Text 18511, 125 rader
Skriven 2011-05-10 09:42:15 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
Ärende: I wanna!
================
Hello Ross,

On Monday May 09 2011 09:50, you wrote to me:


 MV>>>> Since there was no "girl": nothing.

 RC>>> But had there been one...

 MV>> There wasn't one. Period.

 RC> The Dutch arent very smart people, are they?

Menno Blom was not one of the smartest, but he was a lot smarter than some pig
headed USAians that insist one can have real sex with a girl that only exists
in cyber space.

 RC> A variation in the time he chose, could have matched him up with a
 RC> real one.

We do not judge people by what they would or could have done "if". We judge
them by what actually happened. There was no girl.

 RC>>> You carry on as if that pervert knew he was talking to a
 RC>>> sheriffs deputy.

 MV>> He WAS talking to a sheriff's deputy...

 RC> The Dutch arent very smart people, are they?

 RC> The operative word is 'knew'.

You can't have it both ways. If "knowing or not knowing" makes a difference,
than it should do that whether it is convenient or not. If not knowing he
talked to a 50 year old LEO, then it should also make a difference that he did
not know, intent to have sex witha 14 yo is against the law.

 RC>>> If he had zero intentions of molesting a child he would not have
 RC>>> placed himself in that Chicago motel.

He had no intention of molesting a child.

 MV>> He would not be in that hotel had there been no invitation from
 MV>> the "girl".

 RC> and lets thank our lucky stars it wasnt a real girl,

There wasn't.

 RC> that filthy Dutch Pervert Blom would have molested her for sure.

We do not judge people by "would have, if".

 RC>>> He is very much /your/ pervert since you justify his actions.

 MV>> I defend him, not to justify his actions, I defend him because he
 MV>> is my fellow citizen and he was doing nothing here that would
 MV>> have gotten him into problems with the law.

 RC> and had he not gotten off the plane or gone to a particular motel in
 RC> Chicago, he would not have problems with any law..

And he would not have been in that hotel, probably never have been in the USA,
had that agent of the devil Chigaco cop not extended his dirty claws across
national borders into the territory of another sovereign nation to cowardly
lure the non suspecting victim into his trap.

 RC> What is sad is that your society permits that sick shit, you nation is
 RC> full of perverts.

The real sad thing is that you self appointed moral high grounders fail to
accept that other cultures lay the bars at different heights. You lay the bar
for consent at 16, we lay it at 14 under conditions. A two year difference.
Does that make the difference between perverts and saints?

When it comes to driving cars it is the other way around. You place the bar at
16, ours is at 18. Do those two years make the difference between safe
responsible drivers and irresponsible road pirates?

What would you say if we installed a special police force that was to
infiltrate in the cyber world with the objective of luring 16 and 17 year old
US drivers to The Netherlands with the bait of getting a ride in a very
attractive car. A Ferrari or whatever.

And then when they turn up at the parking place in The Hague, arrest them for
"intent to drive a car without a valid license" and throw them in jail for
fifteen years. How about that? Is that OK with you?

Or would you invoke the The Haugue Invasion Act?

 RC> If Felten invited you to Sweden, regardless of reason or enticement,
 RC> the choice is still yours to make as to whether or not to accept it.

Björn would never invite me to Sweden with the objective of trying to get me to
break a law there, so that I could be thrown in a Swedish jail. We do not do
that here, laying traps is considered immoral here.

 MV>> Stretching out your dirty claws into our jurisdiction to meddle
 MV>> with one of our law abiding citizens is a breach of sovereignty
 MV>> and a prime example of you attempting to ram your morals down our
 MV>> throat.

 RC> It is an example of you trying to impress your lack of morals onto
 RC> everyone else.

On the contrary. The fact that you think it is ok to lay traps for citizens of
another country show that YOU have no morals.

 RC>>> and molesting children isnt immoral?

 MV>> No child was molested.

 RC> One easily could have, that was what your pervert was intending on
 RC> doing.

He had no intent to molest a child.

 RC> You people cultivate victims, we try to prevent it.

You have prevented nothing. On the contrary: your actions CREATED a crime.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)