“… rates of child sexual abuse have declined substantially since the mid-1990s, a time period that corresponds to the spread of CP online. . . . The fact that this trend is revealed in multiple sources tends to undermine arguments that it is because of reduced reporting or changes in investigatory or statistical procedures. . . . [T]o date, there has not been a spike in the rate of child sexual abuse that corresponds with the apparent expansion of online CP.”
– Janis Wolak, David Finkelhor and Kimberly Mitchell (2011). “Child Pornography Possessors: Trends in Offender and Case Characteristics”. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 23 (22). doi:10.1177/1079063210372143.
In the UK, new rules exist that oblige doctors and social workers to give the police any information they have about teenagers’ sex lives. The London Child Protection Committee (LCPC) protocol allows child welfare staff an unjustifiable level of interference in the sex lives of teenagers, which could risk breaching the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the right to privacy enshrined in article eight of the convention. Senior lawyer Stephen Groz commented on the new protocol believing that: “It is particularly hard to see what justification there can be for routine assessment – if that is what is intended – in the case of those in the 16-18 year age group, where the prevention of crime will normally afford no justification at all.”  Mandatory sentencing where no clear definition of the crime is known is already steaming ahead. According to one expert, 12 and 13 year-old defendants “are being convicted of relatively minor sexual indiscretions in the crown court, and, if the law operates as it is supposed to, being sentenced to custody when it should be a supervision order.” 
With over 2,225 child offenders serving life without parole (LWOP) sentences in U.S prisons for crimes committed before they were age 18,  it seems Europe is being set to emulate the this direction. It is no surprise that America’s emerging “soft” fascism cloaked under the pretence of liberty is being welcomed by some governments of Europe.
Labour MP David Blunkett (who resigned in 2006 after yet another financial scandal) would likely have called such concerns “airy-fairy” and those seeking a fair and just system as the “enemy.” Blunkett proceeded to remove the presumption of innocence from the Sexual Offences act of 2003, giving a clear and straight road for court cases to be prosecuted successfully without any evidence. This laid greater emphasis on the prosecution state where, as in the US, you are presumed guilty before being proven innocent. This US version of the law paved the way for their fabrications in Operation Ore where an allegation alone was all it took to convict. That is not to say that all of the reforms have been dangerous. On the contrary, many are to be welcomed, yet those that are suspect are so grave that they tend to create difficulties that eclipse glimmers of progress.
Another stalwart defender of Blair’s Britain was Charles Clarke MP the UK government’s Interior minister who was at pains to tell the European Union that in his view: “The judges both in my country and in the European Court need to understand that the people of Europe … will not for a long time accept that action cannot be taken against people who are offering a real threat to our way of life because of human rights considerations …”  This kind of paramoralism is reminiscent of the same use of the Neo-Con theme of “they hate us for our freedoms” so often repeated as a blanket rebuttal for genuine concerns for civil liberties. Nonetheless, the die was cast.
The National Criminal Intelligence Service said in its annual report in 2003 that “more than half of the child porn sites are hosted in the United States” and that “the number of sites coming from Russia has doubled in the past year.” Evangelistic crusades are being encouraged and often waged whipping up a great deal of emotion with little factual data. Child pornography figures in some quarters have been massively overblown or in some cases plucked out of thin air. According to reports from within the US last year a 300 percent rise in internet paedophilia may indicate both a new phenomenon whereby a new technology is utilised but which also reinforces the mythology and lies designed to keep such dynamics firmly in place. If a new crisis is needed then child porn can be used as a “double-bind.” As one journalist recently remarked: “What an irony if the only readily available child porn on the Internet is being maintained by the police and the self-appointed monitors!” 
On the evening of January 17 2005, the UK’s Sky News reported on the false evidence used by the UK police in Operation Ore and the overwhelming incidences of corruption. It remains to be seen if any action will be taken against the police perceived as protector and confidante, is about as far away from reality as it is possible to be. Some men and women in law enforcement know this very well, yet few speak out.
It is likely that much of the child pornography within societies today are produced and distributed underground through an informal but loose-knit networks of paedophiles operating in most European countries with sporadic burgeoning of paedophilia rings arising out of, or adjacent to sexual abuse within neighbourhoods and families. However, with the rise in child trafficking and clear indications of institutionalised child rape networks, child pornography as a multi-billion dollar industry may be, purposely exaggerated. Yet, as a strand in the overall industry of exploitation where billions are indeed accrued, it remains a connected reality, the dividends logically set to increase.
Michael Heimbach, head of the FBI’s Crimes Against Children Unit believes sexual deviants: “… have a real innate need to communicate with others … and sharing experiences. It’s a psychological support base; it makes them say, ‘I’m not so weird’. There are a lot of other people out there that like the same thing I do’’” The current case Heimbach was describing involved “An underground ring of adults who created and trafficked in pornographic videos of naked children being beaten with paddles, hairbrushes and canes.” The “loose-knit” group called the “Spanking Club” were said to have brutally beaten children as young as 4 years old. The club was seen as being influenced and encouraged by the availability of porn and internet chat-rooms where an exchange of fantasies and photos took place.
The more disturbing links to pornography, trafficking and child abuse lead to the front door of the Establishment and naturally remain secured with cast iron protection. We see the guilty and often the innocent placed in prison and taking their own lives while high level paedophiles and child rapists remain above the law. It is also likely that most of the hardcore child porn that does exist is so far underground that it is alongside the impassable domain of the snuff movie where information is almost impossible to come by. For example, the discovery of crimes that may have been continuing undetected for decades are now frequently being seen via the relative “safety” of a closed system known as Internet Relay Chat – IRC – which requires participants to log in using passwords. And many of the paedophiles in question are no amateurs. They can be extremely competent with encryption usage and various other technical ways to avoid entrapment.
The vast majority of stings are carried out by the enormous stores of innocent child nudity and “artistic” erotica that under the laws of the US and increasingly Europe are deemed obscene. As we have seen, this material may also serve as a means to entrap people for private extortion. And what of the recent ruling from the US that effectively all porn is child porn? 
We then have the the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act also known as “2257” which now requires adult porn or erotica companies to keep detailed records proving that all the models they use are over the age of 18. These records contain the real names of performers and their addresses which have to be published somewhere online. It does not take a huge leap of logic to realize that this could leave some persons – such as women operating webcam shows from their homes – open to stalking and harassment. Moreover, all sites coming under the new law are required to have their address clearly accessible to all in order to indicate their “place of business.” To avoid fines and jail terms persons must keep “proper records” and under the new version of 2257, all files that contain every single pornographic or erotic image and film published, must be cross-indexed with age-verification papers for every single performer that features in the stills or movies. This is a huge undertaking meaning massive overhauls for businesses hard drives, the records of which must be kept for seven years. The porn business is up in arms over the law claiming that it curtails significant freedoms. As the same report states: “…they have vast numbers of addresses to punch into their super computer for listing undesirables…. the Patriot Act  was used to prosecute people for offences that were not terrorist offences shortly after it became law.” 
We can easily forget how insidious these new acts and waiting executive laws really are and how they primed and ready to dispense with all constitutional rights. Clamping down on the business of porn is a red herring. As former director of UK civil rights organization and now a much needed voice as Deputy Chair of the new Independent Police Complaints Commission, John Wadham mentioned recently: “I recall an occasion attempting to argue that even alleged sex offenders have human rights, when confronted by the devastated mother of a child murdered by a sex offender.”  Not an easy prospect, which is why child porn and public pornography in general could be one of the many channels by which we might endure a gradual but comprehensive lock-down on internet freedoms.
The genuine Russian-led examples of burgeoning child trafficking networks are a reality, as are some of the isolated European instances of exploitation. Typical examples include the arrest of five suspects in the Spanish cities of Madrid, Murcia, Lerida and Valencia in 2005. One man was charged with abducting, raping and abusing babies as young as 11 months while the others were charged with filming and distributing images of the abuse on the Internet. Or the British man and father jailed for raping a baby with a sentence that was ridiculously lenient.  Both cases were proven instances that child molestation is a growing reality in our societies. This is the nature of the perfect double bind. There are further “politically correct” rulings that funnel more chaos into an already charged domain.
Take the 2004 ruling in the Italian high court that paedophiles can take pornographic photos of children as long as they are not sold for profit. Which means one can share and perpetrate acts of child porn as long as you do not charge for viewing the material, otherwise, it is legal. The report continues: “…that the Court of Cassation in Rome upheld the acquittal by a court in Turin of Antonio B., 45, over photographs that he took when he forced a youth of 13 to carry out sexual acts.”
There are small clues in the above that included “forced” “sexual acts” and “profit.” One wonders what thoughts processes are running through those whose directives one would hope, are first and foremost to protect the interests of children. Similarly, Canada’s BC provincial court also came to the conclusion that possession of child porn represented a clear self-imposed boundary that would not be transgressed by those who chose to view such pornography. A court in Oregon believed a law that prohibited adults from giving minors sexually explicit materials violated the Oregon Constitution’s free speech protections.
There is, as we shall see, a huge difference between an individual who has exploited and even murdered a child for his own gratification and an individual who has been surfing for adult porn. This is the background to much of the prosecutions focused around child pornography. In such an emotive arena all manner of forces are vying for control and have little to do with liberty, least of all for the rights of the child. In effect, child pornography – while certainly encompassing very real predatory beings intent on using the internet to search for prey – is now a term that is used by law enforcement agencies to cover a multitude of sins extending to arts and basic pornography – regardless of its morality.
Let us keep in mind that in 2004 and 2005, three young children were killed by sex offenders. Congress immediately reacted and passed the most unconstitutional child abuse laws in the history of the USA. Yet, while the figures for the prevalence of sexual abuse remains contentious and unresolved, you can bet that the horrendous figures for physical abuse, drug abuse, gang related crime and drunk-driving deaths of children on the roads barely gets a mention. This is not sensational enough; this doesn’t get the voyeuristic and self-righteous juices flowing. Meanwhile, the financial, business and political “Elite” can play the “knight in shining armour” while indulging in the very practices they apparently eschew.
Inflating or even taking advantage of a rise in child pornography online could lead to a comprehensive ban on extreme examples of porn and finally pornography itself. For the masses that is. The tool of child porn will serve as a prelude to more extreme forms of “crimes against the state.” We may look for a gradual fusion between dissidents, Al-Qaeda and the “War on Terror” so that internet surveillance can be comprehensively tightened. The dawn raids of Landslide/Ore and other trawling and entrapment operations that ruined so many lives may well be the first stage in quelling any kind of dissidence of the near future. Criticism of the US government and Homeland Security is perceived as Bush’s line: “if you’re not with us you’re with the terrorists.” In many American minds the sex offender and terrorist is more or less one and the same as in this Georgian State legislator’s opinion: “Sex offenders are the most reviled people in society… They’re one step above terrorists; there’s no political downside to cracking down on these folks.” It is then that we realise the true extent of ponerisation that is now occurring.
In Britain, the “surveillance society” is well and truly here. One of the ideas floated by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre with children bombarded by images and info-tainment, was to turn them into “spy kids” for the Establishment in Europe and the US. This is the crux of the matter: to make people so dependent and reliant on the State from largely phantom fears that children especially feel compelled to turn their own parent’s in. “There are 9.5 million school-kids in the UK. Imagine if we could get them all to save the CEOP’s website to their favourites box so that whenever they are online they can fill in a form telling us who they are talking to, what (those people) are saying and why they think it is a threat.” 
The UK is the most spied-on country in the world according to a recent official report. We are being scrutinized, logged and photographed as never before with a typical Briton caught on camera over 300 times a day. The report highlighted concern over records kept of every internet site we visit and the long-term retention of logs detailing those visits to the growing use of automatic number plate recognition to track people’s journeys. Integrate this with child porn and paedophile concerns – it’s a pretext for Orwellian controls ready and waiting for the State. But hyping the fear is essential. For instance, one study showed how easily the climate of paedophilia panic was eroding normal life. A schoolgirl’s playground banter: “… resulted in her father being refused work because he had been classed as a suspected paedophile. ‘The little girl was overheard saying, ‘My dad bonked me last night’. A dinner lady heard this and reported it to the school authorities,’… Social services discovered that the girl was referring to her father tapping her playfully on the head with an inflatable hammer. The file was closed, but five years later the father discovered he was still a suspected sex offender.” 
We are now faced with the possibility that factions within the US government itself, after seeking to stem a largely imaginary tsunami of child porn became its greatest purveyors and sellers. This was due to factional objectives, the most important perhaps being the protection of an Elite who do indeed prey on children and young adults as a way of life, systemised and institutionalised by political expediency and blackmail.
Shout loud enough and hard enough with inflated figures and dubious data and the core subject matter, where it counts, becomes discredited.
As we can see from other prominent factors such as the War on Terror, the purpose may be to contribute to the initiation of draconian controls where misguided moralism lumps art into child pornography and along with child rape just as dissidents are cast under the same shadow of the terrorist. It is the ultimate justification for the death of internet free speech. The threat of child pornography and those affiliated with “terrorist groups” become the package by which internet freedom is lost for the “greater good.”
Taking this hypothesis further, we might conjecture that if that factions within governments are in control not only of narcotics, arms, human trafficking, but also the pornography industry we can see blackmail would play an increasingly decisive role in forcing certain people into taking top positions in NBC, NASA, Harvard, the military, the FBI, and FEMA. Perhaps there are many such virtual, commercial porn sites directly serving this purpose as recruiters for a new generation of politically compromised men. The Pathocracy needs key positions to be filled to facilitate a greater ease of psychologically compromised individuals whose influence is spread into the everyday lives of the populace enhancing their suggestibility towards specific pre-designed objectives. Those that “fit” in the core network of psychopathic groupings can then be relied upon to carry out their naturally allotted tasks. Disinformation artists in radio, television and the internet may have been given immunity from prosecution by federal authorities in return for defending the government.
Why not use the presence of child porn as the perfect pretext?