This is unbelievably horrifying

[7StringedBeast]

https://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/08/03/us.child.porn.ring/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Washington (CNN) -- More than 50 members of a child pornography ring who engaged in what authorities describe as "horrific" and "unspeakable" crimes have been arrested for sexually exploiting children from 12 years old to as young as infants.

Top federal law enforcement officials say agents busted the global online pornography ring following an intense international investigation that began in 2009. The ring, based in the United States, reached across five continents and 14 countries.

Seventy-two members of the online site called Dreamboard have been charged in the United States. Officials said 52 of them have been arrested in the U.S. and abroad. The identities of the remaining 20 are unknown at this time.

An additional 10 individuals were arrested abroad on charges from other countries.

"In order to become part of the Dreamboard community, prospective members were required to upload pornography portraying children under 12 years of age or younger," said Attorney General Eric Holder at a Justice Department news conference. "Once given access, the participants had to continually upload images of child sexual abuse in order to maintain membership. The more content they provided, the more content they were allowed to access. Members who created and shared images and videos of themselves molesting children received elevated status and greater access," he said.

What particularly horrified investigators were "super-hardcore" posts that involved adults having violent sexual intercourse with "very young kids" who were being subjected to both physical and sexual abuse.

Holder said, "Some of the children featured in these images and videos were just infants and in many cases, the children being victimized were in obvious and also intentional pain, even in distress and crying, just as the rules for one area of the bulletin board mandated. They had to be in distress and crying."

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said, "To give you an example of the scope of this forum, the capture and analysis of the forum revealed that the board may have been the vehicle for the distribution of up to 123 terabytes of child pornography, which is roughly equivalent to nearly 16,000 DVDs. ... Additional media recovered from the targets arrested in the United States alone has been found to contain over one million images of child pornography."

About 600 men belonged to the members-only online bulletin board, which has now been taken down. Authorities said the site encouraged and rewarded members who sexually abused young children and made them cry.

"As alleged, Dreamboard had strict rules and a rigid hierarchy. Its membership was tightly controlled by the group's administrators," Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer told reporters. "Applicants to the group were required to upload quote nude or hardcore child pornography to become members and members were required to continue posting additional images every 50 days or risk expulsion. Moreover, members could increase their status based on their level of commitment to the enterprise. From member, to VIP, to Super VIP, to the most elite status of all, Super VIP Dot. Only those members who produced their own child pornography could be granted the status of Super VIP Dot," Breuer explained.

"The members of this criminal network shared a demented dream to create the pre-eminent online community for the promotion of child sexual exploitation but for the children they victimized this was nothing short of a nightmare," Holder said.

One Justice Department investigator who asked not to be identified because of the ongoing probe said, "Dozens of young children were directly victimized," some of whom had been identified by agents working the case.

Of the five "administrators" who managed the online community, one was arrested in Canada and another in France. The three others have not yet been identified by agents following the case and remain at large.

"Operation Delego" was spearheaded by agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

John Morton, the head of ICE, said the day marked a law enforcement "success" but was nonetheless a "sad" day because of the nature of the crimes involved.

"There are days in this job where it's hard to separate great success from great sorrow and today is such a day. It's a day of great success because we've brought an end to one of the worst instances of Internet child abuse ICE has ever investigated. ... It's a day of great sorrow because this case is ultimately a tale of the perverse and often violent exploitation of children, very, very young children to satisfy the dark pleasures of a group of adult men," Morton said.

The law enforcement effort has been quietly unfolding in stages during the past few months. Four of the individuals arrested have already pleaded guilty, and all received sentences of more than 20 years in prison. Those sentenced are from Illinois, Alabama, Florida and Kentucky.

Those arrested outside the U.S. were picked up by officials in Canada, Denmark, Ecuador, France, Germany, Hungary, Kenya, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Qatar, Serbia, Sweden and Switzerland.

Holder said, "It's hard for me to imagine that there will ever be a penalty that could appropriately deal with this kind of conduct. Twenty to 30 years that the people have gotten in the past is, from my perspective, barely sufficient to handle what they have done in damaging the lives of these young people."

[El Barto]

Sounds like some real nice people.

A couple of points.  For one thing,  I tend to assume that cops will always overstate the details of the crimes they stop,  and prosecutors doubly so.  I'd be willing to bet that,  while certainly detestable,  what they stopped probably wasn't as uniformly evil as they claim. 

Another thing, why is this within the scope of DHS?  ICE?  A lot of people, myself included, said all along that there's no way that if you create an organization with this much power, there's no way they're going to stop at protecting us from foreign threats.  Kiddy porn rings are popular busts and low-lying fruit, so people will cheer this expansion of power.  Drugs will certainly be one of their foci, as well.  See where this is going?

[7StringedBeast]

I don't think that article was using hyperbole at all.  Everything in that article is horrifying.  The fact that a community that large with the guidelines they had existed so long is really sick.  There is no downside to catching these lowlifes.

[Gadough]

I'd be willing to bet that,  while certainly detestable,  what they stopped probably wasn't as uniformly evil as they claim.

What you just read doesn't seem "uniformly evil" to you? Or perhaps I just don't understand the point you're trying to get across here.

[yeshaberto]

that was a very sad and disturbing read

[El Barto]

They described a hierarchy with 600 people.  Do you really think that all 600 of them were actually banging children?  It's easy to make that implication because none of us have any way of knowing what these guys were actually up to.  What they state are the worst cases they find,  which were pretty damned heinous.  That doesn't mean that the majority of them were up to this behavior.  It means that at least one was.  I'd be willing to be that if you really dug into the goings on, what you'd find is a small minority of child-rapists, and a bunch of hangers-on.  These are two very different breeds of scumbags.  

[Gadough]

....I see what you're driving at, but I disagree. Being involved in this at all, no matter what degree to it you're involved in, is disgusting.

[7StringedBeast]

I think you may have missed the part where they had to post pictures of themselves harming children sexually, or be disbanded from the group.  It was a pay to play, so to speak, type of deal. 

I don't know if evil even correctly defines what was going on with that forum.

[Adami]

I think you may have missed the part where they had to post pictures of themselves harming children sexually, or be disbanded from the group.  It was a pay to play, so to speak, type of deal. 

I don't know if evil even correctly defines what was going on with that forum.

From what I read you just had to post any child porn to get on the site. And the more you posted, the more you could see, while the most hardcore of which were posting abuse pics though all were encouraged to.

[73109]

All you had to do was post pictures. In order to gain Super VIP Dot status, you needed to post porn of you and another kid. Not saying either is right. Just saying something.

[7StringedBeast]

Ah ok I must have understood it wrong.  Still, to go along with that site, and belong to a community where that shit was going on and praised is almost as equally fucked up.

[MasterShakezula]

Adults are not supposed to have sexual attraction to children.  What they did is horrendous and a crime.  They deserved to get what's coming to them.  End of story.  

[El Barto]

Ah ok I must have understood it wrong. 

And that's kind of my point.  Since none of us will ever know how that little corner of the internet works,  it's easy for them to lead us in any direction they want.  They're not saying that they busted 15 child rapists and 585 child pornographers.  That's not as newsworthy.

Still, to go along with that site, and belong to a community where that shit was going on and praised is almost as equally fucked up.

Fucked up, yes, but a million miles away from equality.  As I've said in the past, there's a huge difference between being an actor and being an observer.

[j]

Adults are not supposed to have sexual attraction to children.  What they did is horrendous and a crime.  They deserved to get what's coming to them.  End of story.  

Enter El Barto.  Cue argument about predisposition to what one finds sexually arousing and prosecution of thought crimes.

Personally, while I do think there are some good points to be made on that side, the protection of creators and purveyors of child porn is very, very low on my list of concerns.

Authorities said the site encouraged and rewarded members who sexually abused young children and made them cry.

Despite the grim subject matter, anybody else find this wording funny?  Something about the horrible "sexually abused young children" supposedly exacerbated with the relatively tame "and made them cry" struck me as strange.

-J

[El Barto]

Enter El Barto.  Cue argument about predisposition to what one finds sexually arousing and prosecution of thought crimes.

Personally, while I do think there are some good points to be made on that side, the protection of creators and purveyors of child porn is very, very low on my list of concerns.
-J

Yeah,  I'm just a sucker for a good argument that doesn't involve economics and/or Jebus.    

Though to be fair,  I think protection might be overstating my intentions a bit.  And,  predisposition was never one of my points.  Thought crimes are more my concern. 

[MasterShakezula]

Enter El Barto.  Cue argument about predisposition to what one finds sexually arousing and prosecution of thought crimes.

Personally, while I do think there are some good points to be made on that side, the protection of creators and purveyors of child porn is very, very low on my list of concerns.
-J

Yeah,  I'm just a sucker for a good argument that doesn't involve economics and/or Jebus.    

Though to be fair,  I think protection might be overstating my intentions a bit.  And,  predisposition was never one of my points.  Thought crimes are more my concern. 

Hmm, though I realize that little can be done to fix the mind of a sicko and if they are kept in a position in life where they are completely unable act upon their disposition, fine and dandy, then.  Though, still, horrendous that they turned out like that.  But, the second they act upon aforementioned disposition, well, THAT is unforgivable. 

[Adami]

Barto, I'd point out that 70 something people were charged out of the 600+ members. Maybe those 70 something were the hardcore super posters?

[ReaPsTA]

Ah ok I must have understood it wrong.  

And that's kind of my point.  Since none of us will ever know how that little corner of the internet works,  it's easy for them to lead us in any direction they want.  They're not saying that they busted 15 child rapists and 585 child pornographers.  That's not as newsworthy.

Even if we use your numbers, the 585 child pornographers should at very least be in jail for a very long time.

And maybe I'm losing my patience and rationality, but why aren't they just executed?  It's not like Traci Lords where she made everyone think she was 18 then came out about lying about her age.

[j]

And,  predisposition was never one of my points.  Thought crimes are more my concern. 

Ah, must have been somebody else who made that point in the past.  Possibly me, I don't know.  At any rate, I consider the two to be tied together in this case.

I definitely think you're right about the article emphasizing the worst of the crimes and leaving it ambiguous as to how many were actually involved in the absolute worst of the stuff, and to what degree.  Common practice, it seems.

-J

[Adami]

Ah ok I must have understood it wrong. 

And that's kind of my point.  Since none of us will ever know how that little corner of the internet works,  it's easy for them to lead us in any direction they want.  They're not saying that they busted 15 child rapists and 585 child pornographers.  That's not as newsworthy.

Even if we use your numbers, the 585 child pornographers should at very least be in jail for a very long time.

And maybe I'm losing my patience and rationality, but why aren't they just executed?  It's not like Traci Lords where she made everyone think she was 18 then came out about lying about her age.

Are you suggesting that the people who sexually molested infants be executed? Or everyone who looks at naked pictures of any body under the age of 18?

[chknptpie]

Enter El Barto.  Cue argument about predisposition to what one finds sexually arousing and prosecution of thought crimes.

Personally, while I do think there are some good points to be made on that side, the protection of creators and purveyors of child porn is very, very low on my list of concerns.
-J

Yeah,  I'm just a sucker for a good argument that doesn't involve economics and/or Jebus.    

Though to be fair,  I think protection might be overstating my intentions a bit.  And,  predisposition was never one of my points.  Thought crimes are more my concern. 

Are you meaning that looking at naked pictures of someone under the age of 18 isn't an actual crime because there wasn't any physical crime?

[ReaPsTA]

Are you suggesting that the people who sexually molested infants be executed? Or everyone who looks at naked pictures of any body under the age of 18?

People who sexually molest infants should be executed in any world with decency, yes.  Maybe it would be practically hard to implement this, which is fine, but I'd like it if they could.

As for the second part, I wasn't clear.  Once you hit the 14-18 range, a lot of ambiguity kicks in.  The age of consent in PA is 16 for example, which I don't think is a bad thing.  My mind is blown by the stupidity and avarice necessary to charge a teenage with child pornography charges because he had phone sex with his girlfriend.

But when you're actively participating in a forum dedicated to raping children, even if you aren't actually raping the children, why do I want you to be alive?  I don't even care if you want to look at fake child porn.  Some people are sick.  But when you don't have the switch that keeps you from actually raping children or being involved in an operation dedicated to it, I can't even look at you like a human being.

[Adami]

Ok, so people who actively rape infants should be executed.


I don't agree, but it's a lot less insane than "anyone who looks at any underage porn should be shot". Carry on.

[MasterShakezula]

You still believe that there should be punishment for that, though, right?

[Adami]

You still believe that there should be punishment for that, though, right?

For raping infants? of course.


Looking at pictures without actively harming anyone? No.

[El Barto]

Enter El Barto.  Cue argument about predisposition to what one finds sexually arousing and prosecution of thought crimes.

Personally, while I do think there are some good points to be made on that side, the protection of creators and purveyors of child porn is very, very low on my list of concerns.
-J

Yeah,  I'm just a sucker for a good argument that doesn't involve economics and/or Jebus.    

Though to be fair,  I think protection might be overstating my intentions a bit.  And,  predisposition was never one of my points.  Thought crimes are more my concern. 

Are you meaning that looking at naked pictures of someone under the age of 18 isn't an actual crime because there wasn't any physical crime?

I hate to make blanket statements like that, but yes.

[MasterShakezula]

Do you feel that not making CP a crime would reduce the pedophilia rate?  Because that's the only reason I'd say would validate its legalization.  And I very heavily doubt it would reduce the pedophilia rate.  

[Adami]

Do you feel that not making CP a crime would reduce the pedophilia rate?  Because that's the only reason I'd say would validate its legalization.  And I doubt it would reduce the pedophilia rate. 

It would probably have no affect on the pedophilia rate. Why would it that be a necessity to make it legal? Are you only in favor of legalizing drugs if it limits the amount of drug users?

[Pirate]

I'm not the most sensitive guy myself, but this article just made me sad. The emotional harm caused by whatever terrible abuse has been done is irreversible, and as such, I can't think of a horrible-enough punishment for these men. However, giving them the 'benefit of the doubt' would cast them as clinically skrewed in the mind, which is a problem for all of us.

[MasterShakezula]

It would probably have no affect on the pedophilia rate. Why would it that be a necessity to make it legal? Are you only in favor of legalizing drugs if it limits the amount of drug users?

Um, I'm in favor of legalization of all drugs, because stupid people will do cocaine and that sorta shit if they want to, legal or not, and I want an end to be put to the crime scenes/cartels that have been allowed to flourish as a result of these drugs being illegal.  I couldn't give a fuck about how many people are addicted to cocaine.  Their decision. 

I guess I should of rephrased it: I'd only be in support of legalizing CP if it would lead to a massive reduction in predators/molestations. 

[ReaPsTA]

If you legalize child pornography, then there's a market for it.  And how do you fulfill that demand except by... making it?  Zero percent chance it's a good idea.

[MasterShakezula]

So, in other words, the legalization of CP would do nothing to decrease the amount of predators/molestations?

If that is what you're affirming, then, I am quite content with CP being illegal and see no reason at all for it to be legal.

[El Barto]

If you legalize child pornography, then there's a market for it.  And how do you fulfill that demand except by... making it?  Zero percent chance it's a good idea.

Non-sequiter.  It exists regardless of market demand.

Personally,  I don't think it would effect the rates of molestation either way.  There might be some newbs who see such content and decide to act on it, and there might be others who are content to get their rocks off in front of their computer rather than with a real kiddo.  I suspect the two would offset.

[ReaPsTA]

So, in other words, the legalization of CP would do nothing to decrease the amount of predators/molestations?

If that is what you're affirming, then, I am quite content with CP being illegal and see no reason at all for it to be legal.

That's my opinion at least.

Even though it's currently illegal, I don't really see why using Photoshop to bring all of your sickest desires to life is an issue.  No one is being harmed by it.  But actually child porn involves actual children, so anything that can decrease the cost of it is worth it.  Drugs are a different issue because they primarily involve direct harm to yourself.  And even in regards to that, I'm all for Meth being as illegal as possible.

[MasterShakezula]

Drugs are a different issue because they primarily involve direct harm to yourself.  And even in regards to that, I'm all for Meth being as illegal as possible.

Wait a sec, (Okay, this is not about naked children, but anyways), so you'd rather have the violence surrounding the meth trade around than let some dumb-asses become addicted and die, even though they'd of become junkies regardless of its legality?  Please explain.