Satanic child abuse beyond belief.

a reply to: pickledme

I have reported your post as the Hampstead children's identities are protected by a court order. It has also been established as a hoax perpetuated by an abusive mother and her boyfriend. Both are currently on the run.

a reply to: pickledme

You named their father and they can be identified. What is very telling is that you have just joined and want to regurgitate the Hampstead hoax. For anyone that might not have heard of the Hampstead affair and is interested, I would suggest first looking and reading the 'Hoaxtead' website which will tell you everything you need to know.

Scared of something are we

Strangely enough that is the usual MO for the hoax pushers...to accuse others indiscriminately. Anyway hopefully your post will be removed.

Gotta love those capital letters lol...

a reply to: midicon
oh that website run by ricky himself lol, Iv got so much evidence it would make your hair stand on end. Are you Ricky???

you are trying to shut me up as i hit nail on the head....if so much of a hoax then why are you scared people reading it if it had no truth?? You are trying to silence me too harshly for someone without a vested interest.

I shall spread it all over the web if this gets removed, and everyone can thank you for it.

a reply to: pickledme

I know who runs Hoaxted and it isn't the children's father but hey ho. Your reply is revealing and pushing the Hampstead affair seems to be why you are here. Spread away lol...

originally posted by: Char-Lee

Reports Kinsey
used data from just over 5,000 of the male sample and almost 6,000 of
the female sample. Somewhere and sometime in the course of the
project, Kinsey appears to have directed experimental sex research on
several hundred children aged 2 months to almost 15 years. These
children were orally and manually stimulated to orgasm by a group of
nine sex offenders, some of whom were "technically trained" (if they
were not child sex offenders before, they were after the experiments).
These orgasm tests on children constituted Kinsey's experimental child
sex research database!

Do you have a reputable, mainstream source for these claims? Because the Kinsey Foundation addresses this on their FAQ page and their position is that it's blatantly false and never happened.

Have any of these claims ever been proven in a court of law? Have any formal charges been filed?

a reply to: midicon

The father's name is in the public domain, no wrong done.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Char-Lee

Reports Kinsey
used data from just over 5,000 of the male sample and almost 6,000 of
the female sample. Somewhere and sometime in the course of the
project, Kinsey appears to have directed experimental sex research on
several hundred children aged 2 months to almost 15 years. These
children were orally and manually stimulated to orgasm by a group of
nine sex offenders, some of whom were "technically trained" (if they
were not child sex offenders before, they were after the experiments).
These orgasm tests on children constituted Kinsey's experimental child
sex research database!

Do you have a reputable, mainstream source for these claims? Because the Kinsey Foundation addresses this on their FAQ page and their position is that it's blatantly false and never happened.

Have any of these claims ever been proven in a court of law? Have any formal charges been filed?

Yes I have the flu get back to you

originally posted by: VigiliaProcuratio
a reply to: midicon

The father's name is in the public domain, no wrong done.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Fair enough and the moderator agrees with you as the post I reported stands. Having said that you will notice that said member has been banned, I have no idea why. In that post there was reference to the children and certain videos online which I was concerned about. I first became aware of that case here on ATS and became involved with others in an investigative capacity at the beginning of last year. As it stands now the local community are still having to deal with the dregs of what had been a continuous campaign of harassment from all manner of odious individuals...not just on the internet.
You will notice that I was accused of being the children's father, which is standard fare for the hoax promulgators when facing any that oppose them. I can tell from his reaction that the poster was not new to the Hampstead case.
Bottom line is that those children deserve anonymity and a chance at life free from having their faces continuously spread over the internet via YouTube etc. It has been an ongoing battle reporting those videos and Facebook images.
That poster too made a statement saying that the father was trying to fill Saville's shoes...just making up stuff and maligning someone who perhaps is more in need of sympathy as he tries to rebuild his life with his children.

a reply to: pickledme

I can't star your post but I can agree here that we need to care and continue to care and continue to look at the big picture even when they make it go away.! I have not looked at this particular case but I will.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: pickledme

I have reported your post as the Hampstead children's identities are protected by a court order. It has also been established as a hoax perpetuated by an abusive mother and her boyfriend. Both are currently on the run.

The problem is the powerful coverups always "prove" a hoax and if anyone is blamed at all it is a scapegoat or two.

a reply to: Char-Lee

I tell you truly, I do believe that the powerful do have protection. I wonder whatever happened to those two hundred charges involving MP's that the police were pursuing back in the day. They subsequently got lost in the never ending historic sex abuse inquiry dealt with by Theresa May. I only commented on the Hampstead case because I got involved in the aftermath and dealing with the reality of some really strange characters. They ranged from the outright scammers to the delusional...some really nasty too.

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Char-Lee

Reports Kinsey
used data from just over 5,000 of the male sample and almost 6,000 of
the female sample. Somewhere and sometime in the course of the
project, Kinsey appears to have directed experimental sex research on
several hundred children aged 2 months to almost 15 years. These
children were orally and manually stimulated to orgasm by a group of
nine sex offenders, some of whom were "technically trained" (if they
were not child sex offenders before, they were after the experiments).
These orgasm tests on children constituted Kinsey's experimental child
sex research database!

Do you have a reputable, mainstream source for these claims? Because the Kinsey Foundation addresses this on their FAQ page and their position is that it's blatantly false and never happened.

Have any of these claims ever been proven in a court of law? Have any formal charges been filed?

The whole point it that charges are NEVER filed!

You surprise me did you really expect them to say yeah we did that? Did you read the PDF? It has fully backed by listed sources.
www.drjudithreisman.com...
The guy was sick and insane so perfect to help in the destruction of innocence which is clearly a goal for the world's secret leaders. So this guy should teach people about sex! People like this started the whole mainstreaming of being perverts! But go ahead and tell me how great the guys is!

As a young man, Kinsey began inserting objects into his urethra — initially drinking straws before moving on to pipe cleaners, pencils and finally a toothbrush – to punish himself for having homoerotic feelings, and inserting toothbrushes continued throughout his adult life.[18][19][20] After becoming accustomed to the pain of urethral insertions, he circumcised himself without anesthesia.[20

Kinsey's research went beyond theory and interview to include observation of and participation in sexual activity, sometimes involving co-workers. Kinsey justified this sexual experimentation as being necessary to gain the confidence of his research subjects. He encouraged his staff to do likewise, and to engage in a wide range of sexual activity, to the extent that they felt comfortable; he argued that this would help his interviewers understand the participants' responses.[24][25] Kinsey filmed sexual acts which included co-workers in the attic of his home as part of his research;[26] Biographer Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy explains that this was done to ensure the films' secrecy, which would have caused a scandal had it become public knowledge.[27][28] James H. Jones, author of Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life, and British psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple, among others, have speculated that Kinsey was driven by his own sexual needs.[29]

O'Carroll says,
A number of empirical studies have established some unassailable
facts on the subject [of children as innate sexual beings]. The
most famous of these sources is of course the work of the biologist
Alfred Kinsey and his coresearchers which made almost as much
impact in the early post-war years as Freud had in his time.
Perhaps the most striking of the Kinsey findings, as they concerned
pre-adolescent children, relates to their capacity for sexual orgasm.
"Orgasm has been observed in boys of every age from five months to
adolescence," Kinsey wrote. Also, "Orgasm is in our records for a
female babe of four months" [po 36; emphasis added].

www.drjudithreisman.com...

Sanitizing child sexual abuse
Kinsey also based his liberal view of child rape on research tabulated in Graph Tables 31-
34 in the male volume, which chronicled systematic sexual abuse of boys aged 2 months
to 15 years old. Kinsey concluded that the boys, despite violent reactions and crying,
enjoyed being manually and orally stimulated by pedophiles. To Kinsey, what most
people thought was rape was merely “sex play” with children, which was essentially
harmless, particularly if the child gave “consent.”10 He also included this chilling
observation: “Orgasm is in our records for a female babe of 4 months.”11 The Kinsey
Institute, situated on Indiana University’s campus, continues to refuse to open the records
of the Kinsey child sex data to public scrutiny.
Kinsey’s fraudulent research painted a sanitized picture of sexual abuse. Of 4,441
females interviewed, 1,075 reported being “sexually approached” as a girl by an adult
male. But Kinsey dismissed emotional and even physical harm. A comment: “[We] have
only one clear-cut case of serious injury done to the child, and a very few instances of
vaginal bleeding which, however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.”12
Letting off child molesters
With his benign view of child sexual abuse, Kinsey became an activist on behalf of child
molesters. In 1949, for example, he testified before the California General Assembly’s
Subcommittee on Sex Crimes, urging them to liberalize sex offense statutes. He argued
specifically for granting immediate paroles to suspected child molesters, and warned that
societal “hysteria” does more harm to children than the actual molestati

concernedwomen.org...

But by all means lets take the word of those who make money off of all this!

a reply to: Char-Lee

This is a load of dingoes kidneys. You have a so called "expert" say "children don't make up elaborate lies" .... oh yes they do, indeed teenage girls very much do. This is a relic from the satanic panic era, when innocent men and women, were accused of horrific crimes, and called satanists, as an excuse.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Char-Lee

Reports Kinsey
used data from just over 5,000 of the male sample and almost 6,000 of
the female sample. Somewhere and sometime in the course of the
project, Kinsey appears to have directed experimental sex research on
several hundred children aged 2 months to almost 15 years. These
children were orally and manually stimulated to orgasm by a group of
nine sex offenders, some of whom were "technically trained" (if they
were not child sex offenders before, they were after the experiments).
These orgasm tests on children constituted Kinsey's experimental child
sex research database!

Do you have a reputable, mainstream source for these claims? Because the Kinsey Foundation addresses this on their FAQ page and their position is that it's blatantly false and never happened.

Have any of these claims ever been proven in a court of law? Have any formal charges been filed?

The whole point it that charges are NEVER filed!

You surprise me did you really expect them to say yeah we did that? Did you read the PDF? It has fully backed by listed sources.
www.drjudithreisman.com...
The guy was sick and insane so perfect to help in the destruction of innocence which is clearly a goal for the world's secret leaders. So this guy should teach people about sex! People like this started the whole mainstreaming of being perverts! But go ahead and tell me how great the guys is!

As a young man, Kinsey began inserting objects into his urethra — initially drinking straws before moving on to pipe cleaners, pencils and finally a toothbrush – to punish himself for having homoerotic feelings, and inserting toothbrushes continued throughout his adult life.[18][19][20] After becoming accustomed to the pain of urethral insertions, he circumcised himself without anesthesia.[20

Kinsey's research went beyond theory and interview to include observation of and participation in sexual activity, sometimes involving co-workers. Kinsey justified this sexual experimentation as being necessary to gain the confidence of his research subjects. He encouraged his staff to do likewise, and to engage in a wide range of sexual activity, to the extent that they felt comfortable; he argued that this would help his interviewers understand the participants' responses.[24][25] Kinsey filmed sexual acts which included co-workers in the attic of his home as part of his research;[26] Biographer Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy explains that this was done to ensure the films' secrecy, which would have caused a scandal had it become public knowledge.[27][28] James H. Jones, author of Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life, and British psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple, among others, have speculated that Kinsey was driven by his own sexual needs.[29]

O'Carroll says,
A number of empirical studies have established some unassailable
facts on the subject [of children as innate sexual beings]. The
most famous of these sources is of course the work of the biologist
Alfred Kinsey and his coresearchers which made almost as much
impact in the early post-war years as Freud had in his time.
Perhaps the most striking of the Kinsey findings, as they concerned
pre-adolescent children, relates to their capacity for sexual orgasm.
"Orgasm has been observed in boys of every age from five months to
adolescence," Kinsey wrote. Also, "Orgasm is in our records for a
female babe of four months" [po 36; emphasis added].

www.drjudithreisman.com...

Sanitizing child sexual abuse
Kinsey also based his liberal view of child rape on research tabulated in Graph Tables 31-
34 in the male volume, which chronicled systematic sexual abuse of boys aged 2 months
to 15 years old. Kinsey concluded that the boys, despite violent reactions and crying,
enjoyed being manually and orally stimulated by pedophiles. To Kinsey, what most
people thought was rape was merely “sex play” with children, which was essentially
harmless, particularly if the child gave “consent.”10 He also included this chilling
observation: “Orgasm is in our records for a female babe of 4 months.”11 The Kinsey
Institute, situated on Indiana University’s campus, continues to refuse to open the records
of the Kinsey child sex data to public scrutiny.
Kinsey’s fraudulent research painted a sanitized picture of sexual abuse. Of 4,441
females interviewed, 1,075 reported being “sexually approached” as a girl by an adult
male. But Kinsey dismissed emotional and even physical harm. A comment: “[We] have
only one clear-cut case of serious injury done to the child, and a very few instances of
vaginal bleeding which, however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.”12
Letting off child molesters
With his benign view of child sexual abuse, Kinsey became an activist on behalf of child
molesters. In 1949, for example, he testified before the California General Assembly’s
Subcommittee on Sex Crimes, urging them to liberalize sex offense statutes. He argued
specifically for granting immediate paroles to suspected child molesters, and warned that
societal “hysteria” does more harm to children than the actual molestati

concernedwomen.org...

But by all means lets take the word of those who make money off of all this!

Instead of bombing me with links from around the Web, how about you show me someone with expert knowledge of Kinsey's research (the original published documents including methodology, statements by the researchers themselves or by the school, or by legal authorities who investigated these claims). You've tossed a few new claims into the mix with your scatter-shot response to me, so I want to be clear:

I am talking specifically about the claim that Kinsey trained and paid people to molest children.

There have been a lot of sensationalist claims made about Kinsey over the years.

And I cannot read through that whole book looking for proof of that one claim.

If you know where it is, please provide it.

From: www.indiana.edu...

Allegations against Alfred Kinsey and his research on children's sexual responses, as reported in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, were first made in 1981 by Dr. Judith Reisman. She subsequently enlarged on these ideas in a book written jointly with Edward Eichel and published in 1990 (Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud).

When The Kinsey Institute responded, Reisman filed suit in 1991 against The Kinsey Institute, then director June Reinisch, and Indiana University, alleging defamation of character and slander. In September 1993, Reisman's lawyer withdrew from the case, and in June 1994 the court dismissed Reisman's case with prejudice (which means that Reisman is prohibited from refiling the suit).

a reply to: Greggers

You didn't read the information how do you think he learned this? Proof now there is a problem when no one perdues it because they protect the perverts. Think what you will.

Kinsey’s 1948 and 1953 books on human sexual behavior contain tables of information about sexual responses in children as young as 2 months old. Several tables record how long the children needed to be stimulated to achieve “orgasm,” and others record how many orgasms the children achieved in given periods of time.
Read more at www.wnd.com...

www.wnd.com...
Protected!

“He was giving me orgasms and timing it with a stopwatch,” White told WND. “I didn’t like it, I went into convulsions, but he didn’t care. He said all little girls do this with their daddies, they just don’t talk about it.”

White was 7 when her father began abusing her.

“There’s no question that Kinsey broke a number of laws and conspired to break a number of laws to conduct his faux research,” said Matt Barber, a law professor and associate dean at the Liberty University School of Law.

Read more at www.wnd.com...

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Char-Lee

This is a load of dingoes kidneys. You have a so called "expert" say "children don't make up elaborate lies" .... oh yes they do, indeed teenage girls very much do. This is a relic from the satanic panic era, when innocent men and women, were accused of horrific crimes, and called satanists, as an excuse.

So I guess every kid just lies in your neat little book. I am glad for you that the whole thing is just a panic and the filth are all innocent. You live a nice little life in a hole somewhere.

Here's a plausible scientific way of understanding this phenomenon.

Self-organizing systems seek coherency - something that each of the self-organizing elements seek by relaxing their relations.

The organism is thus a "field of relations" seeking coherency,.

Humans seek a coherent relation with their environments. Moral action - or action which extends from knowledge-of-self-experience, and so, affords the Human knowledge of what it needs, and so, what other Humans need - affords coherency by 'correlating' the state of one object (human) with another object (human).

Recent results in quantum biology show that entanglement applies to macroscopic objects - even to large scale molecules like proteins. Correlation between humans - entanglement of human nervous systems - derives from 'attending to the needs of the other' - such that two physically localized systems become non-locally super-imposed upon one another.

Evil actions - or incoherent behavior, generates entropy, or, in more mythological language, "demons". Demons derive their life in the same way that viruses do: from exploiting hosts. The virus is nothing in itself: it needs the cells ribosomes to generate itself: it relies upon the structure and logic of the cell to continue to exist.

Same thing with demons. Human minds provide the "system", and demons, like viruses, merely exploit the structure of the system to propogate itself. In this case, the Human comes to repeatedly dissociate its own reflective consciousness from the reflexivity of its feeling and desiring states. Conscience becomes the 'enemy' - which is incredible, given that conscience is merely the 'natural flux' of the matter of our brains inclining us to honor those dynamics which support us.

In short, people like this are spiritually diseased creatures. They of course don't acknowledge this, because doing evil things literally fills you with forms of enlivenment - the pleasure that arises from the perverse action - which, very literally, becomes embodied as your brains-structure, and inclines you into the same forms of actions.

Emotions - the feelings we feel and enact - constitute the life-blood of the brain-mind.

a reply to: Char-Lee

Try again. It is clearly stated in the video that "children don't make up stories". Children DO make up stories. This has been established in the the entire Satanic Panic era.

Another thing you don't take into account, is some of us KNOW satanists. They don't act in that manner for the most part. At least not any more so than any other human.

So I don't live my life in a hole. I actually live in the real world. I speak to people from a whole range of religious (or a-religious) backgrounds, and understand: They are people.

So quit with eh Satanic Panic. It has been discredited.