Thursday, 17 October 2013


A few days ago Aangirfan did a blog post on Joe and Jadin Bell

in which he/she allowed the posters to attack Christians and call us homophobic. I was attacked for talking about the Pindown abuse, persecution of victims and cover up.

Those posts have been removed now.

The next day Aangirfan devoted a whole blog post on me and let a creepy psychologist leave a comment about me having Asperger Syndrome. Although the post was based on another blog post about me by the one time newspaper reporter John Ward (who has been since blacklisted and persecuted by the shutter uppers) Aangirfan hijacked it for no good purpose _ John Ward did have good intentions, he was trying to expose the Pindown child abuse cover up - Aangirfan only posted the post he/she did on me in order to attack me because of what had been said the day before.

Now I think it is very funny that Aangirfan has put up this post about Asperger Syndrome. Funny and creepy.

Disclaimer: the posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Thursday, October 17, 2013


Photo by kingdomany.

"This boy was born with Asperger's syndrome.

"He was often bullied by older kids and even grown-ups.

"We bought some biscuits for him but the older kids and grown-ups came to rob him every several minutes when we were not beside him.

"I protected him until he finished the biscuits.

"That last day, when we were leaving, that boy saw me in the minibus and waved his hands excitedly.

"I was so happy he remembered me."

Take the online Aspergers Test | Aspergers Test Site

Autism and Asperger syndrome - Treatment - NHS Choices

Many famous and successful people have Asperger's Syndrome.

Asperger's is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, alongside restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests.

This failure to react appropriately to social interaction may appear as disregard for other people's feelings, and may come across as insensitive.


Autism diagnoses level off in Britain after five-fold surge during the 1990s

Madeleine McCann - Exposing the Myths

Joris Demmink Plot Thickens: His New Criminal Defence Lawyer

Posted by Anon at 8:40 AM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook

Labels: Asperger's, bullying

No comments:

Post a Comment

Older Post Home

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


Zoompad said...


Anonymous comments:

My first husband was an extreme verbal abuser.

I put up with it for 8 years, although I would listen to his invective in case I could learn anything from it.

One day, when I was unemployed, he screamed red-faced (and spat, as he stamped his foot at me):

Everybody f-ing hates you at work. Your managers, the people you sit next to....they all f-ing hate you.

It hit me like a bolt from above.......HE WAS SHOUTING AT HIMSELF.

Thus was I introduced to the phenomenon of projection.

We criticise in others what we criticise in ourselves.

As Peter T says: Some people are gay. Get over it!

Some sexual abuse survivors (understandably) cannot accept that at times their bodies may have responded to the abuse, or that they perceived their responses as enjoyment.

Some may run for shelter in religion and project the fact that they have not accepted themselves onto others.....hiding behind the Bible.

Zoompad said...

"Some sexual abuse survivors (understandably) cannot accept that at times their bodies may have responded to the abuse, or that they perceived their responses as enjoyment. "

The person who wrote this has had access to my medical and social work records.

These abusive cowards claim their victims egged them on or enjoyed it, or even turn the whole thing on its head and claim they were the ones that were abused by the child!

Zoompad said...

"As Peter T says: Some people are gay. Get over it!"

I wonder why Peter T's friends never quote from The Betrayal Of Youth? They seem to want to forget the existance of that particular publication!,d.ZG4

Zoompad said...



By Stephen Green – 20th February 2010

Peter Tatchell in the 2003 London ‘gay pride’ parade demonstrating against Robert Mugabe

Click here to view pages from The Betrayal of Youth

It was the start of a liberated sexual new dawn. The era of ‘Why not?’ Archaic laws restricting sexual practices and relationships were going to be swept away. No-one was to say who should do sexual things with whoever, or how. Sexual liberation had become – for some reason – a vital part of true Socialism. If adults consented, then, hey, why should the Church, or the Government, or assorted boring old fuddy-duddies say no to them? And for that matter, if children wanted sex lives, or if adult homosexual men wanted sex lives with children, then that was all part and parcel of the glorious sexual revolution.

Or so it seemed in 1986, when the most extraordinary book of the decade, The Betrayal of Youth, (Click here for the Table of Contents) was published by CL publications in London with the sub-title “Radical Perspectives on Childhood Sexuality, Intergenerational Sex, and the Social Oppression of Children and Young People.”

The Betrayal of Youth (the initials spell ‘BOY’ of course) was edited by none less than Warren Middleton (alias John Parrott – NOT the snooker player) the then “vice-chairperson” of the Paedophile Information Exchange, Britain’s foremost paedophile advocacy and aficionado support group. They did indeed have a lot of vice to be chairperson of.


In a preface, Middleton acknowledged the help or support of Dr Ken Plummer of Essex University, Dr Brian Taylor of Sussex, Mr John Hart of Sheffield Poly, Chris and Jayne Hobbs, his mother and father, homosexual activist Jeffrey Weeks, Nettie Pollard of the National Campaign for Civil Liberty (now called just ‘Liberty’), assorted activists and feminists, and a large number of P.I.E. executive committee members.

The book was part of a campaign to abolish all ages of consent, destroy the responsibilities of parents for their children, deny any ill-effects on children of interference by paedophiles, and withal to make it easier for paedophiles to gain sexual access to children.

A host of weird sex-obsessed nutcases contributed, at Middleton’s invitation. Among them was militant feminist Beatrice Faust, another was the editor of the Sex Maniac’s Diary, Tuppy Owens. In fact she wrote a chapter with Tom O’Carroll, convicted of corrupting public morals earlier by sending out a list of paedophile contacts.

Labour activist Eric Presland, playwright and leading light in the Organisation for Lesbian and Gay Action (OLGA), contributed to The Betrayal of Youth. His article was a routine denunciation of the “power” that adult society has over children, prefaced by a first-person account of sexual activity with children. Mr Presland related his first paedophile experience with a Asian boy of thirteen, and boasted of interfering with a little boy of six.

Zoompad said...


‘Parents,’ he wrote, ‘because of their autocratic power, their exclusive rights, and dubious motives of self-aggrandisement which lie behind the decision to have and rear children, are in many ways the group least fitted to be entrusted with the task of child-rearing.’ So who are? Reading his chapter one is left with a strong impression that he thinks paedophiles make the best child-rearers. Presland wrote of one pre-pubescent sexual partner, ‘I fought for him to free himself from the confines of the family.’

Two of the editorial collective of the far-left Peace News, Miss Kathy Challis and Miss Elizabeth Holtom, the latter a Quaker, contributed a chapter for The Betrayal of Youth. In it they ventured an opinion that would have been viewed with astonishment by Josephine Butler in her fight against child prostitution 100 years earlier: ‘Ages of consent are useless. They are completely unrealistic, and they don’t give children protection from exploitation in any case.’

The former chairman of the Paedophile Information Exchange, Steve Smith, contributed a chapter to The Betrayal of Youth. The biographical notes said coyly he “now resides in Holland ” – he fled there to avoid conviction for sending obscene articles through the post – and he “now hopes to become active in the Dutch crusade for children’s rights.” Presumably he did just that, until even the Dutch lost patience, deporting Smith back to the UK and 18 months at Her Majesty’s pleasure in 1991.


A member of the PIE executive revealed the group’s early thinking on consent law in the Scottish Minorities Group homosexual paper:

‘Adults should be prohibited under CIVIL law from having relationships with children under 4, and in the case of children over 3 and under 10 a similar civil injunction could also be made by those close to the child …. For children between 10 and 18 there should be no legal restriction in cases which did not involve proven physical/psychological harm. Ten is the legal age of responsibility and if a child is deemed responsible for its criminal acts then it should be responsible for its own sex life.’

But Roger Moody, an ‘out’ paedophile intellectual, set out a political stratagem, the key to which was “a revolutionary perspective on social change.” Roger Moody explains:

‘Specifically, this means we don’t work to lower the age of consent, but to abolish it, and we don’t argue that rights over kids be transferred from courts to parents, but that the only people who have the right to kid’s rights – are the kids themselves.’

This was the philosophy behind The Betrayal of Youth for which Peter Tatchell wrote his chapter ‘Questioning Ages of Majority and Ages of Consent.’ His chapter preceded Moody’s offering: ‘Ends ‘and Means; How to Make Paedophilia Acceptable.’

Zoompad said...


At the height of the Cleveland child sex abuse scandal, Peter Tatchell was allowed to comment on it on the Jimmy Young TV programme and promptly advocated ‘rights’ for children, In The Betrayal of Youth Mr Tatchell, homosexual activist, self-proclaimed ‘children’s rights campaigner’ and described as an ‘avid supporter of socialism,’ according to the biographical details, tried to make the legal molestation of children an ingredient of democracy:

‘In a fully democratic and egalitarian society, there can be no question of adults usurping the rights of young people by keeping them in a state of ignorance, fear and guilt, or by resort to arbitrary and autocratic laws which deny them responsibility for decisions affecting their lives.’

When I pressed him on this point in a debate at the Oxford Union it turned out that the abolition of the ‘arbitrary and autocratic’ age of consent law applied to children of twelve. My suggestion that it might involve children even as young as ten did not even cause Tatchell to blink. After all, the whole point of his article and the theme of The Betrayal of Youth was that there should be no age of consent at all.

Indeed, Tatchell wrote in The Betrayal of Youth that the age of majority (sexual consent) is ‘Re-inforcing a set of increasingly quaint, minority moral values left over from the Victorian era.’ The idea that they might just protect children from predatory men, men like his co-contributors, is not one that found any sympathy with Peter Tatchell.

Zoompad said...


When I was on BBC’s The Big Questions on 8th January this year, Peter Tatchell was one of the podium guests. I was asked by the production crew not to comment about paedophilia in connection with Tatchell. The request had come from Tatchell himself. That incident prompted this article. And why should Tatchell make such a request? Not the Oxford Union debate, but another event almost sixteen years ago is still in his mind.
On the Judy Finnegan television show on Sunday 8th May 1994, just eight years after its publication, I accused Peter Tatchell of contributing a chapter to The Betrayal of Youth, which I described as a paedophile book.

Tatchell is of course the leader of the homosexual media stunt group Outrage. When the homosexual ‘age of consent’ was last lowered – to 16 – an Outrage banner was photographed saying ’16 is just a start’.

Anyway, Tatchell called me a liar, and threatened me with a suit for libel. In the “hospitality suite” afterwards he became abusive and violent. Obviously, Tatchell’s contribution to the book on its own, let alone the company in which he placed himself, is now a source of great embarrassment to him, as indeed it should be. No writ was ever received, of course.


For the high-minded socialists and homosexuals of the 1970s and 1980s, sexuality was seen as just one aspect of the way in which children were exploited by patriarchal capitalism. Campaign for Homosexual Equality chairman Michael Jarrett was identifying paedophiles as an oppressed group, and the CHE list of “demands” included the complete abolition of minimum ages for sexual activity. The Labour Gay Rights Manifesto of 1985 said ‘A socialist society would superseded the family household. … Gay people and children should have the right to live together. … It follows from what we have already said that we favour the abolition of the age of consent.’

So was Peter Tatchell out on a limb writing in a book advocating paedophilia, edited by a known paedophile? It is true that a lot of the loony homosexual left thought the same as he did and some of them were active paedophiles as well. But most of them stayed clear of contributing to this vile book. We should be clear that there is no evidence that Peter Tatchell was or ever has been a paedophile – but he certainly gave them support and was in company with them in The Betrayal of Youth.


But twenty-four years later, and with Peter Tatchell elevating himself to the status of ‘human rights activist,’ helping a bunch of child-abusers achieve what they thought were their ‘human rights’ to interfere with small children doesn’t seem quite such a clever thing to have done. Are Tatchell’s views at an intellectual level still the same? Does he realise the implications of them? Does he understand that he provided support to a bunch of men who wanted nothing less than to interfere with little tots? Who approached whom to secure his contribution to this shameful book? Was he aware that Warren Middleton (alias John Parrott), the editor of The Betrayal of Youth, was an avowed child molester? Was he aware that at least two other active paedophiles were contributors? Is he still in contact with Middleton and his cronies? Has he ever renounced them? Answers to these questions will reveal much about Peter Tatchell’s mind, agenda and judgment.

Zoompad said...



Zoompad said...



Criminal defence lawyer said...

I loved your article.Really looking forward to read more.

Civil rights massachusetts said...

Civil rights massachusetts