Operation Ore

The Politics of Entrapment IV: Peverted Justice and Porn Bombing

“We are the Perverted-Justice Foundation. Of course, those new to our foundation likely have no idea what that means. This is a foundation unlike most, if any, other foundations you’ll ever run across. We’re a foundation that does not simply thunder about a problem, we don’t merely advocate or preach against an issue from a distance. No, our foundation is a pro-active endeavor. We’re aggressive. We’re confrontational. We believe you have to be to make a difference in the fight against predators and pedophiles. We don’t wring our hands and say “they’re so evil, what can be done!” We find a way to get things done.”

pervertedjustice.com


Whether that “aggression”, “confrontation” and “getting things done” amounts to truly improving the situation or perpetuating the crimes is a question at least some who can still think attempting to ask amid all the gnashing of teeth. History tells us that vigilantism – whether in the street on the internet – is a cathartic experience for the ones doing the perceived purging, but less objective when it comes to targeting who is innocent and who is guilty. Indeed, with this kind of mindset it seldom seems to matter. It is the same ruinous, neo-conservative reflex to cleanse the world of complicated issues by using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

The internet has already spawned its own version of reflexive and ill-informed initiatives which serve to increase the peripheral ability for psychopaths to extort and control. The distortion of facts, the suppression of real issues and possible solutions are thus kept out of reach. Seemingly with the help of the public, those that are willing to seek retributive justice and project their own fears into the emotional maelstrom can find all they need with Perverted Justice.com. This particular website is but one example of vigilantism and police entrapment American style. It has formed a “gateway” for recruiting “volunteer contributors who pose as underage children in chat rooms. Posing from a variety of ages (standard ages are 10-15), these contributors simply go into chat rooms with fake online screen names and wait for predators to instigate conversation with them.”

Xavier Von Erck, the website owner, claims to target and expose “wannabe pedos” from online chats which have been recorded after the fact and where many have been arrested, convicted and placed on the California sex register. You are able to send the target an email (assuming he still has an account which is unlikely) and: “… If no police agency expresses interest in prosecuting those adults, we post them publicly on our website … Regardless of past interaction with police, we make an effort to present each case to police so that there is an opportunity to prosecute before the log is posted on this site.” [1]

images

Xavier Von Erck, 2006

Once the wannabe predator has been sufficiently stimulated and worked up into a frenzy of deviancy, phone numbers are taken and addresses given, ready for the police show down. The chat room dialogue is then posted on the website with a photo for all to see. Votes are then offered on how “slimy” the person is considered to be. Though this kind of puerile behaviour is the least of the problems on the site, it gives an indication of the intent of the website owner and the people he has employed to run it. Some believe that responses such as these, far from helping to address society’s problem of paedophilia and child rape crime, actually help to create it.

Von Erck provides an extensive FAQ section where all seems above order and meticulously thought out. There are a few problems with this set up however. It appears “Xavier Von Erck” or real name: Phillip Eide, a 26 year old computer gamer of Portland, Oregon, the owner and “director of operations” set up Perverted-Justice over 12 years ago with a strict “Rule of No First Contact” which was observed for the first 2 years. An immediate ban from the site would follow if any member contacted the police or news outlet regarding their ensnarement.

Several years ago the rule was “relaxed” largely due to pressure from ex-members who formed an alternative site corruptedjustice.com (which is no longer in existence) to alert the public that all was not rosy in the land of alleged paedophile busting. Since the PJ’s inception they have claimed to have “busted” over 600 men (as of 2005) with no police involvement. Since then, from the wikipedia listing we learn: “… online operations have led to 314 convictions as of March 28, 2009, with over 200 more currently awaiting trial, and an average of 25 arrests a month for the year of 2006.”

Corrupted Justice (CJ) raised some vital points when they asked:

“How many of those 600 were actual predators who were [allowed to] walk free because the vigilantes didn’t involve police? How many of those people were actually innocent and mistakenly ruined as a result of being targeted by untrained, anonymous Internet cop-wannabes?” The answers are less than encouraging.

Of the 15 plus “group media busts” in which they involve the television media in their stings is minimal at best, with the end result that the predators walk away suitably embarrassed and angry and no doubt still at large. According to CJ: “Out of 1106 men they have ‘busted’, only 42 convictions have resulted.” What is even more disturbing is that very few of the alleged ‘busts’ do not have much to do with child solicitation. On the CJ website it states: “The tiny percentage of their “busts” which have resulted in an arrest were virtually all a result of media reports, phone calls to police from neighbors, etc. after the fact. – The result – Mostly plea-bargains to minor charges because of a lack of usable evidence. Since the taping for February 3rd’s Dateline program, Perverted-Justice has resumed ‘busting’ people with absolutely no law enforcement involvement, preferring instead to let their anonymous members dish out their own form of ‘justice’ ”. [2]

True to form this has inevitably led once again to a number of recent cases since the Dateline taping which have: “… mistakenly begun anonymously threatening completely innocent, non-involved people by telephone and e-mail…”

This is akin to rattling a hornet’s nest and then running for cover. CJ asked in their editorial last year: “…what ever happened to the One Thousand and Sixty Four potential predators they busted but for which they didn’t contact the police? They are living in your community instead of sitting in jail where many of them may belong…”

medium_pj(Wikipedia)

Other substantiated claims against Perverted Justice include:

  • The employment of minors in explicit online sex chats.
  • Anonymous harassment and terrorization campaigns against those targeted.
  • Identity theft against critics of Perverted Justice.
  • Serious threats, defamation against journalists, attorneys and other child-protection organizations who have voiced concerns regarding the group’s vigilante tactics.
  • Classic psychopath tactics of denigrating critics by conversive thinking, paramoralisms and paralogical conclusions
  • No evidence of any actual recognized or legitimate law enforcement training for Perverted-Justice members has been made public other than the “extensive training” claimed by present members.

Though the intent may be to inform and defend children, the route taken to convictions are dangerously close to vigilantism dispensing with the “rule of law” however inadequate this may seem. Once “adult citizens” follow the already extremely suspect version of entrapment then the concept of law and justice becomes less than meaningless where a judge and jury are simultaneously acting as creators and instigators of crimes.

Media mogul Rupert Murdoch and his tabloid news corporation MSNBC screened the “Dateline” show “To Catch a Predator” and paid Perverted Justice over $100,000 to participate in the programme. This is understandable, as the level of trashy voyeurism is matched by the other. However a “reputable” news corporation is not usually so up front about paying for stories and compensating sources, yet this is exactly what they did while watching the ratings climb, pandering to the same old propaganda which enraptured over 8 million viewers. It is tabloid T.V. at its worst yet remains a sure-fire winner for those seeking short-term profits from long-term misery.

In combination with PJ’s activities such exploitative programming merely make predators far more aware of legitimate police stings (a term to be used loosely) and to make the field of child molestation and paedophilia reduced down to nothing more than pop-corn entertainment. All this feeds into the overall impression that PJ and other sites and TV programmes are something other than an altruistic community protection. More likely it is part of a further operation to muddy the issues involved in sexual exploitation. Think War on Terror and we have the same programme – different channel.

Having originally wrote notes for this piece in 2005, it is perhaps most significant that no more than a year later a report from 2007 which gave a powerful indication that this was a police/FBI entrapment scam designed to create predators in much the same way that the FBI create terrorists. (See The Terror Industry). In an article by now defunct operationawareness.com it highlights reports filed to the FBI and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s Cyber-tipline, that  members of PJ were possessing and disseminating images of child pornography. The article observed:

“NBC Universal, which airs the Dateline show is currently facing two lawsuits for numerous improprieties. The first lawsuit filed by a former NBC producer  is seeking $1 million in damages for the wrongful termination. The firing came after the producer questioned the shows ethics and legalities. The second lawsuit seeks $100 million in damages and is brought by the surviving family members of one of the shows “targets”, who committed suicide as the NBC Dateline and Perverted Justice crew descended upon his home when he failed to show up at the “sting house”. Initial reports are that there was no valid arrest warrant for the man and one police officer on the scene was quoted as saying “that’ll make some good tv” after the man took his life.

Trouble has been circulating around the Perverted-Justice group almost from the beginning for working in tandem with NBC. They have been accused as “staging the news” and NBC reportedly pays Perverted Justice $100,000 per episode. Critics worry that this is a big incentive to do whatever possible to create a sting scenario – anything from false accusations to manufacturing evidence. Perverted Justice, is the group responsible for baiting what they term “would be child molesters” online by posing as minors. Although it is also being reported that they use real minors to lure their targets- raising concerns that Perverted Justice is exploiting minors to achieve their goals.” [3]

Unfortunately, letting the authorities know about one of their pet entrapment projects is a little like alterting the wolf that one of his lambs has wriggled through the fence. Sure enough, the presence of Perverted Justice remains as strong as ever and is still mining the internet for innocent and guilty alike. The title of this website is of course extremely apt: a perversion of justice is most certainly taking place and which will boost the child porn entrapment industry whilst feeding into the worst forms of vigilantism buttressed by superficial training schemes. What hope can we have from amateur law enforcement wannabees when the law and justice itself is fully compromised? The upshot of this, yet again, is a public concentration on the effects rather than the root cause, and clever displacement of focus away from Establishment abuse. Moreover, it means real predators will go further underground while true paedophiles seeking help for their condition can be assured of a climate of demonisation and ostricisation from such outfits. You will seldom see a more egotistical, righteous and dangerous forum for self-appointed judge and jury than this entrapment model.

***

Way back in August 2004, KenoshaOnline, a news portal for Kenosha and Wisconsin was forced to shut down its anonymous forum due to repeated spamming from a Defence Department source with “links to incest, bestiality, gay sex and other inappropriate media.” [4] KenoshaOnline’s John Norquist contacted the Pentagon regarding the “porn bombs” but the Department of Defence refused to comment. The site’s traffic saw a significant fall once the forum was disconnected. Perhaps this has a connection the fact that our beloved government workers at the Pentagon were investigated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in 2006 concerning the purchase of child pornography online and discovered: “… more than 250 civilian and military employees of the Defense Department — including some with the highest available security clearance — who  used credit cards or PayPal to purchase images of children in sexual situations.” With assistance from the Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) it was found that at least 30 Defence Department employees “… staffers for the secretary of defense, contractors for the ultra-secretive National Security Agency, and a program manager at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency” were all in possession of child pornography.” However not only did the DCIS open investigations into just 20 percent of the individuals identified, it prosecuted “… just a handful.” [5]

According to John Cook of The Upshot:

“… new Project Flicker investigative reports obtained by The Upshot through the Freedom of Information Act, which you can read here, show that DCIS investigators identified 264 Defense employees or contractors who had purchased child pornography online. Astonishingly, nine of those had “Top Secret Sensitive Compartmentalized Information” security clearances, meaning they had access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets. All told, 76 of the individuals had Secret or higher clearances. But DCIS investigated only 52 of the suspects, and just 10 were ever charged with viewing or purchasing child pornography.” [6]

Meantime, the American public has 24 hr warrantless wire-tapping, intrusive searches at the airport, No knock SWAT raids, unlawful take-down of websites and numerous other unconstitutional actions, whilst government employees have a great deal of immunity from this encroaching police state.  Which brings us back once again, to the presence of blackmail and sexpionage as another reason why over 80% of cases were not investigated. While as of 2015, the case “remains open” it seems it hasn’t stopped Pentagon employees appetite for child porn, in whatever guise that maybe. Indeed, one individual attempted to do so 12,000 times. [7]

In 2013, the National Security Agency offers evidence that it had the same ultra-hypocrisy as the Pentagon in that it sees nothing wrong with accruing vast amounts of information from its citizens internet browsing history – most importantly, what pornography websites they visit – while their many of their employees enjoy viewing a deviant brand of the same. Indeed, targeting muslims in this context, is all part of the war on terror, they explain. But if you think that such practices are restricted to the terror industry, think again. This is surveillance which affects everyone. Using pornography and entrapment operations have multiple purposes to that end.

amateurThe pornography business can be used as a means of social control for a variety of purposes. Even Google has had to defend itself since August 2004 from the likes of US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who had been pressing the search engine giant to release data about people’s searching habits on the internet. [8] The Justice Department was keen to view specific information, including the types of queries submitted by users and the websites in its index. Not one to be accused of worrying too much about the privacy of its users, Google believes the criteria is too broad and “threatens trade secrets.” It fell to privacy groups to warn that user identities could be indirectly revealed, especially with the government’s new drive to collect data for “fighting crime and terrorism.” Their justification was the enforcement of pornography laws with special attention to the 1998 Child Protection Act which was blocked by the Supreme Court due to legal challenges regarding how it was enforced. Gonzales sought a court order to force the company to part with the records. (This is strangely hypocritical since the search engine is already in bed with the CIA).[9]

Over eleven years later and things haven’t improved. Amid the scandal of illegal surveillance by the UK’s GCHQ and America’s NSA revealed by whistleblower Edward J. Snowden the public is getting an idea just how bad it really is under the well-marketed, Goldman Sacs-funded Presidency of Barack Obama. (Although whether this is just a sophisticated psychological operations pantomime is anyone’s guess). Care of his confidente Glenn Greenwald, Snowden’s Leaked documents have shown that porn still plays a part in mass surveillance and intelligence tools. The latest leak has the NSA targeting activists’ and dissidents’ web history in order to locate visits to pornography sites in order to launch a future smear campaign. The claimed target of the social engineering initiative were Muslim radicals but in actual fact were only those critical of government policies.

In an appendix to the leaked document published by the Huffington Post Mr. Greenwald and his fellow journalists describe these individuals stating:

One target’s offending argument is that ‘Non-Muslims are a threat to Islam,’ and a vulnerability listed against him is ‘online promiscuity.’ Another target, a foreign citizen the NSA describes as a ‘respected academic,’ holds the offending view that ‘offensive jihad is justified,” and his vulnerabilities are listed as ‘online promiscuity’ and ‘publishes articles without checking facts.’ A third targeted radical is described as a ‘well-known media celebrity’ based in the Middle East who argues that ‘the U.S perpetrated the 9/11 attack.’ Under vulnerabilities, he is said to lead ‘a glamorous lifestyle.’ A fourth target, who argues that ‘the U.S. brought the 9/11 attacks on itself” is said to be vulnerable to accusations of ‘deceitful use of funds.’ The document expresses the hope that revealing damaging information about the individuals could undermine their perceived ‘devotion to the jihadist cause.’  [10]

When we know that mass surveillance has been in operation for decades, and there is a high probability that most sting operations on child pornography are police entrapments then this is merely confirmation that targets are compromised by monitoring and recording their browsing history. These operations successfully make the final case for blackmail and/or to discredit individuals by a sophisticated process of leakage via social networks and media.  Or as the appendix states: by “viewing sexually explicit material online or using sexually explicit persuasive language when communicating with inexperienced young girls.”

As multiple agencies are cited in the memo it is obvious that they had full awareness of the program and supported its objectives. This should not be anything other than business as usual since US intelligence used the same tactics to discredit so-called members of Al-Qaeda and even Osama bin Laden himself. Recall the juvenile allegations of USB sticks “filled” with pornography and jars of vasoline found at Osama bin Laden’s compound, following the U.S. deathstrike on him in May 2011. This was all part of the same propaganda exercise to revitalise the mythos of Osama as a depraved pervert as well as an evil head of the War on Terror. It’s merely another example of a familiar tactic that is used to eliminate critics.

Keep in mind that if you use the internet then your personal data is up for grabs. If you have the temerity to speak out against the surveillance state and if you have a history of looking at pornographic websites then you can be sure that this is all logged, recorded and filed for future use. Just make sure you don’t become too vocal against your beloved government who only has your protection at heart …

The internet-based Inquisition21 group which we looked at briefly in a previous post were seeking to bring a class action law suit against UK police for the Landslide/Operation Ore scandal and were subsequently delisted by Google. They believed this was due to the nature of the evidence they were sharing concerning child porn police corruption. After refusing to comment on the action Google issued a general statement yet failed to confirm that the Inquisition21 website had breached any of the guidelines. The censorship came just as the site was about to make potentially damaging disclosures about the handling of the Operation Ore investigations. [11]

While a reform of sex laws are periodically needed for improvement on a variety of bills and clauses, the introduction of measures, in effect, hand over responsibility to government bit by bit and decreases our own response-ability, often without the relevant information as to why such laws are considered so essential for our children’s protection and safety. In reality, freedom and responsibility are deeply connected and if one is curtailed the other will inevitably follow. The end result (and purpose) is that governments leverage greater and greater control under the prextexts of child pornography, the War on Terror and the War on Drugs, while its citizens scratch their heads and wonder how on earth it could have happened.

 


Notes

[1] http://www.pervertedjustice.com
[2] Ibid.
[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20121102181540/http://www.operationawareness.com/custom3_1.html
[4] ‘Pentagon declined to investigate hundreds of purchases of child pornography’The Upshot By John Cook September 3, 2010.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Pentagon employee tried to access porn sites at work more than 12k times last year’ Russia Today,
January 07, 2015.
[7] See also: ‘Is Pentagon flooding Kenosha site with porn?’ By Rachel Campbell, The Journal Times , Racine WI, August 26, 2004.
[8] ‘Google defies US over search data’ BBC News, Friday, 20 January 2006.
[9] Former CIA agent and computer expert Robert David Steele, who has close connections with top Google directors, suggested that Google co-operated with the CIA. Steele is was the second-ranking civilian (GS-14) in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988-1992 and a former clandestine services case officer for the CIA. His latest accusations against Google have raised the possibility that other accusations are now credible and that Google is truly censoring in places far from China and much nearer home. For example, Google has been caught censoring recent programmes and critiques critical of the Iraq war. On the October 2006 Alex Jones radio programme, Steele said, “I think that Google has made a very important strategic mistake in dealing with the secret elements of the U.S. government – that is a huge mistake and I’m hoping they’ll work their way out of it and basically cut that relationship off. Google was a little hypocritical when they were refusing to honor a Department of Justice request for information because they were heavily in bed with the Central Intelligence Agency, the office of research and development.”
[10] Document 3RA/501518-12 “Terrorism/Islamic Radicalization Global Radicalizers vulnerable in terms of Authority.” – ‘NSA spied on ‘radicalisers’ porn surfing so as to discredit them, reveals Snowden,’ By John Leyden, The Register, November 27th 20013.
[11] ‘Google erases Operation Ore campaign site’ by Lucy Sheriff, The Register, September 21, 2006.

The Politics of Entrapment III: Inquisition or Protection?

“Sex. In America an obsession. In other parts of the world a fact.”

– Marlene Dietrich


We looked at the Landslide case and Operation Ore in the last post both of which are classic examples of police entrapment in the UK and the US. The defining attributes of entrapment related to child porn hasn’t changed much as we continue through to 2015.  What has become apparent when one reviews hundreds of entrapment cases related to internet paedophilia and child rape networks is the inherent mismanagement and corruption which seems to go with it. The incompetence is often so bad, that the only conclusion is that terror acts and sexual abuse is both prevented, permitted and created as a triangle of industry.

We may be willing to assign the possibility that much of the child porn that is present on the net is controlled by the police and intelligence agency departments in order to act as entrapment operations. So, if you are one of those inclined to view pornography – whatever the moral arguments – and find yourself face to face with an advertisement which appears mysterious or ambiguous, or even explicitly details child porn (including the private peer to peer confines of the so-called “Dark Net”) then the odds are higher that it will be a police entrapment set up.

The labelling of child porn and the moral panic surrounding it, will serve as one of many templates to Machiavellian deception that is so common amongst those who appear to be “protecting” us. The definitions of child pornography set down by America are so broad and vague that it has caused enormous confusion as to what exactly constitutes an obscene image. It is true to say now that the fear and paranoia induced has reached such proportions that mothers and fathers are fearful of taking photos of their naked child or exhibiting nude images where art is the primary driver.

Art, like innocence, has been debased by those who claim to champion its protection. By lumping sexual abuse and child porn into a category that includes artistic renditions of, for example, naked children through photography, is to demean the very nature and appreciation of beauty and the celebration of what it means to live in a free society as oppose to an absolutist one.  As one writer on this subject mentioned: “If images of beautiful nude children are as much pornographic as those of children being raped, then while the beautiful are criminalized the pornographic are made less criminal.” [1]
And then on the other side of the coin, we have the sexualisation of children and young adults occurring in the music, fashion and obviously the accessbility of entrepreneurial amateur porn. These create conflicting messages indeed for everyone, let alone children.

 Irish author and journalist Brian Rothery casts further doubt on the figures bandied about by some police and child abuse advocates. A graph was created from a range of internet research sources which were then used to display the relationships between sites known to contain child porn and all sites on the Internet. Figures revealed make interesting reading:

“… 5 million total sites, 3.5 million public sites and 8,700 CP sites. The 1.5 million difference between public and total is made up of private sites, mainly corporate where one requires a password (not CP sites requiring passwords). The difference in number between the CP and other sites is so great that on a normal graph page, the CP does not register. It is one fifth of one percent – 0.02 percent.

But now let us examine that figure more closely. First the 8,700 contains many duplications, as images are copied. Let us assume that 20 percent of them share images in differing mixes. This reduces the number of CP sites to 7,000. Many of the CP sites move. xyz.com hosted in Brazil one day can appear as abc.kg hosted in, say, Russia the next, and be counted as two within the analysis period. Say 10percent move, reducing the number to 6,300.

There are more sites with child nudity and child erotica, which may be judged by the analysts as CP, than there are real CP sites. A good guess would be most of them. Let’s say 4,000, leaving 2,300. Now for simulated and artificially created images, such as Japanese Hentai, where no real children are photographed, and which many defenders of free expression say should not be criminalized, but, that argument aside, do not involve porn with real children. A conservative guess would be around 6,000, maybe more. This leaves between one or two and 300 CP sites. Let’s take the upper figure. We do not know what jurisdiction in the world would not arrest the hosters and makers of these 300 sites but what we do know is that some of our brave censors have worked hard to find the few that have existed. If there are 300, they make up 0.0007 percent of the total number of web sites on the Internet.[2] [Emphasis mine]

What could be the other motives for capitalising on the promotion of fake child porn websites?

Returning to the UK/US Landslide case under Operation Ore which spawned many other child pornography “crackdowns” the subscriber database and all of the other main Landslide FBI/prosecution files show an interesting precedent never revealed to the defence. Researchers at inquisition21.com have discovered that “… credit cards, however obtained, whether from attempts to access adult sites over Landslide, generated by a program or simply stolen, were ‘jumped’ to so-called ‘child porn’ sites.” The rogue webmasters in question “… used the transaction to charge (defraud) the owner and, because of the extreme names of the sites charged to, embarrass the owner into not complaining about the $30 or so robbed in each transaction.” They compromised the credit card owners by:“‘… incriminating their computers with illegal images. Whilst people believed they were signing up to legitimate adult sites, in reality they were signing up to illegal sites. Forensically, the user’s computer would appear totally incriminating – the signup and the images. This was almost a perfect crime, and this has happened in at least one high profile case.’ ” [3]

The inevitable conclusion is that the payment system was designed to automatically switch from adult to child pornography sites which meant that people were arrested for nothing more than their site names. The fact that the sites did not exist seemed immaterial. Inquisition 21 Group saw the programming codes on the rogue sites that allowed the victims to be jumped to illegal sites and were in doubt that both the UK and Irish police should have seen them.

There are many seeking an earnest appraisal of the subject of child porn just as they are with the roots causes of terrorism. However, both are areas suffering from information dominance and prone to co-option by Establishment agencies for their own purposes. This is due primarily to the high yields of emotional capital available. When there is a probability for collective reaction to a controversial subject then the opportunities are always there to engineer that reaction. High octane emotions and fear are easily channelled. That being the case, clearly distinguishing what constitutes a crime and what may be erotic exploration and innocent art is presently fraught with difficulty due to new legislation and the ubiquity of entrapment set ups.  When civil rights groups and law enforcement agencies become the sole mediators of what constitutes erotic art and child porn, it is a dark day indeed for freedom.

Most people know that there is a huge difference between child pornography that depicts the rape and abuse of a child or infant and the celebration of childhood which may or may not include children  … (gasp) without clothes. There will also always be those who position themselves in the grey area that encourages extreme laws such as pre-teen websites that are ostensibly a pictorial diary that neither include nudity or anything remotely close to porn.[4] However, it certainly could be said to be pandering to paedophiles and those with paedophilic tendencies. Yet, knowing that this is unsavoury, it is not illegal or criminal. In a world that is teetering on a soft form of totalitarianism in all domains, it is an important distinction. Labelling ordinary people “sex offenders” or “suspected terrorists” is becoming easier and easier for police and law-makers. As we shall see in later posts this may well be the overarching objective.

What we have now is yet another form of self-righteous, dogma against imagery that does not conform to evangelical principles. The criminalisation of artistic or dramatic representation; objective intellectual examination and speculation – even thoughts, if they are written down or recorded – are now seen as grounds for prosecution with the sex offender register beckoning.  Once again, that is not to say that child pornography may not be on the rise. This was true enough during the raids from the UK Operation Cathedral where torture and degradation was visited on many children and infants. But caution and the utmost scepticism must remain regarding the causes for such operations, based on the evidence so far. This is especially true if we are not see such operations being politicised so that they are used to imprison dissidents and those who threaten to expose the deep black nature of the political and intelligence apparatus.

sallymann

From the cover of Sally Mann’s: ‘Immediate Family’ which included nude photos of her children. It was lauded by critics as “beautiful” but condemned by the American religious right as pornography. http://sallymann.com/

At this stage it should be no surprise that in the Landslide case and others, the data base of credit card subscribers handed over to overseas police by US authorities, notably the FBI, were found to have had the names of prominent members of government and institutional officials removed, leaving only minor local level politicians, media and celebrity names. These were never raided in the US with authorities stating no evidence of fraud was found.

Could it be that factions within US law enforcement agencies are doing what they historically do best and creating crime for the purposes of blackmail and propaganda “success” stories in exactly the same way that police and British intelligence were doing under Thatcher’s government?  Are elements within police and judiciary, government and intelligence doing so in order to faciliate the creation of a new industry and convenient smokescreen to protect high level child abusers?

According to inquisition 21 researchers this is not in the realm of conspiracy, simply a case of historical fact. As they mention: “It should not be [a surprise] when we already know that virtually all of the child pornography on the Internet today is published by the US police for entrapment purposes.” [5]

Consider a Southern California Police seminar in 1990 where “… LAPD’s Toby Tyler proudly announced that law enforcement agencies were now the sole reproducers and distributors of child pornography.” Author James Kincaid confirm the statement from his own experiences in 2000:

“Several speakers at an L.A. police seminar I attended a few years back laughingly admitted that the largest collection of child porn in the country is in the hands of cops, who edit and publish it in sting operations. There is at most, they say, a small cottage industry among civilians in which pictures (most of them vintage) are traded.” And internet abuse expert John Carr:  “‘I have only seen child pornography twice in my life and then it was at conferences and I was shown it by the police.’” […] There may well be a consensus on the principle of child porn, but there is little consensus on what constitutes child porn.” [6]

The child exploitation industry has now fused with the police directed NGOs. On Monday 24 July 2006, the UK Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, (CEOP) was launched. Director Jim Gamble believes the way forward is to create fake paedophile websites over which ‘undercover’ officers will pose as children on Internet chat rooms. This reflects more of the FBI’s already active in chat-room entrapment operations in both the Americas and Asia. Creating paedophiles where there are none is as effective as searching for and blackmailing those that are, especially when they reside in the lower rungs of the Establishment.

Is the US/UK Establishment creating a virtual CoIntelpro operation using the child exploitation industry as yet another tool for control while increasing a climate of paranoia and fear?

In March 2011, possibly the biggest online global paedophile ring was smashed by Euro-authorities after extensive operation to ensnare members within a global forum – boylover.net – who had up to 70,000 members. Some 670 suspects were identified worldwide, nearly 200 of whom have been arrested. It seems such operations will be continuing well into the future for a variety of complex reasons, where one would hope the protection of the child is the overriding priority.  [7]  “Child porn” may be another label for which the old boys’ network can justify more jobs while actually creating predators and encouraging them to commit certain crimes, thus serving to bury the real child pornography which does exist though possibly in fewer quantities than we were led to believe and hidden more deeply in the encrypted software “vaults” of high society.

America is leading the way in cases of child porn prosecution. The legitimacy of certain sting operations are certainly open to question but the key issue is the the use of entrapment and the rise of pre-crime.  Fused together this is another symptom of society under attack from psychopathological thinking which in turn it leading us down the road to Pathocracy.

inquisition“Inquisition” by Goya

That child pornography exists is beyond question. The extent to which it can be used as a tool for social control is less understood.

The notorious Attorney General Ed Meese back in the late 70s early 80s ironically, may have been the first to be given the mission to heighten the existence of child porn in society. One scenario for this was to create a climate of law breakers, to foster fear and retribution and to further lead America into a state of decline. Commensurate with Kinseyian and Freudian programming, this ensured that society became more decadent than it really was.

In effect, the US government itself may have become one of the mainstays of child pornography. In much the same way as narcotics and arms, it filled a role of both purveyor and habitual user which continues to this day.  Sting operations are initiated to turn around the possible fall in child pornography crime, where the would-be purchasers are actively solicited and eventually prosecuted under new laws.

Writer Jim Peron, a writer and bookseller based in Auckland, New Zealand states:

First, the age limit was raised from 16 to 18 placing the United States outside the Western mainstream. An entire class of publications, which previously had been legal, were now illegal. Publications which were purchased legally in the United States became illegal overnight without the bulk of owners being aware of the change.

Second, Congress dropped the requirement that something be “obscene” before being classified as child pornography. Now the law was so broadly written that family snapshots of a nude child playing in the bath, could be prosecuted—and were!

Third, it was no longer necessary to produce or distribute the newly banned material. Mere possession was now illegal. [8]

Peron goes on to describe how the government created dozens of phony companies and began soliciting people to purchase the material. Government agencies would send brochures under a fake company name to the individual they targeted and in most cases, proceed to relentlessly pester the individual until a sale was made. The police would place adverts in adult publications pretending, for example, to be a woman with a young daughter. This “woman” would then solicit correspondence from men until the men finally decided to buy the material. Prosecutions soared and the moral majority were exulted. However, the problem was, as Attorney Lawrence Stanley pointed out: “…the line between law enforcement and inducing law-breaking has become highly blurred, as undercover “friends” encourage the forbidden fantasies of their targets and sell or send them child pornography after a great deal of prodding. In some cases, the forbidden fantasies are those of the investigating agent.” [9]

Government sting operations included setting up shop as bonafide pornography outlets which were actively peddling child porn and other hardcore images sourced from the belief that the US was under attack from a veritable legion of pimps and paedophiles.  According to Peron, John O’Mally a customs agent created a company called “Produit Outaouais” which offered photos and videos: “The government officials would reproduce photos of young children and mail them to individuals they targeted. Newsweek reported: ‘Together with similar stings run by the US Postal Service over the past few years, federal agents have become major traffickers in kiddie porn.’ In this sting operation alone two individuals who were entrapped by O’Malley committed suicide; one a 25-year-old student and the other an attorney.” [10]

We have seen the harassment of artists, parents and ordinary family members taking nude pictures of their children under entirely natural and loving circumstances. This was turned into something sordid and degrading in the minds of the prosecutors resulting in untold trauma for all those targeted. Under the guise of “protection” these laws are further eroding civil liberties both in the United States and the UK. In spite of this, the same Lawrence Stanley was arrested for paedophilia, whilst Jim Peron was also caught out in March 2005 when The Society For the Promotion of Community Standards Inc. triumphantly outed Peron’s agenda in publishing the article. According to the society which upholds censorship issues, Peron, sold a journal called Unbound (Vol. 1 No. 4) at his Free Forum Books in San Francisco in 1985. The Society, seeking a classification, further stated that the journal was: “readily available to the public in Mr Peron’s bookshop along with the ‘pro-paedophile journal’ NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association).” [11]

The previous owner of the bookshop, Eric Garris, apparently confronted Peron about his “pro-paedophilia” material recounting that “Mr Peron confirmed that Free Forum Books published it.” Detailed within the journal were the objections against a police raid subsequently carried out on Peron’s bookshop where copies of Unbound and other pro-paedophilia publications were seized “in the course of an on-going investigation into David Simons (a part-time employee of Mr Peron’s, who was later arrested, convicted and jailed for 16 years for committing sex-offences against children).” [12]

Peron rather unconvincingly denies anything untoward though admitted he wrote an article “Abused: One Boy’s Story” which he said was used without his permission, defending his piece in lieu of the fact that there was no explicit sexual content while denying that he was referring to paedophiles when using the term “boy lover”. He also further denied involvement with the journal claiming that: “Unbound was published by another person who rented a back office from his former bookstore.” [13]  In the Society’s view and many others, Peron was in fact the editor-in-Chief of Unbound and was trying to wriggle out of the spotlight.

It becomes a little more disturbing when we know that Peron’s source was the aforementioned attorney Lawrence Stanley, who specialised in defending those accused of child pornography and who was arrested in Brazil, charged with child exploitation. Infiltrating the law was not his only speciality. Stanley had “built an international business photographing Brazilian girls and selling their photos through the Internet.” One of these sites: “…featured photos of girls ages 8 to 14 in what police Officer Rui Gomes described to the Associated Press as ‘sensual poses.’ Police said Stanley paid the girls $20 to $40 for each photo session. An official of the Brazilian Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for information on Stanley’s case.” [14]

Though typical of the smoke and mirror operations perpetrated against the public, it is the greatest irony to allow those questioning tactics and statistics regarding child porn to be those that benefit from a greater relaxation of the laws. It amounts to the same ruse when white supremacists cry foul against the discrepancies of Zionist deceptions thereby cancelling out any veracity of the original authorship and research. In other words, these become straw man arguments designed to deflect heat away from the subjects in question.

Once again, the public is none the wiser and the abuse continues.

 


Notes

[1] ‘The Crimen Exceptum of our era….’ Stop the insanity | http://www.rogerisright.blogspot.co.uk
[2] Inquistion 21st Century – ‘Child Pornography’ | www. inquisition.com/
[3] ‘New evidence will also undermine Operation Amethyst’ http://www.inquisition21.com.
[4] ‘Legal child porn’ under fire MSNBC By Mike Brunker March 28 2002 — “The photos of 12-year-old “Amber” cavorting in a swimsuit and various skimpy outfits wouldn’t have raised so much as an eyebrow if they had been posted on a family home page. But on lilamber.com — one of a growing number of “preteen model” sites operating in the legal gray area between innocent imagery and child pornography — they have drawn the attention of the Justice Department and prompted a congressman to declare war on the “reckless endangerment” of such kids by their parents and Web site operators.”
[5] ‘The crime exceptum’ inquisition21.com.
[6] Ibid.
[7] ‘Global paedophile ring smashed, say police’ Euro News, http://www.euronews.com March 16, 2011.
[8] “The Claptrap Over Child Porn” by Jim Peron, The Laissez Faire Electronic Times: Part 2: The US Government Enters the Child Porn Business’,vol. 2, no. 19, May 12, 1987/2003.
[9]   Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Classify “Pro-Paedophilia Journal” Unbound Thursday, 31 March 2005, Press Release: Society For Promotion Of Community Standards Inc. New Zealand.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] ‘Lawyer arrested in Brazil charged with child exploitation’ By Robert Stacy McCain The Washington Times, July 24, 2002.

The Politics of Entrapment II: Ambiguities and “Ado71”

entrapmentWe briefly looked at the United Kingdom’s imbedded Establishment abuse within Westminster and Whitehall and the idea of blackmail and entrapment operating within paedophilia networks. In order to gain a bigger picture of the patterns of abuse and how entrapment and child rape networks operate we need to go slightly further afield and cast our (somewhat jaundiced) eye back to what’s been happening in the last two decades.

1996 was the year that saw a veritable explosion of abuse cases at local, national and international levels. One of the fall-out investigations during the Dutroux-Nihoul case was “Operation Ado71” launched in 1997 by French law enforcement authorities in the Department of Saone-et-Loire, Burgundy in the town of Macon. After one of the biggest crackdowns on organised child abuse seen in France, over sixty men were detained, five of whom subsequently committed suicide, some say due to the “name and shame” policy so favoured in much of Europe and America. Others mention the possibility of a high level mopping up of loose ends leading to members of the French Establishment. Whether these men were driven to take their own lives due to the shame of being caught while also guilty, the shame of being caught while innocent or that they were dispatched for harbouring secrets, can only be speculation. More often than not, it is a mixture of all three.

The accused were brought to court in March 2000, one of whom was Bernard Alapetite the chief executive of “Platypus”, a Paris publishing company, and was found guilty of copying and supplying foreign, child porn videos. He received three years, while suspended jail terms ranging from two to six months were given to more than 50 others. Some of the videos consisted of the rapes of boys under 15 and “young children having sex with animals” which made Alapetite a tidy profit “selling them for between £80 and £100 each…” [1] Meantime, those that were scooped up in the paedophilia trawl had allegedly all bought child porn videos from Alapetite’s mail order company as well as sex shop outlets.

What was disturbing about these suspects was the lack of discrimination as to what constituted “just cause” not least, the process by which the suspects were rounded up:

For example:

“One was a retired schools inspector who had bought his sole cassette 25 years ago ‘because morals were degenerating and I wanted to find out how and why.’

Several others produced medical evidence showing that they had long recognised their ‘deviant tastes’ and ‘attraction for young boys,’ but had never molested anyone and had been undergoing psychiatric treatment.

‘I have never molested a child in my life,’ sobbed one retired office worker during the trial. ‘I am on medication. I bought two cassettes from a catalogue. And now my children and my grandchildren will not speak to me.’

Almost half the suspects claimed they were not guilty of any crime. Some pointed out that their tapes had been seized during a previous operation by the Paris vice squad, and subsequently returned to them as perfectly legal.” [2]

To some this may appear a minor irrelevance and indicative of manipulative behaviour from those whose predispositions to abuse must be given no quarter. Nonetheless, one has to question the after effects of an operation that required more than 2,500 police who searched 800 homes, questioned 700 men and detained 300 suspects leading to the jailing of one supplier and distributor. Most of the men in the Macon case were also homosexual and the “children” in the videos looked between sixteen and eighteen years old. Pederasty over paedophilia maybe. And further, as Le Monde Journalist Jean-Michael Dumay stated during the trial:

“… Why should anybody be criminally liable for their failure to correctly determine the precise age of somebody appearing in a video cassette, as about a third of the defendants were accused of? […] ‘…the only criterion is their subjective appearance.’ Once again the experts in the case were not medically qualified but photography technicians and further: “A significant proportion of the defendants claimed they had acquired the cassettes in good faith not through Alapetite’s network but from sex shops that had them on sale openly and guaranteed that the performers were not underage; indeed some of them had been deposited in the National Library as required by law.” [3]

As stated in the above report concerning evidence presented in court at the time, not only did one of the producers offer affidavits to the police from the performers themselves but evidence from a previous case which collected so called child porn cassettes were, in fact, nothing of the kind and were included in the present case as admissible. None of this was taken up by the prosecution. Dumay makes a strong case that this was closer to religious persecution of homosexuals than a real clampdown on child abuse. He illustrates this by highlighting the knee-jerk nature of our society when a collection of photographs showing mutilated children’s genitals turned up on the list of customers for cassettes where the original uncovered network was elevated to a much more serious and urgent criminal status. In actual fact: “… the photographs had been collected by an association campaigning against the circumcision of children that had nothing to do with the video cassettes.” [4] Much of the guilt then rests on one of voyeurism and rather than paedophilia. Though it may yet arrive, as far as I know, pornography is not illegal.

The internet does provide an outlet to those individuals that are paedophiles and child molesters. Nonetheless, what someone does on-line does not necessarily mean that this is what they desire in the real world. This is the point of fantasy:  to escape. Sexual discussions carried out online do not always come from those with a pre-disposition for sexual deviancy. As we explored in previous posts, human beings are psychologically complex, yet police operations do not reflect this complexity and are confusing the whole idea of predatory sexual behaviour. France’s judicial system appears to be exhibiting the same symptoms currently being expressed in police state America.

computercufflinks© infrakshun

Author and attorney Andrew Vachss has discussed the issue of homosexuality and predatory paedophilia when he said: “The existence of NAMBLA helped perspectify some of the insane lies that the media perpetrated. So, for example, a male kindergarten teacher has sex with a little boy—the newspapers would report this as “homosexual” child abuse. If his target was a little girl, they wouldn’t call it ‘heterosexual’ child abuse.”  Vachess also mentioned the lack of any evidence that homosexuals are naturally paedophiles. Pederasty might blur the line, but paedophilia and homosexuality are not synonymous much as many anti-gay conservatives would like to believe. Once again, the issue here is moral panic, politicisation and psychopathy which traverses all sexual preferences.

Vachss observes:

“There are too many Americans who believe that homosexuals are potential pedophiles, and, indeed, that pedophiles are homosexuals run amok. Not only is that not true, but the only way to combat it is to have the evidence to actually place before a court or a committee or an organization.

The myth that a male who has sex with a male child is a homosexual—as opposed to a predatory pedophile—is endemic. I think that myth is all over the place. And I would say that that’s actually the average person’s perception of it. More common than not.” [5]

Press coverage of innocent persons accused of viewing child porn have been high. Pop band Massive Attack’s Robert del Naja was “caught in the sweep” of Operation Ore, where his number was found on a list of 7,300 UK-based credit card numbers passed on to the national crime squad by the FBI. He was subsequently vilified through the UK tabloids before all charges were dropped and found entirely innocent. [6] UK Actor and chat show host Matthew Kelly was also accused. He consistently denied everything and was similarly found innocent with all charges dropped. Unsurprisingly, high level prosecutions remain elusive.

Questions regarding police investigation methods and serious corruption continue to haunt the successes. There have been many operations to clamp down on the increase in child pornography. What is immediately noticeable from the reviewing the past and on-going operations is the lack of convictions, though there are plenty listed as “suspects” and on-going “searches” and “leads.” 8951 people were suspected of committing a crime with an arrest rate that totalled 6,477 persons world-wide and climbing. The figures for suspects, arrests and convictions feature overwhelmingly under the initially much vaunted Operation Ore, which was the UK arm of a global push against internet-based child pornography and given much publicity during the late eighties and early nineties.

Is it because there is a cover-up of those involved in real abuse or is there actually much less abuse of this nature present? Perhaps it is a bit of both? A closer look at the Landslide case may offer some clues.

Armed with a search warrant and an $800,000 grant, the Landslide Inc. a credit clearance intermediary based in Fort Worth, Texas was raided by the FBI, USPIS officers, US customs, Microsoft, Dallas Police, and other contractors. It was closed in April 1999. Operation Avalanche was the result which oversaw investigations and arrests in the US of 100 individuals whose credit card details were found on the Landslide database. This was followed with international operations such as Snowball, Amethyst and Auxin and the aforementioned Operation Ore in the UK. As a result of the Landslide/Avalanche operations a list of over 7,000 credit card holders and their transactions were culled from the Landslide database and given to the UK police.

The Landslide investigations were initially focused around a website that was alleged to have had graphic thumbnails and banners advertising child pornography. Proprietor Thomas Reedy’s home was raided in September 1999 and his office in December of the same year. Assets and bank accounts were frozen while the servers which had been left to run during this time yielded further credit card details from subscribers which then produced a huge database of suspects.

Although Reedy and his wife were offered a 20 year sentence in return for cooperation in trapping webmasters he chose to mount a defence, claiming he was not responsible for the content on third party websites. This led to his indictment in May of 2000 and a life sentence for his troubles in August 2001. His conviction included 89 counts of conspiracy, possession and distribution of illegal images of minors while his wife Janice Reedy received 14 years due to her relatively minor role in the affair.

_64116585_reedys304gettyThomas and Janice Reedy

The severity of Thomas Reedy’s sentence has since been questioned by many more than his attorney: “the Reedys are victims … to lose 10 years of a person’s life in prison is a helluva lot for a crime that doesn’t involve death …” This is due to the fact that Reedy was not a webmaster nor had he created the sexual images. It was also true that the credit card verification for sites did not involve child pornography. Yet, according to Robert Adams, a US Postal Service inspector, who began investigating the couple in May, they had “helped three foreign Webmasters provide ‘hundreds of thousands of images’ as well as movies depicting children in violent sex acts …” which extended to children of only four years of age. [7] Adams made no bones about the fact after his investigations this was, in his opinion “a global operation” [8] involving webmasters from Indonesia to Russia, where he saw the Reedy’s business as actively providing the means for webmasters to share files and download photos.

The joint US/UK entrapment scheme called Operation Avalanche became embroiled in a breathless media fanfare and alleged help from the FBI to streamline the subsequent arrests that were made in August 2001, just as Reedy began his life sentence. From 35,000 US Landslide subscribers email invitations were sent to all with the offer to purchase child pornography by post. “Members of the Internet Crimes against Children (ICAC) Task Forces and US Postal Inspectors have conducted 144 searches in 37 states with 100 arrests to date for trafficking child pornography through the mail and via the Internet,” [9]

The huge scale of Operation Ore was primarily due to a list of 7,200 names supplied to British police forces by none other than the FBI, (entrapment specialists!) and ICAC, Task Forces. The angle given to the media was that this was a clear-cut case of paedophilia in society where rings were being rounded up and highly professional undercover operations were in action intended to spring the networks of child rapists.

According to respected investigative journalist Duncan Campbell and his research into Operation Ore cases, the evidence was “exaggerated” and “used unacceptably.” Actually, this is being a little kind. American police testimony was wholly discredited and forensic methods deemed questionable at best. Critical evidence provided by US investigators which initially formed the foundation of Ore itself, were proven to be false. Ministers were not informed of this salient fact and it was buried while convictions continued and costs skyrocketed.

Interpol received sworn statements submitted to UK courts in 2002 that Dallas detective Steven Nelson and US postal inspector Michael Mead had explained that all those who visited Landslide were always presented with a front page screen button which offered a “click Here (for) Child Porn” and thus all those who accessed Landslide and paid with their credit card were assumed to be paedophiles.  Campbell informs us, by the time: “British police and computer investigators had finally examined American files, they found that the ‘child porn’ button was not on the front page of Landslide at all, but was an advertisement for another site appearing elsewhere: thus the crucial “child porn” button was a myth. Landslide certainly gave access to thousands of adult sex sites. But accessing such material, which is now freely broadcast and sold in high street grocers’, is not a crime.” [10]

How could such a serious and high profile investigation miss something so terribly obvious?

More importantly, when it was evident to any adequate investigator that: “The real front page of Landslide was an innocuous image of a mountain, carrying no links to child porn. There was ‘no way’ a visitor to Landslide could link from there to child porn sites,” according to Sam Type, a British forensic computer consultant who was asked by the National Crime Squad (NCS) to rebuild the Landslide website. She dismissed the idea that Landslide had created a service devoted to child porn, describing its only difference as a “pay-per-view” service.”

So, what were the authorities playing at? Was it a case of systematic errors or systematic fraud?

Jim Bates, a computer expert with forensic knowledge served as a witness for the prosecution and defence in more than 100 child porn cases. He is convinced that: “… a massive fraud has been perpetrated at Landslide [where] an unknown number of subscriptions are fake …” [11]  US investigators believed that those who accessed Landslide – by the mere act of paying – were paedophiles. Worse still, from the thousands of pay-to-view access channels provided by Landslide’s two services, US investigators had copied the contents of 12 sites out of a possible 400 accessible through one of the Landslide services called Keyz. Although these sites did contain child pornography and around 25 percent or more, about 180 Keyz sites were either standard pornography or unknown. With the Landslide closure over three years before, evidence of incriminating images in many cases were absent, only address and card details remained:

Here, the American evidence that having paid to get into Landslide meant having paid to access child porn has become crucial. Many of the accused argue that their card details could have been stolen and used without their knowledge, or admit that they used Landslide, but for adult material.

The NCS detective who found the real, innocuous Landslide front page in the American police files acted quickly to make it available to police forces and prosecutors. But nobody seems to have paid attention to the contradiction this created in the Operation Ore evidence. Nor did they apparently notice that there were now two, utterly different “Landslide front pages” presented in Operation Ore prosecutions — one totally incriminating, the other (and accurate) page quite innocuous.  [12]

There were many police in the UK who expressed disquiet at the way Operation Ore was conducted. Some became so disillusioned that they resigned from their jobs. One of them was Merseyside police officer Peter Johnston, who described his lack of faith in a letter to The Sunday Times: “I began to doubt the validity of the evidence surrounding the circumstances of the initial investigation in America … I found it difficult to rationalise how offenders had been identified solely on a credit card number.” [13] All of which means that it is very likely that many cases will be overturned or sent to the Court of Appeal. This comes too late for the 33 men who committed suicide and the lives of other individuals and their families shattered.

One of many victims who had been under the Ore investigation since December 2004 was that of Commodore David White, 50, commander of British forces in Gibraltar. Despite a lack of evidence against him, he was instructed to give up his position in January of 2005 after news of the investigations began to spread. Twenty-four hours later he was found dead at the bottom of his pool after taking a dose of sleeping tablets washed down with whiskey. There was said to be insufficient evidence as to whether the Commodore’s death was accidental or suicide, though the latter appears probable. A statement from his brother, showed that his mental state had collapsed after his dismissal and that he was in a “catatonic state of shock.” [14]  The inquest into the circumstances surrounding his death have since confirmed that investigations: “… yielded no evidence that he downloaded child pornography, and a letter was written by ministry of defence police to naval command on January 5 this year indicating that there were ‘no substantive criminal offences’ to warrant pressing charges.” [15] 

The Scottish arm of the Operation was completed in August 2003 after investigating 350 people north of the Border, about 200 of who were in Strathclyde and 70 in Lothian and the Borders. After millions of pounds of expenditure no arrests were made due to a failure “to gather the necessary evidence” though “grave doubts” about suspects remained.[16]

Despite the disastrously flawed evidence from the US, it was the UK contingent of police, lawyers and a frothing media who transformed the possibility of a genuine investigation of child pornography into a verifiable witch-hunt by using emotive catch lines and the reliance of sensation over facts. The very nature of paedophile images already predisposes the media and juries to convict based on the instinct to make it disappear. Therefore, most defence solicitors suggested pleading guilty if any images were found on computers regardless of whether they were guilty or not. Reconciling this with the persistent evidence of high level paedophilia and other deviant activities is not easy.

Once again we have evidence that crimes continue undeterred and with Establishment protection while the public carries the can.

 


Notes
[1]  ‘Dozens convicted in child sex video trial’ by John Henley, The Guardian, May 11, 2000.
[2] Ibid.
[3] ‘The ambiguities in the campaign against paedophilia’ by Jean Michael-Dumay, Le Monde, March 25 2000.
[4] Ibid.
[5] op. cit. Vachss, (Case Magazine)
[6] ‘I’ve always been open about porn’ Friday April 11, 2003, by Alexis Petridis, The Guardian. “He claims that despite the fact that no charges had been brought against him, the police informed the Sun newspaper about his arrest. “The whole thing became this kind of publicity joke. Someone in the police force called The Sun directly, said we’ve arrested so and so, we haven’t charged him. The police shouldn’t be giving that information to newspapers.”
[7] ‘Couple in child porn trial planned to flee to Mexico, witness testifies Defense counters that pair has No criminal history, passports’ – dallasmorningnews.com/ By Debra Dennis Fort Worth Bureau of The Dallas Morning News, April 19, 2000.
[8] Ibid.
[9] ‘Attorney General Ashcroft Announces the Successful Conclusion of Operation Avalanche’ Press Release, US Depart. Of Justice August 8 2001, http://www.usdoj.gov.
[10] ‘A flaw in the child porn witch-hunt’ By Duncan Campbell, The Sunday Times, June 26, 2005.
[11] ‘Operation Ore Exposed’ by Jim Bates,  computerinvestigations.com
[12] ‘A flaw in the child porn witch-hunt’ By Duncan Campbell, The Sunday Times, June 26, 2005.
[13] Child porn suspects set to be cleared in evidence ‘shambles’ by David Leppard, The Sunday Times July 03, 2005.
[14] ‘Military chief killed himself over child porn allegations’ by Caroline Gammell, The Scotsman Fri 30 Sep 2005.
[15] ‘Dead officer absolved in porn probe’ By David Leppard, The Sunday Times, Sunday, 2 October, 2005.
[16] ‘Dismay as international paedophile probe fails’ by Marcello Mega, August 2003 The Scotsman.

The Politics of Entrapment I

By M.K. Styllinski

 “He said there were very highly placed people there. He talked about judges and politicians who were abusing little boys.”

– Whistleblower Vishambar Mehrotra, a 69-year-old retired magistrate speaking of organised sexual abuse by Establishment individuals from the 1980s.Source: The Independent ‘Child abuse inquiry: Met Police investigate alleged murders of three young boys’


Finally, what many writers and researchers have been saying for decades has broken into the mainstream media. The long-standing rumours and persistent allegations regarding a paedophile ring working out of Westminster which involved a number of high profile Members of the British Parliament is now in the public consciousness – yet another “conspiracy theory” that was fact.

Those under the shadow of perpetrating abuse included a former Home Secretary and Vice-President of the European Commission Lord Leon Brittan who died of cancer shortly after the allegation in January 2015. In July of the same year, Labour MP Simon Danczuk told Parliament that Lord Brittan had been sent a dossier of names and allegations concerning organised paedophilia between 1983 and 1985. He told fellow MPs that the late Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens during this period had written to then Home Secretary Lord Brittan about these high profile child abusers “operating and networking within and around Westminster” and delivered a dossier of names. [1] A copy of the file was also sent to Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) top prosecutor Thomas Hetherington. Surprise, surprise….The dossier was then conveniently “lost” by officials and Brittan (not so surprisingly) couldn’t recall any further details about it.


“Asked if he thought there had been a ‘political cover-up’ in the 1980s, he replied: ‘I think there may well have been. But it was almost unconscious. It was the thing that people did at that time.”

– Lord Tebbit, former Conservative cabinet minister


Brittan himself had long been associated with child abuse. After his death more allegations surfaced culminating in a search of his property in London and Yorkshire by the metropolitan police’s Operation Midland, a unit set up to investigate the Westminster ring. Brittan had long been accused of abusing a boy at Elm Guest House in the mid-eighties and multiple acts of child rape in 1986 after an alleged attendance of a rent boy orgy. [2] The Independent on Sunday investigations revealed that as Brittan, Cyril Smith and other high profile MPs and well-known public figures were about to be arrested the investigation was shut down with no explanations. [3]

Of course, this would not be the first or last time.

Danczuk had been calling for an inquiry into an organised child rape network since the late eighties. His dogged research had been based on his recently published book Smile for the Camera: The double life of Cyril Smith detailing the nature of a 40-year cover-up of the paedophile offences committed by Liberal MP Sir Cyril Smith and which personifies just how easy it has been for child abusers to milk the system.

Lord_Brittan_2011

Lord Brittan, 2011. (wikipedia)

29n06smith-485529Sir Cyril Smith

A report from The Telegraph offers testimony of one David Tombs, who ran Hereford and Worcester social services for over 20 years. The official warned the Department of Health from information he obtained from liaison with police investigations that a paedophile ring was in operation. But what was more disturbing was the inference that it was common knowledge and endemic: “When he alerted Department of Health representatives, he was told by civil servants that he was ‘probably wasting [his] time’ because there were ‘too many of them over there’. Asked what he thought was meant by the word ‘them’, Mr Tombs said ‘those within Parliament and government in Whitehall”. [4]

The up shot of these inquiries have revealed that the Thatcher government knew about the abuse but decided to turn a blind eye in order to prevent destabilising the Establishment structure. [5] That was the more palatable reason for people such as Lord Tebbit who excused cover ups as somehow “what people did”, presumably for the good of the realm. Leaving such nonsense aside, what this writer and so many others were saying more than ten years previously – namely, that paedophilia was encouraged in order to be used as a blackmailing tool – was also revealed by a whistleblower in the MSM by the tabloid newspaper the Daily Express. [6] The details are accurate and fit the pieces of past domestic political and geostrategy perfectly. They confirmed that the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) a British pro-paedophile activist group founded in October 1974 and officially disbanded in 1984, was infiltrated as an under cover operation and clearing house for such activities and represented what is after all, standard practice within military-intelligence apparatus – from MI6, CIA to MOSSAD. Thatcher was nothing if not thorough. It was clear that she knew all about the paedophilia Establishment and sought to protect it for the same dubious reasons. Indeed, according to a newly revealed secret file on senior diplomat Sir Peter Hayman who died in 1992, The Independent, reported “… she told officials not to publicly name a senior diplomat connected to a paedophile scandal despite being fully briefed on allegations made against him.” He was also one of many that Geoffrey dickens named on the dossier as a paedophile. Despite an investigation, he was not prosecuted. [7]

As a result of metropolitan police complicity in the cover up of MPs child abusing activities, as of writing Scotland Yard is currently under investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and said it is investigating allegations of ‘historic, high level corruption of the most serious nature’ within the Metropolitan Police force.” There are over 14 referrals of alleged corruption connected to the paedophile ring and sexual abuse claims from the 1970s to the 2005, all of which the IPCC is tasked with investigating. The complete list reported by the is lncuded here:

    • An allegation of a potential cover up around failures to properly investigate child sex abuse offences in south London and further information about criminal allegations against a politician being dropped;
    • An allegation that an investigation involving a proactive operation targeting young men in Dolphin Square was stopped because officers were too near prominent people;
    • An allegation that a document was found at an address of a paedophile that originated from the Houses of Parliament listing a number of highly prominent individuals (MPs and senior police officers) as being involved in a paedophile ring and no further action was taken;
    • An allegation that an account provided by an abuse victim had been altered to omit the name of a senior politician;
    • An allegation that an investigation into a paedophile ring, in which a number of people were convicted, did not take action in relation to other more prominent individuals;
    • Allegations that a politician had spoken with a senior Met Police officer and demanded no action was taken regarding a paedophile ring and boys being procured and supplied to prominent persons in Westminster in the 1970s;
    • An allegation that in the late 1970s a surveillance operation that gathered intelligence on a politician being involved in paedophile activities was closed down by a senior Met Police officer;
    • An allegation that a dossier of allegations against senior figures and politicians involved in child abuse were taken by Special Branch officers;
    • Allegations that a surveillance operation of a child abuse ring was subsequently shut down due to high profile people being involved;
    • Allegations of child sex abuse against a senior politician and a subsequent cover-up of his crimes;
    • Allegations that during a sexual abuse investigation a senior officer instructed the investigation be halted and that that order had come from ‘up high’ in the Met;
    • An allegation of a conspiracy within the Met to prevent the prosecution of a politician suspected of offences;
    • Allegations against a former senior Met Police officer regarding child sex abuse and that further members of the establishment including judges were involved. It is claimed that no further action was taken;
    • An allegation that police officers sexually abused a boy and carried out surveillance on him. There are further allegations of financial corruption in a London borough police force. [8]

Let’s not forget that the presence of a child rape network has always been lurking over successive governements and in my view, an inherent consequence of Statism and all that goes with it. The hue and cry of child pornography became focused in the now infamous allegations of paedophiles within Tony Blair’s New Labour party in 2003. This slipped into internet legend under the snappy title of: Blair’s Protection of Elite Paedophile Rings Spells the End for His Career. (Even at this juncture, the author had succumbed to a heavy dose of wishful thinking by claiming that this would see to the downfall of Mr. Blair and his government. Prime Ministers do not fall anymore, unless deemed expedient that they do so). The article, written by British freelance journalist Michael James for the Scottish Herald, suggested that members of Tony Blair’s inner government were being investigated over child pornography charges and that this information was being used by elements within the US administration to blackmail the British Government into supporting the war on Iraq.


 “… quite extraordinary” and … “a shocking reflection on Parliament” that one year on from allegations and revelations of establishment cover-ups that the public had seen “not one establishment perpetrator brought to justice”.

– John Mann Labour MP commenting on the “Westminster cover up at the highest level”


Further information included speculation concerning Dunblane murderer and suspected paedophile, Thomas Hamilton. Hamilton happened to have connections to the former Secretary General of NATO, Lord George Robertson, also accused of paedophilia, which he strenuously denied, threatening to sue the newspaper when they published similar reports. There are also those who believed this was merely an opportunistic example of a smear campaign concocted by UK intelligence. After all, although paedophilia / child rape clearly exists within the UK Establishment there are equal reasons to remain cautious in light of the blackmail tactic to enforce agendas and political strategies.

_38498291_computer_keys150At the same time, it is disturbing that the disasterous task force Operation Ore, set up to fully investigate allegations of paedophilia and organised child abuse with the authority to investigate the Dunblane connections, simply fizzled out like so many investigations centered around accusations of high level abuse. Not before accusations of incompetence and corruption had surfaced along with innocent individuals imprisoned and no satisfactory answers as to why. Equally, based on the global record and historical whitewashes of the State regarding such issues, it is only natural that we become highly suspicious of the standard: “lack of evidence” in some cases. Expect the same thing to happen with the present Westminster inquiry, Operation Midland and Operation Yew tree, but not before many lower profile figures have been sacrificed for predatory sexual behaviour but not necessarily child abuse and/or paedophilia. In this light, the BBC debacle on Sir Jimmy Savile was very carefully managed so that reporting and investigations stayed firmly within a designated perimeter of exploration. Mainstream media discussion on his links to politicians, Royalty and other VIP members of the Establishment have been largely silent.

Since we understand that child abuse is a way of life in much of the Establishment circles, it is not too hard to see how important a part technology plays in organised networks.

On the subject of internet child pornography, a report in 2006 found that more than half of the 184 Interpol countries had no laws addressing child pornography and where only Australia, Belgium, France, South Africa and the United States had laws which produced what has been called a significant “impact” on the crime. Improvements have been made several years later but we could be forgiven for thinking that the will to prosecute is lacking on the one hand and ridiculously zealous on the other. [9]

It goes without saying that there are certainly paedophiles and molesters for whom the internet is an ideal place to buy, collect and view images of children being sexually abused. We cannot expect such a wonderful tool of exchange to be used exclusively for the greater good, especially with technological horizons pushing the envelope of innovation. It would be foolish to think that sexual predators would not take full advantage of the anonymous and secret opportunities that this global networking medium provides. The process of ponerisation has no defined limits. It touches all societal domains and becomes strategically contoured towards specific goals. Child pornography is no different and has become a minefield of mixed messages, corruption and incompetence, though undoubtedly driven, in part, by good intentions and tireless efforts to bring those targeting children to justice.

But as is ever the case, judging on past and present performances of law enforcement operations regarding child pornography, there is cause for extreme concern on a number of levels which may not be immediately apparent.

 


See also: The Old Boys’ Club I

Leon Brittan: The Bigger Picture” at aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/)

 


Notes

[1] ‘Lord Brittan: The accusations against the former Home Secretary that refused to die’. The Independent on Sunday, James Hanning January 25, 2015.
[2] ‘Leon Brittan ‘attended paedophile parties in notorious brothel’ Sunday Express,By Levi Winchester Jan 25, 2015.
[3] ‘A missing boy and the Australian high commission in London’ by Jacquelin Magnay, The Australian, 31 January 2015.
[4] ‘Warnings of Westminster paedophile network ‘ignored’ because ‘there were too many’ By By Keith Perry and agency, The Telegraph, July 12, 2014.
[5] ‘
Tory child abuse whistleblower: ‘I supplied underage rent boys for Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet ministers’, BMatthew Drake, Daily Mirror, June 13, 2014. | “Senior Tory cabinet ministers were supplied with underage boys for sex parties, it is sensationally claimed. Former Conservative activist Anthony Gilberthorpe said he told Margaret Thatcher 25 years ago about what he had witnessed and gave her names of those involved. His allegations that he saw top Tories having sex with boys comes after David Cameron launched a Government inquiry into claims of a cover-up. Anthony, 52, said: “I am prepared to speak to the inquiry. I believe I am a key witness.””
[6] ‘EXCLUSIVE: Secret service infiltrated paedophile group to ‘blackmail establishment’ Daily Express, By Tim Tate and Ted Jeory June 29, 2014.
[7]’Thatcher stopped officials publicly naming Sir Peter Hayman as suspected paedophile’ The Independent, By Kashmira Gander, February 3, 2015.
[8] ‘Child sex abuse: Watchdog to investigate Metropolitan police over ‘cover-up’ claims involving MPs and officers’ The Independent, By Loulla-Mae Eleftheriou-Smith, March 16, 2015.
[9] International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC) global study of child pornography laws, April 5, 2006.