Feds seize Backpage

Days of Broken Arrows

Crow
Gold Member
^^^^^

"Attorney General Ken Paxton announced today that his office’s prosecution of Backpage.com has resulted in the company pleading guilty to human trafficking in Texas and its CEO Carl Ferrer pleading guilty to money laundering. This comes less than a week after the attorney general’s office assisted the Department of Justice with permanently shutting down the website.

Ferrer will be sentenced to up to five years in prison once he’s fulfilled the terms of his plea agreement with Attorney General Paxton’s office. His cooperation in the ongoing investigation into Backpage could lead to other criminal charges against individuals associated with the company."


Looks like the CEO took a plea bargain deal. They probably threatened him with more legal action than he could ever deal with if he didn't. He'll probably serve less than the allotted five years when all is said and done.

"Human trafficking" charges are now what they hit men with for any facilitation of prostitution. It's a bigger-sounding word -- and a much bigger charge.

The Feds, I assume, wanted to seize Backpage's assets. Plus, John and Cindy McCain were very involved in getting FOSTA/SESTA passed and apparently held a vendetta against the owners. They previously ran an investigative site called Front Page Confidential that did hit pieces on McCain.

Anyone thinking that this marks the end of this should think again. There is a crazed pack of "abolitionists" who are looking for the next battle. According to what I've read on Twitter, they're coming for the porn sites next. Porn sites facilitate prostitution, after all, since the women are being paid to have sex.

As of this writing, the following sites have gone dark: Backpage.com, USA Sex Guide, The Erotic Review, and the "theraputic" massage section of Craigslist. These sites have been around for decades -- but "trafficking" only apparently became a major concern recently.

Why were they oblivious to this in, say, 2004? Could it be that the gov't is inventing the problem, possibly for financial motives? I'd say yes. I don't pretend to know what's really behind this, but the paltry actual number of women truly "trafficked" (as opposed to voluntarily hooking) makes me think there is an ulterior motive here.

#metoo has come back to bite feminists in the ass. While #metoo didn't directly affect the passing of SESTA, it created massive paranoia about sex and the sexual abuse of women by men. It whipped up hysteria and that's why so many politicians climbed on board to sign it.

Now the feminists are bemoaning all the sex workers who have to take to the dangerous streets to earn a living, since they can't screen clients online. Twitter is already reporting one missing sex worker.

Moral: If you don't want grand, sweeping legislation passed that assumes all men are "sexual predators" ready to exploit women, then maybe you shouldn't foster online movements that claim men are predators.

The demi monde is often a bellwether for mainstream society. If feminists are crying over #metoo wrecking the business of "women of the night," wait till they see what it's going to do women in the mainstream in the coming months and years. Thanks to #metoo, women have made themselves into human kryptonite -- and will find themselves out of more and more jobs, because of both paranoia and misguided "good intentions."
 

AneroidOcean

Hummingbird
Gold Member
Days of Broken Arrows said:
Moral: If you don't want grand, sweeping legislation passed that assumes all men are "sexual predators" ready to exploit women, then maybe you shouldn't foster online movements that claim men are predators.

Look, the devil is in the details. I'm not necessarily against sex services being legalized, but if what they allege is true, Backpage was actually involved in laundering money, helping guide people into posting ads for underage prostitution, and were 70+ percent of the child trafficking being reported. That's pretty significant if true and has nothing to do with your argument (again, if true).
 

godfather dust

 
Banned
Gold Member
If they shut down the porn sites I will be very happy. 10s of millions of men currently pussifying themselves through masturbation are not something the system will want to deal with when they go on forced nofap.

Shut that shit down.
 

porscheguy

Ostrich
What’s likely is they seized all of the guy’s assets, and then handed him a stack of charges that could have landed him in prison for the rest of his life. He’s no got little to no ability to fight back and then the prosecutor hands him a deal where he’ll get 5 years, possible minimum security, and maybe he can be out in 3.

Backpage was implicated in 73% of trafficking cases? That’s great. They should have let them stick around until they could be implicated in 90% of trafficking cases. In fact, the more shit that gets channeled through the place, the better I say. It makes it easier for law enforcement to keep tabs on stuff. Now their jobs are that much harder.
 

porscheguy

Ostrich
godfather dust said:
If they shut down the porn sites I will be very happy. 10s of millions of men currently pussifying themselves through masturbation are not something the system will want to deal with when they go on forced nofap.

Shut that shit down.
Why do you care? Did it ever occur to you that 10s of millions of men are stepping aside and taking themselves out of competition for resources that you may want? You can’t espouse the virtues of being a man while denying other men the right to pursue their goals. And if some men wish to jerk off and be nonproductive, who cares? How does this harm you?
 

Days of Broken Arrows

Crow
Gold Member
godfather dust said:
If they shut down the porn sites I will be very happy. 10s of millions of men currently pussifying themselves through masturbation are not something the system will want to deal with when they go on forced nofap.

Shut that shit down.

If you want to shut down sites because you claim they're bad for people, then you just set the precedent for feminists to close this forum.

I can guarantee you that in a court of law (or public opinion) the RVF's alleged "hatred of women" and "misogyny" would anger a lot more people than thoughts of guys jerking off. They'd claim we're bad for women and younger men who we could influence.

This is the United States where we can to have stupid ideas and we get to do things that are bad for us.

I'd also argue that Internet porn isn't bad at all, since several outlets (including the liberal Slate) have linked the rise in online porn to the plummeting sexual assault numbers. I'm old enough to remember the pre-online-porn '80s, when your girlfriend getting raped was a real worry. I'd prefer not to have to worry about that again, and would rather have future criminals rubbing one out and then going to sleep instead of stalking parking garages and the like.

As with #metoo, the removal of online porn would create a lot of unintended consequences and I don't think they'll be good. Online porn, by the way, has been a thing long before we had a soyboy culture. Blame the schools and the media for that one.
 

godfather dust

 
Banned
Gold Member
porscheguy said:
godfather dust said:
If they shut down the porn sites I will be very happy. 10s of millions of men currently pussifying themselves through masturbation are not something the system will want to deal with when they go on forced nofap.

Shut that shit down.
Why do you care? Did it ever occur to you that 10s of millions of men are stepping aside and taking themselves out of competition for resources that you may want? You can’t espouse the virtues of being a man while denying other men the right to pursue their goals. And if some men wish to jerk off and be nonproductive, who cares? How does this harm you?

Very good point, as well as the others that followed. I take it back.
 

The Father

 
Banned
Has anyone heard of a verifiable instance of "Child trafficking". I haven't. We've heard of every other sort of child abuse, Jerry Sandusky, etc. But I don't believe Backpage, The Erotic Review, etc were into children. I think what's going on here is three very powerful groups got in bed: 1) Women's groups who hate that easy sex takes men off the marriage market, 2) Christian nuts who think you'll burn in hell for looking at porn, and 3) silicon valley technocrats who want to reign in free speech.

I really should have stayed in europe, where prostitution is legal, safe and cheap. For now.
 

Days of Broken Arrows

Crow
Gold Member
OK, I think I just realize why this subject is bothering me so much. This time it's personal.

Back in the 1940s and 1950s, the government did everything it could to stamp out gambling, specifically the proto-lottery system called "numbers running." They sold it as a moral panic. They also had no qualms about inventing charges to put a lot of my people -- Italian-Americans -- in prison for being involved with numbers running.

So, they came up with nebulous concepts like "racketeering" when they couldn't find real charges. The public cheered as a lot of men went to prison. This caused a lot of prejudice towards Italians for being "immoral" and involved with "crime." (OK, granted, Italian-Americans WERE involved with crime in the larger sense, but I'm specifically talking about numbers running here.)

Then what happened? By the 1970s, the individual states took over numbers running and gave it glossy-sounding names like "The Lotto" and "The Lottery."

Suddenly, the exact actions the government had deemed immoral and illegal were now legal -- because the government was able to profit. Nowadays they, practically shove the Lottery down our throats.

My guess is something of the sort is happening with Backpage.com and company. As The Father pointed out, the Feds haven't produced any Sandusky-like scandals involving "child trafficking." The government must see dollar signs and want a cut, or the departments are manufacturing crises to keep their budgets big.

And just in case anyone is wondering, I personally HATE gambling and have never bought a Lotto ticket in my life. I'm just pointing out how the government shapes people's morality -- and how the sheeple don't stop to think how something can be "immoral and illegal (OMG!)" in one year, but perfectly fine a few years later. Or vice-versa.
 
Days of Broken Arrows said:
My guess is something of the sort is happening with Backpage.com and company. As The Father pointed out, the Feds haven't produced any Sandusky-like scandals involving "child trafficking." The government must see dollar signs and want a cut, or the departments are manufacturing crises to keep their budgets big.

And just in case anyone is wondering, I personally HATE gambling and have never bought a Lotto ticket in my life. I'm just pointing out how the government shapes people's morality -- and how the sheeple don't stop to think how something can be "immoral and illegal (OMG!)" in one year, but perfectly fine a few years later. Or vice-versa.

I don't see BuyAWhore.Gov opening any time soon. I think this is just Sleepy Jeff Sessions looking for something to do with his time, because prosecuting corruption in Washington takes work and might interrupt his nap.
 

Enigma

Hummingbird
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
28 sexually exploited children rescue and 474 arrested, Feb. 2017

http://ktla.com/2017/02/01/474-arre...g-statewide-human-trafficking-operation-lasd/

84 children rescued and 120 arrested, Oct. 2017

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...human-traffickers-arrested-across-u-s-n812156

That particular bust was spread across several states and involved cooperation with authorities from Canada, the UK, Thailand, Cambodia, and the Philippines.

Speaking of the Philippines, they had their largest child porn bust every back in May 2017, which also included rescuing some of the children who had been used in the material. That bust was based on info provided by the US.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-12/afp-assists-philippines-livestream-child-abuse-sting/8521820

Though Backpage wasn't involved in this, there's a reason the suit specifies 17 countries and not just the US (and there's a reason he plead guilty so quickly).

Here's another one. Sacramento pilot receives life sentence for child sex trafficking offenses, Feb. 2018

http://wtkr.com/2018/01/24/californ...ilipino-children-for-sex-gets-life-in-prison/

Much of the worst child trafficking occurs outside of the US, but these days Western men paying for videos or livestreams of children being abused is a huge problem because it then creates an even bigger market for trafficking.

Personally, I could give a fuck if some 30-year-old hooker feels unsafe if it makes it harder for 5-year-old girls to be raped. I'll also take prostitution being illegal over the thousands of little girls "groomed" in the UK or the mass sexual assaults going on liberal Germany, etc.

Adult, non-forced prostitution has existed long before the internet came about and will do just fine without it. In reality, the fact that it's now so easy and less risky is why this #ExposetheSponsor, SeekingArrangement, etc. shit is becoming so out of control.
 
Were western men paying for livestreams of children being abused on backpage?

Would the rotherdam sexual abuse have been stopped by banning prostitution, when there are already laws against sexual abuse on the books that weren't enforced? Will making life more difficult for hookers in the US somehow protect german women from being assaulted by rapefugees on the street?

What on Earth are you talking about?
 

godfather dust

 
Banned
Gold Member
Prostition being legal would not cause more child trafficking. Obviously child prostitution would stay illegal and a regulated industry would not involve pimps selling teenagers.
 

Enigma

Hummingbird
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
SamuelBRoberts said:
Were western men paying for livestreams of children being abused on backpage?

Would the rotherdam sexual abuse have been stopped by banning prostitution, when there are already laws against sexual abuse on the books that weren't enforced? Will making life more difficult for hookers in the US somehow protect german women from being assaulted by rapefugees on the street?

What on Earth are you talking about?

Does every case of child sex trafficking have to occur through Backpage for child sex trafficking to exist? The guy was laundering money and pleady guilty to human trafficking across 17 countries, why don't you ask him or his defense lawyer for the details.

People asked for examples of trafficking busts, I provided them.

Now, rather than admitting that you don't know what you're talking about, you try to sidetrack the conversation with silly strawmen.

Here's another example:

Former Oklahoma State Senator pleads guilty to child sex trafficking after using Craigslist to meet underage boys for sex

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11/30/ex-oklahoma-lawmaker-guilty-child-sex-trafficking.html
 
Rotherdam, abused children, and german migrant assaults were your examples. I didn't pull them out of thin air.

But that link you provided gives the game up. When a normal person thinks "Child Sex Trafficking" they think, well, human trafficking of children, for the purposes of sex. One of the most despicable and evil crimes imaginable. Organized crime. Abuse. Children's lives ruined forever.

What did the guy in your link do?
He tried to pay for a 17-year old prostitute in a hotel. Via some bizarre application of the federal code, this crime, which would normally be a local or state issue, somehow became "child sex trafficking" with a 10 year to LIFE felony federal sentence.

Stupid? Yes. Illegal? Yes. Child sex trafficking? Absolutely not. Worthy of life in jail? That's insane.

This is ridiculous.
 

Enigma

Hummingbird
Orthodox Inquirer
Gold Member
The other links included dozens of children as young as 3-months-old, which is why you ignored them. The pilot who was sentenced to life was fucking 7-year-old boys. Do you not think that's worthy of a life sentence?

The entire argument was that child sex trafficking doesn't exist so this must be a government conspiracy.

When in fact, even Backpage has never denied their site was used for child trafficking, they simply claimed they weren't responsible. But the investigation uncovered evidence that they were actually encouraging the ads, which is why the owner plead guilty.
 
The leader in soft prostitution reacts to the new law and explains they don’t want the hardcore hookers to flood to his site.

I’m reading the text of the law...I bet he is actually shitting bricks right now despite his calm demeanor in the video. They will probably be ok. Backpage was a sleezy site which made for an easy political hit job. SA is a little more classy. Plus, if the Feds go for SA, they will also have to go for Zuckerberg’s Instagram and we know that will never happen.

 

TooFineAPoint

Ostrich
Protestant
People who worry and fret about child sex trafficking should probably seek psychiatric help.

The kabuki theatre over Backpage should bring shame to any logical adult human.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
I see we still have no shortage of people who don't think the Federal government can strongarm a guilty plea even when the person in question is innocent, and even when the government knows they're innocent for a fact.

"They plead guilty, they are villains, end of story".

:boring:

I too would like to see some of these child trafficking rings chased a bit farther down the road than the expendable middle-men. Nobody with two brain cells to rub together would believe that the bitch in Haiti working for the Clinton Foundation who got prosecuted for child trafficking was operating on her own initiative, but we're supposed to get a boner for prosecuting small time losers while public servants and powerbrokers at the highest levels are given a pass, to mention nothing of our precious muslim immigrants who must never be offended.

Peasant mentality.
 
Top