egafd.com

Feel free to discuss here or goon the new site

http://www.itsadult.com/discussion.html?id=80

Prompted from the news that Pandora Blake is to close her site ahead of enforcement coming in 10 months

Atvod was a thoroughly corrupt organisation. Pandora Blake's site was targeted by Atvod because those who made the decisions about which websites to attack were pursuing a private agenda which included, inter alia, obtaining perverse sexual satisfaction by persecuting so called dominatrixes. Maybe if she casts her mind back, she will realise that someone she dished out a spanking to was responsible for setting Atvod on her as part of his kinky fun. The Minister for Culture Media and Sport, John Whittingdale, was "dating" Olivia King who ran a "dungeon" in Earls Court during the period Pandora Blake was being persecuted. However, I should make clear that the Rt Hon John Whittingdale MP had absolutely no knowledge of Ms King's profession and never once asked her what she did for a living during their entire relationship, which was based on mutual interests. Nonetheless it is undeniable that the persons in Government behind the "child protection" policy have very little credibility as child protectors. After all, John Whittingdale's own brother was a leading member of the infamous Paedophile Information Exchange and was jailed recently for abusing children. While Michael Rock, Cameron's advisor on Internet Porn Filters, was himself prosecuted for downloading paedophile porn.

Following the link that you give to Pandora's video on Youtube also throws up a link to her speaking to an ORG event with Miles Jackman. She says that after she was targeted by Atvod she stared reading up on the matter and came across the DCMS's own commissioned research which showed that there was more evidence of good to children through exposure to porn than of harm. Perhaps she should consider that the same John Whittingdale signed a declaration that the Digital Economy Bill was compatible with the Human Rights Act. Nobody in Parliament queried this. But how can it be compatible with Article 10 ECHR in the circumstances? Art. !0, the Right to freedom of expression, may be qualified for the protection of health or morals. But if the Government, as presumably John Whittingdale did, wish to rely on he Art.10.2 qualification then the onus falls on the Government to show that was there motivation. Given the Ellen Helsper Report, which Pandora read,confirmed by the Guy Cumberbatch Report, how exactly could they? It seems highly doubtful in the circumstances that the Digital Economy Act is compatible with the HRA, and therefore it is probably unenforcible.

You are well versed on this matter Ford Cortina

I'm glad Im not alone in knowing the Digital Economy Act had absolutely nothing to do with preventing children from seeing inappropriate content.

A lot of people find it hard to believe that porn was used as an excuse to invade your privacy to legitimise their constant data mining and snooping using our fear of terrorism as an added reason for this

Im sure things will kick off big time in a couple of years when Brexit is out of the way and our government starts violating peoples civil liberties backed up by the laws in place already to allow them to do this