-Caveat Lector-
from:
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/pedo2.html
Click Here: <A HREF="http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/pedo2.html";>pedo2</A>
-----
The Pedophocracy, Part II:
... to Washington
By David McGowan
July 2001
"Paul and Shirley Eberle wrote The Politics of Child Abuse, a book that
accuses mothers, mental health professionals, and prosecutors of feeding
children stories about sexual abuse. Since the book was published by Lyle
Stuart in l986, the Eberles have been cited as experts in sexual abuse trials
… What is startling about the Eberles' reputation as ground-breaking experts
in the field is that their dubious credentials have not been widely
challenged … Their publication, Finger, depicted scenes of bondage, S & M,
and sexual activities involving urination and defecation. A young girl
portrayed with a wide smile on her face sits on top of a man whose penis is
inside of her; a woman has oral sex with a young boy in a drawing entitled
‘Memories of My Boyhood.'"
Ms. Magazine, December 1988
While the size and scope of these operations have grown rapidly in recent
years, America has - as it turns out - always been a nation whose laws were
friendly to purveyors of child pornography. It was just over twenty years ago
- in 1978 - that the very first federal statute on child pornography was
passed into law. While forbidding production and sale, the statute placed no
restrictions at all on the possession or trade of such materials.
New laws enacted in 1984 forbid the trade of child pornography
regardless of whether any money changed hands, though possession still
remained legal. In fact, as recently as 1990, private possession of child
pornography was legal in 44 of the 50 states, despite the inescapable fact
that all such materials were, by necessity, illegally produced and/or
illegally acquired.
Technology has for some time now played a key role in greatly
expanding the availability of child pornography. The Polaroid camera, for
example, eliminated the need for child pornographers to have access to comp
licit photo labs. Home video cameras did likewise for moving images. Personal
computers, digital cameras, web cams, scanners, and - especially - the
Internet, have vastly expanded the reach of child pornography networks.
In the age of the Internet, child pornography is a booming business.
The Los Angeles Times noted in December of 1999 that: “the number of
investigations for Internet-related child pornography is soaring. The FBI
launched 1,125 such inquiries this year, more than twice as many as last
year.” In the wake of this rising tide, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
issued a ruling on December 17, 1999 which struck a serious blow to the
prosecution of child pornography cases.
As the Times reported, the decision stipulated that “the government
cannot prohibit computer-generated sexual images that only appear to be
pictures of children.” A later report noted that appeals court judge Donald
Molloy stated that the First Amendment bars the government from criminalizing
the generation of “images of fictitious children engaged in imaginary but
explicit sexual conduct.”
On January 22, 2001, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear
an appeal of the case. Should the presidential appointers on the high court
choose to affirm the decision of the lower court, prosecution of child
pornography cases will become all but impossible in all fifty states. Until
that time, prosecutors are “barred from bringing virtual-child pornography
cases in California and the eight other Western states within the
jurisdiction of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.”
As critics have noted, graphics technology now available to the
general public is so sophisticated that it is virtually impossible to
determine if an image has been digitally altered, and if therefore any actual
children were involved in the generation of the image. Justice Department
lawyers argued that very point, noting that the “government may find it
impossible in many cases to prove that a pornographic image is of a real
child.”
Any good defense attorney could, in other words, raise reasonable
doubt as to the authenticity of an image. It could in fact be argued that all
such computer images “only appear to be pictures of children.” Computer
images are not in fact photos, but are digital computer files that display as
a facsimile of the original photo. A sound legal argument could be made that
all digitally transferred and displayed child pornography is therefore legal,
as it doesn't represent 'real children.'
That should come as great news to the international child pornography
networks, given that the United States is their number-one market. According
to investigative author Gordon Thomas, the majority of child pornography
produced worldwide is targeted at the U.S., where by the early 1990s it was
already a $3 billion a year business, and growing.
Thomas claims that - according to law enforcement figures - over 22
million copies of child pornography videos were sold or rented in the U.S. in
1991. He also writes that much of that pornographic material is produced
here, where it is “part of the largest segment of movie making in the United
States.” Jan Hollingsworth concurs with that figure, describing child
pornography as: “A three-billion-dollar - per year - U.S. industry that
grossed twice that worldwide. It [is] bigger than Disney. Much bigger.”
Speaking of Disney, Thomas notes that child porn videos are
frequently trafficked internationally by deceptively packaging them as Disney
videos. Strangely enough, the first man to benefit from the circuit court
decision was Patrick J. Naughton. You may remember him as the executive with
the Walt Disney Co. who ran one of the company's kid-friendly web sites.
Naughton was arrested and later tried on child pornography charges.
He was convicted on December 16, just one day before the decision was
handed down in the case before the circuit court. Within hours of the appeals
court ruling, Naughton was released by federal prosecutors on $100,000 bail.
Despite the fact that he was, as the Times acknowledged, convicted of
“possessing pictures of actual children,” the decision was made to release
him “until the impact of the court's ruling can be sorted out,” illustrating
the significant undermining of existing law that the court ruling portends.
Closely associated with child pornography is, of course, child abuse.
It should go without saying that all kids used in child pornography are
abused children, their abuse recorded on film and tape for the depraved
enjoyment of other child abusers. Also closely associated with child
pornography is the always controversial issue of 'missing children.'
There is considerable debate as to whether there is a problem in this
country with missing children. Some claim that 200,000 or more children
disappear without a trace every year. Others steadfastly maintain that
numbers such as those are grossly inflated, and that abduction of children by
strangers with bad intent is actually quite rare.
The problem is that nobody really knows for sure, since the FBI -
America's compiler of crime statistics - doesn't bother to keep track. As Ted
Gunderson, former FBI station chief for Los Angeles, has stated: “The FBI has
an accurate count on the number of automobiles stolen every year. It knows
the number of homicides, rapes and robberies, but the FBI has no idea of the
number of children that disappear every year. They simply do not ask for the
statistics.”
Many believe that the numbers aren't compiled because the FBI doesn't
want to know – or more accurately, the FBI doesn't want the American people
to know. What is known though is that reports of child abuse have
skyrocketed. Between 1963 and 1988, reported cases of child abuse rose from
150,000 to 2,000,000 per year, a 1300% increase in just a quarter-century.
Child abuse may in fact be the most prevalent - and possibly the most
significant - crime in American society, given that it provides the breeding
ground for so much of the more visible crime plaguing Western culture. As
Thomas reports: “over 90 percent of the teenage prison population are now
victims of child abuse,” and that population is growing rapidly.
In the wake of this rising tide, the Los Angeles Times reported in
March 2001 that: “President [a clearly inappropriate use of the word] Bush's
budget will trim a program aimed at preventing child abuse and cut some child
care spending … A child abuse prevention program will see an 18% cut.” That
money will apparently be much better spent on handing out tax breaks for the
wealthy and building missile defense shields … but here I digress.
Author and e-zine editor Robert Sterling has written of what he
refers to as “a pattern of trivialization of child molestation evidence” that
seems to characterize high-profile media stories. He points out, for
instance, that in the highly publicized Woody Allen and Mia Farrow divorce
case, all the attention was focused on Allen’s illicit romance with Soon-yi
Previn.
Almost entirely ignored in the media coverage was the fact that Allen
was also charged with molesting his own seven-year-old adopted daughter,
Dylan. While the press dismissed those allegations as unfounded and unworthy
of reporting, Sterling notes that “Connecticut state authorities, based on
the testimony of Dylan and others, have stated that they do believe Woody did
molest her, but decided not to prosecute anyway,” allegedly to spare the
child any further trauma.
Sterling also takes note of the “case of the Menendez brothers, who,
after admitting to murdering their parents, painfully revealed that they were
ruthlessly abused and molested by them over the years.” Their claims were
never investigated and the boys were “viciously demonized for trying to
escape the murder charges and accused of making up their abuse,” though there
was in fact clear evidence of that abuse, according to a private investigator
who worked on the case.
Also noted is the kid-gloves treatment afforded Michael Jackson when
he was charged with molestation: “even though the accusations against him are
widely believed to be true, [they] are merely passed off with a laugh among
other smirking monologue jokes on Jay Leno.” And of course, though
unmentioned by Sterling, sister LaToya was ridiculed by the media when she
came forward with stories about the sexual abuse suffered by the Jackson kids
at the hands of their father.
Sterling references other cases as well, including the over-hyped
au-pair trial in which evidence of prior abuse of the child by his parents
was consistently ignored, and the Susan Smith case, in which the media
refused to consider whether her own severe childhood abuse could have been a
factor in the murder of her children, despite the fact that her father
admitted to the chronic abuse.
Coupled with the fact that the press have consistently downplayed the
occurrence of child molestation is the equally disturbing fact that that very
same media have actively promoted the sexualization of children – a trend
that has been greatly accelerated in recent years, and which serves to
legitimize pedophilia.
Taking note of the proliferation of young teen - and even pre-teen -
sex symbols, Tom Junod wrote in Esquire that: “the entire culture is besotted
with the erotic promise of teenage girls … The lure of jailbait now supplies
the erotic energy to a popular culture desperate for what’s new, what’s
young, what’s alive.”
The Junod article is, by the way, a profile of Greg Dark, one half of
the former ‘Dark Brothers’ – notorious purveyors of dark-themed,
occult-tinged porno films. Dark is rather noteworthy for openly peddling
child pornography, in that many of his films featured a very young Traci
Lords, who began working with the Dark Brothers at the age of thirteen.
But Dark has put those days long behind him. He is now working
comfortably in the mainstream. And he is no longer marketing teen sexuality.
No, now he is creating music videos … for Britney Spears, Mandy Moore and the
pre-pubescent Leslie Carter (sister of Aaron Carter and Back Street Boy Nick
Carter). That is, according to Dark, a completely different line of work.
Some interesting facts about Dark emerge in the Esquire profile. It
is revealed, for instance, that he was raised by a satanist father. Dark’s
father “used to read to Gregory from the works of Aleister Crowley, the noted
satanist, when Gregory was very young.” His father’s collection of ‘black
magick’ books is one of Dark’s most cherished possessions.
Also revealed is that Dark is a master manipulator, as he candidly
admits to his interviewer: “And the thing is, I like manipulating people. I’m
comfortable manipulating people. I’m good at it.” Junod adds that, during
Dark’s porno days, he “asked people to do things … curious things … and they
did them.” Such is the nature of the man crafting the images of America’s
teen sex symbols and marketing them to millions of pre-teen fans ... but here
again I digress.
Also closely associated with child pornography is the issue of child
prostitution, which - make no mistake about it - is a booming business. A&E’s
“Investigative Reports” has noted that law enforcement figures indicate that
there are currently some 600,000 child prostitutes working in the United
States and Canada and that $5 billion a year is generated worldwide by pimp
organizations specializing in the exploitation of children.
A&E also reported that, throughout North America, there is a “growing
use of children in the sex trade,” and that young boys make up 51% of that
trade. The FBI has, of course, turned a blind eye; for the last
quarter-century, “federal prosecutions of major pimp operations have been
virtually nonexistent.” As Dr. Lois Lee has noted: “It’s not a high priority
with the FBI to go after kids that are being transported across state lines.
It’s really a disgrace.”
Dr. Lee is the founder of “Children of the Night,” an organization
devoted to helping repair the shattered lives of child sex trade victims. Her
facility, said to be the only one of its kind in the world, has seen 10,000
kids pass through its doors. Fully ninety percent of them have suffered a
lifetime of abuse – first at home, and later on the streets and alleys of
America’s big cities. Most of them suffered their first abuse before the age
of three.
Many of these victims are runaways recruited from small towns across
the country, then brought to prime child prostitution markets such as Los
Angeles and Las Vegas. Once there, they have an average life span of just
seven years; many of them never reach adulthood. For as long as they survive
though, they reap enormous financial rewards for their pimps. The younger the
child, the more popular they are with the ‘Johns,’ and therefore the more
profitable for their exploiters.
All of this would tend to indicate that America is in something of a
state of denial about the proliferation of child molestation, child
prostitution, and child pornography rings, which constitute a vast
underground in this country. But does this pedophilic underground extend into
the halls of power? Is America's political, corporate and military elite
hiding a particularly dirty little secret from the American people? A secret
that, if exposed, could shatter America's cherished political and economic
institutions and bring the house of cards crashing down?
Consider the case of Craig Spence, a behind-the-scenes Republican
powerbroker in Washington. In June of 1989, the Washington Times published a
story that sent shock waves across Capitol Hill. It seems that Spence had
been operating a call-boy ring that supplied young boys, some of them very
young boys, to the Washington elite of both political parties.
It was rumored that a list of influential clients ran to some 200
names, and some of them were publicly identified. It was also alleged that
the ring was part of a CIA sexual blackmail operation, gathering compromising
evidence on Washington politicos and foreign dignitaries. Also connected to
the case were prominent figures in the media; on the guest lists for Spence's
‘parties’ were names such as Ted Koppel and Eric Severeid.
Spence's mansion was found to be overflowing with surveillance
equipment, including hidden cameras and microphones and an abundance of
two-way mirrors. Spence was also known to take his show on the road, giving
some of his boys late-night tours of the White House, according to the Times.
These tours were reportedly arranged by Donald Gregg, the national security
adviser to then-Vice President George Bush.
Though Gregg adamantly denied the accusation, there were undeniable
connections between the two men, including the fact that Spence had once
sponsored a dinner for Gregg. The story quickly dropped off the media radar
screen, and Washington and the press proceeded to pretend as though it had
never been aired at all. By the time Spence turned up dead in a Boston hotel
room just five months later, the story was all but forgotten.
Elsewhere in the country, a Republican operative named Larry King was
embroiled in another high-level pedophile ring. King, whose operation was
based in Omaha, Nebraska, had connections to Craig Spence as well as to
Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Oliver North, and various other major players in
Washington.
The story first began to emerge with the collapse of the Franklin
Community Credit Union run by King, one of many such entities that went
belly-up in the 1980s Savings and Loan scandals. A special senate 'Franklin
Committee' was formed to look into allegations of financial improprieties,
but soon found itself instead investigating claims of child prostitution,
child pornography and ritual homicide.
The investigation soon led to some of the most powerful men in the
state of Nebraska, including newspaper publisher Harold Andersen (a lunch
partner of George Bush), a judge, the mayor of Omaha, the city's Games and
Parks Commissioner, a prominent attorney, the former police chief of Omaha,
and multi-billionaire Warren Buffet (for whose son King sponsored a political
fund-raiser).
Also identified as a patron of the child prostitution ring was George
Bush himself. Though ignored by the U.S. media, the case attracted some
attention from the European press. Pronto, the largest circulation weekly in
Spain, reported that the scandal “appears to directly implicate politicos of
the state of Nebraska and Washington, D.C. who are very close to the White
House and George Bush.”
The report also noted that “there is reason to believe that the CIA
is directly implicated,” and that the “FBI refuses to help in the
investigation and has sabotaged any efforts” by others to do so. The
operation appears to have been in business for several years, with the
knowledge of, and for the perverse pleasure of, a variety of city, state and
federal authorities.
Jerry Lowe, the first investigator assigned to the case by the
Franklin Committee, reported back that: “The allegations regarding the
exploitation of children are indeed disturbing. What appears to be documented
cases of child abuse and sexual abuse dating back several years with no
enforcement action being taken by the appropriate agencies is on its face,
mind-boggling.”
Republican State Senator John DeCamp, in his book The Franklin
Cover-Up, presents a compelling body of evidence to document the charges made
by the child victims and various others associated with the operation.
Equally disturbing is the evidence of the massive cover-up that was
perpetrated by the FBI, local police, the grand jury assigned to the case,
and of course the ever-compliant media. (One report almost made it through
the media blackout. A documentary on the case entitled “Conspiracy of
Silence” was scheduled to air on the Discovery Channel on May 3, 1994. Shortly
before airtime, it was pulled without explanation and has been shelved ever
since. The conspiracy of silence continues.)
The cover-up involved, according to DeCamp, the untimely deaths of at
least fifteen key players in the scandal, including Franklin Committee
investigator Gary Caradori, whose private plane was blown out of the sky on
July 11, 1990 with Caradori and his eight-year-old son on board. Equally
appalling is the fact that the child victims, rather than the perpetrators,
were thrown in prison.
One of them, a young female victim, achieved the rather dubious honor
of spending more time in solitary confinement than any woman in the history
of the Nebraska penal system. It would be a full decade before any of the
victims received even a semblance of justice, and that would ultimately come
not from a criminal court, but from a civil court.
In February of 1998, a judgment was entered against defendant Larry
King in favor of plaintiff Paul Bonacci, one of the most seriously abused of
the child victims, whose abuse at the hands of King began when he was just
six years old – and which included his forced collaboration in the production
of child snuff films. The memorandum of the district court's decision, issued
on February 22, 1999, reads as follows:
“Between December 1980 and 1988, the complaint alleges, the defendant
King continually subjected the plaintiff to repeated sexual assaults, false
imprisonments, infliction of extreme emotional distress, organized and
directed satanic rituals, forced the plaintiff to 'scavenge' for children to
be a part of the defendant King's sexual abuse and pornography ring, forced
the plaintiff to engage in numerous sexual contacts with the defendant King
and others and participate in deviate sexual games and masochistic orgies
with other minor children. The defendant King's default has made those
allegations true as to him ...
“The now uncontradicted evidence is that the plaintiff has suffered
much. He has suffered burns, broken fingers, beatings of the head and face
and other indignities by the wrongful actions of the defendant King. In
addition to the misery of going through the experiences just related over a
period of eight years, the plaintiff has suffered the lingering results to
the present time. He is a victim of multiple personality disorder, involving
as many as fourteen distinct personalities aside from his primary
personality. He has given up a desired military career and received threats
on his life. He suffers from sleeplessness, has bad dreams, has difficulty in
holding a job, is fearful that others are following him, fears getting
killed, has depressing flashbacks, and is verbally violent on occasion, all
in connection with the multiple personality disorder and caused by the
wrongful activities of the defendant King.”
For his years of unspeakable abuse, physical and emotional suffering,
and the complete shattering of his life, Bonacci was awarded one million
dollars. While a bittersweet victory at best, it was considerably more than
most other victims of such abuse have gotten. The trial was significant for
another reason as well; it revealed a glimpse of the connections between the
King case and various other multi-victim abuse cases around the country.
REFERENCES:
1. Asseo, Laurie “Justices Will Review Ban on Virtual Kiddie Porn,”
Associated Press, January 22, 2001
2. DeCamp, John W. The Franklin Cover-Up, AWT, Inc., 1992
3. Hollingsworth, Jan Unspeakable Acts, Congdon & Weed, 1986
4. Junod, Tom “The Devil in Greg Dark,” Esquire, February 2001
5. Laurina, Maria “Paul and Shirley Eberle: A Strange Pair of Experts,” Ms.
Magazine, December 1988
6. Li, David K. “Naughton Free in Time for Christmas,” New York Post,
December 23, 1999
7. Li, David K. “Turn Him Loose! Judge Voids Naughton’s Porno Conviction,”
New York Post, January 22, 2000
8. Savage, David “Justices to Tackle ‘Virtual’ Child Porn,” Los Angeles
Times, January 23, 2001
9. Sterling, Robert “Daddy’s Little Princess,” The Konformist, www.konf
ormist.com
10. Tarpley, Webster G. and Anton Chaitkin George Bush: The Unauthorized
Biography, www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm
11. Thomas, Gordon Enslaved, Pharos Books, 1991
12. Weinstein, Henry and Greg Miller “'Virtual' Child Porn Is Legal, Court
Says,” Los Angeles Times, December 18, 1999
13. “Bush Budget Seeks Child Program Cuts,” Los Angeles Times, March 24, 2001
14. Paul A. Bonacci v. Lawrence E. King (4:CV91-3037), United States District
Court for the District of Nebraska, Memorandum of Decision, February 22, 1999
15. “The Child Sex Trade,” A&E Investigative Reports
PART III
HOME
Click Here: <A HREF="http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/pedo2.html";>pedo2</A>
-----
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
