Six-year-old boy accused of sexual abuse

Submitted by Matt on Wed, 2007-09-19 03:29

The war on boys is unabated. Read this story and gawk at the insanity. Excerpt:

'THE Education Department has investigated claims a six-year-old student ran a "sex club" at an eastern suburban primary school, involving up to up to half a dozen grade 1 students.
...
The mother has been unable to make a police report because the law states sexual assault by a child under 10 cannot be prosecuted.

"Victims of a perpetrator who is under the age of 10 should still have the same rights as any other victim of a sexual crime," she said.'

"Crime"? At the age of 6 showing off your wanky is a criminal act that some think should be punishable as such? The article shows how the matter has become a political issue to be addressed in a legislature! When I was in grade school boys who showed off their wankies were sent to the principal's office, maybe they got a note to take home to show mom and dad, and that settled it. Now it has become a matter for legislators? Absolute madness.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Yes, and you can see how a new branch of the abuse industry is likely to come into being out of the hysteria generated. An indignant mother has already formed "SWAG" and is demanding changes to the Education department to tackle the "problem". You can bet that the resultant organisation, whatever form it takes, will be stuffed full of misandric busybodies, eagerly searching out all those other 6-year old boys (sorry, incipient rapists) who express any interest in their genitalia, in order to expose them as sex fiends and demand ruthless punishment. Next they will be applying for government grants to carry on and expand their vital work. You know the rest. Anyone want to bet against said indignant mum finding herself in a well-paid job as CEO of a boy-busting quango a couple of years down the line?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by PaulP on Wed, 2007-09-19 06:03

***The Daily Faecie - Since 1933 - "All The News That's Shit To Print!"***

September 18, 2007
Weather today: You're gonna get wet, sucker!

Presenting From the Editor's Desk a Two-Part Series of Investigative Articles, called..

LET'S PANIC!!!

(Dunn Geep, Idaho) Now comes to this reporter's attention, that there is a horrendous sex ring among some of the children in almost all neighborhoods in the U.S., and they can all be tied to a central, secretive scheme to extort nickels from kids in return for "sexual favors" (showing one's privies). And it turns out that this vast web of mischief can be traced back to at least the early 1970's (when patriarchal rule was at its peak). For example, when this reporter was in high school, a nine-year-old boy known in the neighborhood as "Dinky" showed his wang to Sally one day (after she dared him to..women start early, don't they?). Then a few days later, she told her friend Terri what Dinky had done, so Terri wanted to see his thingy too. But as Dinky did not want to develope a reputation for "hanging out", he told Terri that Jim's was bigger, and she should go look at his.

Well, it turns out that Jim had already shown his to Marlene, and that there was even another guy in the neighborhood who had shown his to virtually ever kid in town. And, the neighborhood bully had collected a total of up to 80 cents, by blackmailing the lewd exhibitionist boys..if they didn't fork over a nickel each, their parents would be notified of what they had done, and they would each have to spend a whole day in their rooms as punishment!! Of course the girls would not have been punished, even if they did show theirs..as feminists had already made inroads into establishing the "innocent bystander" status of all females (later to become "victim" status)...
[Marvin Fonebone contributed to this story]

See installment two on front page tomorrow!!

potrzebie

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Wed, 2007-09-19 06:37

...prevailing-- for now anyway...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22445628-421,00.html

Still it should never have even come up.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by mcc99 on Wed, 2007-09-19 15:00

Walsh says the law is not meant for but only the bad Sex offender and not for level 1 only the worst level 3? Then why is his law doing this to kids and also so many other families from years ago. John Walsh is a liar as he say's he worked very close with Mark Foley on the law. He knows what it says he is a LIAR PERIOD. See what he told CNN on different interviews.

http://johnwalshournewgod.blogspot.com/

Duke

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by duke on Wed, 2007-09-19 22:43

That's a very good start on an informative website. But the grammar and html formatting are a little off. I "might know someone" who can be of assist..

-ax

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Thu, 2007-09-20 06:23

AWA allows the addition of minors to the National Sex Offender registry. Creating a whole new national feminist run bureaucracy to think of ways to identify as many boys as possible sex offenders, target them for processing (AKA, getting police 'must arrest' policies in place and prosecutorial 'No drop' rules in place to compliment the 'must arrest' laws) and make sure as many as possible end up on the National sex offender registry for the sole purpose of pointing to their pictures on the registry and saying "We were right! Oh, and by the way we need more funding..."

Trust me, I will make anyone a bet payable in 10 years, that AWA will turn out to be MUCH worse for men and boys then VAWA as it opens the door wide for nightmares we haven't yet imagined to be perpetrated against men and boys.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Paragon on Thu, 2007-09-20 15:25