World's Largest Child Porn Network Bust: Arrests in UK, US, Canada, Spain, Brazil ..

[FastTadpole]

Sick motherfuckers, hope that they nick the ones that are actually guilty and not just rounding up all the culprits based on their IPs. It'd also be a nice service not to release the names of the arrested until they were proven guilty.

Quote:Canadians arrested in world's largest child porn network bust
Today 7:30am
Edmonton / iNews880.com
3/16/2011

The RCMP will be releasing names soon of Canadians arrested or being sought in a global round-up of child pornography suspects. Europol Headquarters in the Hague, Netherlands is breaking details of the sickening case that has seen 230 underage victims identified and the arrest of almost 200 people from all over the world, includign here in Canada. Arrest warrants have been issued for almost 700 suspects. There is no early word if any of the suspects is from the metro area. The case centres on activity at a website in Holland. The website had close to 70,000 members. Europol is warning people who want to hurt and exploit children for pornographic purposes: "You will be caught." (BNO,EM,blb)The RCMP will be releasing names soon of Canadians arrested or being sought in a global round-up of child pornography suspects.

According to BNO News, Europol Headquarters in the Hague, Netherlands is breaking details of the sickening case that has seen 230 underage victims identified and the arrest of almost 200 people from all over the world, including here in Canada. Arrest warrants have been issued for almost 700 suspects. There is no early word if any of the suspects is from the metro area.

The case centres on activity at a website in Holland. The website had close to 70,000 members.

Europol is warning people who want to hurt and exploit children for pornographic purposes: "You will be caught." (BNO,EM,blb)

http://www.inews880.com/Channels/Reg/Loc...ID=1385931

Quote:Hundreds arrested after police bust global pedophile network with 60,000 members

THE HAGUE (BNO NEWS) -- Hundreds of people around the world have been arrested in what is believed to have been the world's largest online pedophile network, police said on Tuesday. The investigation spanned more than three years and involved scores of countries.

Full Story: http://wireupdate.com/wires/15857/hundre...0-members/

[Dunamis]

It is good news when they get the real criminals. Yes, let's hope they do ensure those who are guilty are charged and not others. Good news though, cheers FT.

[Hans Olo]

Funny how they never report on how many people they wrongfully accused.

[Dunamis]

(03-17-2011 08:37 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  Funny how they never report on how many people they wrongfully accused.

To be honest, I know it might not be a great thing to happen to you, but I'd rather be wrongly accused and efforts continue to increase to stop such activity, than for red tape to be created over avoiding wrongful accusations.

I personally think keeping children away from such sick individuals is worth the mistakes, in an imperfect world full of them. It would be better if more of the elitist rings were targeted. The only crime that is exclusive to the underclass (all below the elite) is petty theft, everything else clearly has no economic boundaries.

In a perfect world there would never be wrongful accusations, but in a perfect world there would be no child abuse at all either.

[yeti]

(03-17-2011 01:50 PM)Dunamis Wrote:  I'd rather be wrongly accused and efforts continue to increase to stop such activity, than for red tape to be created over avoiding wrongful accusations.

You might want to rethink that, considering that the scum that runs the planet routinely frame their enemies by placing kiddie porn on their computers.

BTW, I don't consider the very basis of common law - that people are innocent until proven guilty - as "red tape".

[Hans Olo]

Quote:I'd rather be wrongly accused and efforts continue to increase to stop such activity, than for red tape to be created over avoiding wrongful accusations.

That's the stupidest thing I've heard. Replace "child porn" with "terrorism" and you have a typical brainwashed sheeple argument. By the way, in many places, if you got wrongly accused of child porn, your life would be over anyway.

I can't believe how people who have learned so much about how propaganda and the police state works, forget everything the moment you replace "terrorism" with "child porn" and they're back at square one. If we let them, they will take away all our liberties and lifes, in the name of - whatever.

Problem, reaction, solution.

[Dunamis]

Wait a minute, we are talking about accusations here, not charges. Wrongful charges are a different kettle of fish altogether, so let's please separate the two, as they are not the same. An arrest is not a charge of guilt!

If the world of people out there are the ones who take you as "guilty" after a simple accusation, then that's nothing to do with the people working the case, that's to do with narrow-minded people and usually many fearful parents.

The arresting and and charging of people is separate to the way the public view wrongful accusations, and it's also separate from the way the media parades child sex offences more and more with ever increasing scaremongering.

Also, "the war on terror" and paedophilia are two totally different things Hans Olo, and should be treated as such. Just because you can draw parallels between child abuse and terrorism, it doesn't mean I can. But then, I am speaking as a father of two children and a care leaver myself.

You might not agree, but I'd argue killing a person is different to abusing a child over a prolonged period, especially so on a sexual level. I'd argue it's FAR worse. I think my mother would have rather died before being raped as a child in care, but it didn't occur that way.

There is also the fact that Paedophilia exists, and an Al Qaeda 'network' doesn't. So yes, Problem, reaction, solution. Only thing, there is no "terror" problem.

[Hans Olo]

So you're basically saying, it's not a problem when people are wrongfully arrested or accused (pick your word of choice, doesn't matter), as long as it's for a good cause, like 'protecting the children', do I get that right? Then I stand by my point, that it's stupid.

And you make a lot of non-sensical distinctions, if I may say so:

- charged with vs. accused of committing a crime. We didn't talk about charges, so why even go there? People got accused, arrested.

- People out there vs. the people working the case. Nobody talked about the police officers, judges or jailers, so why make that distinction?!

- The difference between "war and terror" and paedophilia. I know these are not the same things, what I said was that the government wants to take our liberties, and it doesn't matter if it's in the name of terrorism or paedophilia. I didn't say they are the same, was that too complex of an argument? How can you understand that as "terrorism is the same as paedophilia"?! I'm puzzled.

- The difference between killing a 'person' and abusing a child (children are not persons now?!) and your opinion that one is worse than the other. What difference does that make for my argument here?

- The fact that paedophilia exists and Al Qaeda doesn't. What difference does it make if somebody is wrongly arrested? Paedophilia does exist, but that doesn't make the false arrest of someone better in any way, shape or form.

You may have the last word, this discussion is going nowhere. I still believe you made a grave logical error in your process, I pointed it out and now I'm done. Thanks.

[Dunamis]

Wow, more doublespeak, and twisting my words taking them totally out of context, cool. Where did I say children weren't 'persons' for example? A whole sentence please, not single words.

Seems you are in an argument, with a ghost.

Also, I was replying to you AND yeti btw, he did mention guilt and common law.

[Hans Olo]

Wow, another diversion, now you're twisting my words, aren't you? Where did I say that you said children were not persons? I was asking you a question, wasn't I? Do you know the difference between a question and a statment? I was calling you out on all your distinctions without a difference, and what you said exactly was:

"killing a person is different to abusing a child over a prolonged period"

Which begs the questions on why you differentiate between the two. Now, stop the baseless accusations and be honest for once. Can you admit you made a mistake there?

Also where did I doublespeak? You can't just say "Wow, more doublespeak" and then not have anything to show for it. Not if you expect to be taken seriously. Do you even know what doublespeak is?

Also, are you saying you're a ghost? Because I'm obviously in an argument with you, and you said it seems like I was in an argument with a ghost. I don't believe in ghosts, so what are you, are you even human?

Now, back to the topic. So you're basically saying, it's not a problem when people are wrongfully arrested or accused (pick your word of choice, doesn't matter), as long as it's for a good cause, like 'protecting the children', do I get that right?

This is your statement, verbatim.

"I personally think keeping children away from such sick individuals is worth the mistakes"

Which is, as I explained, wrong.

[Dunamis]

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  Wow, another diversion, now you're twisting my words, aren't you?

No.

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  Where did I say that you said children were not persons?

Here, by clear implication...

(03-19-2011 03:55 PM)Hans Olo Wrote:  - The difference between killing a 'person' and abusing a child (children are not persons now?!) and your opinion that one is worse than the other. What difference does that make for my argument here?

Though how you see killing as equal to sexual abuse over a period of time done to a child is a little confusing to me.

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  I was asking you a question, wasn't I? Do you know the difference between a question and a statment?

No, you weren't. Doublespeak you were though. "children are not persons now" is a statement, that you followed it by a question mark makes no difference. (If preceded by a question, such as...are you saying...then I wouldn't have said anything about it, other than given an answer).

It was a clear attempt at using language to manipulate the conversation without clear reason. I clearly haven't given the emotional response such rhetoric aims for. Sure, it may have been a mistake on your part, but the fact that you haven't said anything about it not actually being a clear question makes me doubt so.

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  I was calling you out on all your distinctions without a difference, and what you said exactly was:

"killing a person is different to abusing a child over a prolonged period"

Which begs the questions on why you differentiate between the two. Now, stop the baseless accusations and be honest for once. Can you admit you made a mistake there?

A mistake? Do you mean I should admit I am wrong, and that both are equal? To kill a man (or woman) is one thing, to mass murder also. Bu tto subject someone, especially a child to sexual abuse, how can you say that is equal? Just because the law punishes murder to a fuller extent, that does not mean the law is correct. If I were writing the laws, those who sexually abuse children would receive the harsher sentences. All it takes to kill in reality is to put a gun in an 18 year old's hands and pay him to "protect and serve", to abuse and torture on a sexual level (for self gratification) in my view takes an extremely sick mind.

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  Also where did I doublespeak? You can't just say "Wow, more doublespeak" and then not have anything to show for it. Not if you expect to be taken seriously. Do you even know what doublespeak is?

Yes, and your not that good.

Clearly avoiding dialogue by trying to close the conversation by use of an un-sourced statement "posing" as a question based on something typed by myself:

(03-19-2011 03:55 PM)Hans Olo Wrote:  children are not persons now?!

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  Also, are you saying you're a ghost? Because I'm obviously in an argument with you, and you said it seems like I was in an argument with a ghost. I don't believe in ghosts, so what are you, are you even human?

My point is, even by slightly twisting my words to suit your motive, you change the person you are speaking to, in that you are no longer arguing with a person, but a creation of your own mind...a ghost.

(03-21-2011 11:07 AM)Hans Olo Wrote:  Now, back to the topic. So you're basically saying, it's not a problem when people are wrongfully arrested or accused (pick your word of choice, doesn't matter), as long as it's for a good cause, like 'protecting the children', do I get that right?

This is your statement, verbatim.

"I personally think keeping children away from such sick individuals is worth the mistakes"

Which is, as I explained, wrong.

No, it's not "wrong" or right! "I personally think".

The fact is, as long as there are those who want justice in the world, and here I am talking about actual justice, not the corrupt government type, but as long as those people live, there will be mistakes. There will also continue to be wrongful arrests, that is simply a by product of human error when punishing those responsible for crime.

Of course such arrests are a problem, NO WHERE did I say they were not a problem or an issue. I simply said, and stand by what I said, that in the SPECIFIC cases of sexual abuse of children, that those risks are worth it. Did you not read how many children we're saved from further sexual abuse in this case.And what about the many more who would have been abused in the future?

For ONE of those children, I would not only gladly suffer wrongful accusation and arrest...I my friend would lay down my LIFE. But then the world is run by those who think little of others rights, their suffering or the sacrifices some take to try and fight such downright evil.

Now, please, think of something other than your current view, and try to refrain from using the "yea, but man, they're using it for control, paedophile arrests are really just a cover", unless you can back that up of course, and also prove children aren't being saved from evil men and women. Then, and only then, would I be willing to reason with you on your views.