Google\Blogger\Blogspot: Slightly Unclear on the Concept…

8 02 2007

Hello,

Thank you for writing in regarding content posted on BlogSpot.com. We would like to confirm that we have received and reviewed your inquiry.

Blogger.com and Blogspot.com are US sites regulated by US law. Blogger is a provider of content creation tools, not a mediator of that content. We allow our users to create blogs, but we don’t make any claims about the content of these pages. Given these facts, and pursuant with section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act, Blogger does not remove allegedly defamatory, libelous, or slanderous material from Blogger.com or BlogSpot.com. If a contact email address is listed on the blog, we recommend you working directly with the author to have the content in question removed or changed.

Sincerely,
The Blogger Team

I have responded to their email with the following:

Dear Google\Blogger\Blogspot,

I do not think you have read (or if you have read, then you have misunderstood) the issue I am requesting support for.

The members of the ACME blog are making malicious and untrue statements about my blog, as well as INCITING their readers to FALSELY flag my blog as being illegal, or inappropriate. They are flagging me WITHOUT CAUSE. Other Bloggers they have been doing this to HAVE had their blogs REMOVED. You can reassure me all you want that you do not do this, but YOUR ACTIONS of the last few months are not in line with YOUR WORDS.

–I*Love*Green*Olives

Hopefully this time someone (not a robot) will read the email and respond with something a bit more reassuring. As it is now the canned response is almost worthless, and no reassurance that someone who works to write their thoughts won’t have their words erased by bigots and ignoramuses following a party line. Why should anyone work to provide Google content under those conditions?

–I*Love*Green*Olives (asking Google not to fail so hard this time)





Paedophilia and the Bible

26 08 2006

Where is Paedophilia mentioned?

Please, tell me!

I’d really love to see it in black and white.

I’ve seen God address many many things in the Bible. I’ve seen it written that clams, oysters, crabs, lobsters, and shrimp are ‘abominations‘ seen God discuss in explict detail the care and cleaning of cum-stains, and chuckled helplessly as God explained the reason why latrines are a good idea. (HINT: no one wants to step in it.) I have sat open mouthed at the explict sexual violence depicted in the allegory of Ezekiel 23 and grinned at the biblical account of God’s plan to ‘moon’ his chosen people in the ‘day of their calamity’ and stood there perplexed as I read how God commanded a man to knowingly marry a whore in complete violation of his own laws.


On the other hand, I’ve also read where Lot gets drunk, has incest with both of his daughters on alternate evenings and for this he is considered a ‘righeteous man‘? Moses in the book of Numbers declares genocide against captives of war and tells the army to kill all the men and women, excepting only the young virginal girls. Later in Deuteronomy more explicit instructions are given, where God makes it clear he sees nothing wrong with making whores out of the captives of war and discarding them when bored of them.

An interesting thing to note about these two instances of scripture is the words used in describing these virgins relates to their way of walking… the way they ‘toddle’ making a clear age distinction here. Look it up, don’t take my word for it (as if anyone would!) get out your Strongs and Naves and check the words used. This is what so many Muslims are referring to when they say Judiasm supports Paedophilia, as well as their pointing to various clarifications of these rules in the Talmud where the age is spelled out as three years old(!) Then there’s the erotic descriptions of the Song of Solomon, where a love affair begins between an older man and a younger girl, evidenced by the way the girl’s brothers comment: “We have a little sister, and she hath no breasts[…]” Should I also add that in the book of Judges Samson’s father-in-law gives away his first wife to a friend and offers him the younger daughter, because she’s nicer looking?

Those few bits aside there is no explict mention of Paedophilia in the Bible. At ALL. In fact you could even say the combination of the passage n Numbers and the passage in Deuteronomy work out towards an endorsement of Nepiophilia… But there is seemingly no mention of this modern scourage that is classified as the ‘worst possible sin’ in the Bible. This horrid evil thing that kills souls gets no mention, and yet God makes the time to talk about how much he hates shellfish and shrimp. God manages to find time to explain how to clean the cum-stains off your clothes in the event of a wet dream, manages to explain he doesn’t like stepping in feces, and tell dirty stories about whoring sisters and their hung like a horse johns, yet He somehow fails to take the time out to talk about Paedophilia???

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” —GandhiLike I said above, I’m not looking to bash God, Christ or the Bible; I’d just like some serious put up or shut up time on this issue. If there is a scripture that specifically addressed the question of paedophilia I have yet to find it and I’ve been searching for it for a long time. Fornication? Why should that even be an issue if I were allowed to marry the girl of my dreams? Considering the ages at which people were married during biblical times I’d think it obvious the reason why there is no mention of Paedophilia is due to it being just another man-made stumbling block. Like women having to wear their hair a certain length and never allowed to go dancing. Or smoking or drinking. Covers used by modern day pharisees who make heavy burdens for others to bear while never making an effort to lift the burdens themselves!

I’m teachable–reasonable answers that fit withing God’s word and are met with two witnesses–but as it stands I’ve begun to lose hope of ever discovering a legitimate reason for Christianity to despise paedophiles as they do. Show me honestly, without word games that God has said Paedophilia is a sin and I will do my best to purge myself of it; as it stands however God seems to have not considered Paedophilia something to get upset over. And given the latest evidence has indicated Mary, mother of Jesus was likely between the ages of 12-15 who are we to argue with what God has so clearly endorsed?

–I*Love*Green*Olives





Why the ‘Please Man’ is NOT Our Friend

24 04 2006

The conduct that landed DuBuc in an Illinois facility for juvenile sex offenders came to light in 1995, when a police officer visited her fourth-grade class in Howell to talk about child and substance abuse. DuBuc sought him out to complain about the way her stepmother was treating her and her natural sister. Police investigated and determined that some inappropriate sex play had taken place between DuBuc and her younger stepsiblings. —-BRIAN DICKERSON, FREE PRESS COLUMNIST, March 29, 2006

Article Here

In other words, a police officer came to her school as part of a campaign against child abuse. Leah reported her concerns (perhaps exaggerated – who knows?) about the real kind of child abuse–real abuse, not ‘Wah! Mummy makes me eat my beets!’ and what happens? The police investigated, ignored this, and proceeded to prosecute and persecute a ten year old girl on the flimsiest of pretexts: i.e., the “anti child abuse” campaign became a pretext for . . . child abuse.

Also isn’t it interesting the way ten year old Leah DuBuc gets thrown away when she tries to complain about her step-mother’s treatment by the word of her step-sisters? Hmmm…looks like Daddy and Mommy decided they didn’t need her anymore. Makes sense, let’s punish the little bitch for daring to complain about the way we treat her…the little puke gets it better than she deserves! So they toss her into some ‘residential rehabilitation school’ and after awhile it all goes away, right? Only it didn’t work as well as they must have hoped if some eleven years later she dares complain about it again!

Look, if Gonzales really thought that even 10 people in their city were going out on “a kidnapping a day” or whatever, wouldn’t they think they would’ve known something? Someone check the numbers! Ghu, this is so obvious, one would have thought this would be the FIRST thing people would do! Take the numbers they like to toss around–The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children likes to quote a 20 billion USD annually comes from the Child Porn industry, so let’s do some math:

Figure that there are about 1 billion people worldwide with both internet access and enough money to pay for these fictitious child porn web sites. I say fictitious because lets face it, any websites with the kinds of stuff Mr. Gonzales is talking about wouldn’t saty up for more than a few hours–if that! The Windows 2000 source code that was leaked a bit back would have lasted longer and we all know how quickly that went down!

Use the figure often provided, that pedophiles make up less than 1% of the population – call it 1% for simplicity.

Assume the extremely unlikely case that every single pedophile, worldwide, with internet access and some cash, is subscribing to these web sites.

Now, throw in the $20 billion figure.

1,000,000,000 divided by 100: 10,000,000 (10 million) peds.

20,000,000,000 divided by 10,000,000: $2,000 per ped, per year, for cp.

Does anybody really believe that the average ped could afford $2,000 per year for child pornography? Keep in mind that many of these would still be in middle income countries, and would drive the average down.

Orwell coined the phrase “doublethink,” and self-contradiction is a requisite of delusion, oftentimes.

So I have to wonder, what is it that we’re supposed to be distracted from this time by hunting down those nasty ‘pedofiles’ instead of addressing the real problems? I mean is it truly only a coincidence that everytime we get an bill up that would end the intrafamilial violence exemptions they trot out the 3\/1L Perverts in raincoats and while we’re all chasing after that sterotype the bill just goes away whilst protecting Daddy’s right to do whatever he wants…

…Congressman Ney suddenly had that revelation, that the majority of states happened to have incest exemption laws, which decriminalized raping a kid with police retrieval services. Oh. Yay. 😦 So, he introduced HR 2382 of 1999.

Only the Family Research Council and NARTH had a little problem with this “attack” on “family values” such as, apparently, rape, so they engineered a smokescreen, and censured the study by Rind, Bauserman, and Tromovitch for repeating what it found – that outcomes vary – rather than what they were “supposed” to find… Anyone remember that little controversy? Well, as you may have noticed, the bill which threatened incest exemptions “mysteriously dissapeared” in all the chaos. Damn. Funny how that happened! 😦

In 2004 There was another attempt toget a law passed to remove the incest exemptions…only suddenly we have the Summer of Missing Children which incidentially had the lowest numbers of children missing in years and the whole thing disappeared again.. Strange how this just keeps happening! I wonder why…. Not to mention good ‘ol Dave Albo sponsoring HB 1054, a bill that would have made Stealing CHICKENS a higher crime than raping one’s own kids. His bill would have made raping and sodomizing children in one’s own care punishable by a fine. Isn’t that special! But pay no attention to Daddy! We’re all here to get the nasty evil internet ‘pedofile’!

Which leads us up to today, when there is yet another campaign to end the incest examption laws. Incidently if you do a bit of research…why look! The highest percentage of children molested or abused have had it done to them by family members! Oh, but pay no attention to Daddy! We’re just about to apprehend some evil predators we found in the chat rooms, to one of our undercover officers–isn’t that more important than stopping the mere 70% of abusers that are immediate family members?

“What about Leah DuBuc?” You ask. “Wouldn’t the intrafamilial violence exemption apply to her too?”

No, they only apply to parents. Now THAT should make all of us take time out for a pause and ask ourselves, just how again all of this protects children?