You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘pedophile’ tag.
I haven’t seen the garbage of people who think homosexuality is normal demand answers from Milo on this: Which pedophiles did Milo expose? What are their full names? And what is the full name of the priest he says abused him? Let’s hear the stories.
Here’s betting a hundred quid, as they say over the pond, that no names will ever be produced, nothing that could identify anyone. Just totally made-up claims.
BTW, The Federalist, of all people!, actually published a good article, “good” as far as today’s sick American society standard goes, about homosexuality and child/teen abuse.
“In the gay world,” Milo said later, “some of the most important, enriching and incredibly, you know, life-affirming, important, shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys.” “Provided they’re consensual,” he added, “provided they’re consensual.”
During a different interview, with Joe Rogan, Milo talked approvingly of an alleged sexual encounter he had with a priest when Milo was around 14 years old. Milo also described attending Hollywood “boat parties” and “house parties,” where he saw things that “beggar belief.” As Milo put it: “some of the boys at [these parties] were very young. Very young.” Later, he reiterated for the third time: “There were some very young boys around at that time.” In spite of Rogan’s prompting, Milo refused to name anyone at these parties.
But wait: the perversity does not stop there. In a 2006 audio clip that resurfaced in the midst of the Milo debacle, Star Trek alumnus and liberal activist George Takei, who, like Milo, is gay, spoke fondly with radio host Howard Stern (and co-host Robin Quivers) about his sexual experience as a 13-year-old boy with an “eighteen or nineteen” year-old camp counselor.
At one point Stern asked Takei: “Were you molested in a sense, because you were 13?” Takei replied: “No, no…I thought he was pretty attractive.” Stern and Quivers seem captivated and delighted by the story. Quivers prompts Takei for details—“Ahh! Was he gazing into your eyes the whole time? Was he saying anything?”—while Stern cracks wise: “Who wants a hand job without kissing?” Takei describes the experience: “It was both wonderful and scary and kind of intimidating, and delightful.”
Reflect on that for a moment: two adults were listening to a third adult describe an instance of genuine child sexual abuse, and were both happy and jocular about it.
There are two deeply appalling aspects to these sordid interviews. The first is the possibility that, as Milo put it, sexual relationships between young boys and adult gay men occur “very often.” At the Huffington Post last week, “gay conservative” Chad Felix Greene described his own experiences in this regard, having his first sexual encounters with adult men at age 14. As Greene put it, reflecting on the negative effect such behavior has had on his life and the need to stop this “generational pattern of abuse”: “As much as the LGBT world seems to ignore [older gay men having sex with young teenage boys], it seems fairly universal and unfortunately not time-bound to a period when young gay men had fewer options.”
Nevertheless, these revelations are unnerving and profoundly troubling, and the implications of these revelations are terrible, especially combined with many years of research showing disproportionately high rates of child sexual abuse against young gay males. Should we not consider the possibility that something both brutal and endemic is going on here, and that we’re simply ignoring it?
Yet there is another, even more troubling idea at work here: the possibility that these stories have been around for a long time, that many people have known about them for a long time, yet nobody has done anything about it, or even cared.
Consider: Milo’s interview with Rogan took place in September 2015, nearly 17 months ago. His statements on the livestream occurred more than a year ago, in January 2016. Yet his remarks and beliefs did not come to wide attention or constitute a scandal until very recently, when they were publicized by a conservative group opposed to his appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
If a grown male celebrity had spoken approvingly of having sex with 13-year-old girls, including having attended a party where “very young girls” were being used for sex, the reaction would have been swift and ruthless. It would not have taken the man in question more than a year to suffer any consequences, as it did for Milo.
Takei’s own tacit approval of child sex, meanwhile, has been on record for more than a decade, and he has suffered no professional or personal fallout for it.
Author: Daniel Payne is a senior contributor at The Federalist. He currently runs the blog Trial of the Century, and lives in Virginia.
It’s hard to be shocked anymore, given the sleaze that oozes out of every pore of both the Republican and Democrat parties, but here I am, shocked.
It’s due to this article:
The Jeffrey Epstein Affair Imperils Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Prospects
The case of the high-flying (alleged) pedophile reveals a broken American political process
You can go to the wikipedia page on Epstein to read a much more detailed account of all his criminal pedophile activities, including having settled up to now no less than 17 accusations, which are in addition to the time he served in jail for soliciting prostitution from a child.
Silverstein continues by saying how Bill Clinton’s entanglement in this sordid affair could affect the upcoming elections:
What all this means is that Hillary Clinton’s husband has already been implicated in the Epstein scandal and that his dubious private behavior, which has already once distracted the entire nation from more important business, could do so again if Ms. Clinton does indeed run for president.
But, wait, would that derail him from voting for Hillary Clinton? Probably not, he says:
What’s worse, at least from my personal standpoint, is that if Ms. Clinton were to become the Democratic nominee I still might vote for her because the likely Republican candidates have retrograde and vile public views about race, class, gender and gay rights, and those are important to me, and especially because the two main parties are virtually indistinguishable when it comes to fundamental economic policy. Because both are bought and paid for by Wall Street and financiers like Jeffrey Epstein, as well as other powerful interests who overwhelmingly fund our political campaigns.
And, hear this, neither would a pedophile scandal that is being largely ignored by the left-wing media along with Bill Clinton’s involvement in it, affect his college-age daughter’s choice to vote for Hillary. Silverstein says he probably will not vote for Hillary, but would if his daughter asked him to. Just why would the little garbage he has for a daughter vote for Hillary?
she [his daughter] is appalled and outraged by the GOP’s stone age social politics and because she would like to see a woman become president. And that’s a good enough reason for me. Maybe.
“It’s also true, in my view, that Ken Starr, who sought to impeach Bill Clinton in the mid-1990s, is a twisted zealot and that it’s probably a bad idea to impeach a president for sexual misconduct, because that has nothing to do with his or her ability to govern effectively,….”
Mr Silverstein’s credibility takes a serious hit with the above statement. The chief law enforcement officer of the land lied, under oath, in an attempt to deny another American citizen her right to due process under the law. He carried on a major coverup, also regularly lying to the American people for over 8 long months, attacking Lewinski’s character, only giving up when the irrefutable evidence of the semen stained dress became public. Mr. Silverstein’s “version” is the persistent urban myth perpetuated by the Democratic Party and Clinton sycophants.
New film – that I have not watched – on the horrors of war in Africa. What is anyone in the West doing to save these people from the horrors of war? Basically nothing. When war breaks out, Westerners leave the locals to experience hell. And that after several Westerner governments have furnished billions in arms for the mass killings along with all the secret “services” for the de-stabilization required for implanting the puppet regimes to rob African people of their resources.
Is this a world that calls itself sane? Civilized? We are awash in evil.
Here is a review of “Beasts of No Nation” – excerpt from http://sfbayview.com/2015/11/beasts-of-no-nation/
“Beasts of No Nation” is a well financed Netflix film that crudely exposes the face of the wars in Africa and the false poverty that has been created by U.S. and other Western imperialist governments spearheading a corporate plan to rob the richest continent on earth of its natural resources.
It is the tale of a little boy in an unnamed African country. The boy, played by Abraham Attah, is orphaned when he is left with his father in the war zone after his mother and young siblings flee. The boy’s father becomes a casualty of the war.
A short while after he was orphaned, a rebel guerrilla army led by the character played by Idris Elba stumbles upon him in the bush. The unromanticized brutality of war is captured in the many battles fought by the very brave but misled child and youth soldiers. The film deals boldly with the psychological aspects of brainwashing and propaganda in war.
“Beasts of No Nation” is based on a novel by Nigerian author Uzodinma Iweala. I did not read the book so I cannot compare the two.
I don’t know whether to be more upset at Idris Elba, who accepted the role of a homosexual pedophile raping his own soldiers for imperialism or myself for thinking that Idris Elba might use the platform to say something about the world order that has crushed over 6 million people in the Congo in ordeals like the one depicted in the film so that Apple, Microsoft, Dell and the rest of the computer industry can steal coltan and other minerals at the cheapest price possible utilizing proxy armies and governments from nations like Uganda, Rwanda and rebel forces in the Congo to do it.
This is the only review I saw that mentioned this: “homosexual pedophile raping his own soldiers”. Finally someone breaking the silence regarding homosexual pedophilia? I suppose we will have to wait for more reviews for the answer.
And after reading this unpalatable review of the novel at the “LA review of books”, this is the comment I left:
Nothing more disgusting than a vile American sitting comfortably in his armchair writing in the most detached fashion about the “child soldier genre” while his country has fueled and armed many of these wars and created the hell that these people have had to go through. The most the author can think of saying about it all is that the “child soldier genre is now passé”.