It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pedophiles in Washington -- More Information Surfacing, and Old Discussions

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:43 AM
link   
This morning, the Drudge Report is flashing a front-page notice that more Washington pages are coming forward with reports of sexual advances from additional representatives. Is Foley just the top of the iceberg?

The pursuit of power has been the primary, overwhelmingly dominant motivating factor in the U.S. government for several decades now. "Elected" representatives in Washington soon loose focus on those they represent, and turn attention to the acquisition of power and mechanisms to retain position. These are the actions of inherent corruption.

And centuries of history has shown us what happens among the corrupt elite... they turn to children... and it seems we've discussed this quite a bit...

Who In The Mainstream/Govt supports the 9/11 Truth Movement? 2005...
Hunter S. Thompson was working on an expose of the Republican pedophile-sex ring when he "committed suicide,

Photographer for White House child sex ring arrested after Thompson suicide 2005...
Well it seems this Gannon / Guckert sex scandals are digging up an old and dirty past of pedophilia in the American Government. I my self am still at a loss as to why this was all able to be swept under the rug for so many years.

Republican Perverts: An Annotated List 2006...
The List includes a variety of individuals associated with the republican party that are involved in sexually related crimes against children. Quite frankly I find it unbelievable that the major media has not picked up on this story.

Video: Conspiracy of Silence - US Politicians Pedophile Ring 2006...
This is downright shocking. It shows how power leads to corruption. This is a program (about an hour long) documenting the case of a powerful black republican, Larry King, (and other wealthy powerful people), running a child sex ring, using children for sex parties in which other powerful political figures attended.

Bush 41 - the Known Pedophile? 2005...
came across this interesting read which appears to be authentic in nature. Apparently, this is a banned edition of the Washington times (dated June29, 1989) that was apparently destroyed at the command of George H.W Bush. Homosexual Prostitution inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush

There are more discussions of U.S. politicians of this nature here on ATS, but the above illustrates that this has not been a surprise for our astute members who look past the mental pabulum perpetuated by "news" outlets.

And when we ask ourselves why the mainstream media isn't picking this up... well... it turns out that at least two Florida newspapers knew about the Foley emails and IMs in 2005, but choose not to pursue the stories.




posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   
One question, if this has been going on for a while, why now is becoming an issue while all this time has been very well kept in the back burner.

Why now, perhaps because elections? Or just to take attention from something more sinister that has been going on.

Perhaps this is the most damaging piece to the present administration and the Republican Party to come out.

Especially when it targets the human nature of the political party leaders.

But can something more be behind all these, something that this will help hide/

It is nothing that will keep the people more interested that a good sex scandal in the white house.

Remember Clinton?

If this issue escalate with more names and records it will become bigger than Clinton sex scandal will ever be.

And that worries me.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   
With all the stuff going on in the white house right now from the revelations of hidden conspiracies about sick and deviant behavior of our leaders in congress, I can not believe that this thread has not been given more attention.

I guess people do not want to be reminded who they have been voting for in congress.

What a shame.

This people are covering each others butts when it comes with their sick behavior.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I'm afraid to think about what will still remain hidden. And my biggest question still is this: What the HELL do grown men see in having sexual contact with children?? Between this and Dateline's "To Catch a Predator", it seems like the majority of men in our society are pedophiles. I wish someone would explain what is causing this disturbing behavior in our society.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   
I started a similar thread a few days ago:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I wonder if the story was sat on because it was homosexual in nature and papers didn't want to "out" someone.

I find the timing of this release a bit suspicious seeing as it supposedly happened in 2003. Yet the story is released 1 month before an election in 2006....hmmmm.

I just wonder who knew what and when? What other things are going to start dribbling out before the election...
(ok, poor choice of words)

I will be very incredulous if there is an attempt to pin this as a republican-only problem...

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Apoc]

[edit on 3-10-2006 by Apoc]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc

I just wonder who knew what and when? What other things are going to start dribbling out before the election...
(OK, poor choice of words)


That is what I have been asking myself also, why now, what else is out there that this will take attention from it.

Or is just political agenda.

This is going to be very damaging to the Republican party and its conservative image.

God fearing conservative Americans do not like stories that involves children, but they get a high when is sex scandals of the male and female kind.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
The news did know about it SO. Well some florida newspapers and Faux News.


Meanwhile, Florida newspapers — who were leaked copies of the e-mail with the Louisiana boy last year — defended their decision not to run stories. Both The St. Petersburg Times and The Miami Herald were given copies of the e-mail, as were other news organizations, including Fox News.

"Our decision at the time was ... that because the language was not sexually explicit and was subject to interpretation, from innocuous to 'sick,' as the page characterized it, to be cautious," said Tom Fiedler, executive editor of the Herald. "Given the potentially devastating impact that a false suggestion of pedophilia could have on anyone, not to mention a congressman known to be gay, and lacking any corroborating information, we chose not to do a story."


But instead of doing journalistic investigating...they didnt want to hurt Foleys feelings by drudging up bad news. God if this doesnt just frakin burn me up to no end. They are commenting on the short exchange about the picture. How is it ABC news has come up with all the nasty little IM's but only they saw a couple.

And he was getting kinky while holding up a vote in the house. Sick Frak.


Maf54: I miss you
Teen: ya me too
Maf54: we are still voting
Maf54: you miss me too

The exchange continues in which Foley and the teen both appear to describe having sexual orgasms.

Maf54: ok..i better go vote..did you know you would have this effect on me
Teen: lol I guessed
Teen: ya go vote…I don't want to keep you from doing our job
Maf54: can I have a good kiss goodnight
Teen: :-*
Teen:

The House voted that evening on HR 1559, Emergency War Time supplemental appropriations.

According to another message, Foley also invites the teen and a friend to come to his house near Capitol Hill so they can drink alcohol.

Teen: are you going to be in town over the veterans day weekend
Maf54: I may be now that your coming
Maf54: who you coming to visit
Teen: haha good stuff
Teen: umm no one really

Maf54: we will be adjourned ny then
Teen: oh good
Maf54: by
Maf54: then we can have a few drinks
Maf54: lol
Teen: yes yes ;-)
Maf54: your not old enough to drink
Teen: shhh…
Maf54: ok
Teen: that's not what my ID says
Teen: lol
Maf54: ok
Teen: I probably shouldn't be telling you that huh
Maf54: we may need to drink at my house so we don't get busted.


Oh you got busted alright you freakin sicko.

Source of IM's

Source of External Source

Edited for Links

[edit on 3-10-2006 by S1LV3R4D0]

[edit on 3-10-2006 by S1LV3R4D0]

mod edit to attach external quote code

[edit on 3-10-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Well that is very nice to know in which State of mind our elected officials in congress are when they are voting for issues that affect us the people.

He is not the only one that is in some kind of state in congress, be alcohol, anti depressants, corruption, deviant behavior or just thinking with who they are going to release the stress that day.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Between this and Dateline's "To Catch a Predator", it seems like the majority of men in our society are pedophiles.


Well I'd say there are a few things contributing to the current problem (which is not really anything new, but open discussion of it is).

1) The changing definition of "childhood" - up until about a hundred years ago or so, teens past puberty were not considered "children" but "young adults". The idea that teens are children is a relatively new phenomenon, triggered by the need for workers in a technological society to have an extended formal secondary education.

Prior to the Industrial Revolution, once a person hit 13 or so, they were considered to be young adults, and expected to start working out in the fields in rural areas, or taking up an apprenticeship in urban ones. 16 all the way down to 12 or 13 was seen as a "marriagable age". That most people don't seem to remember this anymore is a function of:

2) The growth of the mass media. The media we know today is, again, a recent phenomenon. TV has been around since the 1950's, radio since the 1920's. Newspapers have been around for a while, but mass circulation of periodicals like we know today again only dates to the mid 1800's - before that they were a luxury enjoyed mainly by the elites. The mass media has shaped the public consciousness to such an extent that we have trouble understanding what life for most people was like beore it appeared on the scene. We imagine that social mores were something like the ones we have today, but in fact they were very, very different (see item 1).

Radio and television, the first true "mass" media, only came on the scene much more recently, and started changing the mental landscape of society. Before the mass media, there were in effect two moralities, one that people professed publicly, and one that they actually lived by. IE harmless variations like homosexuality were just as common as today, simply not discussed. A harmful variation: the sexual abuse of children (by which I mean prepubescents) was probably far more common than it is today, precisely because it was not publicly discussed, and the perpetrators could get away with it more easily - this was true probably up until the late 70's/early 80's.

The presence of a mass media, whose economic imperatives determine a need to continually shock, changed all this. Taboo subjects started coming out into the open, especially after the initial furor over:

3) The birth control pill. For the first time, a widespread, reliable method of contraception came on the scene. This triggered what we now call the Sexual Revolution (which had really been brewing since the 1890's, but exploded in the 1960's) - as heterosexual intercourse no longer necessarily led to pregnancy, a lot of the old social structures surrounding sexuality no longer served a useful purpose, and started falling apart. With the increasing frankness over sexuality, scientists began looking at sexual behavior more carefully and the public began discussing their findings including:

4) The recognition of pedophilia as a psychological disorder. Pedophilia, is defined by psychologists as a sexual interest in preadolescent children, has made it's way into the public discourse. Unfortunately the meaning of the term has become distorted as it's done so, due largely to point #1.

What was a very specific disorder with very specific traits has come to be defined as any sexual interest in perople regarded as "too young" - the definition of which depends entirely on where you are and who you talk to. Concurrently, people who in reality simply are irresponsible and looking for easy targets have come to see themselves as not people making ethically wrong choices, but as victims of a pathology who "cannot help themselves" - thus easing the guilt that might otherwise stop them from acting on their desires. And those desires are stoked by another trend:

5) The rise of the teen sex symbol. Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, etc... It's noteworthy that both of these popular sex symbols rose to fame in their teens. There are male equivalents - Leonardo Dicaprio was one, Aaron Carter, the New Kids On The Block, etc etc... the emphasis on youthful beauty has become more prevalent in our society at the same time as we're redefining "childhood" later and later. Naturally leading to a very confused attitude towards teen sexuality - it's the thing everyone is trained to want, and the desire everyone is trained to despise at the same time.

It's a means of social control.

As for SO's original point, I dont think we're talking about anything new. The powerful have always sought to indulge in the very behaviors they publicly campaign against. And they've always used their power to get access to exotic and forbidden sexual acts. This kind of thing goes back to Emperor Tiberius and no doubt long before written history.

And it's no coincidence that Tom Foley publicly protrayed himself as a crusader against the sexual abuse of kids - it was to protect himself from public exposure. To point suspicion away from himself.


[edit on 10/3/06 by xmotex]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:42 PM
link   





On June 29 1989, the Washington Times' Paul M. Rodriguez and George Archibald reported on a Washington D.C. prostitution ring that had intimate connections with the White House all the way up to President George H.W. Bush. Male prostitutes had been given access to the White House and the article also cited evidence of "abduction and use of minors for sexual perversion."

In July 1990 a Nebraska Grand Jury was convened to hear allegations that Lawrence "Larry" King, then manager of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union and a rising Republican party star, along with Washington lobbyists, had set up a child prostitution ring in which minors were transported around the country and forced to have sex with King, other top officials, and according to victims who some allege were later harassed into recanting, then-Vice-President Bush.

The Grand Jury dismissed the case as a hoax but former Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp later investigated the claims and was horrified to learn that they were indeed legitimate.



prisonplanet.com...

IN THE MEANTIME, TAKE NOTICE OF THE STORY BELOW:





From our you've-got-to-be-kidding-me file, we discover that, slipping quietly by yesterday, was Child Health Day 2006, which was officially designated by George W. Bush on September 28.

"Each year on Child Health Day, we emphasize the importance of keeping our children safe, encouraging them to practice healthy habits, and educating and empowering them to avoid risky behavior," reads the president's proclamation for October 2. "Parents are children's first teachers, and they play a crucial role in promoting good health and helping young people grow into responsible, moral, and productive adults."

True enough… Good thing they probably never intended on citing Republican Congressmen as standard-bearers in helping kids "avoid risky behavior" or that would have been an embarrassing last-minute deletion, huh?



Ironic.

Source




posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Ironic indeed, dg very ironic.

I still think that all this mess has been brought at the right time for a purpose.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Well, there's no time like the present. If this doesnt open up some eyes, i dont know what will.

Oh, forgot, there could be a major attack right about now to counteract all this.
Almost forgot.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

I still think that all this mess has been brought at the right time for a purpose.






I think you may be right.

But what on earth could be so much worse than this, that they let this out to keep the really bad thing hidden? What is the reaally bad thing?

Any ideas?





posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   
That is very interesting DG. I think once we dig deep enough we will find its not just a Republican thing, but a group of sick puppies on both sides of the political coin. We probably are only seeing the Rep side at the moment. Which begs the question. Is this the october surprise Rove aluded to??? Does he WANT the Dems to win??? Does he know something we dont??? Just wondering cuz im utterly flabbergasted at all this info. At least now i know im not insane when i was checkin out the Dekamp investigations a few yrs ago and totally believing them.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I too see the timing of this "scandal" very curious.

The Chemtrails are back big time.

Mucho military activity in the skies.

Rove's "October surprise" comment.

UFO activity up north after almost two years of nothing.



High strangness will be OK but orchestrated violence won't!

I'm pessimistic!



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
But what on earth could be so much worse than this, that they let this out to keep the really bad thing hidden? What is the reaally bad thing?

Any ideas?


Sure... everything else.

While the dumbfounded American media piles this scandal high and deep, everyone's eyes will be off the madness in the occupied countries, global warning, non-event terrorism, economic troubles, and Walmart uniform changes.

Nothing diverts attention like a scandal. And no scandal is better than a sex scandal.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Well, i agree that the corruption embraces both sides in politics, not just Republicans.

What could be worse? I have no idea, but it will leak out eventually, i guess.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex

1) The changing definition of "childhood" - up until about a hundred years ago or so, teens past puberty were not considered "children" but "young adults". The idea that teens are children is a relatively new phenomenon, triggered by the need for workers in a technological society to have an extended formal secondary education.

Prior to the Industrial Revolution, once a person hit 13 or so, they were considered to be young adults, and expected to start working out in the fields in rural areas, or taking up an apprenticeship in urban ones. 16 all the way down to 12 or 13 was seen as a "marriagable age".

The rise of the teen sex symbol. Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, etc... It's noteworthy that both of these popular sex symbols rose to fame in their teens. ...

the emphasis on youthful beauty has become more prevalent in our society at the same time as we're redefining "childhood" later and later. Naturally leading to a very confused attitude towards teen sexuality - it's the thing everyone is trained to want, and the desire everyone is trained to despise at the same time.

It's a means of social control.

[edit on 10/3/06 by xmotex]


Excellent response xmotex! These statements in your post really stood out for me. It leads me to believe that men feel their attraction to "young adults" is really quite normal. It changes my thinking.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex

1) The changing definition of "childhood" - ...

2) The growth of the mass media...

3) The birth control pill...

4) The recognition of pedophilia as a psychological disorder...

5) The rise of the teen sex symbol...


I think you've done a great job summarizing why it's such a tough issue to talk about. We shouldn't be surprised how confused kids are about sexuality when we've built a society that's so full of mixed messages and then refuse to talk about any of it.

I do think using the term "pedophile" in regards to Foley is inaccurate, as you've demonstrated, however I think we can all agree that nomatter what the accurate term is, it's still completely inappropriate and arguably criminal.

On another topic. Regarding "The Franklin Coverup" SO posted a link to, didn't I read somewhere that there was an investigation that concluded the whole thing was a hoax? I could be wrong about that. And even if true, it doesn't mean it didn't happen, we all know how good these "investigations" are *cough*WarrenCommision*cough*



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 09:01 AM
link   
SkepticOverlord

I missed this thread when you posted it.

Do you have a link to the specific Drudge headline you make reference to?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join