[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More proposals for European censorship

Peter Trei wrote:
> Asgaard writes:
> > On Thu, 19 Sep 1996, E. Allen Smith forwarded:
> > >> STRASBOURG, France (Sep 19, 1996 11:24 a.m. EDT) - The European
> > >> Parliament pressed the European Union on Thursday to act to curb 
> > >> child sex and trafficking rings, saying the fight against sexual 
> > >> abuse of children must be an "absolute priority."

> > It's probably no coincidence that the recently busted, utter 
> > horrible
> > child-molesting ring, with obvious protection from various persons
> > in the establishment, was centered in Belgium - that's where the EU
> > bureaucrat nomenklatura play their power games and go to bordellos.

> What exactly are you suggesting when you say 'it's probably no
> coincidence?" I can't quite figure it out.

"I can't quite figure it out" - says a lot right there.

> [While I've not been following the case in detail, it involves a ring
> of criminals in Belgium who kidnapped children to use them in
> child pornography. At least two little girls were starved to death
> when they're usefullness was over.]
> Are you suggesting that someone specifically set up a ring of
> child pornographers/murders in Belgium, then let it get caught, in
> an attempt to influence the EU parliment?
> Or are you suggesting that this particular gang of sub-humans was
> exposed at this time in an attempt to influence policy, implying that
> the Belgian LEAs knew about, but did not stop the ring until they
> needed a publicity coup?
> I find such notions utterly beyond rationality.

Per that comment about rationality: That LEA's knew about the ring, or 
that they would participate in a scam of some kind?

> Do you expect we're going to see a statement from some Belgian
> police investigator to the effect of "Yes, I  knew they were raping
> and killing children, but was told to do nothing, and I obeyed."?

Any statement that is consistent with developments in this case, and 
other similar cases, most likely.

> There is a tendency of many on this list to demonize those we
> disagree with. If a person or group takes the 'wrong' stance on
> cryptography, key "escrow", etc, many list members will act as
> if that person or group were capable of any atrocity, and is acting
> out of the very worst of motives and hidden agendas.
> Such an attitude is common, but not desirable in the modern world.
> It served some purpose when war involved the literal massacre of
> one's opponents - it's easier to commit genocide against the tribe
> over the ridge if you demonize them into not-quite-humans, but in
> the modern world this is not a rational option.

You should know that "many on this list" bears no relation to the LEA's 
mentioned above.  People on this list have relatively small agendas, in 
money terms, whereas the LEA's are servicing people with Big Money.

> While it's possible to  regard many policies of governments,
> ill-informed, self-serving, populist, and wrong, to act as if there is 
> no significant differences between real democracies and the worst
> authoritarian dictatorships is absurd.

Please list any "real democracies". Thanks a bunch.