Scott ritter works for homeland security?

-----------------------
The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info
-----------------------

Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:30 am

A hot-for-kids press guy in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Public Affairs has been busted by (among others) the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Posted by Tim B. on 04/05/2006 at 11:26 AM
    1. The stupidity of online pedophiles never ceases to amaze me (while at the same time I’m grateful that they are that stupid).  Do they never read the myriad news stories about police units that manage to arrest dozens upon dozens of pedophiles simply by posing as kids online?

      Pedophiles are extremely clever at covering their tracks, so unless there’s a documented history, it’s practically impossible to know until it’s too late that you’ve hired one.

      I’m one RWDB who believes the penalties concerning pedophiles are too lax.  I believe conviction should mean a life sentence without parole, no exceptions, because they are rarely, if ever, rehabilitated.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 05 at 12:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. Yeah, sicko bastard…smart too…Doyle also sent photos of himself to the detective, which were not sexually explicit but did serve to further positively identify him.

      But then we in the States have had a hell of a lot of these lately….

      Claymont teacher charged with having sex with 13-year-old student.

      A 34-year-old teacher from the Brandywine School District has been charged with having a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old student.

      Rachel L. Holt, a science teacher at Claymont Elementary School, allegedly had sex with the boy 28 times during one week in March, according to New Castle County police spokesman Cpl. Trinidad Navarro.

      Delaware Online

      For some reason the females have been getting off, (NO NOT THAT WAY) with much lighter sentences, if any at all.

      Debra LaFave Received no jail time….and why wasn’t I in that god damn school?…:).

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 05 at 12:31 PM • permalink

 

    1. He’s bringing a whole new meaning to “Big Brother”.
      How could he come to this conclusion?:
      I’m 50ish and fat, she’s 13… yeah, she wants me…

      Crush his nuts with a hammer.

      Posted by Texas Bob on 2006 04 05 at 12:41 PM • permalink

 

    1. For some reason the females have been getting off, (NO NOT THAT WAY) with much lighter sentences, if any at all.

      Debra LaFave Received no jail time….and why wasn’t I in that god damn school?…:).

      That last bit answers the “for some reason” part, I think!

      If you want to see pedophiles dealt with they way they probably should be, read some Andrew Vacchs novels.

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 04 05 at 02:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. Glad they are not Vacchs-uous novels.

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 04 05 at 04:11 PM • permalink

 

    1. El Cid, you’re right about our female pedophiles usually getting off easy, but that’s just wrong.  A pedophile is a pedophile is a… they all deserve the same treatment.

      And, JTreacher, I have read those novels.  Andrew Vachss is my kind of guy.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 05 at 04:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. Geezz, what next?

      The President getting a BJ from an intern in the White House?

      Posted by rinardman on 2006 04 05 at 07:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. No cigar games supplanting foreign policy duties either.

      But where is the dumpster?

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 04 05 at 08:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. Questions for Tim:
      Why the reference to Scott Ritter? Do you support the Anti-ACLU brigade?

      Posted by Skeptic on 2006 04 05 at 10:48 PM • permalink

 

    1. Don’t you mean the anti-NAMBLA brigade, Skeptic?

      Posted by PW on 2006 04 05 at 11:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. PW, no I meant what I wrote. I don’t even know what NAMBLA is.

      Posted by Skeptic on 2006 04 06 at 12:41 AM • permalink

 

    1. I want to support the Anti-ACLU Brigade. Do you have a link to their website where I can donate funds?

      Posted by Texas Bob on 2006 04 06 at 03:25 AM • permalink

 

    1. I don’t even know what NAMBLA is.

      Old car, stopped making them many years ago. Here’s a picture of one….:).

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 04 06 at 04:47 AM • permalink

 

    1. I heard that Vacchs was a real cow. Did he write Madame Boviney?

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 04 06 at 06:39 AM • permalink

 

    1. Texas Bob They do have a website.

      stoptheaclu.org

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 04 06 at 12:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. NAMBLA, for those who don’t know, is the North American Man/Boy Love Association, organized by a group of pedophiles who thought they could persuade the rest of us that pedophilia is normal and natural and should not be judged by our outmoded concepts.  I’m not sure if it still exists, or if they have been hunted down by the parents of molested children.  I’m hoping for the latter.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 04 06 at 01:05 PM • permalink

 

    1. Apparently they still exist, or at least their site is still up.  Ugh.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 06 at 05:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. I’m still wondering why Skeptic felt like bringing up the ACLU in regards to Scott Ritter. Is that what they’re concerning themselves with now, media spotlight-hogging pedophile morons? Maybe it is time for another free speech-defending organization to take the ACLU’s place, then.

      Posted by PW on 2006 04 06 at 06:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. How are those comprehension skills PW? I mentioned the Anti-ACLU org (Stop the ACLU) not the ACLU because Tim’s link was to their site. And I mentioned Scott Ritter because, well, let’s see, what’s the title of this thread?

      Posted by Skeptic on 2006 04 06 at 08:22 PM • permalink

 

    1. And linking to a site constitutes approval of that site overall, umm, how exactly? Tim has linked to Kos and the like before, sometimes even without commentary as he did here. Besides, Tim’s humorous headline linked Ritter to the DHS kerfuffle, not to these anti-ACLU folks. That’s what you did, and I’m still wondering what your perceived link between Ritter and either the anti-ACLU or the ACLU is. All you seem to have is “Tim dislikes pedophiles, especially Scott Ritter” and “these anti-ACLU guys dislike pedophiles, and they dislike the ACLU for defending pedophiles”, ergo “Tim must be supporting the anti-ACLU guys”. Thanks for proving once again that you’re a prime case of a commenter whose reasoning skills don’t live up to his pompous posting handle. The only skepticism you’re managing to engender around here is skepticism about your mental faculties. Does posting regularly on Dunlop’s site and Larvatus Prodeo (or whichever lefty blog it was that I saw you at) atrophy the brain that much?

      But hey, keep asking the “important” questions like you did on this thread, it’s pretty much all you’ve shown to be good for in your comments, so who am I to tell you to give up your only raison d’être for posting on this blog? You’re locked into an exciting competition with gustov_deleft for the “Most Annoying Mosquito” prize!

      Posted by PW on 2006 04 07 at 09:48 AM • permalink

 

    1. And linking to a site constitutes approval of that site overall, umm, how exactly?

      Uh oh.  Does that mean I have to join NAMBLA now?

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 07 at 02:14 PM • permalink

 

Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.