King of Hits.co.uk - Your Views Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

King of Hits

Your Views Messageboard

Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

[b]hedda wrote:[/b]
[quote]Mark Williams-Thomas, Sarah Payne, Shy Keenan, the NSPCC , Esther Rantzen et al..

why are you not campaigning to have Rupert Murdoch,Rebekah Brooks, various editors, photographers, journalists, printers etc, who conspired to produce child pornography on Page 3 of The Sun, brought to account?

Mass distribution for profit - quibbling about the change in laws is just that. 
There is no way of avoiding what they did- it was "historic" child abuse.

Isn't that why the law was changed ?. To protect vunerable teenagers from being seduced into posing naked or topless for cash or on the spurious claim that fame may follow ?

They may have escaped the long arm of the law...but they should not escape the court of public opinion.

Please explain why you will not endorse Hedda's campaign to have all who participated in the production of this child porn at the very least, named, shamed and banned from producing newspapers, TV shows films etc.

(I shall be writing to them all)[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: a serious question for child abuse campaigners
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
HomeTruths	Hedda is simply in a different Premier league of logical thought. Now a Most Serious Offence - "Inappropriate Intellect"
hedda	Dawn Morning wrote: hedda wrote: child pornography on Page 3 of The Sun Rubbish. As I type, there's a lot more bare flesh on Southend Beach. Come into the real world, at some stage, hedda. yes probably rubbish. That must be why the law that forbade the photographing and publishing of topless teen girls under the age of 18 is called the : Sexual Offences Act 2003. Silly me. Not as serious as kissing a teen girl of course. Have fun oggling on Southend Beach but make sure the Beach inspector doesn't spot you.
honey!oh sugar sugar.	Dawn Morning wrote: hedda wrote: child pornography on Page 3 of The Sun Rubbish. As I type, there's a lot more bare flesh on Southend Beach. Come into the real world, at some stage, hedda. Also there is a big difference in naked bodies on a beach in a non sexual situation (which I think is absolutely fine) and page three posing which is deliberately sexual because of the poses, the outfits and the captions. (Also fine in my view if children did not have access to it)
honey!oh sugar sugar.	Dawn Morning wrote: hedda wrote: child pornography on Page 3 of The Sun Rubbish. As I type, there's a lot more bare flesh on Southend Beach. Come into the real world, at some stage, hedda. In the seventies they featured fifteen year olds with a countdown to their sixteenth birthday, when they would appear topless. Either they had jolly quick and efficient photographers who sprung into action at the stroke of midnight or the topless photos were taken when they were fifteen!
Dawn Morning	hedda wrote: child pornography on Page 3 of The Sun Rubbish. As I type, there's a lot more bare flesh on Southend Beach. Come into the real world, at some stage, hedda.