Cambodia crackdown on pedos

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 07:05:39 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"Chris Blunt" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:32:16 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"michael" wrote in message
...


Chris Blunt wrote:

Of course not, but your comparison is invalid because Happy Pizza is
a
business that few locals would be likely to visit because of its
relatively high prices. Child sexual abuse is not something carried
out by any particular economic, social or racial group. Most research
on the subject says that the majority of children affected are abused
by someone they know - either a family member or someone close to the
family. The majority of offenders in Cambodia are Cambodians, just as
the majority of offenders in any country are locals of that country.
Trying to push the blame onto outsiders does nothing to address the
real problem, but has a lot to do with getting foreign funding for
NGO's and the government.


So child prostitution should continue as a tourist attraction until the
entire world has eliminated child abuse ???

Not at all, but to be most effective, you should use your resources to
target the main cause of the problem rather than some minority group
on the sidelines.

As you well know, doing that would not get the attention of the
hard-currency donors from overseas, and that's what this is all about.
Its about gaining publicity to obtain money to pay for shiny new
Landcruisers for NGO's and government officials to ride around in. The
real interests of abused Cambodian children are their least of their
priorities.

Chris


I do not "well know" that for a fact.
For example the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is funded to a tune of 25
billion dollars to (as one of their main objectives) develop vacines for
children in underdeveloped countries.
I will certainly agree that various NGO's have varing degrees of
effectiveness.
But in the face of credible specific evidence regarding specific
organizations, rambling about Land cruisers is just irresponsible - aside
from the question of how to get around efficiently where roads are poor or
non-existent.

Even taking your hypothesis
1) Funds would not be avaiable to tacking domestic problems.
2) Funds world be avaiable to takle imported problems.
Therefore that is an efficient use of resources since those resources
wouldn't be available for #1 anyway.

I see severe logic problems here, and a free pass for peodophiles.

Can I just make it quite clear I'm not suggesting that foreign
pedophiles should be allowed to get away with what they do. Some
people commenting on my posts seem keen to twist things around to make
it appear that way. What I'm saying is, if you really want to tackle
the issue the problem should be addressed uniformly, regardless of the
nationality of the guilty parties. When I see government campaigns
targeting "foreigners" in respect of a problem for which everyone is
equally responsible it raises a big question mark.

Chris

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 07:27:55 GMT, michael wrote:



Chris Blunt wrote:

We're talking about a crackdown on pedophiles,

right... now read this:

"Although there are sexual abuse rings and individual abusers who target
large numbers of children, most children are abused by men they know.
Most child sex offenders are married men, who have sex with their wives
and sometimes other adult women - they are children's fathers, uncles,
teachers as well as family friends and neighbours. These men do not fit
the clinical definition of 'paedophile' - adults whose sexual interest
is limited to children - nor do they fit most peoples perceptions of a
'paedophile' - a loner, someone with poor social skills. So most child
sexual abusers are not 'paedophiles' in any clear or obvious sense."

I don't know where you got that quote from, but I've never seen such
nonsense. The dictionary I'm looking at defines a pedophile as "An
adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children". You appear to
be trying to redefine that to suit your own purposes. So according to
you a married man who has sex with a neighbour's kid is not a
pedophile? Have you been ordering too much of that happy pizza again?

so, when you go off on a tangent about "child abuse", it seems to me you
must be indulging in the herb that makes happy pizza happy... which is
why my happy pizza references are not irrelevant at all... or maybe our
senses of nuance in the english vocabulary are different...

How can child sexual abuse be called "going off at a tangent" when the
subject is pedophiles?

your implicit suggestion seems to be that the cambodian government ought
to target child abuse, including the behaviour of predatory paedophiles,
rather than just paedophiles

Predatory pedophiles, or pedophiles - whatever, I'm not into word
games, but yes, they should target the problem wherever it occurs.

... a little like suggesting that they use
sticks to beat back the sea rather than build a small dike somewhere...

So build the dyke where the sea is flooding most, not in a location
where there's only a trickle.

and contrary to your sense that some western countries have actually
done something about this general sexual child abuse, my sense is that
they have funded treatment programs and clinical research and issued
press releases that have in turn generated reams of often sensationalist
media product and a vaguely "conversational" hysteria in a fairly
predictable sector of the "public", and little else...

sexual abuse of children within families or involving mom's boyfriend,
the vast majority of abuse cases, goes on at an undiminished rate; and
by no definition are therapeutic programs "successful" in their various
treatment approaches to this "problem"...

in other words, the usual smoke and mirrors and a little clump of
westerners who can pat themselves on the back, as they've been doing
since about 1450, extolling "their" superior morality... the original
post mentioned Japanese, Taiwanese and Chinese businessmen and
Cambodians: translation? "them there asians is a lot worse than us"...

is child prostitution available in these "advanced" countries? of
course... is it being targeted by governments? yes... is it fading into
memory as we drift toward some morally pure "western" paradise? no, it
isn't... is it readily available? yes, but only to those with means...

so if you're a less-than-wealthy paedo, you drop $1500 bucks on a ticket
to PP and start sticking your dick in kids at bargain prices, not kids
sleeping in their beds at home, surrounded by family and familiar things
while daddy diddles, which is bad enough to say the least, but kept in
cages in little shacks, underfed and otherwise physically abused for
years or months, and forced to be raped by fat ****s who've flown all
that way and spent all that hard-earned cash to do just that...

So being raped by foreigners is unacceptable, but being raped by a
local is just fine? Do parents of kids in the street where you live
know you take this view? I think I'm beginning to see why you're so
sensitive about local pedophiles being targeted now.

i say target them in whatever corrupt and self-serving way things get
done in present-day cambodia and have at it... with funding and
technical assistance from foreign police and the resultant media noise,
the cambodian government COULD actually end up doing something about
THIS problem, i.e. severely limit the size and extent of the child
prostitution business in cambodia (which would also affect vietnam and
burma and thailand)... it will be decades before they have the
infrastructure to emulate western models of "dealing with" the more
common forms of child sexual abuse, keeping in mind that they don't work
anyway...

so, yeah, target foreigners and let 'em whine...

..... and let the vast majority of children who are abused by locals
continue to suffer? That's a great strategy you've got there for
helping the kids in Cambodia.

Chris

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:01:35 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:

Somehow CB's "logic" which I cannot fathom is to dance in seven different
ways trying to say foreign pedophiles should not be confronted. Some of
these arguments appeal to some non-sensical equal opportunity for these
people, or non-fairness.

Excuse me, I did not say foreigners should not be confronted, I said
they should not be specifically targeted while ignoring the much
larger problem within the local community.

Chris

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:27:47 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"Deep Foiled Malls" wrote in
message ...
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:43:04 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"Citrus Flavor" wrote in message
...
Xtile wrote:
six-toes wrote:
PHNOM PENH,

Cambodia Cambodian officials are talking about ways to stop
foreigners
from coming to their country to have sex with children.

They could start by arresting the pimps....but....wait....the pimps
are
government people, army people, hmmm......

Indeed. And if you read the AFP wire story (

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._afp/cambodiae
c
onomytourismchildsex_050228070410a )
there's also this quote:

"They will be looking at how the private sector, NGOs, embassies and
the government can work together better, particularly in providing
information, (and) arresting and prosecuting Westerners," World
Vision
country director Talmage Payne told reporters.

So again the phantom scourge of the 'Western Pedophile' will be the
focus of this latest effort, no matter that Westerners have always
been a vanishingly small part of the problem. Nevermind that far
and away the vast majority of pedophiles in Cambodia are either
themselves Cambodian or are Chinese, Taiwanese, or Japanese businessmen
or tourists. If the NGOs can identify the WHITE MAN as the problem
then they can more easily go to the WHITE COUNTRIES for funding for
their latest fleet of Landrovers (or some such), which is the ONLY
thing any of this is about.


Even if this were true, and there is no evidence presented here,
one less WHITE MAN predator is still one step forward.
What are you afraid of?

Because a flawed strategy is a flawed strategy. You need to attack the
greatest part of the problem, not just the easy targets, being the
white man in this case.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

For complex problems, often all strategies have their flaws.
That does not mean one shouldn't act on them,
and I would challenge the statement

If a strategy is flawed, you find a better one, otherwise it's
probably going to be counter-productive.

"this funding for their latest fleet of Landrovers (or some such), which is
the ONLY
thing any of this is about."

Too many pedophiles and sex tourists hide behind such statements.

I don't actually believe that. Pedophiles don't hide behind
statements, they have much better ways of hiding. Saying things like
this just scares people off having a rational discussion about an
emotion-inducing topic.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Chris Blunt wrote:

a smattering of crap showing that he can neither read nor think and that
he's upset at the thought of western pedophiles losing a haven of cheap
kiddie sex... what's a reasonable man to do?


michael

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:56:44 GMT, michael wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote:

a smattering of crap showing that he can neither read nor think and that
he's upset at the thought of western pedophiles losing a haven of cheap
kiddie sex... what's a reasonable man to do?

Not misrepresent what other have posted?

Chris has been pointing out that the NGOs aim to punish white
paedophiles for their activities in Cambodia. He suggests that a more
laudable target would be the elimination of the sexual abuse of
children in the relevant territory.

It was such a fair, well-justified and straightforward observation
that your expressed misunderstanding must be deliberate.
--
Regards,
John Sharman

"John Sharman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:56:44 GMT, michael wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote:

a smattering of crap showing that he can neither read nor think and that
he's upset at the thought of western pedophiles losing a haven of cheap
kiddie sex... what's a reasonable man to do?

Not misrepresent what other have posted?

Chris has been pointing out that the NGOs aim to punish white
paedophiles for their activities in Cambodia. He suggests that a more
laudable target would be the elimination of the sexual abuse of
children in the relevant territory.

It was such a fair, well-justified and straightforward observation
that your expressed misunderstanding must be deliberate.
--
Regards,
John Sharman



What was also "pointed out", the it was really "all about" securing money to
purchase land rovers for NGO staffers and government officials. Doesn't
sound balanced to me.

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 20:26:09 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"John Sharman" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:56:44 GMT, michael wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote:

a smattering of crap showing that he can neither read nor think and that
he's upset at the thought of western pedophiles losing a haven of cheap
kiddie sex... what's a reasonable man to do?

Not misrepresent what other have posted?

Chris has been pointing out that the NGOs aim to punish white
paedophiles for their activities in Cambodia. He suggests that a more
laudable target would be the elimination of the sexual abuse of
children in the relevant territory.

It was such a fair, well-justified and straightforward observation
that your expressed misunderstanding must be deliberate.
--
Regards,
John Sharman



What was also "pointed out", the it was really "all about" securing money to
purchase land rovers for NGO staffers and government officials. Doesn't
sound balanced to me.

Fair point. I have no direct experience of anti-paedo NGOs in SE Asia,
but I do know that among the staff of one particularly well-known
charitable NGO in UK the Range Rover is the standard-issue work
vehicle, although never seen in the TV advertising.

Presumably Chris's line of reasoning is that targetting home-grown
holidaymakers is a good tactic for domestic fundraising and that
explains why they pursue a policy which gets great news exposure at
home but has minimal impact upon the extent of actual child abuse in
Cambodia.

I don't know if other Western countries get the same thing but once
every few months our media report news that a team of UK Police
officers are being sent out to Thailand/Phillipines/Vietnam/Sri Lanka
or wherever to educate the local force in the detection or suppression
of kiddie porn, child sexual abuse or whichever evil practice is focus
of the day. Every time I see this I try to imagine what actually
happens when you pick up a bunch of not terribly bright British plods
and dump them into an alien culture where they don't speak the local
language or know the local law. I try to imagine the indigenous pigs
saying to themselves, "Great! Just what we've always needed!" I
suppose there may be just one or two hints that the Bobbies can pick
up in their travels concerning the finer points of corruption, but
other than that these excursions are obviously just publicity stunts.
They never seem actually to nick anybody.
--
Regards,
John Sharman

"John Sharman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 20:26:09 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"John Sharman" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:56:44 GMT, michael wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote:

a smattering of crap showing that he can neither read nor think and
that
he's upset at the thought of western pedophiles losing a haven of
cheap
kiddie sex... what's a reasonable man to do?

Not misrepresent what other have posted?

Chris has been pointing out that the NGOs aim to punish white
paedophiles for their activities in Cambodia. He suggests that a more
laudable target would be the elimination of the sexual abuse of
children in the relevant territory.

It was such a fair, well-justified and straightforward observation
that your expressed misunderstanding must be deliberate.
--
Regards,
John Sharman



What was also "pointed out", the it was really "all about" securing money
to
purchase land rovers for NGO staffers and government officials. Doesn't
sound balanced to me.

Fair point. I have no direct experience of anti-paedo NGOs in SE Asia,
but I do know that among the staff of one particularly well-known
charitable NGO in UK the Range Rover is the standard-issue work
vehicle, although never seen in the TV advertising.

Presumably Chris's line of reasoning is that targetting home-grown
holidaymakers is a good tactic for domestic fundraising and that
explains why they pursue a policy which gets great news exposure at
home but has minimal impact upon the extent of actual child abuse in
Cambodia.

I don't know if other Western countries get the same thing but once
every few months our media report news that a team of UK Police
officers are being sent out to Thailand/Phillipines/Vietnam/Sri Lanka
or wherever to educate the local force in the detection or suppression
of kiddie porn, child sexual abuse or whichever evil practice is focus
of the day. Every time I see this I try to imagine what actually
happens when you pick up a bunch of not terribly bright British plods
and dump them into an alien culture where they don't speak the local
language or know the local law. I try to imagine the indigenous pigs
saying to themselves, "Great! Just what we've always needed!" I
suppose there may be just one or two hints that the Bobbies can pick
up in their travels concerning the finer points of corruption, but
other than that these excursions are obviously just publicity stunts.
They never seem actually to nick anybody.
--
Regards,
John Sharman



"Fair point. I have no direct experience of anti-paedo NGOs in SE Asia,"

Neither do I.
I would presume that some (NGO's in general) are better than others, some
are very good and some are downright bad.
Doctors without Borders is a NGO, and IMO a very good one.
Regarding the presence or absence of range rovers at a particular
organization, it may be an abuse of funds, but on the other hand, how is one
suppose to get around efficiently in a country with bad or no roads?

I would hope that the living standards of NGO staff members is not that of
Bill Gates, but I would not expect them to live at the poverty levels of the
constituents. (Although I think the Peace Corps does require their field
members to live in "native conditions").

On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:07:34 GMT, "JosephP"
wrote:


"John Sharman" wrote in message
[..]

"Fair point. I have no direct experience of anti-paedo NGOs in SE Asia,"

Neither do I.
I would presume that some (NGO's in general) are better than others, some
are very good and some are downright bad.

Which means that you need some standard of comparison to distinguish
the good from the bad. Effectiveness and efficiency must be elements
of any such standard.

Doctors without Borders is a NGO, and IMO a very good one.

Yes. I believe that their deserved high reputation has been achieved
by their seeking to do the job (meeting medical needs) rather than
getting their faces on TV.

Compare them with, say, ECPAT who wave a media-attractive banner but
who AFAIK achieve almost nothing at all that has actual impact on the
sexual exploitation of children. They promote talking shops rather
than tackling the problem. They would achieve much much more if they
employed a dozen local under-cover agents in, say, Cambodia to
identify the child-brothels and then spent a similar sum in
subsidising the local Police to arrest and prosecute the owners
instead of taking bribes from the owners.

Regarding the presence or absence of range rovers at a particular
organization, it may be an abuse of funds, but on the other hand, how is one
suppose to get around efficiently in a country with bad or no roads?

By using much cheaper but equally effective locally available
vehicles.

I would hope that the living standards of NGO staff members is not that of
Bill Gates, but I would not expect them to live at the poverty levels of the
constituents. (Although I think the Peace Corps does require their field
members to live in "native conditions").

Even in UK (where Range Rovers are produced) they are regarded as
relatively up-market and expensive vehicles and that is in comparison
with (e.g.) Toyotas that are imported here. I would expect the price
gap to be significantly higher in countries where equivalent Toyotas
or Isuzus are locally produced.
--
Regards,
John Sharman