Radio host Bernie Ward admits he e-mailed child porn to woman known as 'Sexfairy'

Source: mercury news

Former radio talk show host Bernie Ward offered a guilty plea in federal court in San Francisco today to one count of sending child pornography over the Internet in December 2004.
Ward, 57, a former host on KGO radio in San Francisco, admitted to the charge during a hearing before U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker. He told the judge he sent pornography containing sexually explicit pictures of minors by e-mail.

But at the request of Ward's defense lawyer, Walker deferred accepting the plea until the question of whether Ward must immediately be taken to prison is resolved.

Walker will rule on that question at a sentencing hearing Aug. 28. Defense attorney Doron Weinberg said that in the meantime, Ward's legal status is that he has tendered a guilty plea but the judge has taken whether to accept it under advisement.

The charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison and a possible maximum of 20 years. Weinberg said he expects Ward to spend at least four years and three months in prison even with credit for good behavior.



Read more: http://www.mercurynews.com/crime/ci_9196934?nclick_check=1

I was hoping against hope that he might not have done it.

But then he admits that he has transmitted child porn around 150 times.

Very disappointing.

He was a Catholic priest, so it's not that surprising that he's a pervert. :puke:

I am something of a pervert, but ONLY with mature, consenting adults ....

There is a huge difference between child-focused sexuality and ADULT sexuality, no matter how intense the desire or so called 'deviance' .... We are NOT free to steal a child's innocence, even as we are free to enjoy the sexual lusts of another adult ....

Testify!

And just as valid....

He was a radio talk show host, so it's not that surprising that he's a pervert.

(Six of one, half a dozen of the other...)

I have heard of people's love lives and business relationships ruined by these scum.

Just a thought.

Even his lawyers say he was collecting research for his book.

However, I personally think that this is the wrong approach to take in getting published. If I wanted to write a book about bank robbery, for instance, that's no excuse to be an accessory in a bank robbery.

I feel sorry for him, maybe he was trying to do the right thing, but I'm sure that he has plenty of money, and might as well spend a lot of time in prison and think about how he decided to make it. The people who funded him should think it over too.

...

Local channel had an in depth story about his misconduct as a young priest :

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/

For me, it is especially chilling, I've listened to him for some years now. This goes to show how the most seemingly trustworthy people can turn out to be truly evil.

The story mentioned how he will be attending his son's high school graduation. What a nightmare for his family.

I no longer think he is innocent. There is no way that I'd give a guilty plea if I was innocent. Plus the sheer number of the garbage he sent. It's horrible, he did such good work for homeless. Ironic, too, he was what he was condemning.

that even heroes can have their tragic flaws.

First off, let me state for the record, I absolutely LOVE Bernie Ward ... so maybe I'm a bit biased in what I have to say here. And I'm sure it will be unpopular with a fair number of you, and for this, I apologize in advance.

My biggest knock on Bernie in this whole thing is how bloody STUPID he was. How are you gonna be so dumb as to send illegal porn to someone you don't even know, that you just met over the internet? Bernie, my man, for someone SOOOOO friggin bright, how the HELL could you be so bleeding DUMB? Damn it, man!

Now I'll say what many will disagree with, but I really don't care, because this is just my own opinion. How is it that the possession of, or even the sending of, PICTURES, can be illegal? They are friggin PICTURES. Why is it someone with swatstika's tattooed on both cheeks could legally beat off to his library of pictures of, oh, just to be extreme, Jewish child victims in the concentration camps dead, and/or being brutally tortured, and THAT is just fine and dandy, but if they were 16 y.o's enjoying consentual sex, he could go to jail for 5 years? I really don't get that.

I do not believe a five-year prison sentence is appropriate for such a 'crime', it is far in excess of 'fair punishment'. I say this, not because I think kiddie porn is 'okay', in fact, I find it's existence to be very disturbing and sad. I say it for the same reason that I support throwing drug dealers in jail, but not drug users.

I do not believe Mr. Ward is being accused of distributing kiddie porn in the sense that I believe this law was intended to proscribe. IF he was guilty of being a part of MAKING MONEY off of this sort of material, if he was a PRODUCER, a PARTICIPANT, a web-site owner that made money, then, yeah, hey, throw the book at the fucker, and everyone else who takes part in PROFITTING off this material. Five years is not even enough in my book for an offense like that. If it could be shown that he BOUGHT child porn, and thus contributed to it's production, then, yeah, throw the book at him ... five years minimum sounds about right there.

But so far, I've heard nobody accuse him of these things. Furthermore, I've heard no mention that he had some huge library of kiddie porn on his computer. Nor have I heard anything about the actual CONTENT of said 'minor porn'. There's a bit of a difference, in the sickness level, between having a library of babies being gang-***** and having a few pics of 16-17 y.o. naked prostitutes from Thailand (where the age of consent is much lower) on your computer.

But even if he did have a bunch of really sick stuff, I think sentences of that level of extremity are way out of line for what Bernie did, assuming he was in NO WAY involved with actual PRODUCTION (and that would include contributing money in some way) of said material.

And I also think that it's EXTREMELY common that the very people who are attracted to such filth were THEMSELVES subjected to it. So I guess I find it in my heart to be a little forgiving for such souls. I don't think ANYone *chooses* what kind of sexual material floats their boat, and this is probably especially true of the victims of childhood sexual traumas.

I don't care what anyone says (unless you can show me proof Bernie was INVOLVED in funding or participating in kiddie porn production), I don't think Bernie should be going to jail for this. Sorry, I just don't.

And I refuse to believe Bernie Ward to be 'truly evil' purely based on his sending explicit pictures of minors over the internet to another adult. I think it takes a BIT more than that, especially given that he's been as stalwart a contributor to society as one could possibly hope someone to be. And for those of you who don't really *know* who Bernie is, let's just say he's as smart as Tom Hartman and as liberal as Mike Malloy. Losing him off the airwaves is a HUGE loss to 'our side', friends.

<asbestos suit donned>

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

I agree with you.

The day the defrocked Msgr. O'Shea actually goes to San Quentin for MOLESTING OVER 200 boys will be the day I might agree! Last I heard he is living a comfortable life somewhere near Chico, CA. :mad:

The day Rush Limbaugh is taken off the air, I might agree.

The day O'Reilly is taken off the air, I might agree.

The day Craig is no longer in the Senate, I might agree.

The day Foley is charged, I might agree.

I could go on and on with this but I hope the idea is planted in people's minds.

Who did Bernie Ward hurt besides himself and his family? WHO?

:kick:

WOW! The pedophile defenders come out from under their rocks. I can only think of one reason for someone to defend child pornography. Birds of a feather.

Is that called libel or slander, I always get those two mixed up?

Unless they are legal council.

You made *such* a powerful argument against the points I raised.

S'cuse me as I grovel and bow to your rhetorical and syllogistic prowess.

Here, lemme throw one more out there for ya, see what you can do with this:

Assuming that everyone who possesses sexually explicit pictures of minors (i.e. people under 18) *is* a pedophile (i.e. someone who habitually ACTUALLY attempts to/does have sexual relations with CHILDREN) is roughly akin to saying that everyone who possesses a gun is a murderer.

Or that everyone who enjoys pictures of women having sex with each other is a lesbian.

THE WHOLE POINT of my defense of Bernie is that there is NO EVIDENCE, nor even an ACCUSATION, of him being an active PEDOPHILE. If he was, I'm quite certain that none of us would DEFEND HIM.

I *might*, however, hesitate to condemn someone for this, if I were to learn that they themself had been sexually abused as a child. That's only because (I assume this isn't a NEWS FLASH to anyone) it's considered to be a common outcome of said abuse, and I happen to have a soft-spot for people who really didn't CHOOSE to be attracted to who/what they are attracted to. Frankly, to suggest that people who are attracted to children CHOSE to be that way makes about as much sense to me as suggesting that people CHOOSE to be gay. Who the *hell* would MAKE such a choice willingly, given the social stigma's involved? I doubt it's a coincidence that Bernie was raised strictly Catholic, let's put it that way.

Don't get me wrong, please, number one, I'm not conflating being gay with being an active pedophile, so please, nobody get their panties in a bunch over this comparison. The point is about people not having a real choice about what they are attracted to, and it's a point that I think very few people actually stop to think about, in their zeal and outrage, when the subject comes onto their radar. Think about it once more: Who would actually MAKE this choice?

Secondly, I'm ALL in favor of jailing people who ACTUALLY DO act out this proclivity, as well as anyone who is actually INVOLVED in the sexual exploitation of children, as I explained in my earlier post.

But jailing people because of who/what they fantasize about, or over pictures that they look at, simply based on an ASSUMPTION that they WILL act on these fantasies? I'm sorry, I can't get behind that.

Show me that he was involved in damaging or hurting a child, then it becomes an entirely different situation. And you can call me pedophile vis-a-vis a defender of such, if it makes you feel superior. I don't really give a shit what you call me. I know who and what I am, and what I've had to struggle to overcome ... and I can tell you for a *FACT* that such a description doesn't remotely apply.

<<But jailing people because of who/what they fantasize about, or over pictures that they look at, simply based on an ASSUMPTION that they WILL act on these fantasies?>>

So you don't think that a person who sent out all those photos of kids , some as young as four to 17 years old, and even described inappropriate sexual activity with his *own* children, has a history of sexual misconduct with underage girls, and up to now said it was just research, you don't think that's bad?

My understanding of pedophiles psychologically is that they cannot be cured. Also it's practically a given that just having the images won't satisfy them. They want to experience it. That's common sense, that's the behavior pattern. If they fantasize over a child of ANY age, that is sick. Pictures are just the beginning of it.

So please, I don't want to hear it. There is no excuse. None. If he was abused, then the abuse should have stopped THERE. He's supposed to be a man of God. He just makes me sick. It never is nor should it ever be, excusable.

I never said it wasn't 'bad'. OF COURSE it's bad. That wasn't the point.

If he *had* the inappropriate sexual activity with his children, throw the friggin book at him. As I said before.

I don't wanna be in a position of feeling like by defending things I disapprove of, lest people get the wrong idea about me personally. But ... in Bernie's defense, this 'misconduct' with underage girls was when he 27 years old, and these were (ALLEGEDLY) 16 and 17 y.o. girls who he obviously tried to seduce, even force himself on somewhat. While I do not CONDONE this, nor think it's RIGHT, he apparently stopped at that point, once he was rebuffed. He acted like a 'creep', very clearly, no argument. Nobody has accused him of, like, raping these girls. And this is, what, 25 YEARS ago? And thats ALL the 'past misdeeds' that anyone has come forward with, to the best of my knowledge, prior to this point?

And in regards to your dime-store 'psychological understanding' ... guess what? Addicts and alcoholics can't be 'cured', either ... but I bet you know at least of few of them who no longer drink or drug, don't you? Well, yeah, you sorta do, because you know me ... in a manner of speaking. Just because addiction is incurable and drug use has a TREMENDOUS lure to the addict does not mean they cannot abstain. And when you get down to it, ain't that what REALLY matters?

And I think that it is 'sick' to have fantasy's of kids as well, but guess what? You cannot make any such assumption about what someone is going TO DO, based on what they fantasize about or view pictures of. It may very well be the case that every active pederast looks at kiddie porn, but that does NOT logically infer the converse. It's something that is literally impossible to 'sample', because nobody knows what the billions of people who DON'T get into such trouble look at on their computers. This is basic logic 101 ... but it eludes many ...

And it's all well and good to dictate that 'the abuse should've stopped there' in righteous indignation, I don't disagree, yeah, hey, THAT WOULD BE NICE, wouldn't it? Kinda like it'd be NICE if people who grew up in alcoholic households DIDN'T become alcoholics... shoulda stopped there, right? Or that men who grew up in homes where their mom's got beat by their dads didn't grow up to do the same. Yeah, that'd be NICE, too, wouldn't it?

But given (again) that we pretty much *know* that, like the aforementioned scenarios, childhood sexual trauma produces a vicious cycle phenomena with quite some frequency ... so, perhaps next time we hear about like, some nine-year old kid getting abused, we should just put the child to death on the spot, eh? Since there's no hope for them and society can't risk the possibility that there are people running around who have perverted fantasies that we disapprove of because we *KNOW* what they're gonna end up doing because of them.

Cause NOBODY can resist their SEXUAL URGES if they're all PERVERSE, right? Nobody. Just can't be done...

Yeah, right. Whatever.

The reason I'm sticking up for Bernie is because I BELIEVE he wasn't abusing kids. And that he WOULDN'T, either. And if he has the proclivity, and yet DOES NOT do it? Then I don't think that he belongs in jail. In fact, I think, in a manner of speaking, what he has done by NOT acting on his fantasies (if he in fact has not) is worthy of some degree of applause.

One last thing, this woman was apparently some kind of dominatrix, right? Well, has it ever occurred to you the possibility that this whole thing was part of some kind of 'humiliation' fantasy, like, he was doing or saying the most DEPLORABLE stuff he could, in order to be chastised and degraded by this woman, because THAT was what he's *REALLY* into? And he just royally misjudged the situation with her?

Because to me, given the totality of the situation, given that NOBODY has come out since these charges were filed and said he abused them (yes, he acted like a creep 25 years ago, all drunk and stoned, I give you that ...) the humiliation scenario is the one that makes the most sense to me.

Not much sense in going on with this, but I think some points are revelant. First, my bias is with the children.
<<And it's all well and good to dictate that 'the abuse should've stopped there' in righteous indignation, I don't disagree, yeah, hey, THAT WOULD BE NICE, wouldn't it? Kinda like it'd be NICE if people who grew up in alcoholic households DIDN'T become alcoholics... shoulda stopped there, right? Or that men who grew up in homes where their mom's got beat by their dads didn't grow up to do the same. Yeah, that'd be NICE, too, wouldn't it?>>

And it would have been nice if in my own life my mother wouldn't have tried to kill me, or hated me so much I was forced to climb out a window so that she wouldn't have to see me. It would have been nice if my father wasn't convicted of armed robbery, and actually was a decent man. It would have been nice if my half brother as a result of my mother's raising him didn't spend his teen years in jail get into drugs, get off them, get a decent job, have kids and marry, only to find out his wife was cheating on him, get back on drugs and finally blow his head off. Yeah it would have been nice if my grandmother hadn't been hit by a drunken driver and killed. It would have been nice if my aunt hadn't been a heavy drinker who really didn't care after her husband died of alcoholism after he lost his job, and she just jumped into bed with an abusive bastard who dumped her, leading to her death.

Yeah it would have been nice if I didn't have to have been in therapy off and on since my teen years because of all this, it would be nice if I didnt have to battle my own addictions and mental illness that came out of my life. I was abused. I could have gone on to have kids and abused them. I swore to NEVER have kids. I stopped the cycle. The cycle can be stopped. I am fortunate, I fought hard, I fight each day to survive. Every damn day. With all that I can't even come CLOSE to understanding what people who were abused as children by molestors, especially priests, what they must go through.

It isn't 'dime store psychology" about pedophiles. They cannot be cured. I do not give two shakes of a lamb's tail which sickos are at home over their computers, being turned on by children, and they never do anything and they dont get caught. ANYTHING to do with what Bernie did is WRONG. Disgusting.
What he did to the women was WRONG. When one refused, he attempted to make her feel guilty. He was a damn priest. He abused her trust. Damage was done. Period. You think it makes it easier for her because she wasn't raped? Think again.

Let's take for argument's sake your business about he was into masochistic slave whatever. Right. So not only does he send pictures of young kids in all kinds of situations, he talks about HIS OWN KIDS so that she will scold him so he can get off? Baloney. He is SICK.

Do you know how he got caught? SHE turned him in.

As as to the nonsense about having to kill a kid who was abused because he or she may abuse, that is when you begin therapy if at all possible to PREVENT it. I know too well the damn world isn't ideal. I know many will not get help. Some will.

Bernie not only destroyed himself, he destroyed his family, his listeners, the liberal party he supported, the poor that were helped by his thanksgiving drives, his friends, and those children whom he never touched, may never have touched, but he clearly ABUSED, because he took part in exploiting them, like the monsters who did the photos in the first place did. Then he added to the garbage by having fantasies over his OWN kids.

There is no excuse for his kind. He should have sought therapy, he didn't. When caught, he claimed to be researching. I read the whole sick thing back when I wanted to believe that Bernie was being set up. I no longer think that. To view that filth is a crime.

End of this.

We can agree to disagree.

I say put the guy on probation, bar him from being around kids alone, and force him into therapy. The important thing is not that he is cured, like with addiction, as you say, perhaps it cannot be done. The most important thing is not
to relapse, not to ACT on your desires.

I say save the jail space so that someone who actually DOES something to a kid can stay there longer when they get caught. Or someone who actually buys or sells such filth, thus directly contributing to it's 'perpetuation'. I'd rather those people spend MORE time in jail, myself.

I think it's sad that some people are afflicted with this condition, probably most if not all of them due not to their own accord ... but you apparently want to string 'em up despite admitting that there is no 'cure'.

I think in terms of 'harm reduction', so if it appears that looking at freely downloadable (and thus ALREADY 'perpetuated' independently of them) pictures is enough to keep their fantasies fulfilled, and they DON'T go out and abuse? Given that this is an incurable affliction of the human animal, I'd rather have them do that than go out and actually act on their thoughts. I know it's not OPTIMAL, by any stretch. Optimal would be that the condition did not exist, and the pictures were never taken. But it clearly does ...

BTW, your statement that a 17 y.o. would be just as traumatized by having some older guy she 'trusted' trying to seduce her and manipulate her as she would if she were ACTUALLY raped? I can't speak from experience, but I SERIOUSLY doubt that is an accurate statement. I gotta call bullshit on you there.

around the internet. They were abused by taking the photos and then re-vitimized every time they are sent.

Sometimes you just gotta wonder what people are looking for when they turn to God in the first place.

Well said!

:thumbsup:

Holy shit.:eyes: "People are smart". :sarcasm:

:think: Maybe they think we're not going to figure it out.

It's called inductive reasoning, I believe...

and yes, watch out what you write to people. I greatly resent your accusations towards me FYI!

I am pointing out the FACT that some MEN that are GUILTY of committing perverted acts, INCLUDING PEDOPHILIA, are roaming free and never get more than a slap on the wrist for committing such heinous acts towards others, INCLUDING CHILDREN.

The intent of my post was to question as to WHY THE HELL others are practically ignored after committing such acts, while a high profile talk show host becomes a target as others just walk away having done far greater harm (like O'Shea!).

You really don't get it do you or were you that desperate to have your thread kicked?

Here is your "kick".

You can go fuck yourself in the ass with a rusty, tetanus-covered railroad spike for suggesting that anyone who raises a valid issue is a predator.

Eat shit. Die screaming. Go straight to Hell.

Sorry.

Children are being victimized in this instance figure it out.:think:

I personally am biased, having been molested as a child. I think the sentences should be much harsher. Innocence is irreplaceable.

you realize that by his viewing that material, and further by spreading that material,
he is furthering the exploitation of those children?

You're ok with that?

Maybe you are missing something inside.

I don't care that he's smart. I don't care that he's liberal. I do care that a "smart" and "liberal" person was part and parcel in the further victimization of children.

So-- yeah. Buck all you want. It's telling to me the sins we'll wink at if done by "our side", but we'd be screaming with righteous rage if done by the other.

:puke:

n/t

then yes, the punishment does seem excessive for this particular thing.

seems like a hierarchy is as follows:

indirect harm
direct harm
murder

sentences should be based on that, punishing the severest crime the most harshly and much more harshly than crimes that aren't as legally serious. but when they are treated the same, something is wrong.

Maybe he was researching. We really don't know.

(just kidding)

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0215081ward1.html

Jebus! I hope a lot of this was just him fantasizing.

"Mail, mistress!"

"Jail, slave!"

:rofl:

I really liked him. It just goes to show you that you never really know a person-until they get caught perpetuating the abuse of children.

There are children in those photos, many forced to endure rape for the camera and for the prevs who watch. Many are slaves, or kidnapped, or daily abused. Their rapes will be broadcast over the internet for generations. And even if not raped, they are forced to pose in sexual positions.

He perpetuated the victimization of those children in the photographs. And he deserves whatever the law can give him.

Children are being victimized, raped, abused. This is *not* a victimless crime! This shit just turns my stomach. People who deal with kiddie porn should rot in jail.

The Pedophile Defenders need to get a fucking clue.

The hierarchies of perceived evil in the United States are quite twisted.

Under Federal sanction one can drop napalm, burning phosphorous, or simple explosives on innocent children and nobody says much about the "loss of innocence" but God Forbid a computer displays certain disgusting and vile arrangements of pixels.

A right wing radio host can be caught with a bag full of false prescriptions, including Viagra, coming back from a nation known to harbor a thriving child sex trade, and he's still on the air, celebrated for his infamy, and not in prison. But a left wing radio host entertaining his own demons in much less destructive ways (yes, so far as we know...) is thrown to the wolves.

Without a doubt, the Catholic Church has a terrible legacy of child sex abuse, some of it arising from the dangerous tradition of "celibate" priests. It's not a big stretch to assume Bernie Ward was himself a victim of that institutional horror.

This situation is a tragedy, one among many that extend far beyond the influence of the Catholic Church. The hidden undercurrents of sexual abuse in the United States run deep -- we are a society that refuses to confront the rotting horrors lurking in our nation's darkest closets. We would rather make an occasional human sacrifice than confront the greater evil directly.

"It's not a big stretch to assume Bernie Ward was himself a victim of that institutional horror."

It's a far shorter stretch to assume that Bernie Ward entered the priesthood to exploit his sick desires, and Ward is not a victim, but a victimizer of children.

The guy puts up a pole, stacks wood around it, pours on the gasoline, nails himself to the pole, and all we have to do is wait for an eager prosecutor to walk up and throw out a match.

Hooray! What a brave and righteous people we are!

:party:

You minimize the victimization of the children involved in the producing of the "pixels" and the re-victimization every time they are shown.

I've never figured that one out.

Did any of the kids in those pictures know Bernie Ward was looking at them? What signal is transmitted through the aether to the victim? If the prosecuting agents look at these pictures, are the kids "re-victimized" yet again?

Driving these sorts of things deep underground seems to make the problems worse.

If pedophiles were not driven so far underground then maybe we'd have a much clearer picture of who we should keep away from our kids. Their creepy behavior might be public. As it is now we have to be suspicious of anyone who seems to enjoy the company of children "a little too much," including a lot of people for whom these suspicions are entirely unjust.

If possessing child porn was not regarded as such a heinous crime then our legal system would probably identify most pedophiles before they got into more serious trouble, and we would be better equipped to keep them out of jobs such as teaching or childcare. Public pressure could also keep them out of positions of authority within religious institutions, and these institutions (not just Catholic...) wouldn't be able to shuffle potential and actual child abusers around the world in some sick kind of shell game.

I'm a parent, it's difficult for me to think about these things rationally. But we must be rational. Our laws must be practical, they must be just, and they must accomplish what we want them to do. As things stand now our society demands that pedophiles be extremely secretive, and this makes it much more difficult for communities to identify them and respond to their criminal behaviors and mental illnesses in an effective manner. And if we can look at the problem honestly, and not while inflamed with anger, maybe we'd find most pedophiles would limit themselves to photoshopped pictures and rehashing their sick fantasies with other adults.

Personally I believe that transmitting child pornography should be a crime, vigorously enforced, but not to the extent that we turn people into lifetime criminals supported by the state and tortured in prison, and not to the extent that we accuse innocent people unjustly of crimes against our children.

"The hierarchies of perceived evil in the United States are quite twisted."

Because we acknowledge one evil means we necessarily turn a blind eye to another? I don;' think so, pal.

If you think that the electronic transfer of a photo of a seven year old getting raped is merely "arrangements of pixels", that actually says a lot more about you than those you so cleverly think you're targeting...

I worked in CPS for three years before getting burned out on child and sexual abuse. Go lecture to yourself about which evils are getting confronted...

:eyes:

:freak: This World has way too many of them.