horrible but rare crime.

      Now, as someone who has always been attracted to older guys, I really don't care about any of this (well, when I was 14, it would have been nice if the age of consent had been a little lower, but that was long ago). But I find these misrepresentations and this fear mongering offensive because irrational fear among parents ends up causing an erosion of our privacy and civil liberties, and it diverts resources from far more important issues.

    5. Re:biological imperative by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      I grow tired of people treating adults as if their lives are worth less than the lives of children,

      But they are. The vast majority of adults are part of the problem, while children are potentially part of the solution — at least until their parents, who are hopefully adults, participate in their brainwashing and help turn them into good little taxpayers who will be silent and therefore lend their support to all the ills done in their name.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:biological imperative by Slashjones · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But they are.

      No, they aren't. There is no objective value to someone's life. A child's life is no more important than my own.

      while children are potentially part of the solution

      Everyone is potentially part of the solution. You may say that the chances that an adult could change their views are slim, but I'd say the chances that a child could be part of the solution when they grow up is just about as slim.

    7. Re:biological imperative by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      You may say that the chances that an adult could change their views are slim, but I'd say the chances that a child could be part of the solution when they grow up is just about as slim.

      Ah, but the adult has to change their views and accomplish something, the bar is much higher.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:biological imperative by Eunuchswear · · Score: 0

      Some arbitrary, country dependent limit like five fucking years old?

      RTFA.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    9. Re:biological imperative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this particular appeal smacks of conspiracy theory. High ranking, respected people joining in and protecting each other while acting in such a perverse manner? A few Catholics may have done so but this accusation is a stretch.

      A lot of rich and powerful people are pedophiles. I'm not sure which is the cause and which is the effect. I think some of them just like to commit society's most reviled crime as a way of mocking society's rules. This is the kind of behavior Ayn Rand idolized in William Hickman.

    10. Re: biological imperative by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Sounds about as credible, as when people say that "a lot of black people are violent by nature...." Without offering any other proof than their own observations.

    11. Re:biological imperative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may say that the chances that an adult could change their views are slim, but I'd say the chances that a child could be part of the solution when they grow up is just about as slim.

      Ah, but the adult has to change their views and accomplish something, the bar is much higher.

      And if the child has different views and accomplishes nothing, then they both fail to meet the higher bar. In fact, a child has less of a chance of accomplishing something as they lack the resources and experience (and it takes experience to accomplish something, otherwise you simply waste your effort focusing on the wrong targets).

    12. Re:biological imperative by jelizondo · · Score: 1

      Do you have children? Will you NOT be a barbarian clamoring for vengeance if they were molested or raped?

      Tell you what, get some children of your own and THEN you can have an opinion.

      I will be a barbarian and get some vengeance upon any SOB who dares touch my children; if they are YOURS I will be very civilized...

      --
      Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
  14. Re:Just Give Me A List & Some Cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if the list has YOUR name on it?

  15. Don't Like Them? Post Their Info! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous: Your Personal Army

  16. Re:Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not all pedophiles act on their urges. The ones that realize their urges cannot be acted upon and thus live their lives suffering with such an affliction should be commended, not referred to as "scum" just because of an attraction they probably wish they didn't have.

  17. I Don't Buy It by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    I don't buy it for a second.
    "sympathetic"? No one is sympathetic to pedophiles.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even other pedophiles?
      Not the ones selling them 'access' to the children, the ones selling and buying videos, etc...

    2. Re:I Don't Buy It by circletimessquare · · Score: 0

      you'd be surprised

      there are people who actually believe trading in and looking at child porn isn't a problem, that that is victimless, it's just pictures and video

      (it creates demand, of course it's a fucking problem)

      watch this thread, you'll see them commenting

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:I Don't Buy It by davidwr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No one is sympathetic to pedophiles.

      I guess that depends on what you mean by sympathetic and what you mean by pedophile.

      I assume you meant "child molester" not pedophile. Someone else has in another sub-thread already said that pedophiles who control their urges should be commended not called scum.

      As for child molesters:

      Anyone who due to biology or upbringing (e.g. being brainwashed to enjoy sex while a child themselves) that lets them enjoy having sex with kids or young teens and who due to biology or upbringing lacks the self control to keep away from the insides of kids' pants deserves prison (or a psych lockup if legally insane), in- and (if not a life sentence) post-prison mental-health care, and, yes, sympathy.

      Why sympathy? You can't help your biology. You can't help your up-bringing. You CAN and MUST make your own choices as an adult, but if you are facing life with "two strikes against you," you do deserve and have my sympathy. But if I'm your juror that sympathy won't reduce your punishment.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    4. Re:I Don't Buy It by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Well, there are some arguments about it in theory. There are legitimate points to be made. And one universal truth is that there is loads of areas to be improved in how our legal system handles and defines crimes. But, no one personally is sympathetic to them, it is all theoretical.
      And I really do not see where you are coming from. How does it create demand? Are there Pedophiles making a killing off of ads or subscriptions? I sort of get the impression it is more about enthusiastic individuals who do it because that is what they love, and they get a thrill of video taping and posting it. They are not some sort of business man or entertainer, who are just in it for the money or applause.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    5. Re:I Don't Buy It by davidwr · · Score: 1

      there are people who actually believe trading in and looking at child porn isn't a problem, that that is victimless, it's just pictures and video

      (it creates demand, of course it's a fucking problem)

      Excluding the obviously likely "victimless" cases of non-circulating self-pics and never-forwarded-on pics your same-aged boy/girlfriend sent you without you asking, child porn is very rarely victim-less.

      Some people will try to turn those very rare exceptions into a broad generalization that as a whole child porn is harmless. I'm with you in saying that such an argument is hogwash.

      --

      Oh, and for anyone wanting a very rare example, here is a fictional contrived example:
      Suppose my young daughter is a heavy sleeper. I carefully pose her in a pornographic pose while she is sleeping and snap the shutter. The next day she is killed in a freak accident which is completely unrelated to what I did the day before. For the next few decades I look at that image, sometimes because it is the last photo of my daughter and sometimes for sexual reasons. I never seek out or see any other child porn. I never show the image to anyone. Before I die I destroy the image.

      I would argue that my daughter didn't live long enough to become aware that I photographed her much less suffer any mental, physical, or emotional harm as a result. Obviously nobody else was hurt either. Therefore, it was a victimless crime. It was a crime and had I been caught I would expect to go to prison. But it was victimless. As I said, this is a contrived example but I'm sure there are cases where children were photographed in pornographic poses where they were not physically harmed, they were too young or too asleep to remember enough to be mentally harmed until they become aware that the photograph was made (which may never happen), and due to lack of circulation, the existence of the photograph did not create any demand. The photographers are still criminals - the playground rule of "no harm no foul" does NOT apply to this sort of crime.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    6. Re:I Don't Buy It by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      there are people who actually believe trading in and looking at child porn isn't a problem, that that is victimless, it's just pictures and video

      I don't think I've seen anyone argue that the distribution of child porn isn't a problem.

      I have seen people argue that the First Amendment permits it, regardless of whether it's problematic or not.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    7. Re:I Don't Buy It by davidwr · · Score: 1

      Are there Pedophiles making a killing off of ads or subscriptions? I sort of get the impression it is more about enthusiastic individuals who do it because that is what they love, and they get a thrill of video taping and posting it.

      Based on what I read a few years ago, unlike child prostitution where there is a significant $/commercial aspect, there wasn't a significant $/commercial child-porn trade. However, there was a very significant "in-kind" child-porn trade among creators and collectors.

      Unlike legal adult porn, there isn't any copyright protection, which really cuts down on the potential profits. That, and the constant threat of getting busted makes running a $-profitable kiddie-porn enterprise difficult if not outright infeasible.

      Child prostitution, unlike child porn, can't be freely copied over and over again, so despite the threat of getting busted there is some viable economic model.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    8. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, it's just circletimessquare. I was about to seriously reply to your comment, but then I saw your name and realized you were a mere troll. The complete lack of capitalization should've been a giveaway.

    9. Re:I Don't Buy It by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      I don't think I've seen anyone argue that the distribution of child porn isn't a problem.

      It's a problem in the sense of privacy, but I don't think it should be forbidden. If rapists act based on other people's demand for more, then their actions are their own and no one else's. We need to stop people willing to rape others, regardless of whether or not they're raping children. But adults' lives are only about half as valuable as children's lives according to society, so good luck with that.

      I have seen people argue that the First Amendment permits it, regardless of whether it's problematic or not.

      This.

    10. Re:I Don't Buy It by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Unlike legal adult porn, there isn't any copyright protection, which really cuts down on the potential profits.

      Only if you accept that copyrights are effective in the first place, something which I've yet to see be scientifically proven.

    11. Re:I Don't Buy It by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      and who are you? why would you have a strong opinion about me. do i know you? otherwise, to go after me personally, anonymously, this is what we call a troll

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    12. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While copyright isn't popular around here, the fact remains that a lot of people manage to make money by producing easily copyable content. Even porn, despite its high infringement rate (yeah, I'm not sure how that works either). And it's a lot easier to do so if the content is legal.

    13. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      (it creates demand, of course it's a fucking problem)

      Is there any evidence for that? No. Is there any evidence that enforcement against viewers is effective? No.

      watch this thread, you'll see them commenting

      Yes, indeed we are. You fabricate "facts" to support an encroachment of a surveillance state and totalitarian government. Typical for you.

    14. Re:I Don't Buy It by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      While copyright isn't popular around here, the fact remains that a lot of people manage to make money by producing easily copyable content.

      Yes, and they might even be able to do that without copyright. We have no idea what our society would look like if copyright just magically vanished. Businesses, instead of abusing copyright to get what they want, would have to find alternative means of making money. Would they be successful? Again, copyright's effectiveness has not been scientifically proven, so no one knows.

      And it's a lot easier to do so if the content is legal.

      Indeed, and that's the main difference, not the lack of copyright.

    15. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just someone who reads your trollish authoritarian comments on occasion. Good job getting some Slashdotters riled up, I guess.

    16. Re:I Don't Buy It by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Even if it created demand, someone's actions are their own. No one has to rape to respond to "demand," so if they do, it's their fault.

    17. Re:I Don't Buy It by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      i've commented on the topic. you've commented on me. who is not contributing substantively here exactly? therefore who is the troll?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    18. Re:I Don't Buy It by DasDad · · Score: 1

      What if the CPorn in question is computer generated? Its should already be possible to create simulated CP, thats impossible to distinguish from the real thing with the naked eye. (Pun NOT intended) Wouldn't this be a victimless crime? Why/why not? Or is the aversion to pedophiles more of a purely moral panic? And a question of moralizing what paraphelia is or isn't proper and right.

    19. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using an incorrect definition of trolling for the purposes of trolling? Interesting.

    20. Re:I Don't Buy It by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      When you are confused in situations like these, always ask yourself what cold fjord would do; the answer will surely involve getting the government out of our lives. Here's the answer: The community doesn't want things such as drawings of children having sex or simulated child porn, so they should be banned. In addition, realistic simulated child porn makes it more difficult for law enforcement to do their jobs, and as we all know, we exist to make law enforcement's job easy. This is perfectly constitutional and anyone who says otherwise wants License and not Liberty.

      cold fjord: For a Smaller, Leaner Government.

    21. Re:I Don't Buy It by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      the topic is

      Anonymous Asks Activists To Fight Pedophiles In 'Operation Deatheaters'

      do you have anything useful to say on the topic?

      that's what i tried to do, and i got many even tempered, thoughtful replies, on topic (except for yours)

      http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

      but for me to speak on topic, eliciting on topic responses... that's "trolling" according to you

      meanwhile, all you seem to do is talk about *me*. why? how is that useful? how is that helpful to the topic? i'm not the topic douchebag

      if you desire some sort of interpersonal friction, you might want to try a dating site. otherwise, shut the fuck up, and stay on topic, or you're a useless troll

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    22. Re:I Don't Buy It by omnichad · · Score: 1

      impossible to distinguish from the real thing

      So in this case, how do you prove an image is a simulation?

    23. Re:I Don't Buy It by RatBastard · · Score: 2

      Add to this that many child molesters are not pedophiles and things get even messier. A lot of child molestations are basically rape: acts of anger, domination and ownership, especially when committed by new step-parents.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    24. Re:I Don't Buy It by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If you're talking about convicting somebody of a crime, shouldn't the question be how you prove an image is not a simulation? I believe the law in my jurisdiction says that there needs to be an identifiable minor in the picture.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    25. Re: I Don't Buy It by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Digital watermark?

    26. Re:I Don't Buy It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry you had a terrible step-parent...

  18. Why sure! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because we know out of 7 billion people on Earth, at least 6 billion of those are PEDOPHILES! What else could you spend your time doing? hmmm...

  19. Yes but ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yea yea yea ... but dont take away my freedoms please.

  20. Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This also looks a lot like a slightly unpopular kid going and beating up the most unpopular kid to make everyone else like them more.

    Pedophiles are like Nazis: They are widely assumed to be completely and thoroughly evil and thus worthless human beings. If you are going to pick a group to engage in vigilante activity against this is just about the perfect one, because who is going to going to stand up and say 'that's not right'. Unlike other extremely unpopular groups like Human traffickers or actual no-Nazis, pedophiles are not generally gun toting violent lunatics, so the risk of being murdered in retaliation is pretty low.

    If you want to break the law to try to uphold the law, this is a logical choice, I guess.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by sharknado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Pedophiles are like Nazis

      You have that backwards. Pedophiles are the group that society wants to watch burn. The group that nobody will cry for as they are marched to the stake, or the concentration camp, or the guillotine. The group that politicians use as moral grounds for passing laws based on hate and vigilantism instead of justice. It's a slippery slope my friends.

    2. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Agreed, in that nazi analogies, the pedophiles are more like the jews that was exterminated with nobody doing anything about it.

      In both case, the jew/pedophile are the perfect victim; everybody hates them and there are lot of propaganda dehumanizing them. The right combo to justify mass murder.

    3. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by ZeRu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Paedophilia itsef is a slippery slope as well. There is a drastic difference between having a sex with a 5-year old and a 15-year old, and yet both of those gets you placed in a jail (from what I know about laws on the matter at least).

      --
      If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
    4. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not a slippery slope, that's a cliff with someone waiting to push you clean off when you try to look over at the edge at those highschool seniors.

    5. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by cheetah_spottycat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, it's not. The slippery slope is where the legal definition got extended so much beyond the clinical definition that it no longer makes any sense by any rational criteria in an alarming number of cases it is applied to. Before we go out on the street and call for a witch hunt, the common definition of "pedophilia" needs to be reformed, so that it again means actual child abuse, and neither "12 year old boys discover their sexuality like everyone else did during puperty" nor "17 year old girlfriend sends naughty pictures to 18 year old boyfriend" or any completely normal, consensual and non-threatening behaviour in between. Free those resources to fight actual child abuse, and we don't need self-appointed trigger happy internet superheroes with torches and pitchforks who think who need to take the law into their own hands.

    6. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're being horribly naive.

      Everything, from increasing the age of consent, outlawing prostitution, the current hand-wringing over internet porn, denying adequate sex education, restricting availability of contraception, the furor over gay marriage, is about controlling the expression of sexuality.

      It perfectly serves that all that energy gets channeled into socially acceptable expressions, like beer ads or driving a hot car to attract women, or getting breast augmentation.

      Fuck if anyone is going to accept teens making their own sexual decisions (they are always coerced by deviants, even though being attracted to older people is so well established as to be clichéd); they can wait until they can pay for it in cash like everyone else.

      Confusing the definition of pedophilia only helps to maintain control.

    7. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by ZeRu · · Score: 1

      Well I agree with you that the problem lies in the legal definition, but laws declaring what's legal or illegal also shape people's perception. Woman deciding to perform an abortion isn't doing anything illegal and is not a story that you'll hear on the news, but now imagine media and people's reaction if someone kicked the very same woman in the guts while she was on her way to the abortion clinic, causing something that would still happen less than an hour later.

      We've had enough stories about teachers who had (totally consensual) sex with her student, yet the media and the authorities were screaming "sex abuse" just because the so-called victim wasn't 18...back in my high-school days we could only dream about our sexy teacher giving us a blowjob.

      --
      If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
    8. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Tom · · Score: 1

      This and more. There's also a massive difference between actually abusing a child and trading pictures of nude kids on the beach. And many more details.

      That's the main problem with the public court of opinion - our own and the medias tendency to simplify. To replace details with labels.

      Every witch hunt in history has this problem. They all start with something arguably reasonable. You want to get rid of the witch because she poisoned your cows. You want to kick out jews because they steal money from the people. You want to drive the heathen out of the community because he erodes moral values. You want to put the paedophile behind bars because he abuses children. More or less reasonable arguments, maybe not true but there's a causality in the thinking that we can relate to. But a few steps further the cause is lost or abstracted and the individual becomes a group, and the causality is not even assumed anymore, just implicit in the group attribution. Now you want to burn all witches, kill all jews, slaughter all heathen or castrate all paedophiles. Not because they've one anything, only because they belong to a group that you've given the "evil" label.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    9. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I agree with you that the problem lies in the legal definition, but laws declaring what's legal or illegal also shape people's perception. Woman deciding to perform an abortion isn't doing anything illegal and is not a story that you'll hear on the news, but now imagine media and people's reaction if someone kicked the very same woman in the guts while she was on her way to the abortion clinic, causing something that would still happen less than an hour later.

      And imagine someone beating your skull in with a 2x4 while you were getting into your car in which you were going to get into a fatal 18 car pileup on the highway, causing something that would still happen less than an hour later.

    10. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Before we go out on the street and call for a witch hunt, the common definition of "pedophilia" needs to be reformed, so that it again means actual child abuse,

      You don't even know what pedophilia means. It doesn't mean child abuse, because "philia" doesn't mean abuse.

      Trading sexually explicit pictures of minors by definition depends on minors being harmed. Trading non-sexually-explicit pictures of minors for sexual gratification is creepy as fuck, but it's not harming minors. Pedophilia isn't harming minors, child abuse is. Not all pedophiles abuse children, or even trade in media which actually involves children being subjected to child abuse.

      Pedophilia has been equated with child abuse only for bad reasons, and here you are helping it along. Cut that ignorant shit out.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comparison is retarted and so are you.

    12. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      if you worded it to say "on your way to intentionally start a fatal 18 car pileup" it might be more valid

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    13. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      urine idjit...
      kids are not magically imbued with their sexuality at age _____ (fill in the blank with YOUR countries arbitrary age), we are sexual beings from birth, it only ramps up when our hormones start kicking in and making us into crazy teens...
      have NO interest in 'kids' in any way, shape, or form; BUT, i see a 'mature' 14-15-16-17 year old in the mall who LOOKS 21+ and i'm NOT supposed to be 'attracted' to her like i am with a *real* 21 year old hottie ? ? ? bullshit...
      WITH ZERO intentions of doing anything in either case, but just because i'm on a diet, doesn't mean i can't look at the fucking menu...

    14. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you can't see the problem with using children--even if the images are non-explicit--for sexual gratification then you are the one that is ignorant.

      Oh no, I absolutely do see the problem. There are real kids really getting hurt as a result of the demand for child pornography. There's really no valid question about that. But we also need to draw a clear line between pedophilia and child abuse, because the two are not the same thing.

      Jacking off to pictures of kids clothed on a playground is harmful to those kids who are just trying to exist in the world and not be a sex object.

      The work on the subject is fairly well divided on whether that sort of activity provides relief or just entrainment. So it's unclear, in fact, whether it is or is not harmful. If the children are unaware that someone is thinking of them sexually because that someone is not interacting with them, then they are not being directly harmed.

      It's clear that something has backfired in the brains of people who sexualize children. They need help. Currently the thinking is to destroy them. The general attitude towards pedophiles prevents them from seeking help. I've seen what happens when someone gets discovered as a pedophile with images of children on their computer, etc etc. People who have known them for years and would have spoken up for them the day before are saying anything to preserve their own accountability while giving not one single fuck as to what happened to that person to make them that way.

      Feel free to disregard my argument because i am Anonymous, though.

      I don't disregard serious arguments because people are anonymous, only shit-talking. FYI.

      Hopefully you will sleep better than a 30 year old that was raped as a kid.

      If it makes you feel any better, I don't sleep well at all. But in before accusations of pedophilia, I do find that shit creepy and disturbing and unacceptable. I just feel the same way about how people treat pedophiles in a world in which youth equals beauty, the bunch of fucking hypocrites.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I defy you to write a law that replaces the current law that does all of the following:

      a) Is as easy to read and follow as the current law, and
      b) Is as enforceable or more enforceable than the current law, and
      c) Provides as much or more protection for minors than the current law.

      My expectation is that the only way you'll be able to do that involves some sort of full mind-scan of the accused to determine their intent, using some sort of science-fiction technology.

    16. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a world of difference between being a Jew and a pedophile.

      I see a lot of sympathy toward pedophiles in this thread, little to none toward the real victims. Kids.

    17. Re: Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Your comment won't be disregarded because you're anonumous. It'll be disregarded because you're literally proposing the introduction of thoughtcrime. Which is ethically and judiciously abhorrent, as well as abhorrently stupid. And while you pontificate on whether it should be legal to masturbate to a picture of fully clothed kids on a playground, and the non-existent damage it may cause them, pontificate on this: The majority of child abusers have themselves been victims of sexual abuse. So not only will they be victimized as children, they'll also potentialet be victimized later on as adults. By you.

    18. Re: Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Your comment won't be disregarded because you're anonumous. It'll be disregarded because you're literally proposing the introduction of thoughtcrime. Which is ethically and judiciously abhorrent, as well as abhorrently stupid. And while you pontificate on whether it should be legal to masturbate to a picture of fully clothed kids on a playground, and the non-existent damage it may cause them, pontificate on this: The majority of child abusers have themselves been victims of sexual abuse. So not only will they be victimized as children, they'll also potentialet be victimized later on as adults. By you and other get-tough-on-em types.

    19. Re: Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too much tart. Measure twice, but tart once, as they say.

    20. Re: Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well actually a pedophile doesn't have any victims. That would be a child abuser you're thinking about.

      Some pedophiles are also child abusers, but the majority aren't. And of course not all child abusers are pedophiles.

    21. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by ZeRu · · Score: 1

      And imagine someone beating your skull in with a 2x4 while you were getting into your car in which you were going to get into a fatal 18 car pileup on the highway, causing something that would still happen less than an hour later.

      Assuming I was getting into my car with the purpose of injuring or killing myself? I don't see a difference either. Furthermore, if my plan involved colliding with other cars and endangering lives of others then the person beating my skull should be applauded (and if not, they still save some property and prevent environmental damage).

      But your argument didn't seem to come with such preconditions, Mr. Strawman.

      --
      If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
    22. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      Let's hope that it stays safe to say things in support of due process, fairness, understanding, and moderation on such a charged subject, and that doing so is not willfully construed as favoring pedophilia. Freedom of speech, right? Some people seem awfully anxious to demonize pedophiles, to the point of mob hysteria. It looks like some of the tough talk on child molestation is out of fear, so that the mob doesn't turn on them. It's like that old SNL skit, the Church Lady, asking her guests if they hate Satan.

      Pedophilia has a long history. The Roman Emperor Hadrian, one of their best, had a favorite greek boy. However, Roman Emperors were notorious for excess, and certainly don't make a good choice if one wants average people. There are still older customs. In early Iron Age battles, the winning commander might rape the losing one. Why? Maybe to demonstrate as graphically as possible that he was victorious and to humiliate the loser even more if that was possible, maybe as a severe punishment to further inspire other commanders to do all they could to win or die. The Bible is full of divine punishment for "deviant" sexual behavior, in particular the fates of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

      Could some instances of pedophilia be consequences of disease? For instance, there's Toxoplasma gondii. I find it amazing that a parasite can hack an animal's brain so subtly, removing the fear of cats and only cats, while largely leaving other brain functions intact. If that's possible, why not a disease that makes people have pedophilic urges?

      I can't see anything wrong with using drawings of children, or blow up dolls, or whatever other harmless substitute may be available. Especially if that keeps a pedo from harming real children.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    23. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Pedophiles are like Nazis

      You have that backwards. Pedophiles are the group that society wants to watch burn. The group that nobody will cry for as they are marched to the stake, or the concentration camp, or the guillotine. The group that politicians use as moral grounds for passing laws based on hate and vigilantism instead of justice.

      It's a slippery slope my friends.

      Pretty soon it'll be people who are suspected of having harbored lustful thoughts of girls who appear to be under age.

      That and camera technology in the posters you see everywhere advertising clothes/makeup etc for young girls so that men whose eyes linger just a little too long on the poster are flagged as potential pedos.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    24. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What I'd like to know is whether trading sexually explicit pictures of child sex that don't involve a real child is a good thing or a bad thing. That's legal in some but not all jurisdictions. I don't want to curtail freedom of expression just because I find something squicky and disgusting, but if Poser images or drawings lead to increased child molestation I might get behind banning or restricting them.

      I fear that the emotions involve lead to demonization, which is not only harmful to certain people (you can go to a psychologist with a wide range of problems, but you'd best not admit to pedophilia) but interferes with research into what I really care about, which is children not being raped.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    25. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by davydagger · · Score: 1
      you didn't actually read the article. They aren't going after pedos in general, but what they are claiming to be a very specific child torture ring, with alleged heads in high ranking government and corporate positions.

      Given the nature of "Anonymous", its unlikely they are the original nihilistic self-described terrorists, the moralfagging social justice activists that came in for opperation channology, or even the Federal agents that had been giving the group dirrection with the mass arrests of the former two. This sounds like someone diffrent with a thin grasp on American society.

      The video asserts there will be mainstream news defending pedos as "child lovers", something that never happened, and most likely never will.

    26. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct. Not all jews support circumcision. But let be honest, most do. Especially the one that take their religion seriously. These jews are exactly like child abuser. Not that all paedophile abuse children either. But you know what I mean.

    27. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      Ahh the amazing power of hindsight - or precognition.. The slightest change in starting circumstances can sometimes lead to such wildly different outcomes. -

      ".. imagine someone beating your skull in with a 2x4 while you were getting into your car in which you were going to get into a fatal 18 car pileup on the highway, .. causing you to die 20 minutes early.."
      ".. imagine someone beating your skull in with a 2x4 while you were getting into your car in which you were planning to cause a fatal 18 car pileup on the highway, .. saving XX lives .."
      The person with the plank still faces a life in jail or execution.. Time to call Pre-crimes division..

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
    28. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      Also apply the 'homophobe rule', 'anyone who publicly exhibits as an extreme homophobe is almost certainly underneath a repressed homosexual'..
      So anyone who publicly exhibits as an extreme paedo-hater is almost certainly underneath a repressed paedophile..
      With recursive iteration (and guns all round) this could get interesting.

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
    29. Re:Who are you? I'm bat- er, ANON! by davydagger · · Score: 1
      the only time sexuality is accepted in this country is either in advertising, by the rich and famous, or if its done in compiance after purchasing the right combination of products that allow you to be sexualized.

      Or, you can have sex in the missionary position after marraige.

      Those are the only two accepted types of sexuality in this country.

  21. Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by davidwr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Suspected != guilty and if they go around publicizing suspects or even people who the police have named as suspects or "persons of interest" who turn out to be innocent, it will hurt Anonymous's own reputation big-time.

    What they - and everyone else - can and should do is make sure that if you do run across child porn or links to what you think is child porn, you immediately report it to all relevant authorities and that if the authorities seem to be ignoring a case, that all relevant news outlets are notified. If the news outlets seem to be participating in a cover up, notify other news outlets, but be careful: What looks like a "news outlet conspiracy of silence" may be because the FBI is in the middle of a sting and the feds have asked the news outlets to keep quiet until the trap is sprung. If Anonymous's well-meaning attempts to bring things into the open result in the sting being aborted or going bust, well, that would be bad.

    On a side-note:

    * Do not go "looking for" child porn - you could wind up being charged and convicted yourself. If you are wondering what it's like, my best educated guess is it is like looking at images of concentration-camp children: 1) the underlying event that happened to land on camera haunts the person in the photograph for his or her life, 2) the image itself is likely to be so stomach-churning that it will haunt you for a long time, and even if it doesn't, 3) the knowledge of what happened to that child should haunt you for a long long time (if it doesn't, either you have grown jaded and I'm sad for you, or you need to talk to someone because your conscience may be less than that of the average adult's and this diminished conscience may lead you to hurt someone without realizing it and/or without caring)

    * If you routinely do things in your fight against child-porn that put you at a higher risk of running across it, as some of these Anonymous guys likely are, take technical steps to reduce your risk (use a text-only browser, for instance), and have a lawyer on retainer. Ask your lawyer what steps you need to take so when the police do come knocking it's painfully obvious to the police, the jury, and to everyone else that you are not intending to actually download or possess the stuff but sometimes it gets through your technical barriers.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you been screened for autism?

      I ask because you just posted your own theory of a "good way" to hunt for child pornographers via technical means and you expect that law enforcement would:
      1) Care about claims that a person following your advice is a vigilante, and
      2) Agree that they're one of "the good guys".

      I refer you to Han Reiser's trial where he thought that simply because the law has some passing resemblance to a logic-based coding system he was competent to defend himself.

      He was wrong in a classically autistic way. So are you.

      Your advice is horrible and is founded on insane premises. HTH.

    2. Re:Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      Suspected != guilty and if they go around publicizing suspects or even people who the police have named as suspects or "persons of interest" who turn out to be innocent, it will hurt Anonymous's own reputation big-time.

      Yes, it would hurt Anonymous's sterling reputation as fine, upstanding citizens, full of kindness and charity, the very model of intergrity and all that is good in the world.

    3. Re:Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      If the news outlets seem to be participating in a cover up, notify other news outlets, but be careful: What looks like a "news outlet conspiracy of silence" may be because the FBI is in the middle of a sting and the feds have asked the news outlets to keep quiet until the trap is sprung.

      Or the news outlets don't judge something that "links to what you think is child porn" to be newsworthy. (Which it isn't actually.) Or they lump you in with the dozens (or more) other tips from "crazies" they get on a daily basis. Or... any one of a dozen more perfectly sound reasons.
       

      If you routinely do things in your fight against child-porn that put you at a higher risk of running across it, as some of these Anonymous guys likely are, take technical steps to reduce your risk (use a text-only browser, for instance), and have a lawyer on retainer.

      See also "looks like a crazy because he claims to have found text that sounds like it might be associated with images he thinks are child porn".
       

      Ask your lawyer what steps you need to take so when the police do come knocking it's painfully obvious to the police, the jury, and to everyone else that you are not intending to actually download or possess the stuff but sometimes it gets through your technical barriers.

      And I suspect any lawyer worth his salt is going to advise you to just Stay The Fuck Away from the stuff. The only way to actually know it's there is to actually look at it - and the only way to do that is to actually download and possess it.

    4. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by davidwr · · Score: 1

      Have you been screened for autism?

      A few years back I did some pre-screenings for Asperger Syndrome. I was below the cutoff for further screening.

      Your advice is horrible and is founded on insane premises. HTH.

      If you are correct, then I hope the lawyer that I also advised "active hunters" to hire will tell them so.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    5. Re:Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by davidwr · · Score: 1

      And I suspect any lawyer worth his salt is going to advise you to just Stay The Fuck Away from the stuff.

      If that's what your lawyer says, either follow his advice or get a 2nd opinion (and if they agree, follow the advice). They know the law as written and as enforced (i.e. whether the local, state, and national prosecutors will be "friendly" or "hostile" to you regardless of the actual statute) better than I do.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    6. Re:Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      And I suspect any lawyer worth his salt is going to advise you to just Stay The Fuck Away from the stuff.

      If that's what your lawyer says, either follow his advice or get a 2nd opinion (and if they agree, follow the advice).

      If you want to do something of such high risk so badly that you'll lawyer shop until you get the advice you want - why bother to ask a lawyer at all?
       

      They know the law as written and as enforced (i.e. whether the local, state, and national prosecutors will be "friendly" or "hostile" to you regardless of the actual statute) better than I do.

      They know the law as written, and case law, but they have fuck all way of knowing which prosecutor you'll be brought to the attention of or how he'll react.

    7. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's pointedly ignoring the fact that there is a legally safe way to hunt predators: switch to a career in law enforcement.

      Next up, he will pull "tips" out of his ass for people who wish to perform amateur heart surgery. Of course, he will have a disclaimer that one should ask a physician if performing amateur heart surgery is a good idea before doing it, and if that physician says "no" then keep asking physicians until you find Dr. Nick from "Hollywood Upstairs Medical College" to approve the preconceived notion.

      What could possibly go wrong?

    8. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because the law has some passing resemblance to a logic-based coding system

      You are hallucinating wildly. Do not attempt to drive. Sit back, relax, and do not type text online. The drugs will wear off eventually.

    9. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Law enforcement rarely hunts actual predators. Instead, they mostly go after people who look at images and video and simply label them as predators, even if they never raped anyone. The actual rapists are often free to continue raping.

      But it's not a good idea at all to form some sort of unaccountable vigilante lynch mob.

    10. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Law enforcement rarely hunts actual predators. Instead, they mostly go after people who look at images and video and simply label them as predators, even if they never raped anyone.

      Whatever you say, RMS...

    11. Re: Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you routinely do things in your fight against child-porn that put you at a higher risk of running across it, as some of these Anonymous guys likely are, take technical steps to reduce your risk (use a text-only browser, for instance), and have a lawyer on retainer. Ask your lawyer what steps you need to take so when the police do come knocking it's painfully obvious to the police, the jury, and to everyone else that you are not intending to actually download or possess the stuff but sometimes it gets through your technical barriers.

      Pretty sure simple possession is a frank offense regardless of what "technical barriers" you put up.

      If I were on a jury, I'd vote to convict you. Hell, I even believe in jury nullification and I'd still vote to convict you.

      Your claim of "hunting" these guys is about as credible as a middle age guy telling his wife a "virus" is responsible for all that tranny porn she just found on their computer's hard drive.

      I'll be looking for your name in the news.

      PS. don't try blaming a virus when the charges are brought... that's played out.

    12. Re:Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by omnichad · · Score: 1

      make sure that if you do run across child porn or links to what you think is child porn, you immediately report it to all relevant authorities

      I'm afraid that if you do this, you will be convicted for possession. The authorities are desperate for convictions and your browser cache is enough for them.

    13. Re:Avoid outing suspects, and other tips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it will hurt Anonymous's own reputation big-time.

      I laughed so hard I couldn't read the rest of your ridiculous post.

  22. Pedophilia itself is not a crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuous_Pedophiles

  23. idiotic by slashmydots · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So there's a conspiracy of high ranking officials worldwide who all are in the same child abuse ring? I wonder if they've been presented with the counter-evidence of ummmmmmmm no there's not. They're going after something that doesn't exist. Yeah, I'm sure NBC didn't cover a story well enough because there's a giant pro-child abuse lobby working for them. Are they even serious? No wonder these people don't have full time IT jobs to occupy their times.

    1. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      Being a pedophile is also different from being a child molester or even someone who looks at child porn.

      Try googling "pedophile ring". Organized pedophilia is hardly hypothetical.

      Mostly just witch hunts and conspiracy theories.

    2. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      A nonexistent threat to myself? What are you even referring to?

      And I think it's amazing that you "for the children" losers are so concerned with something that in large part isn't even a significant problem to begin with. Car accidents (and many other things) are more of a concern to me than bogeymen like terrorists or child molesters.

      In fact, the real concern here is all the scumbags who take advantage of "We need to save the children!" fools and get them to support laws which violate our fundamental liberties and privacy. They're much more of a threat than child molesters or terrorists will ever be. Most of the 'threats' to us are in our own governments.

    3. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      Besides, why just children? Why not adult rape victims? Why are children put on such a pedestal? I for one don't think that children are magically more important than adults.

    4. Re:idiotic by gophther · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It speaks volumes that you are lumping organized pedophile rings that very much exist and destroy the lives of thousands of children, with "think of the children" idiots who don't want sex scenes in PG films.

    5. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think they're talking one big child abuse ring. Well, there's the Catholic Church coverups, but, other than that... well, the point of this is the assertion that cover ups are common simply because the common reaction of just looking the other way and they want to shine sunlight on them.

    6. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Pedophiles or child molesters? Pedophiles who look at child porn? Both? Which is it?

      These "pedophile rings" are much less of a threat to us than the NSA's mass surveillance, the thugs working for the TSA, car accidents, the freedom-hating "for the children", or any number of other things. To begin with, most of it's just witch hunt nonsense. I'm sure some of these rings do exist, but the threat is greatly exaggerated.

    7. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      Your lack of compassion for our fundamental liberties and your involvement with the illogical "for the children" crowd have been noted.

      You don't get to decide who I do or don't have compassion for, you ignorant fool, just like I don't get to decide that for you. Just because I don't worship children and place their lives above all else does not mean I have no compassion for rape victims. But do note that I have compassion for all rape victims, including those who are children.

      Introducing logic into a topic where people are screaming to burn the witches is never a bad thing, and it doesn't mean that you lack compassion for victims. I have no interest in your conspiracy theories or your exaggerated bogeymen, but that does not mean I feel no compassion for those who are raped.

    8. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually a threat to children as well. (Children who are not being abused, that is.) Separating them from their parents for years and telling them they can't even see their siblings unless they accuse their parents of crimes hardly helps them to become balanced adults. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria#Outreau_child_abuse_prosecutions Even adults can be easily manipulated into believing they committed a crime.

      There is also a tendency for politicians, the media and the general public to mix up child sex abuse with non-violent offences related to 'children' old enough that they would have been expected to be parents during most of our recent evolutionary history, when only a very small minority of humans reached the age of forty.

      But the worst thing about the witch hunts is that they discredit and sometimes mislead the prosecution of actual crimes of this nature. Actual organized child abuse is known to occur because of hard evidence such as video recordings and small children found dead or alive with injuries that were obviously caused by rape. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux Sometimes there is also credible evidence from victims who come forward decades later, and sometimes children disappear under suspicious circumstances.

      The problem is that child sex abuse is a taboo, and our reactions to the suspicion of taboo breaking are irrational. The odds that any given vague suspicion is founded are low, but as soon as it becomes public the consequences are dramatic even if there is nothing to it. As a result, we are much less likely to report supicions of the worst crimes. Also someone investigating child sex abuse is much more reluctant to consider exculpatory evidence than someone investigating a crime without such a taboo. I blame this binary switching between looking away and witch hunts for a climate in which child sex abuse is harder to detect and prevent, and lives are ruined by unprofessional handling of unfounded suspicions.

    9. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 2

      Resorting to name calling and conspiracy alleging doesn't make you look any better.

      You mean like how you said I supposedly have no compassion for victims? Name calling does not make any of my points valid. I've noticed that you've totally avoided putting forth any logical counterarguments and instead opted to comment about how I called you names or how you've decided in your own imagination that I have no compassion (irrelevant to the conversation anyway); why?

      it's going to help the cause of eradicating child exploitation

      Do you have any evidence that it will help, rather than end up with innocent people accused of things they did not do? Mob justice rarely is anything resembling actual justice, and I have severe doubts that anything "anonymous" will do will help the situation. But since you seem to have some evidence that I don't, perhaps you should put it forward?

      and there is nothing you can do about it.

      Probably not, just like I can't stop all the "protect the children" witch hunts that result in innocent people's lives ruined. Does that make you feel better?

    10. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Name calling does not make any of my points valid.

      Or invalid, for that matter. It does not affect the validity of my points at all.

    11. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you heard of Jeffrey Epstein? or about what has been going on in England over the last year or so?

      It's really not a big stretch to say high ranking officials worldwide are all in the same child abuse ring. Right now we just need a pedo-Snowden to provide concrete proof of what is already known.

    12. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scotland yard confirmed 3 young boys were killed, the palace is playing games to avoid having to tell authorities anything, a guy linked with world leaders and high political people was confirmed to have been involved in child trafficking... It isn't exactly an off-the-cuff conspiracy, there is some substance to it all.

    13. Re:idiotic by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Try googling "dragon". Dragons are far from hypothetical! See all the people who claim to have seen dragons, are dragons or believe in dragons? And like organized pedophile rings among the rich and powerful, the media is too scared to reveal their existence with any form of proof or cooperating evidence!

    14. Re:idiotic by oobayly · · Score: 1

      You do realise the investigation into the deaths is related to a Tory MP from the 80s, don't you? It has no relation to the palace or Jeffrey Epstein.
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
      Your comment shows how badly this Anonymous campaign can go (if they actually bother to do it) - people find it a lot easier just to fling accusations around with no attempt to even do a simple fact check.

    15. Re:idiotic by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Aw, you were doing so well. I agreed with you up to this point.

      1. Children need looking after, that's just how they are. It's not putting them on a pedestal, it's recognizing that they are vulnerable.

      2. It's possible to deal with one issue at a time. Just because bad things happen to other people does not mean concentrating on one group with particular issues and needs is wrong.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    16. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No relation to the palace except Prince Andrew has accusations against him too, and the palace is closing ranks and passing hurried laws to protect their "privacy".

      And Operation Yewtree started with "one entertainer", by the way. So your "one Tory MP" is optimistic.

      We shall see, but perhaps you should check your facts. Most people commenting on this apparently haven't read the news this year yet.

    17. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      " the counter-evidence of ummmmmmmm no there's not"

      You should read "The Franklin Cover-Up" by John Decamp, and do some research on the Canadian whistle-blowing police officer "Perry Dunlop", Google "Mark Dutroux", and "Elm House", for starters, before making such a ridiculous and uninformed comment.

      Pedophilia is the fabric that holds the establishment together.

    18. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      1. Children need looking after, that's just how they are. It's not putting them on a pedestal, it's recognizing that they are vulnerable.

      This is a misunderstanding of what I am saying. What I am saying is that children's lives aren't more important than the lives of anyone else. It is just as bad for an adult to be raped as it is for a child to be raped.

      2. It's possible to deal with one issue at a time. Just because bad things happen to other people does not mean concentrating on one group with particular issues and needs is wrong.

      No, but as you may have noticed, the "for the children" crowd goes absolutely nuts when it comes to children, to the point where some of their nonsense has actually been put in laws. The sheer amount of focus put on children is further shown every time a politician uses the "We need to save the children!" excuse to violate our liberties. It's right up there with terrorism.

    19. Re:idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "These "pedophile rings" are much less of a threat to us than the NSA's mass surveillance"

      No, they are not. Not by a long shot.

      The reason that the 'elitists' get away with spying and engaging in immoral and illegal behaviour is because they are connected to the old-boy pedophile rings.

      Top military, police, business, judges, politicians, clergymen, etc. are all bound to eachother and swear loyalty to eachother in these groups. And they watch eachother's backs. That is not to say that EVERYONE is involved - you only need a corrupt police chief to have a corrupt police department that is otherwise full of decent police officers, for example.

      The CIA had (probably still has) a program in the 1980's called "The Finders" - which procured children for abuse by prominent members of society and so they could be blackmailed into doing the bidding of the intelligence agencies. (Former Senator John DeCamp and the late Ted Gunderson, FBI special agent, investigated and published some excellent material on this subject.)

      The reality is that it is a very, very sick world that we live in and nobody wants to pull back the curtain and expose the horrors of child abuse that continually surround us.

      While there may be some issues with the approach, this is nonetheless one of the most important things that needs to happen in modern society. How many more innocent children need to have their lives destroyed before something is done?

      These sick pedophile rings MUST be exposed if humanity is to evolve and be truly free.

    20. Re:idiotic by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      The reason that the 'elitists' get away with spying and engaging in immoral and illegal behaviour is because they are connected to the old-boy pedophile rings.

      The ones that haven't been shown to exist, you mean. This is a mere conspiracy theory.

      The NSA violates my and other people's rights far more than some "pedophile rings" of such scale that can only exist in the minds of conspiracy theorists. To begin with, these dubious "pedophile rings" would only affect a small portion of kids at most, whereas the NSA's mass surveillance is vast.

      This is truly pathetic. This "For the children!" nonsense has no business here.

  24. Only 45 replies and we are Godwin'd by davidwr · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Only 45 replies and we are Godwin'd. On a serious note, I think your 2nd paragraph is unfortunately true on a practical level. So is your first, for that matter.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  25. Awesome idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous, you have my blessing. I hope their project shuts down as many peddlars and perpetrators of child porn. I know someone who working in for the Chief Censor here in NZ and the stories they could tell me were horrific. They would get given a a DVD with 20,000 images and be asked to "..to find the 20 worst ones". They took solace in the fact that their work could stop it happening to another child - what was in front of them has happened and they could do nothing about it.

  26. Better cancel my kid's medical exam appt.!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given people are so fucking stupid they will attack paediatricians thinking they are paedophiles

    Wait, what? Good thing I saw this post. That kind pedophile at the clinic offered to do my kid's football physical for free tomorrow after school. I'll cancel that appointment right after I submit this reply.

  27. international pedophile networks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only one that I can think of is the icky stuff on Tor's freedom host that was shut down. Wasn't aware there are more networks. Shareeza is pretty much dead or not active, I think.

  28. Since when does ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

    ... Anonymous need help?

    Since the real Anonymous got sent to jail.

    This is a publicity stunt.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:Since when does ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do me a favor, look up "anonymous" in a dictionary.

    2. Re:Since when does ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      A dictionary is out of context.

      Top members of hacking group Anonymous arrested after LEADER 'betrays them and works with FBI for six months'

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  29. 1982 called, they want their postal inspector back by davidwr · · Score: 1

    I was under the impression that this kind of thing was reduced to a pretty small problem and that very little new child pornography was being made

    This was practically true in the early 1980s, before digital tech got cheap.

    For a few years, the postal inspectors were catching each other far more than they were catching real child-porn purveyors.

    Prior to the very late 1980s, child porn was *arguably* legal in at least some parts of the United States. Congress changed the laws and the feds started cracking down big-time on international and postal child-porn traffic (this was in the early days of FedEx) and the open-market importing of child-porn-containing magazines from abroad through the mail system ended for good as a result.

    The advent of cheap/free ways of getting a photo into a computer and sending it to anyone who wanted it with a low risk of getting caught (at least a low risk in the 1980s and early 1990s) allowed the problem to go from almost nothing to whatever it is today.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  30. Prior to the very late 1970s, **NOT 1980s** by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Prior to the very late 1980s, child porn was *arguably* legal in at least some parts of the United States

    The paragraph should read:

    Prior to the very late 1970s, child porn was *arguably* legal in at least some parts of the United States. Congress changed the laws and the feds started cracking down big-time on international and postal child-porn traffic (this was in the early days of FedEx) and the open-market importing of child-porn-containing magazines from abroad through the mail system ended for good as a result.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  31. Re:They can start with Epstein and Andrew! by gophther · · Score: 1

    It's true, it is no accident that everything Anonymous does now is in line with our foreign policy and law enforcement objectives. Maybe even more clever than that, because pedophilia is a touchy subject internationally with our allies, many of whom have no problem selling little girls to rich men and see people not in their class as totally expendable. By having this seeming independent group of "anarchists" take on those touchy issues, you have ample plausible deniability, and you get your objectives met with relatively little effort and exposure.

    Really I think it's a good use of all those little script kiddie punks' time and effort. Do something useful instead of just undermining our own institutions.

  32. what about the Jimmy Saville case? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The BBC covered up a serial child rapist. He was well connected to politicians.

  33. ".to find the 20 worst ones" by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Maybe Anonymous's next project will be to write a computer program to help with this, so the Chief Censor in NZ won't have to wade through 19,980 not-quite-the-worst images while looking for the 20 worst ones.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  34. Re:Want evidence of an organized pedophile network by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Of course, it's (mostly) legal there

    As they say on Wikipedia, "citation needed."

    --

    I assume by "legal" you mean legal according to national, regional, and local laws. If you mean legal as enforced due to the cops just not caring or the cops being sufficiently bribed, well, I won't argue that one way or the other. If there are "self-governing" or "lawless" areas in Saudi Arabia then I won't argue with you with respect to those areas either.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  35. this op has nothing to do with the children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it has to do with trying to unseat the corrupt regimes that are dominating this entire planet.

    obamasweapon.com

    Lets use this child porn shit to bust the cops, military, and top government officials who protect it.

  36. More hot air than politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're hiding the way they're hiding, only better since we don't go out picking fights with anybody. Unless they're posting material and becoming "known" nicks in the community they won't even find the main distribution channels, much less the closed producer-only circles. I could probably tell them where to apply, but unless they can produce custom material they'll get nowhere. All they'll find is the pedo equivalent of the pirate bay, lots of distribution but only the lowest common denominator and nobody of significance.

    In fact, that's our biggest blocker right now as producers these days seem to only trade with other producers, the trickle-down effect is all but gone and we're mostly rehashing the same old material. You'll find lots of sexting videos though, if you want a 10yo to go naked on webcam there's hundreds if not thousands of clips. Oh and with regards to the hysteria over nekkid kids, there's >1 million nudist photos and such already.

    Also the production of new material got a lot less idiot proof with cell phones that record GPS coordinates in the EXIF data, digicams were brilliant but now many producers make their own "Go directly to jail, do not pass go" card before anyone can tell them about their terrible mistake because once you've shared it other stupid people will keep sharing it until the police gets it.

    P.S. I recognize the clip from the description, it's called "kyky" and she's more like three, not five. It's the kind of clip that genuinely deserves the pedosadist sticker and there's a lot of other pedos who would like to strangle him. Sadly we have a minority who I think get more off on being sick fucks than being pedos and those clips don't go out of circulation just because 98% of pedos want them gone, just like we don't go away because 98% of you want us gone.

    I'll guess you'll have to take my word for it but we have smiling kids, we have laughing kids, we have kids who have fun playing adult games, we have kids who get orgasms, we have kids who want more, we have kids who love to show off on cam. I'm sure you'll say groomed, brainwashed, unable to give informed consent. Fair enough, but this is like showing a violent back alley rape as representative of sex. Not saying it didn't happen, but it's 10+ years old and still infamous.

    1. Re:More hot air than politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally, someone with 1/2 a clue to the subject at hand! 99% of the posters here are clueless to what is going on; and if anyone were to post more informative details, they'd certainly be labelled
      a pedo for it.

      This 'industry' covers a spectrum from the singletons (FrankMcCoy, Eggplant, once stood out) producing and sharing their own to big producers with big budgets (mostly in ukraine and russia) who probably aren't pedos themselves but satisfying a demand in the hussy universe.

      Lavish sets, professional photographers, many women in charge and kids who hardly look abused with parents who've more than likely signed a release.

      All lumped into the same bag on the side of history's perversions. Sure, I've checked it out;
      from AAction nudies to the rougher stuff; from disgusting to too cute by 1/2.

      Sure, there is abuse in many cases, of trust if not directly physical. But most of it is not, its just kids being kids; little different from mplayer girls (and boys). It also reflects the reality that little girls (mostly) have been sexualized by society since forever if not just these past 5 decades. They want to be models, they want to pose.

      I'm happily married for decades, have no kids, have no interest in kids. My interest was in society's deviates and how the world opened up for them one fine day in September. There is/was far, far worse in alt.binaries; torture, bestiality, voyeurism, just about every deviation one could think of. It reflects human nature and a lot of it is consenual; so I'm not one to judge.

      But i've concluded that people who will abuse kids
      also abuse everything/one they can. It's about their power-trip more than sex; and possibly their
      own pitiful circumstances.

      My interest in KP groups was (not is) due to their
      ability to stay one step ahead of authorities and preserve their anon. These people are very saavy, tech-wise, and despite the info sharing between LEA's internationally (like the big russian busts in recent years) are still (mostly) able to cover their tracks quite successfully; the low-hanging
      fruits collecting in their basements, not so much.

      To sum up:

      Much/most of the industry is not abusive and many
      participants decry the worst of the lot.

      This 'war' is hurting more than it is helping.

      Much of pedophillia is not by definition abusive
      (soft), until it goes to court and a once-willing
      participant is convinced by parent/prosecutor they have been victimized to avoid the stigma of being sexually curious.

      Finally, and I can't believe I would say this: /.'ers would do well to wrap their heads around the mechanisms distributors employ (tor certainly,
      remailers and encryption, tunneling, etc..) because pedo groups are the 'tip of the spear'
      when it comes to avoiding surveilance.

  37. How ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that Anonymous members are also the perpetrators.

  38. This is finally going to get the man to take cyber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    terrorism seriously. When Anonyouse is going after the cheap supply of underage comfort companions for the world elite, you know there is going to be a confrontation. Identity theft. Ehh whatever. Limiting the nations elite to a supply of 10 year old prostitutes. Now you have a serious problem, that needs to be dealt with. I whole heartledy support this effort. As a hopeful stooge, to the elite. I humbly submit that we pass immediate emergency legistlation called the 'stop beutifull black babies from being raped by evil old white guys' bill This bill would require that each and every baby born in the usa or it's subsidiaries to be installed with a tracking device, and camera, so that we can monitor the rape of black babies by white men in real time. It would also call for the coerced abortion of all all babies who are not beutifull. After all you can not be raped if you are not born. If we can stop the rape of just one baby by the forcefull abortion of millions then it is worth it.

    -All hail the new world order.
    Don't agree with my insanity, then guess what you are a pedophile, and your kids will be rounded up by cps (child protective services) and given an all expense paid trip to the Epstein rehabilitation ranch for disturbed youth.

  39. think of the children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is any one aware of the bull shit guide lines these life killers ,baby rappers have to live by ,i always thought they werent soposto live by schools WRONG 1000 feet

  40. Take a look at the Labor party in Australia. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you consult the public record for convictions for crimes related to this issue and then cross reference against Australian politicians who were at some time associated with the Australian Labor party you will find a 100% correlation. Every single conviction! So how do you explain that?

    A terrible coincidence or something more organised and sinister?

    Why is this relevant? Because if the assumptions of Anonymous are correct it would clearly be something they should look into first as there is no other pattern so strong in all that is know to be fact about these matters.

    But no they will not do that, because they were planning to get people to go on a fishing expedition against the other side of politics in the USA.

    This evil is a global phenomena so they have no valid excuse to not look at everything that comes to light, not matter how inconvenient it is and no matter how far it takes them from their original targets.

    The ball is in your court Anonymous.

  41. Was the last paragraph really necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus fucking Christ.

    Thanks for the nightmares.

  42. Anonymous is dead by DasDad · · Score: 1

    Any wannabe pseudo-subversive can upload a YouTube video and claim (correctly) to be Anonymous. But it seems that most of the original network that made up Anonymous seems to be either locked up, moved on to other endeavours, or went back to /b and 8chan... The few that are left, and whoever they've managed to attract, seem to consist mostly of the loony, Alex Jones-listening extremist fringe-elements, if this "Operation Deatheaters" is to be taken seriously. Sure Anonymous... Go ahead and try to find your imaginary pedophile super villains. We'll be waiting for news about these huge networks of pedophile police officers, powerful politicians, businessmen, etc. that pull the strings and keep their evil conspiracy so well hidden! But you already know, that all they'll uncover will be allegations, accusations and maybe doxx of some poor saps who had some pedo pics, got arrested and convicted and did their time already.

  43. Anonymous is dead by DasDad · · Score: 1

    Any wannabe pseudo-subversive can upload a YouTube video and claim (correctly) to be Anonymous. But it seems that most of the original network that made up Anonymous seems to be either locked up, moved on to other endeavours, or went back to /b and 8chan... The few that are left, and whoever they've managed to attract, seem to consist mostly of the loony, Alex Jones-listening extremist fringe-elements, if this "Operation Deatheaters" is to be taken seriously. Sure Anonymous... Go ahead and try to find your imaginary pedophile super villains. We'll be waiting for news about these huge networks of pedophile police officers, powerful politicians, businessmen, etc. that pull the strings and keep their evil conspiracy so well hidden! But you already know, that all they'll uncover will be allegations, accusations and maybe doxx of some poor saps who had some pedo pics, got arrested and convicted and did their time already.

  44. Talk about jumping the shark... by DasDad · · Score: 1

    Since Anonymous have apparently been taken over by the loony, Alex-Jones listening fringe, I suppose that "Operation Inside Job" or "Operation find the REAL 9/11 perpetrators" is next. Thats the logical next step, if you believe that huge, powerful pedophile networks are being protected by "a conspiracy of silence among sympathetic politicians, police and mainstream media" isn't it?

  45. the fox guarding the hens? LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hacker nerd pedos vs hacker nerd pedos. Is this going to be the pedogeeks' civil war - or rather the pedogeeks' slap fight?

  46. Men can marry young girls in Old Testament. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Men can marry young girls in Old Testament.

    If a man rapes an unbetrothed young girl then Deuteronomy 22 28-29 comes into effect. Here he must keep the girl all his days and pay her father.

    The woman was created for the man. The man was not created for the woman.
    The Bible is internally consistent on this.

    The man is ba'al: master.

    Girls, Women are for companionship with the man.
    Otherwise they wouldn't exist, only one sex would exist and it would be strong.

    1. Re: Men can marry young girls in Old Testament. by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Yes... And Muhammed the prophet of Islam married a ten year old, which would undoubtedly have labeled him a pedophile in today's world. Jewish law also doesn't forbid marrying a girl under (today's) age of consent. I'm sure it's not much of a surprise to well rounded readers of Slashdot, that the moral and legal standards a thousand years ago, or more, are quite different from our own. Do you have a point to make?

    2. Re: Men can marry young girls in Old Testament. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck You.
      "are quite different from our own. Do you have a point to make?"
      Speak for your FUCKING self.

      There is no "our" or "we" here. There is you and what you have been indoctrinated with, and the feminist system you live under.

      Mohammed was correct. The Jews were correct. The Israelis were correct. The medeval franks were correct: young female children make great companions to men.

      CUNT worshipers like you oppress men and steal from them their birthright - which is to be the master of the female.

      FUCK YOU.
      I hope your world burns.

    3. Re: Men can marry young girls in Old Testament. by DasDad · · Score: 1

      Less than 20% of women in the US identify themselves as feminists*. In Europe the highest support is among Italian women, where only 31% would call themselves a feminist. So your irrational fear of feminists is groundless. They've managed to alienate most of the people they claim to represent, and outside of a few hotbeds of revolutionary Marxism in a handful of universities, they have become an irrelevant footnote and relic of the past. Like hippies or The abstinence movement. Moreover, they're also completely irrelevant to the subject at hand, so perhaps your trolling is needed elsewhere? *Not to be confused with equality regardless of sex, which around two-thirds support.

    4. Re: Men can marry young girls in Old Testament. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone supports a woman's "right" to vote, or a woman's "right" to call the police on her husband, or the woman's "right" to own a weapon, or a woman's "right" to serve on juries or testify against men, or a woman's "right" to never be given to a man when she is a child, or a woman's "right" to refuse sex with her husband, etc.

      Then that person is a feminist.

      Feminists should be killed. All these women's "rights" are in opposition to the Old Testament. Every state in the western world is a feminist police state: they all ban child marriage of girls, and they did so once women gained influence in the mid 1800s.

    5. Re: Men can marry young girls in Old Testament. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow dude, you need to read the label on your bottles. It clearly says to take no more than one red pill a day.

  47. Try again and now actually THINK this time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You just failed civilised society 101: We. Do Not. Do. Vigilantism.

    Administrating justice is the government's job, on the presumption it'll do it fairly. You might look at McCarthyism to see what happens if the fairness goes away, and the slightest suspicion is enough to ruin someone's life for the rest of his life. Here, you just have to point at somebody and cry "pedo!" and that's all he wrote.

    The accused might as well step out, there's nothing but eternal losing battle left. And that quite regardless of whether the accusations are in any way warranted. So innocents will go down, just like in the commie-hunts. But that was with hearings and things, this is just over-eager "hacktivist" kids scraping together whatever data they might find. This is an online version of playing with wd40 and lighters in a paper, wood, rope, and oil factory. Everyone involved ought to know better.

    You have a point, though: The whole thing is hard to think about, because invariably our lizard brain steps in and people run entirely on "must! protect! the! children!" emotions. There's no thought here, just lizard brains running on instinct. And that is a very effective way to pave the road to hell. So step back and actually think this time.

    1. Re:Try again and now actually THINK this time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just failed grammar 101: we do not put periods after every word in a sentence.

      (Yes, I now it is a popular means of showing emphasis. I contend, however, that it is also a stupid means of showing emphasis, and it is grammatically abhorrent. Use exclamation points! Employ a modicum of rhetoric! Bold your anger! If all else fails SHOUT IN ALL CAPS!!! (Yes, still wrong, but not as awful as the period-after-every-word nonsense))

  48. Dont fight pedophiles by drolli · · Score: 1

    but fight pedophile criminals.

    That being said, i doubt that i wnat to put justice in this respect in anonymous hands.

  49. Some front page editing? by binarybum · · Score: 1

    C'mon /. editors. The example at the end of this summary paragraph is really graphic, jarring and terrifying. It's a little much for a front-page headline summary and frankly unnecessary to the subject of the story anyway. A little bit of journalistic couth would be appreciated.

    --
    ôó
    1. Re:Some front page editing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I second this, way to graphic for the summary.

  50. Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So i wonder how many ongoing investigations theyre going to ruin
    Theres so many ways this could go badly its not funny

    1. Re:Oh dear by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is no way this can go right. I expect that we will see people having planted evidence on their machines, vigilante murder, false accusations in spades, etc. This may be the absolutely worst thing they could do.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  51. Ah...so that's who it is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given this group has been supporting military objective of the US and British governments, from the Arab Spring to this crap...then I think it is safe to assume that this astroturfed organization is mostly intelligence groups.

  52. Is this a joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A conspiracy of silence about pedophilia? When the word is thrown around as excuse for every freedom-limiting law being proposed?

    And why the hell is this a job for Anonymous? What need is there to be anonymous while fighting against pedophilia? Who do they think they need to hide their identity from? In the current witch-hunt climate, it seems like there couldn't be a more socially-acceptable cause.

    1. Re:Is this a joke? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      This whole thing is not credible at all. After all, some of the supposedly abused children would have remembered later and some pictures would have shown up. A large conspiracy cannot be kept completely secret, history has shown that time and again.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  53. Re:Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Getting rid of the "unwanted attraction" is easy enough - remove certain key parts . . .

  54. Now wait a second.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The scientific consensus seems to be, that in the vast majority of cases, a persons sexuality is hardwired from birth.

    The brain of a transsexual, for example will look different from the brain of a heterosexual in a PET scanner.

    Just like the brain of a pedophile will react differently to specific stimuli.

    That's usually one of the arguments against "conversion therapy", that it's cruel since the person is born this way.

    Since pedophiles also didn't "choose to be born this way", why the hostility and dehumanization, even in the case of abstinent pedophiles who attend (the limited) number of programs for them, and don't download illegal images?

    Its always easy to demonize and otherize a small minority. But the puzzling thing is, that even those who are usually quick to accuse other of persecuting minotities don't see their hypocrisy.

    1. Re:Now wait a second.. by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      Since pedophiles also didn't "choose to be born this way", why the hostility and dehumanization, even in the case of abstinent pedophiles who attend (the limited) number of programs for them, and don't download illegal images?

      The fact that there is such a thing as "illegal images" is disgusting, and in the US (despite what our authoritarian courts have said), unconstitutional.

      As for why all the demonization: The matter involves children. These people are ruled by their primitive instincts to such a degree that anyone who even slightly looks at their children in a way they don't approve of becomes a demon that is going to everyone. Forget the constitution and forget fundamental liberties; anything measure that these people think will increase the safety of children is acceptable, because they believe that our fundamental freedoms are less important than safety, a mindset that leads to tyranny.

    2. Re:Now wait a second.. by Slashjones · · Score: 1

      These people are ruled by their primitive instincts to such a degree that anyone who even slightly looks at their children in a way they don't approve of becomes a demon that is going to kill everyone.*

    3. Re:Now wait a second.. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And they are harming their children that way. Children in the US these days are locked-in, always supervised, never learn to be autonomous or make their own decisions. The adults this produces are crippled. All because of some imaginary people that abduct children to rape them, which basically never happens for any practical purpose. When all police statistics say that by far the most danger to children comes from their parents and "strangers" do not even make the statistics, they are so rare as a source of danger. What these people fail to realize is that _they_ are the primary danger to their children, or they are violently misdirecting to others because they _know_ it.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  55. validation by Tom · · Score: 1

    the ongoing work, which has been divided into three steps.

    None of which is validation of the information.

    It'll be interesting to watch how much of this is going to end up being disclosure, how much a witch hunt and how much targeted disinformation. It's already far too popular to destroy peoples' lives by accusing them of kiddie porn, now you can make an anonymous account on Github and add your enemies.

    We seem to forget too often that the more vile the crime, the more sure you need to be that you actually have the guilty party. Falsely accusing someone of a petty theft is bad, but it will be forgotten. Falsely accusing someone of murder, rape or kiddie porn, not so much.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  56. Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man should have to marry the girl, pay her father, and never divorce her aslong as he lives (Deut 22 28-29). That is the law of the Old Testament.

    If whatever is said in the OP is true.

    Isn't 5 a little young though? Even Mohammed (MOHAMMED!) went for a 7 year old.

  57. Marry Young Girls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Moses and Mohammed had the right idea.

    Men can marry young girls in Old Testament.

    If a man rapes an unbetrothed young girl then Deuteronomy 22 28-29 comes into effect. Here he must keep the girl all his days and pay her father.

    The woman was created for the man. The man was not created for the woman.
    The Bible is internally consistent on this.

    The man is ba'al: master.

    Girls, Women are for companionship with the man.
    Otherwise they wouldn't exist, only one sex would exist and it would be strong.

    Feminism and feminists must be destroyed, along with their supporters.

    1. Re:Marry Young Girls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy posts this information every time this topic comes up. I don't think he's actually joking, so take the "funny" mod off.

  58. Man in the mirror. by pigsycyberbully · · Score: 0

    It's a subconscious mental disorder the fear of one's own subconscious that repulses the person who reacts in a hysterical way to his or hers subconscious fantasies over having sex with children, which makes that person act in an hysterical crazed violent way to anybody who has been accused of such activities rightly or wrongly. They wish to project that compulsion for all to see. ( I am innocent look at my reaction ). It is not that they are really child molesters themselves it is just their subconscious. it used to be used by the state to blackmail dissidents. The church used to use self abuse fucking oneself with a object. That doesn't have the power it once had but that was then and this is now. A person who reacts in a calm and collective way is the one you can trust to enforce the laws. This anonymous is either a paedophile or a government agency. Which one are you? child molester? rapist? self abuser? bestiality? homosexual? mother fucker? which one makes you act crazy. They call it the "Man in the mirror". Rule your mind or somebody else will.

    1. Re:Man in the mirror. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This anonymous is either a paedophile or a government agency.

      My money is on government agency this time. At a time when politicians are raving about banning or backdooring encryption - which is what Anonymous ought to be concerned about - "Anonymous" suddenly comes out with this vigilante formula. It's too convenient.

  59. Not covered by the WaPo or the NYT? by jcr · · Score: 1

    The guy must have something to hold over the heads of some media bigshots. I can't see any other reason why the two top Democratic party media properties would pass on giving the Republicans a black eye like this.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Not covered by the WaPo or the NYT? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Probably because this guy isn't associated with the Republican party in any official manner. TFA indicates that he worked for a company called Base Connect, which is currently under investigation for soliciting donations from senior citizens to political campaigns, and instead of giving the money to the campaigns, the company just pockets it.

      In other words, he worked for a company that claims to be a Republican fundraiser, only it isn't actually one. Instead it's some kind of boiler room tele-fraud type company.

      Yet somehow this got spun as being a big Republican conspiracy.

      The reason this isn't big news is because it's literally a story of "Some guy raped his 5 year old daughter, got fired from his job, and is currently in jail. More news at 11." There wasn't anything sensational about it, so it didn't make national news.

  60. Re: Just Give Me A List & Some Cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Old Testament states in Deuteronomy chapter 22 verse 28 that the penalty for a rape of a young girl that has not been betrothed is if the man is discovered with her is that the man keep her and pay her father and not send her away all his days. Not death. Yes it is talking about young girls in the Hebrew. The penalty for enticing someone to follow another judge/ruler/god however is death. Are you asking us to follow your law or the law of some female controlled state and to not follow the law of the book of Deuteronomy?

    I personally would prefer that people follow the laws created by the society in which they are currently a part of, rather than following the laws supposedly handed down by an invisible man in the heavens written in a book 2000 years ago. Helps with getting along with your neighbors when you actually listen to them and don't hurt their children rather than listening to the voices in your head, or the head of someone 2000 years ago who just happened to write them down.

  61. That is not a conspiracy. Nor semantics. by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Not the purposefully coordinated kind where everyone meets in a dark room somewhere to plot their actions, but the kind where everyone sharing fundamentally rotten values leads to effectively coordinated flock behaviour.

    That's philosophy. Ideology. Worldview.

    There is no need for a conspiracy to cover up anything - if everyone KNOWS not to be a "snitch". Or a "rat". Or a "stool pigeon".
    You know... a traitor.

    People will act independently towards the same goal, if they share the same philosophy or ideology.
    Individuals don't even need to be aware of each other's existence for it to work.
    They just need to have a same set of beliefs and/or ideas.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  62. Re: Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop ou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK - it's *your* 5 year old daughter who these scum are getting their jollies just watching. You OK with that? Still accepting of their issue? Really and honestly?

  63. Re:Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    The brain?

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  64. You say recidivism is high, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are wrong. Recidivism rates for sexual abuse is actually low.

    https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/sx-ffndr-rcdvsm/index-eng.aspx#a05

  65. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't support this.

    I live in a country where the people are either too stupid or have no intention of distinguishing the difference between a pedophile, a possessor of abuse photos/videos or child molesters. (Yeah, UK, I'm talking about you!)

    We live in a time where even being branded falsly of one of those three things has a genocidal* lynch mob at your door, ready to drag you from it, beat you to death and set fire to your body.

    I personally have no issue with those who have a sexual attraction to children and never act on it.

    While the law is incredibly corrupt (e.g. letting abuse continue for decades because of fears of being branded racist), it should be the responsibility of the authorities to go after those who have photos/videos or abuse kids.

    I also have no issue with people who have lolicon manga, because I am vehemently against thought policing, not to mention the arbitrary and unjust banning, criminalization or censorship of victimless acts, art, literature or things.

    *While genocide is limited to genetics, the article says "religious groups." I'm fairly sure religion is a line of thinking, not a genetic trait. So if that can classify, I don't see why other things can't.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't support this.

      I live in a country where the people are either too stupid or have no intention of distinguishing the difference between a pedophile, a possessor of abuse photos/videos or child molesters. (Yeah, UK, I'm talking about you!)

      We live in a time where even being branded falsly of one of those three things has a genocidal* lynch mob at your door, ready to drag you from it, beat you to death and set fire to your body.

      I personally have no issue with those who have a sexual attraction to children and never act on it.

      While the law is incredibly corrupt (e.g. letting abuse continue for decades because of fears of being branded racist), it should be the responsibility of the authorities to go after those who have photos/videos or abuse kids.

      I also have no issue with people who have lolicon manga, because I am vehemently against thought policing, not to mention the arbitrary and unjust banning, criminalization or censorship of victimless acts, art, literature or things.

      *While genocide is limited to genetics, the article says "religious groups." I'm fairly sure religion is a line of thinking, not a genetic trait. So if that can classify, I don't see why other things can't.

      Sadly, you are correct on all points I think. Another one: the majority of child sexual offences are *not * committed by pedophiles. I repeat, the majority of child sexual offences are not committed by pedophiles. Most child sex offences are committed by sexual opportunists, often drunk, who do not meet the clinical definition of "pedophile", which is a *psychiatric* diagnosis from the DSM. It is also not a legal term. Also, attraction to physically mature adolescents is *not* pedophilia at all and is not even a mental disorder, it is called hebophilia. These facts are easily discoverable, yet the media refuses to educate the public on these.

  66. You're right that pedophilia cannot be 'cured' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/insight/2013/12/22/is_pedophilia_a_sexual_orientation.html

  67. Re:Just Give Me A List & Some Cash by gweihir · · Score: 1

    The world runs on useful idiots. Maybe the prison system needs propping up and they are trying to generate a few vigilante murderers and eliminate some political opposition in the process.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  68. Puzzled. What "information" are they sharing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having just watched their sketchy video, I still don't understand what information they are planning to disseminate on social media. How will they coordinate a "victim-led" inquiry that leads to a base of evidence that will stand up in court? It sounds like a mess?

  69. A Noble Venture ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... to be sure.

    The group is calling on volunteers to help with the ongoing work, which has been divided into three steps. The first is about collecting "all the factual information,"

    So how will we know the difference between the Anon. warriors for justice and any other paedophile collecting material?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  70. Re:Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Getting rid of certain "unwanted posters" is easy, just doxx them as pedophiles on the internet..

  71. Why "DeathEater" ? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

    Obviously a Harry Potter reference, but it seems like an odd choice. Perhaps after shutting down all the pedophiles, they can find the secret to immortality, and purge the mudbloods from the world too.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  72. Have I been hiding under a rock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excuse me, but this is the first I have heard of this.
    To me that is interesting, because I am an avid news consumer, from several different sources, including:
    Local News
    NPR
    BBC
    PBS Newhour
    Slashdot, Reddit, Blogs, FB, etc

    With how heinous and despicable this crime is, the evidence, what was found on his computer, the fact that he has a wife and four children, that he posted very conservative/biblical leaning tweets, posts, etc, etc, etc it would lead one, regardless of party affiliation or regardless of "politicalness" AT ALL, that this should be a huge story.

    Lets rephrase that:
    HUGE STORY

    Let me put this another way:
    If this had been a MoveOn.org staffer, or a COO of some very liberal leaning fund raising group, you can
    GUARAN-FUCKING-TEE IT
    This would be all over the news, and that the right leaning faux news machine would be beating the dead horse endlessly, ad infinitum...

    Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that this story has slid for the past two months totally under the radar?
    I don't agree with Anonymous methods for sure, but their alarm that this hasn't been all over the media makes complete sense to me.

    Please, slashdotters, explain to me why this isn't a huge story, from at least a political perspective.

    Again, if this guy had been the COO of a flooring supply company(or similar non-inflammatory enterprise), I wouldn't be surprised that it had slid under the radar.

    1. Re:Have I been hiding under a rock? by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

      Members of pedophile rings are protected by the system. Plain and simple.

      --
      Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  73. A time for violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have written many articles, comments, and webpages. I always tell people that violence is the wrong response. In these cases, however, when the evidence is irrefutable and on film, I must, for the first time ever, state that these sick, evil individuals should be permanently removed from our society. Grind their asses up and fertilize a field somewhere with them. Anyone who is sexually excited by a crying, terrified child....anyone who can get and maintain an erection while they hurt and rape a 5 year old child....well that's a sickness that is so deep in them that they are a danger to every child they come into contact with. People with this evil inside them should be destroyed, put down like a rabid dog. If the law won't do it, then let his neighbors do it. Informing everyone and exposing these creeps is the way to go. PUBLISH THEIR ADDRESSES AND LET THEIR NEIGHBORS KNOW WHAT IS LIVING NEXT TO THEM.

    I hope they do publish every bit of info on the sick bastards and every person who helped cover up or refused to prosecute their crimes.

    If someone dragged this one out into the street and set him on fire I would applaud. Just make sure they are actually guilty first. ON FILM, with NO DOUBT. We don't need another witch hunt.

    1. Re:A time for violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If people like you had their way, people would be summarily executed because they look or seem guilty of something.

      People like you make me fucking sick.

    2. Re:A time for violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess you can't read, or maybe your attention span is too short for you to read the entire comment, so I will repeat myself: "Just make sure they are actually guilty first. ON FILM, with NO DOUBT. We don't need another witch hunt."

      Stupid people like you who form opinions without actually reading entire articles make me fucking sick.

      Morons like you are the reason the corrupt politicians keep getting elected. I'm sure your vote goes to the candidate with the best sound bytes.

      Loser.

    3. Re:A time for violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why are you using my posting handle? Can't think up one on your own?

  74. Elite Pedophile Ring Reference Material by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1
    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  75. A bit of "Add Vice" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would vote for the castration of that guy who raped the 5 year old, but done slowly, with a vice!!!!
    Let Anonymous Name And Shame those involved in this evil. The "law" has not been able to stop this practice as it looks to involve some powerful people. Anyone who harms young children like this is despicable, and deserves no leniency or excuse whatsoever.
    Denys in Oz.

    1. Re:A bit of "Add Vice" by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

      Agree. A rusty vice.

      --
      Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  76. Why? by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

    "For one thing, we don't really know why some become pedophiles"

    Sure we do.

    Many pedophiles mimic the abuse that they suffered as a child.

    And many, many more pedophiles are coerced into it via old-boys clubs, fraternities, secret societies, etc.
    It is part of being a 'privileged' member of the club.
    "Play ball and keep our secrets and you will do well in life and your career. Expose us and we will destroy you."

    Even Freemasons must engage in sexual relations with other members in order to become a member of the 'brotherhood" - albeit with adult members, not children. I have heard that pedophilia occurs higher up in the degrees (Shriners) but I don't know that for a fact.

    Homosexual activities - aka "brotherly love" - are part of the initiation of a 3rd degree, or "master mason". Interestingly, the Masons are known to recruit "good, upstanding, financially secure, (heterosexually) married men".

    Women cannot become real Freemasons because the sexual initiation rites at the 3rd degree require the initiate to have a penis.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
    1. Re:Why? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      We may know why some pedophiles get that way, but until it's safe to discuss one's pedophilia with a therapist we're not going to know as much as we should.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    2. Re: Why? by DasDad · · Score: 1

      I assume your best source for this information, is some guy ranting at another forum?'

    3. Re:Why? by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      How about shemales?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  77. Re:Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out by MagickalMyst · · Score: 0

    "Not all pedophiles act on their urges."

    While the typical "park bench pervert" may not, the majority of pedophiles do. They belong to pedophile rings that provide children to them. It is a sickening, vicious cycle of child abuse and abuse of power. It needs to end.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  78. Re:They can start with Epstein and Andrew! by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

    I agree. And i've also wondered if Anonymous wasn't created by NSA/Mossad/GCHQ. It would explain a lot.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  79. Re:Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Provide a link to a credible reference. Because you are wrong.

  80. They should watch Hang 'Em high first! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they watch Hang 'em High first!

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061747/

  81. What about those at 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait didn't ANONYMOUS start from 4CHAN oooh they are only busting themselves. What about the ones who are forced with weapons to do things against their will. That sounds like Domestic Terrorism shouldn't Anonymous target those people.

  82. But what about Amanda Todd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The one where Anonymous was interviewed and Anonymous Members didn't even remember her name. Yet they caused alot of trouble for something that was STAGED.

  83. But I did nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First they came for the pedos, but I'm not a pedo, so I did nothing

    Then they came....

  84. Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Walking down the road with skittles and tea is such a fucking crime.....

  85. You're both useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No he doesn't have anything useful to say and that was his point about your posting. We all read your posts and already know what you're gonna say and how you'll say it. At least I don't forget what I read every time I go to sleep. For instance, solely from your posts, I do believe you are Filipino or live in the Philippines at least at one time, and you were making some movie...about zombies maybe. It used to be in your sig. I can tell you what any of the big posters on here will respond with. You all have your agendas, and unsurprisingly, they rarely change. Whether either of you fit the classical definition of a troll, well you guys can argue about that. An outside observation however, clearly shows both of you, and now myself included are wasting electricity and time.

  86. Failure immenient! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think Slashjones there has read this whole thread or he may have observed what I have: constantly repeating the very same arguments, almost verbatim, allows us to dismiss what you're saying. It's like you're campaigning or something and we don't trust politicians. Now the amazing thing is, regardless of your tactics, is that this will go forward....and fail miserably. You act like you've found some new magic bullet. Many have tried before you and many will try afterward, but you will all fail and there's nothing you can do about it.
     
    CAPTCHA: pansies

  87. Re: Conflicted : all for it yet scares the crop ou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK - it's *your* 5 year old daughter who these scum are getting their jollies just watching. You OK with that? Still accepting of their issue? Really and honestly?

    Did they approach my daughter? No. Did they touch my daughter? No. Did they speak to my daughter? No. Did they expose themselves to my daughter? No. Then yes, I am still accepting of their issue. They didn't hurt my daughter and they didn't hurt me. They didn't affect me or my daughter in any way. They have a medical condition that needs to be understood, and possibly treated. I'm fine with that.

  88. You're funny...not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think you realize that
    A) YOU are sitting here reading "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"

    B) That you are commenting about nerds on a nerd website and how nerdy they are.

    Exactly how are you, yourself, not a nerd? You're looking like a nerd, walking like a nerd, and quacking like a nerd. THIS nerd can only come to the conclusion that you're...A WITCH! BURN HER!

  89. I'm OK with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that there are undesirable persons beating their dicks to pictures of my 5yo is a problem I can't fix. We all know, once it's on the Internet, it's pretty much there forever. I could hunt down every person that has seen these but what will that accomplish? A new person every minute would probably view those. It would become a fruitless lifetime fight. What I would personally want to know is exactly how those pics ended up on there in the first place. I don't want to punish YOU, personally for beating your dick to pics of my kids. But I will stop the supplier of said pics. Now, I already know what your counterpoint will be, and just to nip that in the bud, you'll claim that that's what you guys are doing. But we all know you'll never get one single supplier but you'll fuck up the lives of many others and claim victory anyway. Your celebrations will be hollow.

  90. a little heads up is in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're about to start describing child rape please take two seconds to warn your reader so they can decide if the want to consume such material. I'm just about to go to bed. Your closing description went way too far.

  91. This comming from a group from 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many people know what 4chan had on their sites, & TOR which in 2013 the FBI found a group using TOR for the same thing that Anonymous is after. If anything Anonymous is out helping them the Celebrities the Celebrity kids who didn't know better but Participated in torturing a kid multiple times to steal idea's from him than attacked another. All they are doing is recycling old news and changing the dates on them it's pathetic. Anonymous helping the Pedophile super powers from around the world. Are they still mad that they have to Stage more events to further their career's. They have the nerve to make it seem like Lizard Squad's attack was recent so they can make themselves seem like they are this great wonderful group fighting for our RIGHTS. GOOD JOB ANONYMOUS YOU ARE A DISGRACE TO THE VICTIM AND WHAT THE HUMAN RACE STANDS FOR Justice and his freedom and his rights. Sedating a baby and a kid and a man to make yourselves look good is bad, you are the worst form of TROLLS out there you are just like the writer for SHREK is Love Shrek is life. You don't deserve the suit or the masks to go with it. You can't even remember Amanda Todds name in Interviews half the time just look at Youtube your own member Interviewed and he couldn't remember her name for that pathetic STAGED EVENT. Was Sandy Hook your work also Anonymous? STOP STAGING EVENTS STOP CHANGING THE DATES ON THE NEWS CONFESS TO YOUR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY STOP JENNINE or JENNIE STOP PAUL STOP JENNIFER STOP THE HEERDEGENS. Sorry for my poor Grammar but I am limited on what I have access to.

  92. There's something tacitly cowardly by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    about targeting people like this and seeking to defame them and accuse them of things, while at the same time hiding and having no fear of repercussion for what mistakes you make and the innocent people you will inevitably harm along the way.

    Vigilantes aren't heroes; they aren't seeking justice of any sort, they are not out to actually change anything.

    All they really accomplish is destruction and the induction of fear.

    Pedophilia is bad. But so is the use of confidential underage informants by the police in the USA every day. DA's and prosecutors take part in this fiasco, children have died as a result, yet nobody really cares.

    If you're going to take the high road when it come to the harming of children, start with the war on drugs and the cops, district attorneys, the DEA, and the courts role in the systematic exploitation of children to justify the militarization of the police force and SWAT teams and bloated law enforcement budgets.

    Insisting that pedophiles that have acted on their proclivities be convicted based on things called evidence and due process shouldn't make you a target by an organized group of anonymous basement dwellers.

  93. Adult porn more sadistic, too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    misleading article, using the hate on pornography. porno never really changed, people just want to tell us, it gets worse.
    And pedo fixiation on child instead of teens ... no wonder, as pedo means someone attracted to childs before puberty.

  94. Lucien86 the fag tries to feel better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On his being a genetic error fag putting normal people in shit bin with defects like himself.