Too Funny To Ignore

Well, for those interested, my time in Cambodia is going wonderfully. It's all I'd hoped for and more. The people are beautiful, friendly and very accommodating; the sights are stunning; and the food is delicious and cheap. I wasn't sure how reliable the internet connection would be but so far I've no complaints. I hopped online to check my emails and do some share trading and thought I'd have a quick look at AZU to see how things are going. I'm glad I did as the latest stream of comments is hilarious. I'm about to head out to hit the bars so I'll keep this short and post the three funniest comments in reverse order:


In third place is Little Robbie Taylor. Robbie's always good for a laugh with his red-under-the-bed blog. He takes himself so seriously and thinks he's such a smart cookie but his rantings demonstrate otherwise. No Robbie, paedophiles are by definition people sexually attracted to prepubescent children. Most paedophiles never touch a child in a sexual manner and therefore can't be child rapists. But Robbie knows this.. he just enjoys lying.



In second place is AZU's most vocal pro-rape advocate: Julia Kanago. I'd love to see the video she demanded from notorious child abusers Jeremy Bolick and Clay Keys wearing their signs before she became friends with them. Unless of course she doesn't hold her friends to the same standards as her enemies. Now, she wouldn't be a filthy hypocrite would she? ROFL.. of course she is.

So who could possibly be stupid enough to top that comment?



Who else but court jester Clay Keys. 'We' have no respect for any paedophile hey? Maybe Derek's right about his self loathing after all. The rapidity with which he's managed to infiltrate AZU has been stunning. Now the guy convicted of the charge of Lewd and Lascivious Act Child Under 16 has been embraced by his erstwhile enemies and is just one of the gang. I have no idea whether Clay's a paedophile or not and really don't care as I judge actions, not attractions. He's far worse than a paedophile: he's a child abuser. He may have convinced his AZU buddies that someone who is sexually attracted to prepubescent children is worse than someone who sexually abuses them but some of us are not so blinded by bigotry as to sucked in by his rhetoric.

So there you have my top three and I've no doubt anyone reading this will find them as funny as I do. The sad part is they don't realise how funny they are.

And now it's time to hit the bars...

Lessons In Dishonesty Pt1: Jeremy Bolick

Following the AZU blog and the blogs of its main contributors is an interesting exercise in different means of dishonesty and distortion.

In this first part I'll be focussing on Jeremy Bolick (aka Static) and his favourite tactic: the deliberate false attribution of statements. He's tried this on me a couple of times.

Despite having multiple child sex convictions himself, he seems to think if he can prove someone else to have a paedosexual orientation any points they make will be discredited, regardless of their validity. As detailed in my post here, he tried levelling the claim at me. Unlike many who he's tried this on, I decided to take him to task and challenge him to prove his claims, knowing full well he couldn't. I'm sure he thought after my original challenge I'd let it go but I decided to prove my point and restated my challenge on a few occasions. It was some months before he finally responded. During that time he'd done all he could to find anything he could use against me. Up until that point, the only 'evidence' he could uncover was that I use the terms paedophile and paedosexual interchangeably. Obviously, this is not any real evidence but there was nothing further to find so Jeremy resorted to his favoured tactic. He scoured the Girl Chat forums to find an Aussie poster and then cut and pasted the posts into comments on the AZU site, attributing them to me. As I said at the time, I'd have expected him to at least make up some fake IP addresses in order to 'prove' the Girl Chat posts and my blog entries came from the same computer but he didn't even bother doing this. Why? Because the AZU crowd don't require actual proof. They're happy to knowingly embrace and promote a lie if it's all they've got. To date Jeremy's provided no proof to back up his claim that I'm a paedosexual so he and his cronies still rely on the random Aussie's comments and try to use them against me even though they're fully aware of the blatant dishonesty of doing so.

And now Jeremy's back to his old tricks:



I stopped posting on the AZU blog a long time ago as I realised their habit of censoring and manipulating comments would always prevent me from getting a fair hearing. Anything I want to say in response to their postings I do on my own blog. Again, the response of Jeremy to a lack of ammunition is to create his own. I recently posted an article about the importance of judging people based on what they do, not on who they're attracted to (link) which has obviously ruffled Jeremy's feathers. I also posted a number of questions for Jeremy and Clay Keys to answer regarding their views on some of AZU's extemist policies and why they don't consider the policies should apply to them even though they're both child sex offenders (link).

So how does Jeremy respond to these articles? By taking the comment of someone who's posted on the AZU comments page and attributing it to me in the hope of making me look like a hypocrite. I made it perfectly clear in my post that I judge people's actions. Obviously the act of molesting a child is abhorrent to me whether it's disguised as wrestling or in any other form. Using the post of someone else to try and make it seem that I have contradicted this belief is simply pathetic. But the main underlying reason for Jeremy's dishonesty is he knows my questions have exposed him and he wants an excuse to explain away his lack of response. Be honest Jeremy; you don't want to answser my questions because you know you'll either have to voice your opposition to AZU's extremism and raise their ire or explain why you don't hold yourself to the same standards as you hold others.

Jeremy: You're a coward, a liar and a kiddie fiddler and I hold you in nothing but contempt.