Pirate Bay founders defend hosting pedophilia discussion site. Seems like an interesting case to say the least. Personally I agree that Freedom of Speech is most important when the subject matter is distasteful and/or unpopular. I think as long as the site in question - displays no child porn and has no links to places where child porn could be procured whatsoever - then I think Pirate Bay is right to host it - for the sake of Freedom of Speech.
None-the-less, this is a pretty controversial and touchy subject - and I'll admit that this is certainly walking the boundarys a little.
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
TPB isn't one to shy away from stirring the pot.
Pedophilia related material (like videos) aren't the kind of thing that you'll see on open trackers (mainly due to port-bombing, or worse physical attacks, pedophiles have had to become VERY tech savvy) but, I do respect the TPB lads for encouraging discussion and sticking to their rhetoric. 50 years ago, homosexuals were disgusting and vile, but through serious and frank discussion and realizing they're not all that different from straights, they're now at least tolerated. If there's no discussion about the material it becomes the big bad wolf, very little concrete facts, but a lot of innuendo none the less... without discussion, you'll never know if it was just hype or worse than reported.
BTW: BK3K, The link text might be better worded, it sounds like TPB has a pedophilia discussion site when they don't. Perhaps:
Pirate Bay founders defend hosting pedophilia: ZeroPaid discussion page.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Friday, June 08, 2007 5:25 AM
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
One of the biggest problems with censorship is that it doesn't cause anyone to stop speaking, it just limits those opinions and facts to private discussion.
I'm personally very interested to know the what/why/hows of pedophiles. How do they justify their actions? Why don't they just like other adults? What do their victims say?
I'd love for them to voice their opinion to me so I can explain their idiocy to them... and the violence that would ensue if any of them touched one of my kids.
---
I'm of the old school rationale that says that there has to be a victim (or an intended victim) in order to be a crime. When a serial killer goes on 20/20 and says it's fun to rape and kill women and describes his previous acts, it's vile, but not criminal because he's not actually DOING it nor is he talking about a crime he's about to commit. It's the same thing with cartoons or stories about kids being molested. There's no crime there, no matter how disgusting the subject matter is. Talking about something isn't a crime, writing/drawing fiction about something isn't a crime. If it was, Francis Ford Coppolla would be in jail for crimes against humanity because he made Apocalypse Now.
As for arresting people before a crime, I'm all for it, if the crime is seriously intended to be carried out. We've all fantasized about robbing a bank in our darkest moments when we're crushed with debts, but it's just in our heads. Not a crime. Now if we'd scoped out the bank, bought guns and a getaway car and had blueprints and an escape route mapped out... that's a tad different.
Still, it's a hot potato subject and it's hard to be impartial when it comes to little kids being ogled by old perverts.
the problem with this is that in todays soceity the prudes get everything they want. it seems that whenever a subject like this comes up and there are two sides the "good side", but rather the prude side, wins the battle. Just cuz one person, or even thousands, doesnt like a particular subject does not mean that others cant freely speak of it. Yes, its callede freedom of speech. Get the @!#$ over it you prude bastards. Turn your head. If you dont like something on the internet, there is nothing forcing you to view it or read it. Let them be. Yes it may be a disgusting, vile thing they are talking about, but they are free to do so. I personally dont condone homosexuality, but you don't see me trying to get it pulled from the net, nor do you see me viewing pages that have that content. People need to start being responsible for themselves. If you dont like something, stay away from it and let others do as they please.
Agustin: if you're not adverse, I'll get you the names and publishers of some pedophilia investigative text-books. I will warn you that it made me wonder about a causal relationship.. like fire starting, bedwetting and animal torture have a causal relationship with psycopathic serial murder. They don't see anything wrong with what they are doing (and some exhibit psychosis to where they're helping the children by damaging their sexual identity, Case in point:
NAMBLA. They "condemn sexual abuse," but their members have been caught breaking statutory rape laws.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
This site was home to a number of *illegal* street racing stories.
Knoxfire: Yeah, that's why there's criminal conspiracy and stalking as indictable offences.
LiquidFireCavy (mdk): Prudes, I don't know. The more out-there ideas (the wars on Terror, Drugs) are usually espoused by reactionaries that were either too self-interested, or funding pet-projects to do something about it in the first-place. They go WAAAAAY overboard, and then you get the proverbial pound of cure requirement. In MONUMENTAL feats of idiocy, you get things like prohibition that make people that are already criminals into millionaires. It's the squeaky wheel syndrome at its finest.
Pedophilia, on the other hand does harm kids. Making children into sexual objects before they are old enough to form that portion of their identities, causes them irreparable harm... There's no difference between that and rape (in my opinion). TALKING about it (in terms of objective discussion) is not illegal, and never should be. Open and unencumbered speech is the foundation that democracy is based out of... Following talk with action: if you're acting on pedophilic impulses, THAT's where you go afoul of the law. Personally, I have no illusions about people that write incest or pedophilic fiction: that's their way of working out their impulses, but if they follow that up with acting it out, then they're breaking the law. People that use fiction as a way of cheaping out of their own responsibility, it's BS, and most people know that... it's like the twinkie or Chewbacca defence: it's a ruse that's easily seen through.
Either way: Talk is cheap.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
The Pirate Bay is based in Spain, though...
Ja, dere sveedes.
Part of the reason they still exist today is because the Swedish court system is a civil common-law system, not a jury system. The Swedish courts disallowed punitive damages in the case of the RIAA pressuring them to shut down the torrent service, and they actually required true proof of loss in the case of the MPAA attempting to shut them down (basically, TPB had stated unequivocally that the data that was hosted on their servers were not the MP3/Movies etc, but simple files that contained information that allowed individuals to get the information... TPB didn't transfer the file information, so they didn't create a loss... ingenious, using common sense). This is part of the reason TPB is significantly better than US based trackers like Torrentspy.
Anyhow, the interesting thing about secularized courts and governments: They usually take time to evaluate long-term effects of things before allowing silly judgments to be imposed because some over funded crybaby defendant association is screaming.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
ok, freedom of speech my ass
we are talking about pedofillia. taking advantage of children. children not old enough to defend themseves or to even make the rational decision that "yes, my 4yr old ass really does want to let this 40yr old guy touch me"
we all have our own sexuall perversions, I really don't care until it comes to the unwilling or the to young. and I think making these things public will only cause pedofilliacs to become more daring and even more think that what they do is right.
the only way I could possibly see this as ok is if there are authoritys monitering these things to keep track of these people to make sure they don't harm any more innocent children. I am all for freedom of privacy to, but we are talking about CHILDREN GETTING MOLESTED here. just the fact that you are willing to talk about it in the open like that should be probobal cause enough for the authoritys to track your ass.
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
when you beat someone in a civic people wine and make excuses
when you beat someone in a cavalier they pull over and check under thier hoods
^^^who says they have actually harmed a child? they may just be writing out a fantasy. fantasy <> reality
See, the problem with this argument is that you see it cutting both ways...
If someone wants a sensitive topic like this to be frankly discussed, opposites they feel that the floodgates are set wide open for the actual implementation of the act.
If someone wants a sensitive topic censored, opposites feel that the floogates are wide open for broad-sweeping contol of speech and thought.
It would be considered a deplorable act for someone to write about, say, atttempting to, or killing, well, anyone. But it IS written about in all of mainstream media; so does that mean that we have to quit the syndication of any TV show that shows someone killing someone else?
In my opinion, there's fantasy, and there's reality, and there are only circumstances where they actually cros boundaries. Writing about or displaying a deplorable act in mainstream media should be fine in any context because it's just that--fantasy. If i want to write a story about, say, me raping GAM up the arsehole and peehole with a battery drill--i should be allowed to. It doesn't mean i'd actually *do* it. If I do indeedcary out that act, then I should be prosecuted.
Otherwise, we get into thought control--and then we're no better than the Nazis or any religious extremist group.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Look at it this way: Talk is cheap.
Until someone DOES something, it's Freedom of speech. Unpopular, gross, gruesome, hateful speech... it's ALL protected. Once you censor something, it's the beginning of the road to oppressive censorship, and then, to Stalinism.
I don't give a damn: I can listen to Louis Farrakhan spout off about the pork, David Duke go off about niggers and spics... whatever... It's despicable, ignominious, shabby and a whole lot of other adjectives... and it's all protected, no matter how wrong or base it is.
Sorry, if you start censoring the unpopular speech, there will be no dissent, an without dissent, you're nothing. Free speech is the first and foremost of the amenments of the bill of rights, for a reason... without the freedom to speak, the rest don't mean a whole lot.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
[b]While I think people who that are into child porn are evil I still think that they have should equal rights to discuss the topic. After all it only fair that we respect their freedom of speech. Lets the Gods punish them for their evil ways.
I'd consider them less evil and more screwed up than anything.
If we take your stereotypical "chat room" pedophile, they honestly believe they are doing no wrong and are actually being good to the child (albeit severely messing them up on all mental and psycological levels posible). To me, that's not evil. Theres no malicious thoughts there. Doing something that you believe is good but it ending up having some seriously bad consequences on the one to do it to/for is grave misguidedness and showing something wrong with the roadmap between someone's personal ethical standard and society's at large. Not in my definition of truly evil. Granted, the person needs serious help. I look at it like this: Someone that finds a kid that is living in a broken home without parents that love them, who proceeds to show them their definition of "love" both emotionally and physically is a lot like someone that sees a person having a heart attack on the street and proceeds to slice their chest open and subsequently give them open-heart massage.
Now, someone that goes out to engage in pedophilia for the sole purpose of huring the kids and deliberately messing them up, then yes, that's evil.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
