NO TO PAEDOPHILE HUNTERS!

UPDATE  31/01/18

Older readers will remember that horrible time in the 1980's when the evil Sidney Cooke led a gang of paedophiles in the rape and murder of 7 year old Mark Tildesley, 14 year old Jason Swift and other boys who had disappeared.  The arrest of Cooke led to the uncovering the evil gang known as 'The Dirty Dozen', whose modus operandi was to lure rent boys and runaways back to their flat, where they would be drugged, raped and murdered. 

Most of their victims were missing teenagers, boys who had run away from home who were picked up at the London terminals with offers of friendship and a bed for the night.  It will probably never be known how many were killed by this gang.  I imagine this is an ongoing heart ache for families of missing loved ones.  

Their game was up when they snatched 7 year old Mark Tildesley at a funfair, his young age, setting off a massive police investigation that resulted in the trial and conviction of these evil men.  And of course, it highlighted the dangers faced by rent boys and runaways, not just in London, but worldwide.  I have no doubt those dangers still exist, and it is heart  breaking, but hopefully now there is much more awareness, and of course CCTV and phones in our pockets that can pinpoint exactly where we are. 

Cooke's gang were targeting 'lost' kids, that is kids who could disappear without trace, and without a public outcry.  They had a target demographic, and sadly, they were easy pickings.  Easily identifiable getting off the trains with their backpacks and luggage.  Today's equivalent I suppose would honing in on troubled kids via social media, a game of numbers, how many 'fuck off you perv's' do they get before  they find a victim?  I'm guessing a lot, which is probably why most paedophile hunters are trying to entrap each other. 

Cooke and his evil gang, showed us a dark murky side of life that was unknown to most of us.  We knew exactly who the evil ones were and sadly, we discovered how easy it was for this gang to prey on vulnerable teenagers.  Valuable lessons were learned and if they weren't, I advise every parent with a stroppy teenager to tell them the story of 'Hissing Sid' as the vile creature was known.  That scary time between little Mark's disappearance and the arrest of the evil gang will I am sure be ingrained in those of us who remember it, the whole of the UK knew a paedophile gang were snatching children. 

Apparently Jim Gamble, former head of CEOP has said there are 700,000 paedophiles operating in the UK.  I don't know what that means, but it sounds truly alarming.  Are they paedophiles in the Sidney Cooke mould? Does operating mean active?  As in trying to groom children online?  The figure is staggering, but more troubling in my opinion, is who are their victims?  The childrens homes and institutions no longer exist, and it is very hard now for anyone to go off radar.  As I don't know what this 700k demographic is made up of, I presume he means on social media, thus presenting the internet as the biggest danger to our kids and the need for a specially trained police force. 

An army of online paedophile hunters would effectively be a branch of law and order devoted to pre-crime activities.  A less sophisticated Minority Report system that arrests people before they go on to commit a crime.  The majority of that 750,000, actually, scrap that, 749,999 will probably Not molest a child.  Viewing even the vilest of pornography does not lead to violent crime, anymore than a video nasty or a song by Marilyn Manson sends millions of teens on a killing spree.  It just doesn't happen.  Evil isn't triggered by movies, books, music, the arts or even pornography.  It was there before the internet, see Sidney Cooke.

Just to be absolutely clear, I do not condone child pornography in any way but I do not accept that looking at images makes these 750k men dangerous criminals.  I have never seen the kind of 'sickening stuff' that is said to be available on the net, nor do I want to.  But if this kind of thing is happening, why aren't the makers and distributors of these images being rounded up?  I don't buy the argument that the audience are responsible, it's like trying to stop the drug trade by targeting the users. I would much rather hear that the children who are the subjects of these vile images are being rescued and that the bastards assaulting them are being locked up.  If the police in the 1980's were able to swoop in on Sidney Cooke and his gang, there should be no excuse now.  We live in an age of constant communication and constant surveillance, how are these 750,000 paedophiles able to operate? 

Ps.  I have just read the Times Article on Jim Gamble.  The predators apparently can be teachers, police officers....... from all parts of society etc....'.  Wow pretty much anyone can be arrested and charged for a pre-crime.   

Unfortunately, I do not have a Times subscription so cannot reply, so, Dear Bishop Blake, I am a careleaver and survivor of a Catholic childrens home and I'm happy to assure you, paedophilia is not rife.  In my 60 years on this earth, the only place I encountered it was in the Convent.  I also encountered sadism and brutality, sexual abuses's less salacious sidekicks .

I don't know what kind of crazy world you live in Bishop, but with my opposite of a sheltered life, I suspect I'm a lot closer to reality than you are, and I have never met anyone the slightest bit interested in having sex with kids.  And it's the kind of thing you would remember.  Young adults and thirtysomethings are much more interested in each other, than they are in kids.  Heck, chuck in the 50s and 60s too and few sprightly 70 year olds too. 

I sometimes wonder if these paedophile hunters have ever spent any time with actual children?  Because 99% of the time, they are a gigantic pain in the arse. The one who stays in with the kids has drawn the short straw.  They talk incessantly, and when not talking they are singing or doing somersaults on your white sofa with sticky mitts and chocolate goo coming out of their mouths.  Then there are the demands.  Every time you sit down, they think up a new one.  Your only hope of survival is to play something repetitive until one or both of you falls asleep. 

As nobody wants to go below the surface of the 'P' word, the logistics and the reality are completely overlooked.  Saying there are 750,000 paedophiles in the UK disguised as teachers, police officers, etc, (not doctors?) is truly bizarre.  How are they able to operate?  Are they taking advantage of their professions?  Are kids being molested at school and by the police?  The key word, as used by the Bishop is 'potential', 750k potential paedophiles.  That is anyone who has looked at something they shouldn't could potentially have their lives and careers destroyed because it is assumed they will abduct and kill a child.  That is an almighty leap, but it bumps up the fear factor. 

I tend not to think there are paedophile gangs in the suburbs made up of teachers, police officers etc.  Not just because the idea is disgusting, but because it is completely unheard of.  People tend not to sexually abuse their children and pass them around to the neighbours, the idea is so sick, it wouldn't even make the plot of a seriously disturbed 'B' movie.  I fear the Bishop has very little faith in human nature if he thinks it does.  Yet we must accept it as true because it comes from an online child abuse expert and a Bishop.   



_____________________________________

I rarely visit the cesspit (CMoMM), because I simply don’t have their stomach for their deplorable fascist views.  They quite literally leave me feeling nauseous.  Today especially as they have an entire thread devoted to paedophiles and what they would like to do with them.  

 

I’m not quite sure what the consensus is, as they are both berating Jim Gamble, who’s name heads the title of the thread, whilst at the same time supporting his idea of an army of vigilantes trained to track down paedophiles online.  The idea of a specialist police force to track down paedophiles online is horrendous, I’m not sure it would even stand up in a communist or fascist state?  What powers would these non police be given?  The power to access the online activity of anyone they choose? The power to kick in doors at the crack of dawn and the power to seize children and computers as Operation Ore did in 2002?  Happily, I’ve never seen anyone, other than Jim Gamble promoting the idea.

 

The subject of paedophilia however is so emotive and yucky, that most people act with their primal instincts. Quite rightly, we are genetically programmed to protect our young. I’m not a violent person in any way, but when I see the evil faces of convicted child murderers I want to batter them to a pulp. I get the anger and the rage.  Unfortunately, rage blinds us to logic and reason, that's why discussion of this subject is almost impossible. 

So let's start with the basics.  The generic image of a paedophile is a dirty old man alone in his bedroom trying to groom young girls and boys online. Someone socially inept, isolated but somehow also hooked up to others just like him, extremely unlikely btw, because paedophiles have difficulty relating to their peers, on any level.  This group, happily is minute, and the perpetrators more likely to be sad, than bad, they are afraid to go out. 

The next group are the opportunists, the psychopaths like Ian Huntley and Mark Bridger.  These are almost impossible to legislate against, they are a freak of nature and every society has them.  Their crimes don't stem from the internet, the evil was always within them.  On the plus side, they are very, very rare.

The largest group by far, are those active paedophiles who ingratiate themselves into vulnerable families by grooming the Mother.  Or they are friends, relatives or even professionals.  Almost every abused child, was abused by someone who knew them.  And it is not just sexual abuse, it is physical and psychological cruelty.  Physical abuse, which is far more prevalent and can be fatal, rarely if ever gets a mention.  The best protection is education, so much is spent on educating children on internet safety, how about educating them on safety in their immediate world.  Especially those young naïve mothers who go from abusive relationship to abusive relationship.  We should be empowering children and young parents, not taking over their personal responsibility. 

We are all being taught to fear the internet in the same way our predecessors were taught to fear books.  And those planting the seeds and spreading the terror are not doing it for philanthropic reasons.  They have blown the problem of internet trolls,  completely out of proportion, most are halfwits posting infantile threats, who are, in reality, afraid of their own shadows.  I don't know how anyone takes them seriously.  As for paedophiles online, the danger does not outweigh the benefits.  That some bad people use the internet, should not be an excuse to police it for everyone.  .
 

But let's get back to the central theme.  The policing of the internet by untrained police who are not bound to the same high standards as the professionals is abhorrent.  It reminds me of that moment when Napoleon introduces his attack dogs to Animal Farm,  I can't think of anything scarier, than if King Jong Ung were to take the helm. 

 

Where does it end? Their agenda may be to track down paedophiles, but what if they stumble on other crimes along the way?  The keeping of a database of an internet's user's activity online is wide open to abuse, including corruption and blackmail.  If it is one of their own, a paedophile hunter, do they keep it quiet?  How do they select their victims, targets? Isn't a bit weird for grown men to pretend to be scantily clad teenage girls? Just curious.  Effectively, we have a situation where paedophile hunters are talking to each other while pretending to be nubile teens.

 

I have seen Jim Gamble pitch his 'people's army' or whatever it is he wants to call his specialist vigilantes, but I've never seen anyone take up the cause.  It is not in step with the spirit of times.  The real Masters of the Universe reside in Silicone Valley, and their aim is to get information to everyone on the planet, they are genetically opposed to the kind of restrictions Jim Gamble wants to  put in place.  JG now finds himself out of step in the real world having to compete on a level playing field, he doesn't have the police advantages he once had.  And he is competing with young internet geniuses who had laptops when he had a teddy bear.  He is a duck out of water where new apps are concerned, it's a young person's industry.  Though I fear had he put his ideas forward in the Blair era he would have got what he wanted and that's where the  Animal Farm reference came in, in case anyone is wondering :)

 

The whole idea of vigilantes and paedophile hunters has less to do with protecting children, than it does with wanting to be part of an angry mob taking out their rage on a deserving victim.  It's ugly.  It's uncivilised.  There is something savage and Lord of the Flies about it.   A couple of years ago, I read with horror, how a drunken British mob chased a Spanish waiter who had the audacity to chat to British kids in the swimming pool.  You small, small people, your fear is not only deranged and illogical, it could have resulted in a tragedy.  And let me take this opportunity to thank every foreign waiter I have ever met, who has kindly taken the time to chat to and amuse my kids  holiday.  They are among the happy memories we always came away with. 

Since when did kids become sexualised?  Answer: Never, because 99.9% of us don't see kids that way and never will.  It would never have entered our minds that our kids were sex symbols lusted after by at least three quarters of the adult population.  Maybe someone should come up with a new line in baby hijabs.  Cover the little blighters from head to toe! 

Yes, we have now reached the ridiculous stage.  Ancient lost tribes are laughing at us, they know the photographer isn't actually stealing their souls.  Let's look at worse case scenario.  Imagine a pervert does get hold of your child's picture.  What is he going to do with it?  Ok, apart from the yucky obvious, but so what?  There are billions of pictures of children on the internet, including children of the royal, the rich and famous.  Unless you and family go around with bags over your heads, your image can be captured by anyone, anywhere. 

But I have entwined two topics, which I am afraid was beyond my control.  I should explain.  As the subject of paedophilia is yucky and most of us know little about it, this army of paedophile hunters could accuse anyone of anything.  The key to their success is entrapment.  Something frowned upon in the official police, and open to all sorts of abuse, particularly if the target is anyone they choose.

In theory an internet army of paedophile hunters doesn't sound such a bad idea, if they are guilty they deserve to be caught and they deserve to face an angry mob in a car park.  No-one will speak for them, and no-one can speak for them, without being accused of being a paedophile, or a paedophile supporter.  Ergo, this mob justice is allowed to flourish unchallenged and if Jim Gamble has his way, it will have a government stamp of approval.

But the reality is, real lives are being affected, some destroyed, I understand there have been suicides.  They may 'catch' some guilty men, but what of the effect on the wives, children and families of these men? The deceptive nature of the job makes me question the morality of those who would apply, it is a job for professional liars and those who get a kick out of leading angry mobs.  It isn't a fight back against paedophiles - real child abuse in real time is flourishing in these hard times.  It is the targeting of a tiny pathetic minority, while ignoring ALL of the bigger issues.  If these people care so much about children, why don't they get together a lorry load of provisions for the kids in the refugee camps?  Or better still, start up an after school dinner club for all those kids who are going hungry?