Thursday, 30 May 2013

Hahahaha - It Just Gets Better And Better

9:52PM BST 30 May 2013

Murder of April Jones 'proves [sic] porn link to sexual assaults'

"Internet search companies such as Google came under pressure tonight to block child pornography after a children’s charity said that the sites “fuel the fantasies” of paedophiles [sic] who then sexually assault children [sic].

Bridger’s laptop computer contained a cache of images of children being raped and abused.

As Mark Bridger was jailed for life for the abduction and murder of five-year-old April Jones, the NSPCC said there was a “worrying link” between his looking at indecent images online and the crime he went on to commit [did he have breakfast, too?].

It called for “effective measures” [sic] to curb the ease [sic] with which extreme pornography and indecent images of children can be accessed."

A little sorry to laugh, April, but they are making a mockery of your tragedy. 


Martin Evans

Martin Evans

Martin Evans 

We cannot even be bothered to find an image of the buffoon.


Ironically, Martin, this is a good piece, and we believe that much of it goes to explaining what happened, if indeed it did happen, as the court has decided ...

How Mark Bridger shunned his middle class upbringing for a life of lies and violence


Thursday 30 May 2013 23.44 BST

Internet pornography: never again

"Internet pornography is sometimes abusive and often violent. Mark Bridger, convicted yesterday of the murder of April Jones, had compiled a store of it.

Violent pornography is easily and freely accessible, and at most requires only a credit card. The link between such material and actual violence, most commonly against women and children, is disputed – occasional studies claim there is, as one headline had it, a sunny side to smut.

But there is strong evidence that at the very least it is addictive, can normalise violence, and at the same time diminishes sympathy for its victims. It is a kind of incitement to hate. Abusive and violent pornography should be banned. But that is easier to say than to do."

Online child abuse: perpetrators and voyeurs must both feel the full force of law

Don't ignore online child sexual abuse. Report it

Last updated: May 31st, 2013

Campaigners who blame online porn for child murders are letting paedophiles [shame you said that, Brendan] off the hook

"According to John Carr, an adviser to the Government on child safety on the internet, in the wake of the conviction of Mark Bridger for the murder of April Jones we should clamp down on porn on the internet. Not just illegal porn, but legal porn too. He says Google and others should set their search settings to the "safest option", meaning that everyone who used them would be blocked from finding both legal porn and the viler, more underground stuff. He reckons that putting up "more barriers" to porn will help to prevent certain men from crossing the line from being perverted to being murderous, and thus "more children will be safe".

On both a practical level and as a matter of principle, Carr's proposals don't add up and should be rejected. Practically speaking, it simply isn't tenable to suggest that the availability of porn on the internet is endangering children, putting them at greater risk of being kidnapped and murdered by perverts than they would be if web-based nastiness wasn't available. In truth, the unstoppable spread of the internet has coincided with a decline in the number of children dying violent deaths. The number of kids who die violently is lower today than at any time since records were kept on such grisly matters. In England and Wales, violent child deaths fell by 40 per cent between the mid-1970s and 2010, from an annual toll of 136 to the mercifully lower 84 today. Most of those kids are killed by people they know. The number of children killed by strangers has always been very low, and this, too, is falling – in recent years, in this era of porn being available at the click of a button, it is running at about six a year. To argue that there's a correlation between the availability of online porn and the killing of children is to turn the facts completely upside down."

31 May 2013

Block child pornography on Net, say MPs [WTF?] after April Jones' killer Mark Bridger is jailed

"MPs have called for internet service providers to block violent and child pornography, in the wake of Mark Bridger being jailed for the kidnap and murder of five-year-old April Jones.

Keith Vaz, the chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, told The Times that the case has shown [how, Keith?] that online images of child sex abuse [sic] need to be removed.

And Jim Sheridan, who sits on the Commons culture committee, said that violent sexual images, including those depicting children, should be blocked.

He told the Times: "I know it's extremely difficult to ban it (but) I think with the political will and the technology, if you can do it, we should be doing it."

April's murder is the second high-profile case this month to feature disturbing extreme pornography"

Search engines urged to block more online porn sites 

""But he said one of the "key routes" paedophiles [sic] used to find content was through adverts containing "code words" that are placed on legal hardcore pornography sites." [John Carr, clearly mad as a hatter] 

Published at 12:01AM, May 31 2013

Calls for ban on ‘vile trade’ of child violence websites

"MPs have called for a clampdown on websites displaying violent and pornographic images of children after it emerged that Mark Bridger had regularly accessed extreme material.

Bridger’s most visited website offers videos and pictures of beheadings, burn victims, impalements, murders, and, most tellingly, dead children.

Even the titles of many of the images are too graphic to reproduce here. Under a category entitled “dead children” there is a section headed “what people searched for to land here”. It includes “child sexual abuse” and “dead children gore”". [ah, now we see what your little game is] 

2:28pm UK, Friday 31 May 2013

Disagreement Reigns Over Child Abuse [sic] Action

"Google and Microsoft query what else they can do to stop people accessing child pornography, amid calls for more to be done.

The revelation that Mark Bridger used search engines Bing and Google to try [ah] and find images of child abuse [sic] has led to predictable calls for "more to be done".

While it's not immediately apparent that any of the images the killer of April Jones had on his mobile phone were directly sourced through search engines [ah], neither Google nor Microsoft (who run Bing) would be so bold as to argue that child pornography cannot be obtained in this way [so, how does that work, then?].

Both companies maintain that whenever they are made aware of illegal content they act immediately to delist it and inform the police. And they themselves are actively looking for this material in an attempt to limit its spread. [indeed]

Software, in addition to human resources, is used to try and filter out explicit or illegal imagery. [indeed]

But the tenacity of those supplying this illegal material should not be underestimated – abhorrent though it is to consider, [why?] there is a market hungry for child pornography. {is the customer always right?]"

31 May 2013 Last updated at 15:30

April Jones: The challenge to catch online child abusers [sic]

"A worker at Ceop Organisations such as Ceop and the IWF work together to find and catch child abusers [sic] online

Mark Bridger's conviction for the murder of five-year-old April Jones has once more brought the issue of online child abuse [sic] to the fore. Many are in agreement that more needs to be done by web companies to block and remove such content. But what exactly is being done now, and how effective is it?"

April Jones Murder Prompts Calls For Google And Search Engines To Stamp Out Child Porn

Google may face block on child porn as April Jones murder 'proves link to sex assaults'

What WILL it take for Google to block child porn? [they do, very well] Jailed for life yesterday, April Jones's murderer is the latest child killer to use the internet to fuel his perversion [sic]


1 June 2013 Last updated at 10:48

Children 1st seeks tougher [sic] court action over online child abuse images [sic]

"Children 1st said courts could and should do more to protect children [sic] from exploitation

A Scottish children's charity has called on the courts to impose maximum jail sentences on those found guilty of viewing child pornography online.

It follows the conviction, earlier this week, of Mark Bridger for the murder of five-year-old April Jones in Wales last year.

Bridger had viewed images of young children on his computer.

Children 1st said the case highlighted [sic] the need to use every legal means possible to protect children from harm [sic].

Bridger's conviction sparked renewed UK-wide calls for much tougher restrictions on those seeking to access online images of abuse.

In Scotland, Children 1st said it believed the full range of sentencing powers was not being used and claimed that penalties imposed on those who have viewed child pornography were not as harsh as for other sex crimes." [do you know why?].


Children 1st


Saturday 01 June 2013

Google and Facebook attacked over 'paltry' donations to internet child protection charity

"Three of the internet's most profitable companies have pledged “paltry” amounts to child protection bodies, despite their continued verbal support.

Google raised just over £20,000 to the Internet Watch Foundation [IWF] - a figure that accounts for 90 seconds' profit for the search engine giant. Facebook's donation totalled at around £10,000 and Microsoft pledged roughly £20,000, according to the IWF's records."


Published: 11 hrs ago (2/6/13)

Google must pay taxes to fund internet police and rid web of child abuse [sic] ... April deserves that - Say Sun Justice Campaigners 

"Our demands [oh dear]:

1. On-screen warnings for people who view child abuse images

2. ‘Safe search’ option as default setting to protect kids from pornography

3. Search engines and ISPS should fund policing of internet

4. Embrace ‘photo DNA’ technology to track child abuse images

5. Use technical expertise to identify people searching for illegal content"

Almost all happens, already, or is totally unworkable.  


So, we all now know, how 'valid' your piece is, Jim penned the meat of it.


Posted on May 31st, 2013
Want child porn blocked? Meet the IWF

"The causality of any of this aside — because it’s frankly not clear that porn leads to child abuse and murder — Carr is calling for Google to default to a level appropriate for children. This is essentially an extension of MP Claire Perry’s call for a UK-wide, opt-out network-level porn filter, but passing it off to Google — an American corporation — instead. That campaign failed after the government ran a consultation that asked Britons if they wanted a UK-wide porn ban — and overwhelmingly they don’t "

No comments:

Post a Comment