Listening to the news this morning I heard about how Australian authorities have arrested a man in connection with the bush fires. They listed a few charges re. the fires, then added "also for posession of child porn".

I began to think. Has the child porn charge been added to ensure the public are turned against him and to lessen his chance of a fair hearing? Was he found in posession of child porn and then they decided to pin the bush fires on him as an easy result? It just seemed a bit bizarre and out of place. It's possible that they just happened to find some child porn during a routine search after his arrest, but the cynic in me was alerted.

I think it's the result of having heard so many cases where child porn charges seem to be a convenient add on. If you want to discredit someone, relate them to child porn.

I would think public anger over the fire is sufficient to turn people against him, but just in case he turns to be not guilty of starting the fires they have the child porn to fall back on, so they'll get him either way.

Am I being too cynical here? Maybe I just need more coffee.

The cynic in you is spot on Dom; remember the "terrorist" who got shot and the whole thing was a mistake so a child porn charge was hastily added (and subsequently dropped)?

Paedophiles often start bush fires. It's all that lurking about in woodland waiting for children. They get bored! FACT! (not)

Those who make Child Abuse images should be sent to jail for massive sentences.

Those who view them should be offered help to overcome their "problem" before they offend in more serious ways.

It does not help them to send them to prison or to identify them. In fact it will drive them underground - leave them with feelings of no worth - and in the end this may even push them into more extreme behaviour as they give up their life.

Child porn is an allegation as well which the authorities use to smear their opponents. The Police in the UK will travel around making this allegation if they have nothing against a "suspect" - they use it as a catch all.

99% of the time there is no Child Porn. But the Police have achieved their aim to disrupt and smear and unsettle a person's life.

The East London terrorist incident should have led to 200 police losing their jobs. The police who shot the two innocent men should have been jailed. Those who alleged Child Porn with no evidence should all have been put on trial for perverting the course of justice.

The FACT that not one person was held accountable for many totally CRIMINAL AND ILLEGAL acts - shows how the authorities in the UK are run by the CRIMINALS in our country.

The POLICE are the CRIMINALS in the UK. The sooner everyone realises this and takes steps to protect themselves the better. Especially if you are a minority group ( Islamic - Christian - Gay - Gyspy - Black - Journalist - Photographers/Film-makers )

They seek to protect their own spheres of influence which I have unearthed evidence of drug supply ( 50% comes from the Police I would suggest or is allowed to exist with no sanction ) child abuse rings ( 90% include Police and members of the Judiciary ) and so on.

Australia - USA and the UK are run by the same people and use the same methods. Therefore this is just par for the course.

the police and media are already saying this man is responsible for 21 deaths and whipping up hatred and vigilante style justice.It's impossible to blame anyone at this stage for deaths.

I'm with Germaine Greer on this one-she's slammed local authorities for refusing homeowners the right to clear trees from around their houses-particularly as the bush is filled with gum trees that burst into flames in a second with the amount of oil in their leaves.

Germaine has her own large property in NSW where they film "I'm a Celebrity-Get Me Out Of Here"

As for the child porn charge-they routinely include pics of teens over 16 and under 18 as "child porn".
This happened with the Crown Prosecutor who had prosecuted many for this crime-and was then busted himself when he took his laptop for repairs.

Stories exagerated beyond all sanity-"thousands upon thousands of nude pics were found" said the police. In reality the majority were of legal aged teen boys and about 12 pics were of lads around 15 or so.

It's an odd crime really. Pictures are only photographs of a crime. When about 20 distinguished people-judges, lawyers, doctors etc, sent letters of support for this man to the court-entirely normal practice,the Murdoch newspapers went insane and basically accused them of being pedophiles as well.

Delicisously they had to pay each of the 20, $40,000 each in a libel case. One is a friend of mine-one of the world's most respected academics on the French language. He built a new conservatory on his house with the winnings-he calls it "Rupert".

I would go further and suggest that in such a massive area how can they possibly have found 'the man' responsible?? Did someone see him start a spark? If they did how do they know it was that spark that started the inferno? You follow? Unless the culprit used an accelerant and that was found upon his person (unlikely,,,the bush doesn't need an accelerant..it is a natural accelerant)

Added are the porn charges..and one can only assume through bitter experience...that this man is the Barry George of the bush fires.

And I thought Australia were better than us.

Bollocks!!