Tuesday, 11 June 2013

CEOP - Once Again, We Challenge Your Lies

Posted: 09/06/2013 08:36 BST | Updated: 09/06/2013 09:27 BST

David Cameron Tells Google Child Pornography 'Pollutes The Internet'

"David Cameron has demanded [sic] Google do more to rid the internet of child pornography, warning that lives are being put at risk [sic].

The Prime Minister said he was "sickened" by the material available online [how does he know, from CEOP/IWF?] and told web search firms to stop making excuses [sic].

The companies have been summoned [sic] to a council of war [hahahaha] with Culture Secretary Maria Miller [oh dear], and Cameron's adviser on the issue Tory MP Claire Perry [oh dear], on June 17.

Research [sic] by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) has suggested [has what?] that more than half [what, all?] of those who view child abuse images [sic] go on to commit abuse themselves [really?]."

Publish 'your' 'research', in full, for peer analysis - or stand accused of being liars.



Addendum (12/6/13)

We quite like Richard Bougeard, at present. He seems a nice guy, keen and pleasant, but, he is just another dangerous, clueless, newbie ... here we go …


Tuesday, 11 June 2013 

We are far too lenient with online sex offenders [sic] (JEP 11/06/2013)

"Whilst reading through todays online edition of the JEP, I happened on an excellent [seriously flawed, on most counts] article by Richard Heath, that impressed me so much I thought I'd include this in my newly started blog.

In this piece Richard refers to the link between viewing child abuse images/videos [sic], and the sexually motivated murders of children, following the convictions of Stuart Hazel and Mark Bridger. To any normal person [sic], it seems perfectly plausible [sic] that someone who has a sexual "fetish" (for want of a better word) [indeed] for children and looks at such images online, will, quite probably [sic], eventually get bored of merely viewing these vile images or films [sic], and go to the next step of actual sexual abuse of children [sic]."

... and so it goes on. Read the articles, for yourself, because a big hit will come.


This, of course, ties in with this tosh ...

Published: 09th June 2013

We need web cops to keep our kids safe

"They went online and searched for images because of their deviant [sic] sexual interest in children. Abusers caught viewing images will argue they would never [never say never] progress to contact abuse. I bet Bridger would have used the same defence if he’d been caught with images earlier [and would he have been correct, or not?].

But a study was carried out on 155 US prisoners jailed for viewing child abuse images [sic].

At the beginning, 26 per cent admitted a physical contact offence with 75 children [already a skewed cohort].

By the end of the study, which used a lie detector test [ah], 85 per cent had admitted to contact offences with 1,777 children.

So what can internet giants such as Google do? [little, to nothing] Contrary to popular belief, Google DOES block abuse images [we know].

When we were setting up CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre), Microsoft, Google and others gave us plenty of help [wonder why?]. Now, more than ever, we need that spirit of partnership and shared responsibility.

Internet service and search engine providers could consider the British Transport Police model — a fully-fledged police service paid for by the rail, freight, passenger and infrastructure businesses that they make safe [The Unaccountable Internet Police (UIP) - Yes, we know what you were employed to do, Jim].

It is a model that could be funded by a levy from the internet giants, many of whom enjoy beneficial tax breaks.

They could and should sponsor safer search initiatives, warning and deterring people who search for images that are blocked. [nice, but, essentially, irrelevant]"

... and this ...

Oh Dear Jim, You Are Getting Sloppier And Sloppier, In Your Old Age - The Butner Myth?

No comments:

Post a Comment