German police close gigantic child porn site

Overheal

KeepItLight wrote: »

this is the worst possible thing to have a 'right on' opinion on. anyone who is trying to defend 'civil rights' of kiddy fiddlers is seriously suspect. due process or not

Do you accuse the solicitors, attorneys, etc. of engaging in pedophilia for providing the citizen with their civil right to due process?

Why? Or, why not? If not, then when does this specially apply?

Let's pretend for a moment the court just decided to exterminate Mr. Allen: well, aside from all the appeals and the associated costs, the reputation hit to Ireland for sliding backwards into something resembling Saudi Arabia (lol the irony), the anti-trafficking charity would be out 40k euro. Also, if extermination was on the table I doubt the defendant would have pleaded guilty and this would have resulted in more court time and incurred costs, taking up time for the court to do more meaningful things, like trying and/or convicting other dockets and cases.

KeepItLight

Overheal wrote: »

Do you accuse the solicitors, attorneys, etc. of engaging in pedophilia for providing the citizen with their civil right to due process?

Why? Or, why not? If not, then when does this specially apply?

i don't know where you got the idea that I said that.

but anyone who is trying to defend the rights of paedophiles is seriously suspect.
this is not a good hill for you to die on.

Overheal

KeepItLight wrote: »

i don't know where you got the idea that I said that.

but anyone who is trying to defend the rights of paedophiles is seriously suspect.
this is not a good hill for you to die on.

So what is "suspect" about the lawyers etc?

What do you propose should be done to those who represent such defendants in court?

Civil Rights is always a great hill to die on, in fact. Join me there.

KeepItLight

nullzero wrote: »

The "Paedophilia" and "Civil rights" Venn diagram for most people has no intersecting points, for others however...

nor should it.

Overheal

KeepItLight wrote: »

nor should it.

If I accuse you of pedophilia: do you still get the presumption of innocence? A day in court? Or do we just dispense with the pleasantries and do an on the spot execution?

I thought people had evolved since the witch trials if I'm being honest.

KeepItLight

Overheal wrote: »

So what is "suspect" about the lawyers etc?

What do you propose should be done to those who represent such defendants in court?

Civil Rights is always a great hill to die on, in fact. Join me there.

no rights for paedos, ever. there is no greater objective evil that should be wiped off the face of the planet, preferably painfully.

I'm no longer going to discuss this with you. You seem to have picked a side and I don't want to get sitebanned, which is likey to happen if i have to respond to this muck

I was watching a programme before on this topic and they had some guys who identities were concealed who had paedophilic thoughts/urges but didn't want to act on them. They wanted to try to get help, treatment, etc for it but they were afraid of being ostracized by their community.

What do people think of that scenario? They haven't broken any laws or committed offences. Should we try to help them to prevent them from offending (perhaps "cure" them), or feed them to rats, etc?

Overheal

KeepItLight wrote: »

no rights for paedos, ever. there is no greater objective evil that should be wiped off the face of the planet, preferably painfully.

So alright, if hypothetically I accuse you or someone close to you of being a pedophile you have no right to a speedy trial by a jury of your peers, all your personal items can be searched without warrant and your name can be plastered in the newspapers, and we have to presume your guilt by association of course if it's someone close to you.

Fair? Or should there be a process to determine someone's guilt and associated punishment, like a set of laws perhaps, maybe even a court system held up by a Constitution?

GreeBo

KeepItLight wrote: »

i don't know where you got the idea that I said that.

but anyone who is trying to defend the rights of paedophiles is seriously suspect.
this is not a good hill for you to die on.

Isn't the whole point of rights that everyone has and is entitled to them? While there will always be implications to those who break the law, we don't just abandon our morals and go feral, regardless of how heinous the crime might be.
It's what makes us civilized. If one wants the type of society that allows for beheading as a punishment then you also have to accept the other things that accompany that...

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

If I accuse you of pedophilia: do you still get the presumption of innocence? A day in court? Or do we just dispense with the pleasantries and do an on the spot execution?

I thought people had evolved since the witch trials if I'm being honest.

There's a difference between somebody making an accusation by word of mouth etc to somebody actively seeking out materials online which are 1 known to be illegal and 2 require the person seeking them to use the dark Web.

All of the 400,000 members of that site are paedophiles who actively pursued their sexual interest in children, they weren't people who were publicly named and shamed without evidence. Most of them will never be brought to justice.

The notion that civil rights of paedophiles needs to be respected and the invocation of witch trials as a means by which to measure peoples reaction to paedophilia is not reasonable.

Mimon

Deleted User wrote: »

There are more than you think.

Now, Ill keep things vague.

Many moons ago, in my office, I had to work quite hard to get a good rating.

My other colleague had it cushy and better pay another higher plush department, not his own office like the top brass, but everything else bar that.

5 years after I left that place of work saw his mugshot in evening herald after conviction for multiple child porn images

How the mighty had fallen, and never to return.

Could you not just have said that you had a work colleague who was caught doing depraved **** like this? Your post comes across as a work related gripe.

Stihl waters

Is paedophilia considered to be a recognised sexual attraction to children the same as heterosexuality/homosexuality or is it considered a depravity, scientifically speaking, are there some people with an attraction to children who will never act on it but still be classified as paedophiles

Mimon

Deleted User wrote: »

More than the authorities can deal with, I'd imagine.

They should recruit hundreds of specialists to investigate it, one of the most heinous crimes, should go after every one of them.

Overheal

GreeBo wrote: »

Isn't the whole point of rights that everyone has and is entitled to them? While there will always be implications to those who break the law, we don't just abandon our morals and go feral, regardless of how heinous the crime might be.
It's what makes us civilized. If one wants the type of society that allows for beheading as a punishment then you also have to accept the other things that accompany that...

Civil Rights that don't apply equally to everyone may as well apply to no one.

Civil Rights that apply to the worst of persons is the test of that.

Cheering on what happened at Abu Ghraib may as well be consent to be treated like you were in Abu Ghraib, etc. etc.

Mimon

Stihl waters wrote: »

Is paedophilia considered to be a recognised sexual attraction to children the same as heterosexuality/homosexuality or is it considered a depravity, scientifically speaking, are there some people with an attraction to children who will never act on it but still be classified as paedophiles

Not sure but there was an American man on Moncrieff on Newstalk and he was a pedophile that has never acted on it and was trying to encourage others to do the same.

Feels strange to say it but had to have admiration for him in a way.

eleventh

Deleted User wrote: »

I was watching a programme before on this topic and they had some guys who identities were concealed who had paedophilic thoughts/urges but didn't want to act on them. They wanted to try to get help, treatment, etc for it but they were afraid of being ostracized by their community.
..

There's an agenda to normalise this evil - to see it as something that can be 'helped', 'understood', 'talked about' etc.

Overheal

Mimon wrote: »

They should recruit hundreds of specialists to investigate it, one of the most heinous crimes, should go after every one of them.

Agreed in principle but what's there feasibility. Where are the hundreds of specialists going to come from.

"sign up today to look at child sex abuse imagery to catch the bad guys"

The people who do work these jobs experience trauma as a result. How much would you have to be compensated to sift through it. Great appreciation for those whom already do.

Overheal

eleventh wrote: »

There's an agenda to normalise this evil - to see it as something that can be 'helped', 'understood', 'talked about' etc.

I don't know that it can be helped but like any other threat (to society), it absolutely needs to be well understood.

KeepItLight

GreeBo wrote: »

Isn't the whole point of rights that everyone has and is entitled to them? While there will always be implications to those who break the law, we don't just abandon our morals and go feral, regardless of how heinous the crime might be.
It's what makes us civilized. If one wants the type of society that allows for beheading as a punishment then you also have to accept the other things that accompany that...

i am not advocating for execution with no trial, i understand due process.

I am calling out the how suspect it is that certain posters first instincts in this thread are to jump to the defense of the rights of paedophiles.

Mimon

eleventh wrote: »

There's an agenda to normalise this evil - to see it as something that can be 'helped', 'understood', 'talked about' etc.

What's the alternative? Stick our heads in the sand and not try and understand what is driving them etc?

I had one experience where a pedophile was following my son in Spain, would rather the ones that are trying to stop themselves than a predator like that fk.

KeepItLight

eleventh wrote: »

There's an agenda to normalise this evil - to see it as something that can be 'helped', 'understood', 'talked about' etc.

i can see this happening here in the west, we'll lose any moral high-ground to 'enemies of democracy' if it does

Mimon

Overheal wrote: »

Agreed in principle but what's there feasibility. Where are the hundreds of specialists going to come from.

"sign up today to look at child sex abuse imagery to catch the bad guys"

The people who do work these jobs experience trauma as a result. How much would you have to be compensated to sift through it. Great appreciation for those whom already do.

Yeh, when typing I knew it probably was not realistic but as much resources should be thrown at it as it is up there/worse than murder in terms of serious crimes.

A start would be trying to catch the ones looking at it.

eleventh

eleventh wrote: »

There's an agenda to normalise this evil - to see it as something that can be 'helped', 'understood', 'talked about' etc.

Yeah I've seen that agenda out there. But I'm not talking about normalising the abuse, that should never be considered. I'm just wondering how many could be steered away from offending with treatment. The alternative is to act only after the abuse has occurred, which is our current strategy.

Overheal

KeepItLight wrote: »

i am not advocating for execution with no trial, i understand due process.

I am calling out the how suspect it is that certain posters first instincts in this thread are to jump to the defense of the rights of paedophiles.

Your observation is incorrect, however it shouldn't be suspect at all.

Rather the first instincts involving this conversation were that everyone tangentially involved in child sexual abuse, from the accounting to the viewing, should all be exterminated like rabid rats. Literally, exterminated, like rabid rats. No holds for trials or due process mentioned, just if you had a hand in it, exterminate them like rabid rats. I don't think rabid rats have a right to due process, nor do I find any good faith interpretation of that which would assume they have due process or civil rights if they are being treated as less than human, and therefore beneath warranting of human rights.

I am however flummoxed about what you are suspicious about? Care to share?

eleventh

Mimon wrote: »

What's the alternative? Stick our heads in the sand and not try and understand what is driving them etc?

I had one experience where a pedophile was following my son in Spain, would rather the ones that are trying to stop themselves than a predator like that fk.

Some problems are not solvable. This is one of them.

If money is to be spent, there are worthy causes to spend on.

KeepItLight

KeepItLight wrote: »

no rights for paedos, ever. there is no greater objective evil that should be wiped off the face of the planet, preferably painfully.

I'm no longer going to discuss this with you. You seem to have picked a side and I don't want to get sitebanned, which is likey to happen if i have to respond to this muck

Pretty bizarre post. Some basic civil rights get extended to everyone regardless of what heinous crimes they've committed. It's part and parcel of living in a functioning society, regardless of how hard it is to swallow

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Agreed in principle but what's there feasibility. Where are the hundreds of specialists going to come from.

"sign up today to look at child sex abuse imagery to catch the bad guys"

The people who do work these jobs experience trauma as a result. How much would you have to be compensated to sift through it. Great appreciation for those whom already do.

Surely there's AI that can sift through this filth.
Sweetie 3.0...

Overheal

eleventh wrote: »

Some problems are not solvable. This is one of them.

If money is to be spent, there are worthy causes to spend on.

I'd much rather focus on the elimination of human trafficking, but can see why psychology buffs etc. are interested in the problem from another angle.

Overheal

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

Surely there's AI that can sift through this filth.
Sweetie 3.0...

I guarantee you some are in operation and are being trained etc.

No direct evidence to point to other than experience with deep learning software, which is coming into its own and is packaged along with computing packages like MATLAB etc. but if one of these people who has to look at this thought it could be automated so they don't have to as much, I trust they already have, and that this type of thing was probably among the reasons for DL's development.

MrMusician18

Has no one else noticed or remarked how odd it is that an investigator is seemingly looking for tech tips on boards on how to process the investigation?

Doesn't inspire much confidence tbh.

Overheal

Hhhhh wrote: »

Pretty bizarre post. Some basic civil rights get extended to everyone regardless of what heinous crimes they've committed. It's part and parcel of living in a functioning society, regardless of how hard it is to swallow

Surely it's one of the first things they teach you in law school, or go on about rhetorically, ie. challenging students if they could be a Zealous Advocate for an accused pedophile etc.

Mimon

eleventh wrote: »

Some problems are not solvable. This is one of them.

If money is to be spent, there are worthy causes to spend on.

So you don't try and catch people who create and watch heinous child abuse?

Can't think of many other problems that is more worthy to try and solve.

Overheal

Mimon wrote: »

So you don't try and catch people who create and watch heinous child abuse?

Can't think of many other problems that is more worthy to try and solve.

They were apparently responding to you re: the 'curing' etc. of pedophilia:

"What's the alternative? Stick our heads in the sand and not try and understand what is driving them etc?"

Not anything about not prosecuting or enforcing existing laws on child sexual exploitation.

cgcsb

Germany has been patting its self on the back lately for taking a health lead approach on peadophilia, which they claim dramatically reduces the incidence of offending. Basically they offer potential offenders anonnymous therapy. They may be right and the location of where the ring was found is immaterial. But I wonder is the health led approach adding a degree of permissibility in what is already probably the most sexually permissive country.

Germany/Austria seems to be a bit of a hub for paraphillias such as sexual cannibalism, paedophilia and incest. I remember an interview with Joseph Fritzel in which he said "maybe you should look in other people's basements" which sounded quite chilling and indicates that there are long standing groups for these things that seem to predate the Internet. You'd wonder how these things could possibly exist before the Internet. Perhaps there's some cultural reason for this and a different relationship with violence.

People calling for extreme and barbaric punishments are a bit of an eye roll tbh. Like what will this achieve other than making treatment harder to get and increasing the number of offenders and the danger to children being held captive.

Snake Plisken

Amazing how you get posters on here trying to normalize it by the old we need to understand the poor Peado and they have human rights that we need to respect. Nah screw that if your commiting acts on small children or going onto the dark web to watch this then chemical castration and sex offenders register for life!

Overheal

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Amazing how you get posters on here trying to normalize it by the old we need to understand the poor Peado and they have human rights that we need to respect. Nah screw that if your commiting acts on small children or going onto the dark web to watch this then chemical castration and sex offenders register for life!

"Chemical castration reduces recidivism effectively when offered to sexual offenders within the context of simultaneous comprehensive psychotherapeutic treatment. However, chemical castration under the current laws is vaguely positioned between punishment and treatment due to lack of informed consent by the recipient, and so remains a problematic issue for medical ethics."

Interesting subject altogether. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3565125/

In the context of stopping the crime of viewing I'm sure it would help but not eliminate it. I imagine some of the more perverse would continue to desire the content to view regardless.

Even the devil has an advocate, Snake, and in our society Civil Rights, and that's the point of having them. None of my comments should be in any way misconstrued as some defense of pedophilia or the sexual exploitation of minors or anyone of any age.

Snake Plisken

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Amazing how you get posters on here trying to normalize it by the old we need to understand the poor Peado and they have human rights that we need to respect. Nah screw that if your commiting acts on small children or going onto the dark web to watch this then chemical castration and sex offenders register for life!

I'm amazed how some posters are unable to read.

Potential-Monke

Good to hear they were caught, but I can't imagine too many of the 400k will be caught, only the idiots who used identifying information.

But I have a question on the overall issue, and I do like to play Devils Advocate. What age is the cut off? Are we going with the Irish age of consent, 18? Or the Ukranian one of 16? How about Japans 13? What if you were in a legal relationship in those countries, and took pictures as couples sometimes do. Should they be done for having child porn?

And why is 18 our age of consent, when most people would consider an 18 year old still young/immature (and science saying the teen years usually go into the mid/late 20's). Also, does it extend to naturist photos? A quick Google Image search for "naturist" or "nudist" will return some questionable images, but it's legal because naturism/nudism. Just to note, anyone who does that is, according to some on here, a paedo and should be executed without trial.

I also agree with another poster on here, back in the early internet days, it was possible to accidentally get child porn images/videos. As a teen, strangely I was attracted to other teens, but that word is in both areas, legal and illegal. It is still, by and far, the most searched term today. And why are we still sexualising school uniforms? Every Halloween, you would need many, many hands to count all the "schoolgirl sluts" out and about on the lash.

I agree it's wrong, and those involved should be severly punished, but we're looking at it from the point of view of our society and its laws, other countries are more or less lax. It needs a worldwide approach, and while we still have countries that think it's ok above a certain age (but below our 18) it'll never get solved.

riffmongous

Wait, Japan is 13? Is there some caveat there?

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

I assume everything was done through Tor and any transactions were done through crypto so I don’t imagine you’ll have much luck finding answers through social media

How is crypto not traceable?

Overheal

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Good to hear they were caught, but I can't imagine too many of the 400k will be caught, only the idiots who used identifying information.

But I have a question on the overall issue, and I do like to play Devils Advocate. What age is the cut off? Are we going with the Irish age of consent, 18? Or the Ukranian one of 16? How about Japans 13? What if you were in a legal relationship in those countries, and took pictures as couples sometimes do. Should they be done for having child porn?

Valid Qs; Interpol standards maybe; someone posted the terminology page earlier and that links to the following:

RELATED DOCUMENTS

Terminology guidelines for the protection of children from sexual exploitation and sexual abuse
2.36MB
EN
FR
ES
SEE ALSO

The Luxembourg Guidelines


http://luxembourgguidelines.org/english-version/

Which then are the statutory definitions that any country's own statute on the law must probably follow. So, if that guideline sets age guidance than I would use what Interpol is using, I ordinarily assumed it was 18 across the board that Interpol monitored across all jurisdictions.

Every Halloween, you would need many, many hands to count all the "schoolgirl sluts" out and about on the lash.

Up until 2020 or so you could still easily find outrage stories about some costume or another being sold to children that vendors labeled 'slutty demon' etc.

Overheal

fvp4 wrote: »

How is crypto not traceable?

I don't know enough about crypto to use crypto. It seemed like another great hoax to make money out of doing nothing that somehow accidentally started making money because of its perceived value. One of them being the perhaps misapplied misconception that crypto currencies are difficult if not impossible to be hacked ie. cryptographic so if I got something wrong I'm happy to be told. I almost bought a Dogecoin, but then didn't bother with the required paperwork step.

Potential-Monke

riffmongous wrote: »

Wait, Japan is 13? Is there some caveat there?

Nope, it's 13, but apparently people are waiting longer, and it's usually in pre-arranged things, in which the older male usually doesn't consummate the marriage until a few years later. Convictions for paedophillia were only given to content creators up until 2015 or 2005, can't recall. And it's not illegal to have child porn in anime, so that's still rampant over there, even full anime series on it.

But builds my point. What we consider illegal over here, is legal in other countries, and while Overheal was nice enough to point out that Interpol uses 18, but that's not much good if the local government and laws allow it.

harmless

Overheal wrote: »

I don't know enough about crypto to use crypto. It seemed like another great hoax to make money out of doing nothing that somehow accidentally started making money because of its perceived value. One of them being the perhaps misapplied misconception that crypto currencies are difficult if not impossible to be hacked ie. cryptographic so if I got something wrong I'm happy to be told. I almost bought a Dogecoin, but then didn't bother with the required paperwork step.

Thinking of crypto as only a type of money is not looking at the big picture.
It's also so much more than cryptographic, that is only one element of it.

The technology is what is really valuable, search for uses of blockchain technology if you're interested in learning more. And that is only what has been conceived and developed so far.

There are thousands of currencies and I believe most will fail and become totally worthless.
All the different coins have flaws. The few that make the correct decisions to remove these flaws will be the ones that succeed going forward and will probably retain or increase in value.

Even knowing this it really did catch me off guard when the Europen Investment Bank registered digital bonds on the Ethereum network.

I'm still a long way off understanding it. I find the white papers heavy nevermind going any deeper.
https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/

fvp4 wrote: »

How is crypto not traceable?

It's not untraceable just incredibly time consuming and difficult to do so. Actaully the transactions are easy to find and lookup, anyone can do it. It's finding the identity of the owner of the wallet or wallets that is difficult. I could easily make any number of wallets for myself without giving any personal info.

Overheal

Oh for ****s sake, some of them are really this thick? or this has to be a pisstake from one of them

https://twitter.com/BadLegalTakes/status/1389411847355334660?s=20

GreeBo

KeepItLight wrote: »

i am not advocating for execution with no trial, i understand due process.

Really?

KeepItLight wrote: »

no rights for paedos, ever. there is no greater objective evil that should be wiped off the face of the planet, preferably painfully.

ohnonotgmail

Overheal wrote: »

Oh for ****s sake, some of them are really this thick? or this has to be a pisstake from one of them

https://twitter.com/BadLegalTakes/status/1389411847355334660?s=20

it seems to be real https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2021/apr/16/bentonville-man-sentenced-to-30-years-in-prison/

cgcsb

riffmongous wrote: »

Wait, Japan is 13? Is there some caveat there?

They don't talk about it in Japan, they don't talk about much of anything really in terms of social issues but peadophillia is sort of partially mainstream in Japanese media. There are child and teen female celebrities that command armies pervy fans.

Countries with low age of consent typically caveat the age of the other partner e.g. 15 is OK if the other person is under 18 or something like that.

How many of us remained virgins until 17? Not many I bet.

harmless

harmless wrote: »

Thinking of crypto as only a type of money is not looking at the big picture.
It's also so much more than cryptographic, that is only one element of it.

The technology is what is really valuable, search for uses of blockchain technology if you're interested in learning more. And that is only what has been conceived and developed so far.

There are thousands of currencies and I believe most will fail and become totally worthless.
All the different coins have flaws. The few that make the correct decisions to remove these flaws will be the ones that succeed going forward and will probably retain or increase in value.

Even knowing this it really did catch me off guard when the Europen Investment Bank registered digital bonds on the Ethereum network.

I'm still a long way off understanding it. I find the white papers heavy nevermind going any deeper.
https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/


It's not untraceable just incredibly time consuming and difficult to do so. Actaully the transactions are easy to find and lookup, anyone can do it. It's finding the identity of the owner of the wallet or wallets that is difficult. I could easily make any number of wallets for myself without giving any personal info.

I bet there’s numerous ways to actually work out the wallet owner. That said Bitcoin seems to only really work as a currency on the dark web, I have not seen it on Amazon, or any online purchasing platform of note.

KeepItLight

GreeBo wrote: »

Really?

yes. I said paedo, not 'person accused of paedophilia'.

As in convicted.

If someone mentions a murderer or bank robber - do you assume they are only talking about people accused, but not convicted, of these crime?
Or do you only extend this grace to child-rapists?