Alleged paedophile ring in Fermanagh.

ceadaoin. · 02-12-2019 12:56am

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.impartialreporter.com/news/18070468.10-friends-died-abused-one-lucky-ones/?ref=twtrec&fbclid=IwAR1H3iexan4Pnmf6bFmdOXpWp0BzWHkTSWkEHAXqs3PCwYyKUIiCmfn8mEU

If a man had approached me when I was 12 years old and offered me money to let him do what he wanted with me, I'd have run a mile.

Obviously, at that age, Kevin could not have consented to what was done to him but the fact that he was sick after being attacked for the first time means that he definitely regarded it as horrible. So why would he consider the offer of money as being worth going through that time and time again?

Because he was groomed. He says it there himself.

Dr. Bre · 02-12-2019 1:00am

Pavee On Point wrote: »

This will be highly unpopular with the male users of Boards but I believe internet porn is too blame for increased pedophilia.

Guarantee you many men who are bustd for cp get into it because they need ever more sick and depraved porn to get off to.

Loads of paedos around before internet porn. Can you explain Ireland in the 70s and 80s ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 1:03am

beejee wrote: »

Going off this topic, which is outrageous, I had a quick look into research on paedophilia.

Ok, lets view the findings.

Two things stood out to me. First, it's unheard of across the entire animal kingdom. Secondly, if it's true, over half of studied pedophiles have had brain trauma before the age of 12.

Interesting. Not disagreeing with you, but I'd be curious to know what specific brain traumas were amongst the findings. Could be useful in determining how people become pedophiles if true.

Anyway. Let's have a look at your conclusions.

Regardless, I view all new-age research into sexual deviance as complete and utter codswallop. Every damned excuse under the sun to, let's be honest, handwave away nutters as "normal".

He likes boys and women and dresses as a Turkish delight at the weekends? Oh, sure perfectly normal, it's just the *insert latest claptrap of the day*.

She likes to pretend to be a horse while married to a woman who's bisexual and into pansexualism? Nothing could be more sane, all you need to do is remove society's backward stigmas and all shall be grand!

Pedophilia is a mental malfunction. It's "bad" today, and I don't give a flying **** if it becomes "normalised" in 20 years. Or bestiality, or any of it. I'll never accept it, because it is evidently and obviously nuts!

All nutters, each and every last one, and just because some have managed to worm their way into being miraculously "normal" just this minute, won't change the facts of the matter.

Crazy, crazy stuff going on, weirdos left, right and centre. Crazy doesn't last though, and the ironic thing is that the MORE crazies come out of the woodwork, the easier it becomes to see all of them.

Oh dear. You're just ranting now.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 1:06am

Pavee On Point wrote: »

This will be highly unpopular with the male users of Boards but I believe internet porn is too blame for increased pedophilia.

Guarantee you many men who are bustd for cp get into it because they need ever more sick and depraved porn to get off to.

Two problems here:
1) the idea what people are looking for "more and more sick and depraved" porn
2) considering that virtually all men watch porn, there's be a hell of a lot more pedophile if your premise was accurate.

EDIT

Three, including the point made by Dr. Bre above.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 1:17am

Pavee On Point wrote: »

No problems at all. Porn is like a drug and porn addicts need more and more sick and depraved material to get off to. Hence cp.

I freely admit I was looking at more and more extreme porn (nothing illegal) before I kicked the habit

You're not actually challenging my point, you're just stating the same thing again.

The bit on bold is fallacy.

tdf7187 · 02-12-2019 1:23am

Muahahaha wrote: »

Its hard to explain but its pretty common when minors are groomed to be prostitutes.

I saw a bit of a documentary on this case (Spotlight I think) a few days back and it was an open secret that the bus station toilets in Enniskillen was a meeting place for all these paedos and they shared him around. Really horrific stuff and a blind eye was turned by many to what was going on.

Sounds like a similar situation to the Piccadilly cases and the Dirty Dozen in the UK, whose abuses escalated to murders.

This website is a good resource on these matters:

https://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/

It has been hypothesized that the RTE set designer Charles Self was murdered by a rent-boy that he took home.

In Ireland there were several paedo networks some involving well-connected perps from (at least) the 1960s onwards, most of which were never properly investigated.

It should be noted that cottaging, as it was called, was a legitimate way for gay men to meet each other back then, due to the level of homophobia in society and the legal system. I am just making this point as while abuse of adolescents is unacceptable then and now, but it was a legitimate outlet back then for adult gay men to meat each other.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 1:25am

Pavee On Point wrote: »

So how come young men are having ed problems? Yeah that's right, they're hooked on porn and a real vagina doesn't do it for them.

I'm not saying every man who watches porn will turn pedo but am saying you don't need porn in your life.

But hey, telling men on Boards.ie that porn is unhealthy is like telling them they shouldn't waste their time with computer games.

Again: none of this either challenges what I wrote or elaborates on what you wrote.

Your point also seems to have changed: initially it was porn addiction causes pedophilia; whereas now it's porn is unhealthy.

I put it to you that this is confirmation bias. What you actually believe is that porn is bad; and you're trying to link it to pedophilia in order to feed this bias.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 1:48am

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I put it to you that this is confirmation bias. What you actually believe is that porn is bad; and you're trying to link it to pedophilia in order to feed this bias.

Pavee On Point wrote: »

Porn is unhealthy. The porn industry is sick and corrupt. Stop supporting it.

And yes porn is like drugs, you need harder and worse stuff to get off on. No one can deny that

Do yourself a favour ditch the porn. Use the horniness to motivate you to go out and get a real woman.

Nice little ad homeinem to finish with

Anyway. Point in bold proven, end of discussion - now back on topic or I don;t need to reply.

Raconteuse · 02-12-2019 2:34am

I don't think it works that way. There are men attracted to women and not men, who have abused boys.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-12-2019 1:01pm

beejee wrote: »

Going off this topic, which is outrageous, I had a quick look into research on paedophilia.

Two things stood out to me. First, it's unheard of across the entire animal kingdom. Secondly, if it's true, over half of studied pedophiles have had brain trauma before the age of 12.

Regardless, I view all new-age research into sexual deviance as complete and utter codswallop. Every damned excuse under the sun to, let's be honest, handwave away nutters as "normal".

If they say half of them had known brain injuries as children, then how on earth is that saying they’re normal?

Investigating to understand something doesn’t mean you excuse it. Nor does it mean you don’t think it’s a problem.

If that’s the way some people are hardwired, then it’s really important to know about it - so we can better predict behaviour and take precautions to protect children.

beejee · 02-12-2019 1:32pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If they say half of them had known brain injuries as children, then how on earth is that saying they’re normal?

Investigating to understand something doesn’t mean you excuse it. Nor does it mean you don’t think it’s a problem.

If that’s the way some people are hardwired, then it’s really important to know about it - so we can better predict behaviour and take precautions to protect children.

That's the theory of this stuff, that it will somehow have a positive outcome. But it doesn't work that way in reality.

They'll never pin it down as a prognosis, just like all the rest. Instead, it will have a sticker slapped on it as a diagnosis... Then it becomes an excuse, then it becomes "normal" and "must be accepted" for fear of marginalising these people.

It's rife, everywhere you care to look. Have a child that's a brat? Hey, let's see if we can slap "adhd" on it, then everything that follows is allowable.

Are you aware there is already a growing push to normalise paedophilia? You don't have to look far. And it follows the tried-and-true path of all the other mental disorders through to widespread "acceptance".

Impossible for pedophilia, you say? Go back 20 or 30 years and see what was considered "crazy and impossible", and now is projected as perfectly "okay" through mass media.

"oh that's completely different!" some might say. Yeah, everything's "different" when it doesn't suit

El_Duderino 09 · 02-12-2019 1:38pm

beejee wrote: »

That's the theory of this stuff, that it will somehow have a positive outcome. But it doesn't work that way in reality.

They'll never pin it down as a prognosis, just like all the rest. Instead, it will have a sticker slapped on it as a diagnosis... Then it becomes an excuse, then it becomes "normal" and "must be accepted" for fear of marginalising these people.

It's rife, everywhere you care to look. Have a child that's a brat? Hey, let's see if we can slap "adhd" on it, then everything that follows is allowable.

Are you aware there is already a growing push to normalise paedophilia? You don't have to look far. And it follows the tried-and-true path of all the other mental disorders through to widespread "acceptance".

Impossible for pedophilia, you say? Go back 20 or 30 years and see what was considered "crazy and impossible", and now is projected as perfectly "okay" through mass media.

"oh that's completely different!" some might say. Yeah, everything's "different" when it doesn't suit

So, what should we do? Not even look into it in case we learn about it?

I don’t see learning about things as a bad thing. I would prefer discussion on the topic even if that means there are people who are in favour of things I don’t agree with.

beejee · 02-12-2019 1:58pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So, what should we do? Not even look into it in case we learn about it?

I don’t see learning about things as a bad thing. I would prefer discussion on the topic even if that means there are people who are in favour of things I don’t agree with.

It's a difficult thing to do, especially with the Internet, but I do think that's how these things get a foothold, just asking questions establishes a genuine discussion.

Sounds fine, but it's that very thing that lends legitimisation, and onward it goes then.

I know a lot, if I may say so, about the effect of "research" and policy on populations. And without going any further into it, some of the things we take for granted, such as honesty, are ultimately destructive.

It's human nature to prod and poke at everything in the name of curiosity. Well, it has a limit, and this subject, for me, is one that will end badly.

That's all I have to say about it. Time will tell, but I wouldn't be holding my breath on a positive outcome.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-12-2019 2:13pm

beejee wrote: »

It's a difficult thing to do, especially with the Internet, but I do think that's how these things get a foothold, just asking questions establishes a genuine discussion.

Sounds fine, but it's that very thing that lends legitimisation, and onward it goes then.

I know a lot, if I may say so, about the effect of "research" and policy on populations. And without going any further into it, some of the things we take for granted, such as honesty, are ultimately destructive.

It's human nature to prod and poke at everything in the name of curiosity. Well, it has a limit, and this subject, for me, is one that will end badly.

That's all I have to say about it. Time will tell, but I wouldn't be holding my breath on a positive outcome.

Nah. Fear is no reason to stop all discussion or investigation

beejee · 02-12-2019 2:16pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Nah. Fear is no reason to stop all discussion or investigation

Keep prodding and poking them, but be prepared to have the hand taken off you.

It's not fear, by the way, but common sense. Goodnight!

The One Doctor · 02-12-2019 2:19pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So, what should we do? Not even look into it in case we learn about it?

I don’t see learning about things as a bad thing. I would prefer discussion on the topic even if that means there are people who are in favour of things I don’t agree with.

Abusing children is abhorrent, there is nothing to discuss about that.

There is a very dubious move afoot to normalise or minimise paedophilia.

People who attempt to normalise abuse or grooming, online or in real life will be contacted and encouraged to recant. As to those who abuse children or watch the abuse... they will encounter certain difficulties.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-12-2019 2:19pm

beejee wrote: »

Keep prodding and poking them, but be prepared to have the hand taken off you.

It's not fear, by the way, but common sense. Goodnight!

Yeah I'd support continuing to work to figure it out. Fear is no reason to stop learning.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-12-2019 2:26pm

The One Doctor wrote: »

Abusing children is abhorrent, there is nothing to discuss about that.

There is a very dubious move afoot to normalise or minimise paedophilia.

People who attempt to normalise abuse or grooming, online or in real life will be contacted and encouraged to recant. As to those who abuse children or watch the abuse... they will encounter certain difficulties.

I really don't think I would want to spend much time chatting about whether it's abhorrent or not. That would be a pretty short conversation.

I was talking about investigating causal factors in the perpetrators. Only with a view to protecting children by either rehabilitation, working with the ones who are attracted to children but want help so they never act on it and harm anyone and, identify the ones who pose an imminent risk and keep them in prison or whatever, so they don't harm anyone.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 2:39pm

beejee wrote: »

I know a lot, if I may say so, about the effect of "research" and policy on populations. And without going any further into it, some of the things we take for granted, such as honesty, are ultimately destructive.

Yeah, I've seen the ranting you did in respect to your alleged "research".

But tell me: what specifically do you know and what research are you talking about? What works and articles have you read and dismissed, and why?

It's human nature to prod and poke at everything in the name of curiosity. Well, it has a limit, and this subject, for me, is one that will end badly.

That's all I have to say about it. Time will tell, but I wouldn't be holding my breath on a positive outcome.

No one can predict the outcome, granted - but I seriously doubt anything can be resolved through ignorance.

But then, you come across as someone who's not interested in making children safe.

beejee · 02-12-2019 3:33pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Yeah, I've seen the ranting you did in respect to your alleged "research".

But tell me: what specifically do you know and what research are you talking about? What works and articles have you read and dismissed, and why?

No one can predict the outcome, granted - but I seriously doubt anything can be resolved through ignorance.

But then, you come across as someone who's not interested in making children safe.

Will you ever jump off a bridge, ye mad yoke

"not interested in making children safe"!

You keep the conversation going about paedophilia all you want with your" just asking questions", go for it.

You are the oxygen that breathes these things to life. I mean, you can't even differentiate two different sentences, "I know about research" and "I looked at a few papers on this specific subject" are not the same thing. Do you understand that?

If reading comprehension is a stumbling block for you, I'm hardly going to attempt an explanation of advanced population steering now, am I?!

I won't be back, so make your dismissal as juicy as you like. It means nowt to me.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-12-2019 3:43pm

beejee wrote: »

Will you ever jump off a bridge, ye mad yoke "not interested in making children safe"!

You keep the conversation going about paedophilia all you want with your" just asking questions", go for it.

You are the oxygen that breathes these things to life. I mean, you can't even differentiate two different sentences, "I know about research" and "I looked at a few papers on this specific subject" are not the same thing. Do you understand that?

If reading comprehension is a stumbling block for you, I'm hardly going to attempt an explanation of advanced population steering now, am I?!

So you know that there's research (no ****?!) but you haven't read the research and are quite happy to dismiss the research you haven't read. OK then.

I won't be back,

Your decision is wise based on your (lack of) information and your dismissal is granted.

political analyst · 03-12-2019 1:45am

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Because he was groomed. He says it there himself.

Isn't grooming where a pervert befriends the victim and then defiles him or her?

The girls in Rotherham were given food and alcohol by older men who then raped them. The difference with the Enniskillen case is that Kevin was sexually assaulted twice before he was given money to keep being violated.

political analyst · 03-12-2019 1:51am

Another man, who told the Impartial Reporter that he was sexually abused by David Sullivan in the back of a bus on which Sullivan was a driver, said that Sullivan's colleagues were aware of what happened and took the pee out of him (the victim) about it. Why would anyone who was not involved in the paedophile ring but aware of what Sullivan was doing think it was funny?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 03-12-2019 4:24am

political analyst wrote: »

Isn't grooming where a pervert befriends the victim and then defiles him or her?

The girls in Rotherham were given food and alcohol by older men who then raped them. The difference with the Enniskillen case is that Kevin was sexually assaulted twice before he was given money to keep being violated.

Grooming is coercing the child into participating in a sexual act willingly - doesn't necessarily have to involve giving them anything.

ceadaoin. · 03-12-2019 7:30am

political analyst wrote: »

Isn't grooming where a pervert befriends the victim and then defiles him or her?

The girls in Rotherham were given food and alcohol by older men who then raped them. The difference with the Enniskillen case is that Kevin was sexually assaulted twice before he was given money to keep being violated.

No, grooming is when the victim is made to accept the abuse and it takes many forms, often making the victim feel like they are a willing participant in what is being done to them or that they deserve it. Its about gaining power over the victim in whatever way possible in order to coerce them into sexual activity.

Potential-Monke · 03-12-2019 8:27am

Well, we could just go with the definition:

"the action by a paedophile of preparing a child for a meeting, especially via an Internet chat room, with the intention of committing a sexual offence."

spodoinkle · 12-12-2019 10:54pm

Arrests made today, on election day, I'm not even surprised they're trying to hide this in the news, the orange order rule the North

Alleged paedophile ring in Fermanagh.

Comments