From: Tony Hollick (anduril@cix.compulink.co.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 03 1998 - 04:01:00 MST
>> Hoover was soon 'hooked' on hard-core political pornography (including
>> 'kiddie-porn' -- 90% of U.S. 'kiddie-porn' is under FBI or State
>> control).
> Really? Does that still apply?
As far as I know, yes. It's a 'guesstimate', inevitably. Here's
Rudolp Chelminski and Olivia Moussouris, writing in the June [1997]
issue of the Reader's Digest:
"American authorities ... now work with an effective weapon: the
Child Protection Act of 1984. This legislation authorized
aggressive police work and initiated a national programme of
identifying paedophiles in their communities. Ray Smith of the US
Postal Inspection Service, which finds itself on the front line of
intercepting both domestic and imported child pornography, explains
how it works.
"When we find out about child porn for sale, we go and buy some.
Then we arrest the dealer and sieze his records. After that we go
proactive: we take over his business and his contacts. "Sorry we've
been away" we say. "Now here's what we've got for you." If a
customer takes the bait, we grab him"
These and other aggressive methods work. "Paedophiles have told me
they would never touch a kid in the States" says Patrick Yvars, a
Paris police commissioner..."
[60 Minutes documented a horrifying case of such 'proactive'
witch-hunting, where the US Postal Inspection Service produced
tempting porno catalogues, and bought up mailing lists up to twenty
years old. They mailed the damn things out. One who responded was
a former Korean War Air Force pilot. When his order was delivered,
it was accompanied by police officers with warrants for his arrest.
He refused to 'plea-bargain' and instead fought the prosecution. He
was acquitted. When he obtained discovery of case documents, he
found that over a hundred people had been similarly entrapped. Five
had committed suicide. Many had lost marriages, families, jobs and
homes. Lives had been ruined.
>> If you read Hoover's -- aptly-named -- book 'the
>> Masters of Deceit', it's clear that he hates communism for all its
>> democratic and libertarian bits, ....>
> What bits are those?
There's no substitute for reading Hoover's book to understand this.
Except for reading Thomas Sowell's brilliant text on Marxism. The
communist dream (as distinct from the State socialist dream) was of
a stateless society, where (within reason) people can do whatever
they like and have whatever they want. Sond familiar? It should do
-- it's what all of us want, isn't it? >:-}
Part of the brief for PsyWarriors and 'Wars of Ideas' participants
is to understand the enemy's cause better than he or she does. The
main difference between libertarians and communists is over the
'private property in the means of production' issue; and the
boundary demarcations between the individual and society.
Why do you think so many brilliant people fought so bravely and so
well to realize the communist dream? If we had a few thousand
Extropians with that degree of determination and ability, we could
change the world. Maybe we do. Maybe we will. Maybe we're better
off with a 'molecular' system of organization, independent and
autonomous 'cells' which keep separate for security reasons. Like
our friends in NTS, in Russia.
>> The extended authoritarian extreme-Right subculture of social control
>> freaks that Hoover spawned and bred _still_ plagues America (and
>> American 'law-enforcement'; and American politics -- especially Republican
>> politics; and the media).>>
> The "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?
As an 18-year-old college student, Hillary was a Goldwater Girl in
'64, working hard for a Goldwater victory. Barry Goldwater kept telling
the authoritarian Extreme Right (the 'Coercive Authoritarians') to
get off her case. Now perhaps they'll believe him. >:-}
Hillary and I are Goldwater Liberals, you see. And in our hearts,
the dream is still the same... >:-}
"Freedom means doing whatever you damn well please" -- Barry M. Goldwater
Check all the 'names' and their contexts and connections via:
http://www.pir.org '90 000 Spooks and Far Rightists.'
Fully searchable, with _wonderful_ retrieval facilities. All
citations drawn from 250 000 fully-referenced books and press
articles etc. Lots of my friends are in there! >:-}
[ FX: "Watch it, Hollick, or you'll be in there too." ] >:-}
> ....er...Right Wing Media???????
The American Spectator? The Washington Times? For starters...
Tony (listening to Beth Nielson Chapman singing 'Sand and and Water')
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:33 MST