Last Saturday I was reading the Daily Mail and found myself sickened even by the normal standards that a human and a man finds himself upon reading that femiservative exploitative rag (which now has strong links with the men’s human rights movement).
The reason for my nausea was an article by journalist Amanda Platell detailing the horror of child porn websites that are supposedly just a click away on Google, and which contain hardcore images of children being violently raped.
I was sickened for three reasons. Firstly, because her article is likely to have been wildly exaggerated, in the hope that Amanda and her female middle-aged readers can content themselves knowing that further draconian
teen child porn laws are on their way after such an ‘expose’. Millions of pounds, and the efforts of countless police forces and IT experts worldwide, are poured into taking down child porn sites as soon as they appear online. It is highly unlikely that hardcore violent child porn sites could be found so easily via Google, as Platell claims, when Google bases its search alogorithm and ranks websites upon the basis of factors such as the age of a site and the number of visits it recieves.
Secondly, because the article, as well as appealing to the sexual insecurities of its female middle-aged readership, was also blatently appealing to the suppressed desires of the paedocrite male readers who make up the rest of that newspaper’s demographic :
One video I watched, of 24 minutes in length, came up when I typed ‘teen schoolgirls abused’ — another of Hazell’s searched-for phrases.
It starts with a sweet-looking girl in her early teens, walking home in her school uniform: long white socks, short skirt and, as we discover later, pristine white cotton underwear.
It’s a stilted performance. But while the girl is clearly acting a role, the fear in her face appears to be all too real.
A man is watching her in a car parked outside her house. His accent is a peculiar hybrid of British and American. We learn he’s been stalking the girl for weeks. He knows when she gets home from school that she is alone for an hour before her parents arrive back from work.
He tricks his way into her home and within minutes is violating her, before forcing her to perform a sex act on him. Then he rapes her, in every possible position, all captured in close-up. ‘No one has to get hurt,’ he says to the child, ‘if you do what I say.’ He tells her she’s ‘secretly enjoying it’.
His other repeated refrain is: ‘Don’t you tell a soul or I’ll come back and hurt you.’ And hurt her he does. Not forgetting his final phrase: ‘This is our secret.’
Of course, detailing the fact that the ‘sweet looking girl’ was wearing ‘pristine white cotton underwear’, was absolutely essential for journalistic integrity. It had nothing to do with titilating the subhuman paedocrite readers who would scream outrage and loudly demand to hang every paedo by the balls, whilst attempting to ignore their own massive hardon lest their wives should notice. And no doubt, the middle-aged wives reading that article could relive their own fantasy of being an innocent attractive young girl again, instead of aging old hags, young, pretty, and virginal enough to still attract even the the violent predations of thuggish males.
But the third reason I was sickened was because here was a Daily Mail journalist brazenly admitting to watching hardcore violent child pornography, with the intention of titillating her readers and selling more editions of her rag paper, and yet I knew she would not be arrested because, firstly she’s a woman, and secondly, she would claim she did so for the purpose of ‘research’ (the classic). In fact, I was ready to write an article here titled ‘ Daily Mail’s Amanda Platell admits to viewing child porn – no arrests made’.
However, I may have been wrong. It seems that Amanda Platell is rightfully facing investigation for viewing hardcore child pornography. The nation’s paedo-finder general, Mark Williams-Thomas (who led the Savile hysteria), reported her to the police – another example, it seems, of the accusers starting to accuse each other.
It is unlikely that Platell will face charges, given the corruption within the Metropolitan Police, but let’s hope it has at least given the paedophile and her editors some unpleasant moments.