War on Peadophiles - 350 arrested in police blitz.

Actually, the 'blitz' took place over a year and the story refers to suspected peadophiles. What do they mean by suspected? How many were charged? How many are innocent?

We also have to look at what qualifies someone as a peaophile in modern Britain. It's not just about being a child molester, or even someone who is sexually attracted to children. The net has been widened to such a degree that almost any normal person can find themselves labelled as a paedophile. The grooming laws have created an extraordinary situation where people (mostly men) can be arrested on the assumption of intent. You don't have to have contact with children, you only need to make friends with their parents and this could be considered grooming if some idiot thinks your ultimate motivation for befriending a parent is to get close to the children.

One Catholic teacher had his painting of the Madonna and Child seized because it featured an image of a semi-naked baby.

This war on peadophiles is really an attempot to spread fear and paranoia. The headline also comes during a govermnent crisis. Every time the government are in crisis the media produce a story about either peadophiles or terrorists. Once or twice might be coincidental, but it seems to have become routine.

We need to look beyond the headlines.

According to New Labour the following are suspected Paedophiles :

Men who work with children - teachers - nurses - nursery assistants etc. and they have to prove they have not been caught yet by having a CRB Enhanced check.

Celebrities who are over 40 who once had a teenage fanbase. e.g. Michael Jackson type figures. After all when they were young they surely would have dabbled.

Anyone possessing any photo of a child in which the child is smiling ( provocatively posed ) or in nightwear or beachwear or underwear. Therefore 99% of all holiday photos would qualify their owners as paedophiles.

Now I think once all parents and photographers and those who work with children are taken into account as paedophiles it ONLY LEAVES TWO GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PAEDOPHILES. Funny that.

The TWO GROUPS who are NOT paedophiles are POLITICIANs and THE POLICE......

Funny that. If the penny has not dropped by now then you are missing the point.

The PAEDO SCARE stories are to hide and cover up the TRUTH.

Remember the IRISH ABUSE CASE TODAY - it was not the CATHOLIC CHURCH who were at fault ( They just administered the abuse and controlled it on behalf of the local and national government and Police who TURNED A BLIND EYE ( because they were at the root of it )

Demonising the population to hide your own abusive tendencies is the way that the Politicians and Police hide their evil ways. Read DAVID ICKE the BIGGEST SECRET for the explosive story about how the ELITE have controlled the CHILD ABUSE INDUSTRY over the past century. Once you read that you will understand completely what is happening.

Well , at least, if we read that book we'll understand what David Icke thinks is happening.

BR wrote:



Remember the IRISH ABUSE CASE TODAY - it was not the CATHOLIC CHURCH who were at fault ( They just administered the abuse and controlled it on behalf of the local and national government and Police who TURNED A BLIND EYE ( because they were at the root of it )
.

How do YOU know that the Police were at the root of it and what benfit is there for "turning a blind eye?" I agree that the Catholic Church were not at fault primarily, but surely those who were supposedly looking after kids who happened to be Catholic were accountable?

It seems the Catholic Church did know about the abuse and actively covered it up rather than deal with it openly.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8059826.stm

Surely the clergy's vow of celibacy is at least partially at fault here. A life of , enforced celibacy is not natural. But yet again the Catholic Church (well, not only them) are obsessed with the idea that sex is somehow a sin, and not a natural act of love and enjoyment that is nothing at all to be ashamed of.

The clip of film on the TV news provided sufficient proof that the children in that place had been horribly abused. They were made to sleep beside posters of Donny Osmond !!!!

How would you like that? Huh?

do you have a link JC ?

I watched a fascinating TV program just recently about gay culture in the USA and it brought up the dreadful demolition job done on Paul Rubens and his wonderful Pee Wee Herman character over his arrest in a porn cinema but then also on an alleged child porn charge.

Heaps of celebrities came out to support him and to say they had viewed his art collection, that was the subject of the arrest inlcluding Elton & Jennifer Aniston plus UCLA professors.

Under that very dodgy "plea bargain" system in the USA he pleaded guilty to a very minor charge and was fined yet he still has the collection and art collectors have offered him a fortune for it.

As many have pointed out..most of Europe's art galeries and museums could be accused of displaying child porn under the current hysteria and in The Library Of Congess in Washington there is a mural by Ganymede with nude pre-pubescent boys in quite suggestive poses.

This is little to do with child protection and all to do with imposing personal 'morals' on a populace. When the details of a countries children are collected on a data base-when a 10 year old boy is taken into a Texan court shackled in chains (imagine the sheer terror for this lad) authority has lost all claim to a moral high ground. (The Sun of course is exempt from these rules)

There is most definitely a witch-hunt..today they came for the "pedos"..tomorrow..who knows ?

I think you will find that the "celibacy" vow was a device begun after about 500 years of the Catholic Church's establishment and was more to do with the fear that the off-spring of priests may have a legal claim against church property.

Various Popes were fathering kids left right and centre and we all know what the Swiss Guards(all unusually handsome young men) were on about.

Most churches are more like political organisations.