EUtopia News

[anderson]

Who is rallying to defend child slavers?

[Baron Samedi]

Originally Posted by anderson

Who is rallying to defend child slavers?

I'm shocked that you don't know the story he was covering.

Easy Meat: Inside Britain's Grooming Gang Scandal

https://www.amazon.com/Easy-Meat-Bri...ords=Easy+Meat

A Look Inside Britain's Muslim Sex Grooming Gang Scandal

The author describes how Muslim flesh-peddlers operate as part of a well-organized extensive network of taxi drivers, shop and restaurant owners, and security guards. Girls, mainly between the ages of 11 and 14, the majority from state-run children’s homes, are ensnared while traveling from school to home, at shopping malls, restaurants, bus stations and similar public venues. They are enticed with flattery, feigned friendship, gifts, alcohol and drugs. Alarmingly, a footnote in the book references a quotation from a city outreach worker with the Children’s Society who states, “every girl living in a children’s home in the city of Birmingham is being sexually exploited.”

McLoughlin makes reference to the staggering profitability of the sex grooming enterprise for the Muslim community. He cites a 2007 expose, Mothers of Prevention by Julie Bindel, a feminist writer and founder of the legal reform group, Justice for Women.

Bindel estimated that a pimp can make $325,000 to $550,000 annually with one 16-year-old girl. From that, Bindel extrapolated that over the average 15-year-per-girl pimping period, the annual value of this criminal activity could amount to approximately £300 million or $425 million.

https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...g_scandal.html

British judge bans press coverage of pedophile gang

http://www.worldtribune.com/british-...edophile-gang/

Under the guise of "Protecting the UK from terrorism;

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
An act amending the Terrorism Act 2001 and making further provision about terrorism and security.

"To amend the Terrorism Act 2000; to make further provision about terrorism and security; to provide for the freezing of assets; to make provision about immigration and asylum; to amend or extend the criminal law and powers for preventing crime and enforcing that law; to make provision about the control of pathogens and toxins; to provide for the retention of communications data."

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-terrorism-act


Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
"To make provision about offences involving stirring up hatred against persons on racial or religious grounds."

• Creates new offences of stirring up hatred against persons on religious grounds.
• Requires that the words, behaviour, written material, recordings or programmes must be threatening and intended to stir up religious hatred.
• Defines religious hatred as hatred against a group of persons on the basis of their religious belief or lack of religious belief.
• Amends the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 so that the powers of citizen's arrest do not apply to the offences of stirring up religious and racial hatred.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ous-hatred-act








<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The most terrifying video you’ll see today. <a href="https://t.co/Vb8yNpZNCo">https://t.co/Vb8yNpZNCo</a></p>&mdash; Mike Cernovich 🇺🇸 (@Cernovich) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1000070858252038144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Thousands protest the instant jailing of citizen-journalist Tommy Robinson, while social media goes dark after take-down notices. Is he out of order? Or does he have a point to make on free speech? Interesting Times for the UK. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FreeTommy?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FreeTommy</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/citizenjournalist?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#citizenjournalist</a> <a href="https://t.co/yk5qxCF3zT">pic.twitter.com/yk5qxCF3zT</a></p>&mdash; John Leet (@JohnLeetAuthor) <a href="https://twitter.com/JohnLeetAuthor/status/1000705660307279872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 27, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5yj7kCHSqG0" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">My statement in front of the British Embassy in The Hague today.<br><br>Free Tommy Robinson!<br>Restore Freedom Of Speech!<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TommyRobinson?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TommyRobinson</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FreedomOfSpeech?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FreedomOfSpeech</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FreeTommy?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FreeTommy</a> <a href="https://t.co/VLq0Xo6xWq">pic.twitter.com/VLq0Xo6xWq</a></p>&mdash; Geert Wilders (@geertwilderspvv) <a href="https://twitter.com/geertwilderspvv/status/1001062197596966912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 28, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


So, the UK government is using censorship laws to protect muslim child sex ring businesses, jailing reporters covering the story, and censoring the story from UK controlled media.

That's why those who support the imprisonment of Robinson are supporting child sex traffickers.

I don't see any middle ground here.

If it weren't for the internet, UK citizens would be blissfully unaware of the whole thing.

[Baron Samedi]

Incidentally....should be interesting to watch the EU financial markets this week.

As always, I am watching Deutsche Bank closely. It's become a hobby of mine, waiting for the inevitable....it's kind of like the financial Schrodinger's Cat. It's fascinating....is it alive, is it dead?

[Baron Samedi]

I will put this out there, in defense of EUtopia. There is one area, at least, where they are far, far, far ahead of the United States in the Liberty department...

As New Privacy Rules Hit Europe, Google and Facebook Hit With $8.8 Billion in Lawsuits

http://theantimedia.com/google-facebook-lawsuits/

"Forced consent is not consent". Love it.

That is a rule that needs to be applied to many, many more things, not just social media.

Like taxes, for example.




Right, Jaric?

[anderson]

I am aware of the case. I'm not aware of anyone cheering for these groomers, though. It's cute how desperate you are to find flaws in order to fit your preconceived ideas of "socialism bad"

Also lol at calling Robinson a "citizen-journalist" and lol at posting anything by Geert Wilders.

[AnOldTroll]

Originally Posted by anderson

I am aware of the case. I'm not aware of anyone cheering for these groomers, though. It's cute how desperate you are to find flaws in order to fit your preconceived ideas of "socialism bad"

Also lol at calling Robinson a "citizen-journalist" and lol at posting anything by Geert Wilders.

I think of socialism as a boiled frog analogy.
Consider it.

[Baron Samedi]

Originally Posted by anderson

I am aware of the case. I'm not aware of anyone cheering for these groomers, though. It's cute how desperate you are to find flaws in order to fit your preconceived ideas of "socialism bad"

Also lol at calling Robinson a "citizen-journalist" and lol at posting anything by Geert Wilders.

Your media censors coverage of the case.

Your government jails journalists who try to cover the case.

You, apparently, approve of these things. The way I see it, that is standing up for child sex trafficking.

I would also say that equating reporting the trial with jury tampering is a ridiculous stretch of logic.

I guess we should apply that to everything criminal, yes?

---------- Post added at 01:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 PM ----------

Originally Posted by AnOldTroll

I think of socialism as a boiled frog analogy.
Consider it.

For the record, it's a good analogy, but it doesn't work in real life. Just sayin.

[anderson]

Originally Posted by Baron Samedi

Your media censors coverage of the case.

Your government jails journalists who try to cover the case.

You, apparently, approve of these things. The way I see it, that is standing up for child sex trafficking.

I would also say that equating reporting the trial with jury tampering is a ridiculous stretch of logic.

I guess we should apply that to everything criminal, yes?

---------- Post added at 01:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 PM ----------

Robinson is not a journalist. Repeat that 100 times. He's not a journalist.

The case has been covered by mainstream media. To my knowledge, none of the journalists reporting on the case, for various outlets, have been imprisoned.

The problem is that you soak up blatantly FAKE NEWS(!) because you agree with its stated position and this is why it's a travesty that you carry on talking about being critical of the media, etc. You are probably one of the least critical thinkers on this board, unless the topic is something you're opposed to.

In this way, you accept random stories about pizzeria child sex, the plight of the poor white "journalist" (did I mention he's not one?), Russia's interference or non-interference, etc.

Now, I don't mind that you're biased. We all are to a degree. Where the wheels fall off is when you claim moral and intellectual superiority when it comes to dissecting the media landscape. Take that for what it's worth.

[Baron Samedi]

Originally Posted by anderson

Robinson is not a journalist. Repeat that 100 times. He's not a journalist.

The case has been covered by mainstream media. To my knowledge, none of the journalists reporting on the case, for various outlets, have been imprisoned.

The problem is that you soak up blatantly FAKE NEWS(!) because you agree with its stated position and this is why it's a travesty that you carry on talking about being critical of the media, etc. You are probably one of the least critical thinkers on this board, unless the topic is something you're opposed to.

In this way, you accept random stories about pizzeria child sex, the plight of the poor white "journalist" (did I mention he's not one?), Russia's interference or non-interference, etc.

Now, I don't mind that you're biased. We all are to a degree. Where the wheels fall off is when you claim moral and intellectual superiority when it comes to dissecting the media landscape. Take that for what it's worth.

Your honor, the prosecution rests.

Incidentally, the child sex slavery (pizzagate) is still progressing. Anyone seen Tony Podesta or Anthony Weiner lately?

[anderson]

It's OK to admit that you're wrong from time to time.

[Baron Samedi]

Allison Mack......NXIVM...Schneiderman? Any of this ring a bell?

These are dots. They'll be connected when the time is right.

[anderson]

Originally Posted by Baron Samedi

Allison Mack......NXIVM...Schneiderman? Any of this ring a bell?

These are dots. They'll be connected when the time is right.

Bet Soros sponsored it all, plus attended all the parties in full SS regalia...

[Baron Samedi]

Originally Posted by anderson

Bet Soros sponsored it all, plus attended all the parties in full SS regalia...

Not all of it, but since you asked....

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xshDkqB1rYc" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

BACKPAGE: Online Child Trafficking Protected By Google, Government & George Soros
April 10, 2018

Popular sex advertising website Backpage.com was shut down and seized on Friday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. According to the notification, the website and its affiliates were seized under the enforcement of several other agencies including the U.S Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona, the Internal Revenue Service, and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section. The founders of Backpage, Michael Lacey, Jim Larkin, and CEO Carl Ferrer, have been fighting a slew of legal battles the past few years. The owners are consistently accused of facilitating human trafficking on their website in a variety of different methods.

The documentary film I am Jane Doe presents a detailed journey of multiple child sex trafficking victims and their families fighting for justice. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) 75% of child sex trafficking reports were derived from Backpage. Due to these numbers, this makes it the #1 used website for online child trafficking. For years, Backpage has been known to be a site in which sex traffickers gained easy access for the advertisement of women and children, making it a magnet for online trafficking crimes.

In one personal story, a mother named Kubiiki Pride found her missing 13 year old daughter on Backpage with provocative pictures of her posted in the escorts section. Kubiiki Pride was forced to purchase her daughter back from the trafficker in order to secure her safe return home. Her trafficker was later jailed, however, Pride also expressed great concern for the website which remained unaccountable. After reaching out to the company, Pride states they refused to take down the explicit photographs of her daughter despite the imprisonment of her trafficker. Enraged at the inaction of the company, they decided to file a lawsuit claiming the site as well as parent company Village Voice Media Holdings, were complicit in the trafficking of children. Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it was ruled that Backpage should have no liability for the crimes committed on their site. Unfortunately, this was a common theme as the company continuously won numerous lawsuits in the past decade. Article Here

Lawyers working the cases were baffled, the company remaining unscathed seemed to be a “mystery.” But Backpage owners accumulated massive amounts of wealth over the years, making it nearly impossible to go up against them. In its initial stages, Backpage acquired a net income of $5 million annually; by 2015 they were making $153.8 million per year.

Attorney Erik Bauer, representing underage children who were advertised in Seattle, was finally able to get his case to the Washington State Supreme Court. Their argument was that the company was deeply involved with assisting the traffickers in the creation of their content. Backpage appeared to have “coached” the criminals into using particular wording as to remain undetected by law enforcement. Their posting rules seemingly provided guidelines for traffickers to continue with their criminal activities. For example, the site would recommend posters spell out telephone numbers in order to make it difficult for the FBI to track. Additionally, they would advise them to utilize prepaid cards instead of debit or credit cards to stay anonymous. Additionally, the “Banned Terms List” was altered frequently. In a feigned effort to “crack down” on traffickers, Backpage stated they utilized a list of banned terms for their site. These terms included words such as “Teen” or “School Girl.” Yet no sooner was the list implemented, it was then reversed. Other times, if the words were not unbanned, common code language was promoted as a clear depiction of young children. In the end, judges ruled that the website did not “maintain neutral policies.” One judge implied the company was a “partner in crime” just as if they owned a site hosting “snuff films.” Link Here

By 2015, CEO Carl Ferrer was ordered to testify in front of a Senate Subcommittee on Child Trafficking. Ferrer disregarded his subpoena and failed to appear in court. He became one of the very few citizens to be held in Contempt of Congress. Meanwhile, a company-wide email was sent out laying off the majority of its moderators and advising to seek council immediately, should they be asked to testify. Ferrer was eventually arrested, however, a judge ruled this violated the CDA 230 and promptly released him.

In 2016, the Backpage founders and CEO found themselves in another legal bind with pimping charges coming from California’s then-Attorney General Kamala Harris. The case, however, was quickly swept under the rug. In October, co-founder Jim Larkin donated $10,000 to Nancy Pelosi super PAC (House Majority PAC), a committee which also contributed to Clinton’s 2016 Presidential Campaign. Only 2 months, later the case was dropped by Sacramento Superior Court Judge Lawrence Brown who also cited CDA 230. According to The Washington Times, the owners have a history of being a major contributor in politics. Since 2010, they have been recorded as giving $99,000 to candidates and $95,000 to various Democratic parties. Link Here

Yet, politicians, judges, and super PACs aren’t the only powerful entities who protected Backpage throughout the years. According to I am Jane Doe, several groups provided millions of dollars in financial support to Backpage during their legal battles. The main groups include the Electronic Frontier Foundation and The Center for Democracy and Technology. The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) contains the following major institutions:

AT&T, Facebook, Ford Foundation, Google, Inc. MacArthur Foundation, Markle Foundation, Microsoft, Yahoo, and even the George Soros backed Open Society Institute.

http://www.theeventchronicle.com/cab...orge-soros-2/#

[Baron Samedi]

Apparently, a couple of journalistic entitites challenged the court ordered media blackout and won today.

"The Independant" and "Leeds Live", whomever that is, but good for them.

[anderson]

The order has been lifted for a while and the Independent ran stories anyway, but yeah, it's all part of a big socialist plot to keep Robinson a white slave.