FBI Sets up Fake Child Porn Links That if Clicked Trigger Armed Raids on Users

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
I take your point on "unreasonable search and seizure" as an argument about civil liberties, but to me i'd rather argue on the idea of it being so very risky with regards to getting many innocent people.

But they're directly related. The right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure is there for the purpose of protecting those innocent people.

Lowering the bar, for probable cause, is why innocent people can now become victims of such heinous raids and accusations. It's these unreasonable search and seizures that are going to ruin more lives.

When it comes to something like kiddie porn, I want the F.B.I. to have substantial evidence, and all of their ducks in a row before going on a raid.

First off, to prevent false accusations from ruining more innocent lives; and second, to prevent those who are guilty from getting off on a technicality.

These honeypots are sheer laziness in action, and I don't want those who are actually guilty, of dealing in kiddie porn, to walk because the F.B.I.'s method of investigation had more holes in it than a pound of swiss cheese.

[edit on 3/27/08 by redmage]

Originally posted by jackinthebox
Indeed. I do however, believe that toleration toward pedophilia should be displayed so that those who experience it can find assitance to help them avoid criminal activity, as opposed to being driven even further undergound than they already are, and increasing the liklihood of them to offend.

That is in my view the correct way to approach this, whilst i find it abhorrent that someone could have these ideas in their minds i also realise that if society learns to not accept it but restrain themselves, then maybe we could help find treatment. That is not to say we should release a paedophile form prison, if they commit and illegal act they should be locked up for life until a tested cure is found.

If however they never harm a child, never look at child pornography and never harm a child at all then we should be ok with them living free and maybe if we tolerate this sort of person they could get help from a qualified psychologist and hopefully get support in controlling their urges. If they have made the concious effort to never act upon them then it shows they are capable of keeping it under control.

The average person will sadly treat anyone who has these thoughts the same way as someone who actually as abused a child, there is no distinctin and as you said it ends up that they are driven underground, where they will find great temptation for their urges. Afterall if you are already demonised for your thoughts as much as an "active" paedophile then why not just commit the acts?

We truly need to stop child pornography, we have to stop it and we have to stop actual paedophiles and anyone found with this material who has purposly downloaded it, and anyone who has ever commited a sexual act with a child should in my humble view be locked for life in a secure institution.

I read a lot on the issue and have not yet found any research that claims to have a cure for paedophiles. From shock treatment, to chemical castration, to mood elevators. The only study i found once claiming to havea 100% success rate was a christian research foundation claiming that all paedophiles who came to them no longer feel atttracted to children. I will leave it to you all to decide whether that ones true or not

The only study i found once claiming to have a 100% success rate was a christian research foundation claiming that all paedophiles who came to them no longer feel atttracted to children. I will leave it to you all to decide whether that ones true or not

No, that is true. The brainwashing power of Christian orthodoxy is mind-blowing

Neverminding the priests molesting children of course!! That doesn't factor into the 100% success rate I am sure!

Originally posted by redmage
But they're directly related. The right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure is there for the purpose of protecting those innocent people.

Whilst i can see your point here i don't thik they are directly related, civil liberties could be maintained for example if the people using these honey traps had to provide more information to access this premium content. Maybe it would be good if the FBI used a system like this.

Say they set up a website, they wait for someone to come along, they click the "sign up" button as the site is apparently supplying all the sick stuff they want. They sign up with name etc, the they are given a phone number and a code saying something like "for the safety of our members we are asking them to phone this number so we can make sure they aren't police, residential numbers only".

I bet you many of these people would be stupid enough to call and you'd have their voice on record, perfect. For me this is one of the only ways you could make sure you had your man using a honey trap method.

Originally posted by redmage
Lowering the bar, for probable cause, is why innocent people can now become victims of such heinous raids and accusations. It's these unreasonable search and seizures that are going to ruin more lives.

Indeed i agree that this isn't just about child pornography in the states. From what i have seen of the current adjustments to your laws, the police just need resonable suspicion. This is very different to probable cause, it's such a wide net they are casting that they could pretty much raid anyones home.

Originally posted by redmage
When it comes to something like kiddie porn, I want the F.B.I. to have substantial evidence, and all of their ducks in a row before going on a raid.

First off, to prevent false accusations from ruining more innocent lives; and second, to prevent those who are guilty from getting off on a technicality.

Yes being falsly accused of such a thing would destroy most people,, it's an accusation that will not wash off, a mark upon your very soul. Your could have the most close friend or soulmate who whilst wanting to stand by you just couldn't stand the looks and insults they would get for simply being near you. So yes we must always have the absolute proof before we charge any of these individuals.

Absolutely i think we completely agree on this one. The last thing you want is some actual active paedophile getting off on a technicality. This would mean that this paedophile would become more careful with how they got their pornography. They would no doubt go and learn all about the internet and how it works and you would never again catch them.

Originally posted by redmage
These honeypots are sheer laziness in action, and I don't want those who are actually guilty, of dealing in kiddie porn, to walk because the F.B.I.'s method of investigation had more holes in it than a pound of swiss cheese.

Again i agree and have said from the start of this thread that this idea is ultimately flawed. What happens if the FBI break in only to find that the individual has nothing on their computer? What if they actually are guilty but were smart enough to keep everything on a seperate, small flash drive? Many of you might not be aware but versions of Linux (an operating system) can be booted from a USB pen. These don't leave much trace on your system and if used correctly you would never prove anything against these people.

Hiding some of these USB pens would be easy, you could even swallow them! So no the FBI website is a bad idea, an awful mistake and for anyone who is found innocent after investigation i honestly feel complete sympathy.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Whilst i can see your point here i don't thik they are directly related, civil liberties could be maintained for example if the people using these honey traps had to provide more information to access this premium content. Maybe it would be good if the FBI used a system like this.

That idea sounds great on the surface, but if the Feds created a full-blown fake site to lure pedos to sign up memberships, credit card info and all, they would actually need real content to do that. The only real way to do that would be by putting real photos/videos of underage children in the site, which of course would mean the FBI themselves would be breaking the law.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

That idea sounds great on the surface, but if the Feds created a full-blown fake site to lure pedos to sign up memberships, credit card info and all, they would actually need real content to do that. The only real way to do that would be by putting real photos/videos of underage children in the site, which of course would mean the FBI themselves would be breaking the law.

Not necessarily. There was obviously no actual content with this link we are discussing.

You would have to take away the credit card bit though for several reasons. From what I understand, these people really aren't in it for the money a lot of the time. They operate like an underground P2P so right away the credit card thing would throw off all the hardcore ones.

Then there is the little problem of criminal solicitation. An undercover posing as a hooker can't offer services for a price either.

You could set up a site though, using key phrases and such, to lure creeps to sign up for an access code. You could even have this sort of buried in a site that shows legal porn.

Oh man. Everyone is so worried about what happens online while back in the real world...

Dallas club where girl, 12, stripped will keep license

Originally posted by jackinthebox
Oh man. Everyone is so worried about what happens online while back in the real world...

Dallas club where girl, 12, stripped will keep license

WHAT! WHAT! I am honestly speechless, well ok i can still type but the sandwich i was eating is stuck in my throat. How exactly can they allow them to keep their license? They allowed a 12 year old girl to strip, obviously they claim they didn't know she was 12 but come on, they must have asked for ID to give her the job.

Wow she must have, as the article says, had the body of a twenty year old, that is nuts!

The real sad thing is that this is much worse then if she just YouTubed it or something. For her sake I mean. The kind of environment some strip clubs are is the lowest of the low. And alot of strippers, especially at the really bad strip clubs, are hookers on the side too. I really hope this girl didn't get exposed to that as well

**edit: change to "twenty year old*

[edit on 123131p://28u41 by Lucid Lunacy]

What i dont understand is, the link that entrapped them contained no actual kiddy porn material, so what are they getting charged for? seeking it or just clicking the link? how can u be charged for kiddy porn if the file contained garble and useless data? I didn't know there was a crime for clicking a link which contained no unlawful images/videos. Guess the fbi are running out of idea's hey

Well... I've noticed one thing. The people who didn't believe that people could be fooled into clicking these links... uh, they stopped posting a couple pages back...

Interesting, isn't it?

Oh, and the 12 year old stripper thing is pretty sick...

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Whilst i can see your point here i don't thik they are directly related, civil liberties could be maintained for example if the people using these honey traps had to provide more information to access this premium content.

So you do see the relation. Your comment of "civil liberties could be maintained" shows that you understand civil liberties are not being maintained with this current system; their lack of respect for civil liberties is a direct part of the problem.

A "registration" system would certainly be an improvement. There are issues with identity theft; however, it would provide more evidence for legitimate probable cause, and it would negate many of the current opportunities for false positives, and/or letting the guilty walk free.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Indeed i agree that this isn't just about child pornography in the states. From what i have seen of the current adjustments to your laws, the police just need resonable suspicion. This is very different to probable cause, it's such a wide net they are casting that they could pretty much raid anyones home.

Sadly, this seems to be becoming more, and more of a reality everyday over here, and the erosion of our rights is what is allowing these "wide nets" to be cast. Furthermore, many jingoistic attitudes are running high, and turning a blind eye to these actions. "It's all for our own safety.", and "You're either with us, or against us.".

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
yes we must always have the absolute proof before we charge any of these individuals.

I wouldn't go quite that far. Don't get me wrong, proof would be great, but "proof" is in the eyes of the jury. That said, they (the F.B.I.) damn well better have some substantial evidence before jumping the gun with accusations/raids such as these.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Absolutely i think we completely agree on this one. The last thing you want is some actual active paedophile getting off on a technicality.

Exactly! Tied with false accusations, that is my other greatest fear with this system.

In the interests of not offending anyone else who may have clicked on BiohazardT's link, I'll use myself as an a hypothetical...

Lets say that I'm a kiddie porn mogul. Furthermore, that I've got millions upon millions of terabytes of movies, and images, of the most twisted and heinous acts ever captured, or depicted with children. I mean everything! From Roman bathhouse paintings to the kid next door; you name it, and I've got it. No one on the face of the earth is as depraved, degenerate, and perverse as me...

Still with me? Ok, just checking.
(My Danish ancestors are probably rolling in their graves for me to even humor such a stereotype. )

Alright, now lets say that I clicked on BiohazardT's link, and that the F.B.I. was stupid enough to let active URLs get printed in a MSM story; so tomorrow I get my "7 a.m. raid" along with numerous others, all over the U.S., who've clicked hidden links that various "BiohazardT's" have spread across the net.

The agents are now literally dancing in the streets because of the "goldmine" that they've struck. Ok, not literally; the streets are actually too full with all of the U-Haul trucks they've had to rent in order to haul it all away, but they're dancing in the yards none the less. Fast forward>>>

A few months later I finally reach my court date, and the first thing my lawyer does is to "move to suppress the search warrant". Why? Because I'm an forum member who's clicked on a link that was supposedly going to an F.B.I. briefing, and had absolutely nothing to do with any actual attempt to download kiddie porn. Probable cause is now shot, and all of those terabytes of confiscated evidence are now inadmissible. The charges are subsequently dismissed, and I'm free to go offend again. Why? Because the F.B.I. was too lazy to do any actual investigative work, and their chosen method was sloppy and easily abused/misused.

That's the other reason this plan is so flawed. Not only can it end up ruining more innocent lives, but it could also let the guilty walk free, on a technicality, due to a lack of proper investigative procedures before all the raids were executed.

Now, I know that's all hypothetical. Kiddie porn ain't my thing, and I don't believe that the F.B.I. would be dumb enough to give active links MSM attention; so I don't fear anyone here actually getting raided (Although I do find it highly offensive that a now-former member thought such things would be funny), but the problem is that there are guilty people out there, and I don't want any of them getting off because they clicked an easily disguisable/abusable link in an email, or anywhere else on the net.

There definitely needs to be a better way; one that's not so dangerous when it comes to the posibilities of ruining innocent lives, and one that isn't so easy for the guilty to walk free on a technicality. Personally, I'm seeing major shortcomings, at both ends, with this honeypot idea.

[edit on 3/28/08 by redmage]

reply to post by jackinthebox


Now that deserves a thread of its own!

I can't believe that they can't shut the place down for employing a minor!

Of their "laundry list of things we can use" shouldn't that be #1?

[edit on 3/28/08 by redmage]

Originally posted by JoeTheThird

Originally posted by just_julie

Originally posted by redmage

Originally posted by gtirlad2
HAHA GOOD PHILOSOPHY. IM PRETTY SURE THAT IF SOMEONE ACCADENTLY CLICKED THE LINK AND THEY HAD NO INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE ON THERE COMP, THEN THE FEDS COULDN'T DO #!

Again (as I mentioned at the top of this very page), except for ruining their life through the stigma of being plastered all over the 6 o'clock news for being the prime suspect in a kiddie porn raid. It wouldn't matter if they were exonerated. The damage would already be done.


P.S. Drop the caps lock, it's considered rude.

[edit on 3/27/08 by redmage]

Ruining THEIR life? What about the kids who are getting abused?? They will never grow up and have a normal life... trust me, I know this. I can understand how it can be damaging for a person (IF THEY ARE TRULY INNOCENT) if they accidently came across the porn, or someone else was using their computer, but how long does the damage last?

This is completely irrelevant.

What about the kids?

If this is the only thing that matters, it would justify round the clock surveilence of every person.

Why don't we lock you up for child abuse until you prove you haven't harmed anyone? Why not, since we are doing it for the children?

How long the damage lasts is really none of your business to judge. Any length of time is long enough in a free society.

As a matter of fact, any person who is ignorant enough to give up their own rights, should be moved to a place that corresponds to their beliefs. Giving up your rights on a voluntary basis is damaging to those of us who would like to remain free.

Take your helpless children with you.

WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY is that it gives police a REASON to want to search someones house. I DO NOT LOOK AT PORN let alone kiddie porn so I dont know how easy it is to "accidently" click on a website that would have kiddie porn on it.

How long the damage lasts IS MY BUSINESS TO JUDGE seeing as though I was a victim as a child.

Do you really think the FBI is setting this up just to annoy YOU and A FEW OTHERS, or just to "stick their noses" into other peoples business???

Yes it is about the children you ignorant fool. Helpless children? Of course they are helpless.... THEY ARE CHILDREN!

I see somebody is thinking with emotion rather than logic...

You say you don't know how easy it is to accidentally click one of those links. Read back a couple pages, half the people following this thread were tricked into doing it.

And that was WHILE TALKING ABOUT BEING TRICKED.

But it must be a good idea still, because even though it's inaccurate, it makes you feel better about your past.

To hades with our rights! The heck with real investigation! Why waste our time with such trivial things when we can just go with our knee-jerk emotional reactions all the time?

Originally posted by just_julie
WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY is that it gives police a REASON to want to search someones house.

I've gotta disagree. A simple IP log is no valid reason, it's merely a poor excuse. The simple system described in the article is far too susceptible to ruining even more innocent lives, and to chances of letting the guilty roam free.

Originally posted by just_julie
I DO NOT LOOK AT PORN let alone kiddie porn so I dont know how easy it is to "accidently" click on a website that would have kiddie porn on it.

Again, one doesn't need to "look at porn" to accidentally click a wrong link; links can be easily disguised as anything, and they can be placed anywhere online.

In case you missed it, someone a couple pages back placed what was one of the actual honeypot links in this very thread. She disguised it as an F.B.I. briefing on the topic, and members clicked it. She also "did it for laughs", just to see if someone would get raided, because she was too afraid to click it herself. People like her are a perfect example of why this system is so flawed. You may not look at porn, but you do surf ATS.

How would you feel if you were raided, for kiddie porn, tomorrow at 7a.m., with your neighbors watching? All because you clicked on a link in an innocuous forum. Would you be happy because it's "all for the children"? Do you think you could handle the way your neighbors would look at you after that? How about when you saw the 6 o'clock news saying "This morning the F.B.I. executed a raid on "just_julie" under suspicions of child pornography?" Would you still be happy and secure because it's "all for the children"?

No one wants such criminals to roam free, but we can't start treating everyone like criminals; that won't make things any better.

Originally posted by just_julie
Do you really think the FBI is setting this up just to annoy YOU and A FEW OTHERS, or just to "stick their noses" into other peoples business???

Personally, I'm not sure. I'm having a really hard time wraping my head around the idea of why they would choose a method that is so weak/fallible for a crime that is so serious.

[edit on 3/28/08 by redmage]

Remember "Johnny Five" the personable robot from the movie?

Someone should set up a robot in front of a computer in an otherwise vacant house to click on all these FBI sting links and then videotape the scene when the FBI come in on a raid. Sting the stingers.

Just about anyone with a bit of smarts can drive into any alley in any town USA and link up to anyone's phone line and tap the internet.

Now if we all just keep the Ten Commandments, there would be no FBI or porn or offenders or perverts.

Neverminding the priests molesting children of course!! That doesn't factor into the 100% success rate I am sure!

You are forgetting a few things. 1st off, while Catholics are still technicly Christians, the remainder of Christian denominations separated from the Catholic church because the Catholic church was teaching things that were not in the Bible, and did not follow the Bible's rules. Jesus said " I am the way the truth and the life, noone comes to the father but by me " that negates the whole idea of praying through Mary. Purgatury !? No Biblical findings whatsoever. They believe that we have to pray people into heaven out of Purgatory. If that's true, then Jesus was not who he said he was. That given the priests molesting children is aweful and the priests should have their willies removed. They are not representative of true Christians as a whole.
2nd What is wrong with anyone wanting to help these people and rehab them, Christian or non? It's not brainwashing. They don't lock them up in rooms and force feed them sermons.
Pedophilia is a mystery to me. I mean, I didn't want to see a 12 year old girl naked when I was 12. More or less as an adult. Let alone a naked boy.
The government doing this scares me though. I've told my story on here before about someone hacking my computer and storing this kind of filth on it and protecting it so the only way I could get rid of it was a complete restore. I downloaded an episode of Friends one time off of limewire. When I opened it, it was not Friends. It was a young girl giving a grown man oral sex. It left my computer immediately, but what happens when a glitch hits or let's say my child goes to one of these links? I'm responsible right?

Also, what about people downloading this stuff over WI-FI? Would McDonalds be the place that gets raided or are they sophisticated enough to go beyond the Wi-Fi?

I would love to create a spyware script that would edit someone's host table to associate google.com with the IP of these kiddy porn sites and watch people's houses get raided all across the country.

"But officer.... I was just googling myself, I swear!"