I received an email last night claiming Kevin Strom, whom I knew 24 years ago only as a white activist, is about to be released from prison after pleading guilty, as I understand, to one count of child porn (specifically, ONE image he supposedly made himself with Photoshop).
I have noted in earlier posts on this tragic topic that Strom's father committed suicide when Kevin was 27 -- and therein lies a tale in my experience as a person who was molested myself for years.
As I posted earlier, Kevin had a certain veneer of arrogance that many noticed (and also disliked) -- but arrogance, in my experience, can often mask some sort of actual lack of confidence.
I can only speculate what may have gone on in Kevin's own childhood -- but somehow I doubt it was happy. This is not to excuse in
any way child porn (IF Strom ever really possessed any), but rather to point out that nothing arises in a vacuum.
I note that all the other charges against him, including stalking children and threatening witnesses -- instigated by his vengeful, hate-crazed and apparently lying ex-wife -- were thrown out the first day of the trial by the judge.
I will conclude by saying that as a Congressional candidate in 1990 and today, as a presidential candidate, I advocate the death penalty for child molesters -- and I advocate the death penalty for all involved in these rings.
Below is the text of the news story, followed by comments on the blogsite by various readers, including myself.
* * *
Neighborhood watch: Kiddie porn possessor to be released
by Lisa
Provence
Kevin Strom in a pre-arrest Wikipedia page photo.
Kevin Strom, who was sentenced to 23 months for possession of child pornography and who proudly counts himself a white separatist, gets out of prison tomorrow, and his pending residence in the 1100 block of St. Charles Court is causing some neighborhood consternation.
Filling neighborhoods with unwanted racial pamplets and papers has long been a tactic of white supremacist organizations. In this case, however, it appears someone in the neighborhood, or someone who doesn?t like Kevin Strom, may be doing the leafleting.
The Charlottesville neighborhood where Strom, founder of a now-defunct white separatist organization called the National Vanguard, will live with his mother, stepfather, and two children has been papered with fliers warning about the registered sex offender who will be residing among them.
Charlottesville Police Chief Tim Longo, who lives in that
neighborhood, hopes Strom gets a fair treatment in his transition back into society.
?We talk a lot about redemption,? says Longo. ?He?s served his sentence. I would hope people will not pre-judge.?
Longo calls Strom?s mother and stepfather ?good people? and ?good neighbors,? and he says his children play with Strom?s children, who have been living with Strom?s mother while he was incarcerated on the child porn possession charge. And Longo points out that Strom, who has been at the Federal Correctional Complex in Petersburg, will be heavily supervised during his 15-year probation.
Strom went to trial last year on charges of enticement of a minor and witness intimidation, charges that were thrown out. He pleaded guilty to one count of child porn possession, but said he?d possessed it ?unwillingly,? and at the April 21 sentencing declared, ?I am not a pedophile.?
His estranged wife, Elisha Strom, denies leafleting St. Charles Court about
Strom?s September 3 release, but says, ?Someone has to notify the neighborhood, especially since he?s still pretending to be innocent.?
The Stroms? tempestuous relationship was revealed in court last fall, after Elisha Strom?s phone calls to police accusing Strom of kiddie porn possession, stalking a 10-year-old friend of her daughter?s and intimidation of a witness? herself? led to felony charges. She did admit to bashing Strom on the head with a telephone.
While Strom is not prohibited from being around his minor children, Elisha Strom maintains that her husband is a danger to children. ?He?s in denial,? she says. ?[Strom and his parents] are trying to play the victim. They?re not victims.?
Another St. Charles Court resident, who asked that her name not be used, is most concerned about ?those two wonderful children living in that household with Kevin?s mother.? She says, ?I can?t imagine the impact on them. I just don?t know what the publicity
is going to do to those children.?
« Water leak: another group jumps ship?
*
John de Nugent September 2nd, 2008 | 9:33 pm
The article fails to say that most of the charges and accusations in this article were thrown OUT by the judge on the very first day.
Kevin Strom may have been guilty of something or he may have been railroaded. But there is no evidence he ever harmed children. As a person who was molested myself, l I have no forgiveness for true pedophiles. but there is no evidence he was one. There IS evidence the court knew he was a white rights activist. . . .
In any case, the man has done his time.
*
Kevin Strom Released from Prison at cvillenews.com September 2nd, 2008 | 9:51 pm
[...] Neo-Nazi and little-girl-lover Kevin Strom gets out of prison tomorrow. He?s paid his debt to society, but that doesn?t mean you can?t despise him. [...]
*
Marie Drummond
September 2nd, 2008 | 10:01 pm
Kiddie porn is the easiest crime in America to be set up for, and it is virtually impossible to defend against. The accusation alone is enough to convict. Whether this guy did or did not possess child pornography, he has done his time and deserves the chance to start over. Michelle Obama is right - America is a mean country!
*
Mr T September 2nd, 2008 | 11:20 pm
The facts are that regardless of whether or not he was ?railroaded? because of his beliefs about race, the jury has spoken and as a society we need to keep a watchful eye on our neighbor. Pedophiles have a huge failure rate and it is up to Mr. Strom to keep himself well out of harm's way. It is also up to anyone involved to be fair in both directions when protecting the children. You cannot unring a bell or unmolest a child.
*
Marie Drummond September 3rd, 2008 | 12:24 am
Mr. T - where are you getting
your statistics for the ?huge failure rate?? US Dep?t of Justice statistics on recidivism among sex offenders of all types shows a 5.3% re-arrest rate, and a 3.5% re-conviction rate. Dept. of Justice statistics for the same period show rearrest rates for all violent crimes at 61.7%, and reconviction for violent offenders at 46.9%. Yet those ex-cons aren?t singled out and subjected to vigilante harrassment upon release.
Demonizing people who have served their time, taken their treatment, and returned to society neither protects children nor honors America?s ideals of ?justice for all.? It merely fans the fires of the latest hysteria - and in doing puts children at risk by so inflating the registered sex offender lists that the true (and rare) predator who is a real danger to others is concealed in the registry list instead of being highlighted as legislation like ?Megan?s Law? intended.
*
John de Nugent September 3rd, 2008 | 7:30 am
Dear Marie Drummond,
The DOJ statistics you cite sound very encouraging, but they DO fly in the face of all I have ever heard about pedophile recidivism. I recall as a then Massachusetts resident the then governor 1991-97, William Weld, a former U.S. Assistant Attorney General under Reagan (Harvard college summa cum laude and then Harvard Law School grad) on the topic, and he was saying on television that the recidivism rate for child molesters was around 80% and, he said with dejection and disgust, it seemed an incurable addiction.
I of course would like to believe your hopeful assertion, Marie, not his. I am, however, very concerned, in view of shocking books such as the Franklin Coverup by Nebraska state senator John DeCamp (avalable at amazon.com), that there is a federal-level conspiracy to minimize child molestation because it actually
goes on in the Congress and among congressional staffers. Pat Buchanan is one of the few commentators to openly say the Republicans still have a serious problem here with pedophiles. Wherein lies the truth? I will repeat that I was molested myself, and for years, and I am very deeply interested in your reply, Marie
=============
On the topic of The Franklin Coverup, here is an accurate review on the Amazon site (I know Ted Gunderson, former regional director of the FBI, and he also vouches for DeCamp's book):
Quote:
This book, authored by a former Republican Nebraska State Senator, exposes the elite web of crime, satanic cults, and child sexual abuse that reaches through the highest levels of power in our society. The organized cover-up and suppression of the events and victims' accounts is well documented, as is the author's role as attorney in the investigations and court cases. It's interesting that former CIA director Bill Colby ambiguously acknowledged to the author that the scenario described is real, and not long thereafter Colby turned up dead under suspicious circumstances. This is a good book to recommend for those in denial about the depravity and deviousness of those with power and influence in our society. The only significant weakness about the book is that it does not go into much discussion of the larger context of elite cults and organized conspiratorial activity, instead just focusing on a small portion of this activity.
Another accurate review states:
Quote:
This book is quite shocking in many ways. The allegations of child abuse, money laundering, drug running and official governmental cover-ups both big and small. The Iran-Contra affair and CIA mind control. How do they all play in this midwestern state? Read this book to find out.
If it's true it is totally shocking. And how can it not be true? While the allegations many times appear outlandish the writer names names and points fingers at very powerful individuals. Why has no one filed law suits for slander if these allegations are not true? That brings is back around to the unbelievable thought that these allegations are true.
A groundbreaking book that sometimes seems to go off on tangents but all the while is a very important read. Witness the power of the government in ways that most people don't realize exists, the sordid underbelly. Outstanding.
Yet another review, good at first but marred by a ridiculous skepticism about the MONARCH project (I guess it all got just a little too scary for the reviewer, who prefers to think it all was just a local problem so he can sleep better at night):
Quote:
I live in Omaha and I well remember when this story broke in the press. It was big news; Lindbergh baby headlines, in fact. When I saw this book was available, I knew I had to read it and find out the information that the press refused to carry. John DeCamp names names and skewers people with little regard for his own personal safety.
I won't go into too much detail on what happened. Read the book to find that out. It is sufficient to say that there were many allegations of child abuse, homosexual encounters, drug abuse and embezzlement of monies involved. The people accused of the abuse were very prominent people in Omaha society, and still are today. DeCamp lays it all out for everyone to see. He cites sources and makes devastating charges against all those involved. He even indicts the federal government as a willing participant in this cover-up. DeCamp is most impressive when he outlines the scandals of Bob Kerrey's tenure as Nebraska governor in the early and mid 1980's. Several bank scandals and questionable loans cast Kerrey in a fairly sinister light. DeCamp says Kerrey used NIFA (Nebraska Investment Finance Authority) to make loans to his buddies and corporate interests. This is the same thing Bill Clinton did in Arkansas with the ADFA while he was governor, around the same time! Those wacky Democrats! What will they come up with next!
Needless to say, some of the revelations in this book are tough to read and pretty shocking. There are explicit descriptions of unnatural acts and violent incidents. There are big drawbacks to this book, however. For one thing, DeCamp has an ego the size of a house. He is constantly patting himself on the back and makes sure everyone knows how much money he could make, how successful his career is, and how many big names he can drop. It gets old real fast and hurts the book, in my opinion. He also gets off on some weird tangents. It's one thing to brag about your involvement in the Gordon Kahl case, or the militia movement. When you start talking about a CIA project called Monarch, in which America's youth are being programmed to kill and maim, you are really stretching credulity. I even roared out loud with derision when I got to the section on Monarch. Attempting to tie one of the Franklin kids into Monarch isn't a good idea, either. It erodes credibility. Despite these parts, the book is a good examination of the entire scandal. No matter what anyone ever says, the death of Gary Caradori is EXTREMELY suspicious. No one can argue that Peter Citron isn't a pedophile, either, as he served time in prison for that crime. These two events alone cast sinister suspicion that something was going on, although whether anyone will ever know the true scope of the scandal is highly unlikely.
Would I recommend this book? Yes, especially for the Kerrey info and the actual discussions of the Franklin cover-up. Just be sure and read this book with caution. Never believe everything you hear, see, or read!
============
Now WHY is all this distasteful topic relevant?
BLACKMAIL.
I have said it before and I will say it here again: Washington DC is run on bulls----, bribes and blackmail.
The federal government puts out a steady stream of LIES.
Many of its actors are on the take.
And if they do perchance try to back out, having somehow grown a conscience in that whorehouse on the Potomac known as the District of Columbia, someone has a dirt file on them an inch thick to keep them in line.
And the file may even include videos of them molesting a child at a drug-and-booze-fueled orgy. THAT is the ultimate blackmail.
You do-not-want to go to prison as a known, convicted child molester. That can be a fate worse than death when those other inmates get ahold of you - because very many of them were molested as kids themselves. It would be better for a convicted molester to just blow his or her brains out.
Let me tell you what is happening, folks:
There are those who are deliberately organizing and promoting child molestation in Washington DC. Why? So that the whole sicko town (whatever the beauty of its white marble buildings) lives in terror of being exposed and going to prison.
Just aside from the indescribable suffering of the child -- and I lost 50 years of my own life in an emotional hell over it -- this is subverting our entire government, AND the media, AND even some police chiefs. There is lots of serious dirt to go around throughout the ruling class in both parties.
It is all part of the nearly total takeover of our government at the highest levels by PSYCHOPATHS.
And which group is most behind this unspeakable evil?
The group that in its holy book, the Talmud, openly condones sex with children.
As this poster, who uses the avatar "Saint Hitler," reports:
* * *
Don't even get me started on that book of Satan, my Solutrean brother!!
What about this!?
Quote:
MISHNAH. WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN (7) HAS HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH (8) A LITTLE GIRL, (9) OR WHEN A SMALL BOY (10) HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN-UP WOMAN, OR [WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY] INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD (11) ? [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ] ?
? Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 11a
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 57
The translator, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, amplifies the text with footnotes:
7)A man who was of age.
8)Lit., 'who came on'.
9)Less than three years old.
10)Less than nine years of age.
11)Lit., 'One who was injured by wood', as a result of which she injured the hymen.
? Rabbi Dr. Daiches
Let's review the above-cited Mishnah: "When a grown-up man has had sexual intercourse with a little girl, or when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman ?" It is obvious that sex activity between a grown man and a little girl, and between a grown woman and a little boy, is a part of the woof and the warp of everyday Talmud life; such relationships, in the eyes of the Sages, are unremarkable. There is no prohibition on sexual activity between adults and young children ? it is simply regulated. Recall the words of the Very Reverend the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire the late Dr. Joseph Herman Hertz:
Religion in the Talmud attempts to penetrate the whole of human life with the sense of law and right. Nothing human is in its eyes mean or trivial; everything is regulated and sanctified by religion. Religious precept and duty accompany man from his earliest years to the grave and beyond it. They guide his desires and actions at every moment.
? Rabbi Dr. Hertz (38)
Thus, if the Talmud permits girls three years old and younger to be sexually used by adults, that is the law. The concern of the Sages is to ensure that the adult is not, technically speaking, in violation of any of the rules.
Regenerating Virginity
In the Gemara that follows the Mishnah of Kethuboth 11a (cited above), the Sages discuss the issues. They say having intercourse with a girl younger than three is like putting a finger in the eye. Rabbi Dr. Daiches explains in the footnotes that, just as tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.
GEMARA. Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood. (1) When I said it before Samuel he said: 'Injured by a piece of wood' does not apply to (2) flesh. Some teach this teaching by itself: (3) [As to] a small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman, Rab said, he makes her [as though she were] injured by a piece of wood; whereas Samuel said: 'Injured by a piece of wood' does not apply to flesh. R. Oshaia objected: WHEN A GROWN-UP MAN HAS HAD INTERCOURSE WITH A LITTLE GIRL, OR WHEN A SMALL BOY HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A GROWN-UP WOMAN, OR WHEN A GIRL WAS ACCIDENTALLY INJURED BY A PIECE OF WOOD ? [IN ALL THESE CASES] THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]; SO ACCORDING TO R. MEIR. BUT THE SAGES SAY: A GIRL WHO WAS INJURED ACCIDENTALLY BY A PIECE OF WOOD ? HER KETHUBAH IS A MANEH! (4) Raba said, It means (5) this: When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this, (6) it is as if one puts the finger into the eye; (7) but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood,' and [with regard to the case of] 'a girl injured by a piece of wood,' itself, there is the difference of opinion between R. Meir and the Sages.
? Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 11b
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 57-58
Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches amplifies the text with footnotes (page 58):
Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.
Lit., 'is not in'.
I.e., the difference of opinion between Rab and Samuel with regard to that question was recorded without any reference to R. Judah.
The Sages differ only with regard to a girl injured by a piece of wood, but not with regard to a small boy who has intercourse with a grown-up woman. This shows that the latter case cannot be compared with the former case. The Mishnah would consequently be against Rab and for Samuel.
Lit., 'says'.
Lit., 'here', that is, less than three years old.
I.e., tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years. Cf. Nid. 45a.
? Rabbi Dr. Daiches
To a person unaccustomed with the Talmud culture, it may seem that discussion of sexual intercourse between grown men and very young girls is merely theoretical. But as we shall see, cases are cited, judgments are weighed and debated, and the Sages discuss the wounds suffered by the young girls as a result of the intercourse.
More on Regenerating Virginity
We know that the amount of a woman's kethubah depends on her virginity on her wedding day. But what of a woman who, as a little girl below the age of three years, was raped or otherwise subjected to sexual intercourse? The Sages rule that the kethubah of such a woman is set as if she were still a virgin.
MISHNAH. A WOMAN PROSELYTE, A WOMAN CAPTIVE, AND A WOMAN SLAVE, WHO HAVE BEEN REDEEMED, CONVERTED, OR FREED [WHEN THEY WERE] LESS THAN THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY OLD ? THEIR KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]. AND THERE IS WITH REGARD TO THEM THE CLAIM OF [NON-]VIRGINITY. (17)
? Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 11a
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 54
This seems like a generous and humanitarian ruling, the creation of a legal fiction of virginity when the woman is no longer physiologically a virgin. But Dr. Daiches corrects us. He tells us that, according to the Sages, the hymen of a girl younger than three literally grows back again.
If they had sexual intercourse before they were three years and one day old the hymen would grow again, and they would be virgins. V. 9a and 11b and cf. Nid. 44b and 45a.
? Rabbi Dr. Daiches (25)
See also the discussion of Niddah 44b and 45a, below.
As we continue to explore the Talmud doctrines on child-adult sex, we will see further confirmation that the Talmud Sages believed that the hymen regenerates in a girl younger than three.
"? Of Lesser Age, No Guilt is Incurred"
In modern America, sex between an adult and a child is condemned in proportion to the youth of the child. That is, Americans generally consider sex with a fifteen year old, a twelve year old, a six year old, and a three-year-old on a continuous scale of condemnation. The younger the child, the greater the condemnation.
Talmudic law works on the reverse scale: sex with younger children is less significant than sex with older children. How did this doctrine come about?
Scripture states thus:
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
? Leviticus 18:22 (KJV)
The Old Testament prohibits a man lying with a man; but notice, the Old Testament does not prohibit a man lying with a boy. Thus, the Talmud Sages arrive at their position on pederasty. In the following, bestiality said to be committed "naturally" when a man uses the vaginal passage of the beast, and "unnaturally" when a man uses the anal passage of the beast. The Sages make a similar distinction for the couplings of a woman with a beast.
GEMARA. ? Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that. (2) What is the basis of their dispute? ? Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]; whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty [in that respect]. (3) But Samuel maintains: Scripture writes, [And thou shalt not lie with mankind] as with the lyings of a woman. (4)
It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Pederasty at the age of nine years and a day; [55a] [he] who commits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally; or a woman who causes herself to be bestially abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment. (5)
? Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 54b - 55a
Soncino 1961 Edition, page 371
The translator, Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman, amplifies the text with footnotes. Note particularly footnote 2: "? but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred." See also the final sentence of footnote 5: "? nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable." (See Soncino Talmud Glossary for definition of Baraitha.)
I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
At nine years a male attains sexual matureness.
Lev. XVIII, 22. Thus the point of comparison is the sexual matureness of woman, which is reached at the age of three.
(Rashi reads [H] instead of the [H] in our printed texts. A male, aged nine years and a day who commits etc.] There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first ? a male aged nine years and a day ? refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning ? because firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha supports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.
? Rabbi Dr. Freedman
The plain English meaning of the Talmud text is clear, but if there is any doubt, the Soncino scholars put the matter to rest: No guilt is incurred with a boy child younger than nine, even in incest. Thus we see that Orthodox Jewish doctrines concerning homosexuality are not accurately represented by Dr. Laura and other Orthodox spokesmen.
* * *
These people are a disease ["Saint Hitler" concludes], Judaism is a disease and Andrew Winkler [the courageous Australian Jew who runs ziopedia.org] can 12- step them to freedom from it!
=============
And there you have it -- a massive conspiracy to promote child molestation. And I, John de Nugent, candidate for president, state that it is backed by the leaders of the most powerful ethnic group in the USA. This means that the most monstrous evil imaginable has taken hold of the federal government -- and between the hard-core psychopaths who run it and the blackmailed sinners it has roped in, they will NEVER repent.
The federal government has no legitimacy, only its naked control of the police and military. It is NO LONGER our government; it is a tyranny. And when you support the federal government, you support the spread of indescribable evil, a revolt against both God and man.
And child.
No one reading this can run from this battle. You should fear for YOUR soul if you do. For this evil will go on growing until all must take sides.
By now you should have seen this Clint Eastwood masterpiece. A boy (played as an adult by Tim Robbins) is molested by three creeps. As an adult, he is therefore (but unjustly) suspected by the police of involvement in a child murder. A wife who is an emotional idiot betrays him, part of a chain reaction of tragedies that all go back thirty years to the vicious deeds of three molesters.