Tuesday, November 21, 2006

As They Rejoice...

Well, bc, gc, etc is back up, and they're still being hosted by steadfast. As we've seen, steadfast shut em down fast, then reviewed their content and put them back up again. Now's the time to get out all your links and screenshots and send them to steadfast. Here's the blog, for those of you who like to go hogwild in comments sections:

As I've said in former posts, it's good to be tactful and careful when informing folks about what's going on. We don't want them to be defensive. But we do want them to know.

Update: There's reason to believe that steadfast is going to take them down again after a termination notice. :)


Blogger Rez said...

i just got this from Karl-

Overall, I agree with you, that what they stand for, etc. is wrong in many ways, but from what I can tell, the content is legal and protected by the first amendment. It should not be our duty to determine what content is offensive, what content is potentially harmful, etc. that is for law enforcement and the courts to decide, and we are more than happy to cooperate with the legal system if it is requested. If they contact us and want to setup a sting operation, or similar, we are more than happy to cooperate, but we do not diminish peoples' first amendment rights based on the opinions of individuals.

Karl Zimmerman
Steadfast Networks
Phone: 312-602-2689
Fax: 312-602-2688

12:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bye Jacey good luck you guys!

1:53 PM  
Blogger Mata Hari Super Spy said...

Standard canned response from Steadfast. Here are some more contacts for everyone, including their personal blogs. :)

Top guys at Steadfast:

Karl A. Zimmerman - President/Chief Executive Officer



Raymond P. Tetzloff - Chief Operating Officer



Kevin M. Stange - Chief Technology Officer



Back to being a super spy!

3:42 PM  
Blogger jacey said...

bye Jacey good luck you guys!

Thanks Violet, take care. :)

8:20 PM  
Blogger Rez said...

Standard canned response from Steadfast.

yeah, that's the feeling i got. still, i wonder how stronly he'll feel about free speech when people who don't agree with him start exercising some of their own.

8:50 PM  
Blogger Rez said...

bye violet. it's not going to be the same without you, but you need to do what's best for you.

8:57 PM  
Blogger jacey said...

I just sent off an e-mail.

yeah, that's the feeling i got. still, i wonder how stronly he'll feel about free speech when people who don't agree with him start exercising some of their own.

Indeed, BC and GC have a tendancy to bring ALOT of media coverage with them aswell. :)

And if that list you passed on to me is correct, they host roughly 470 websites. CSOs could contact everyone of those - no problem at all.

12:09 AM  
Blogger Rez said...

it does matter, violet. you'll be missed. take care of yourself, and you know where to find us if you ever need anything.

3:29 AM  
Blogger Rez said...

they host roughly 470 websites.

some of that 470 are Steadfast's, but it looked like more than 400 last i checked. i wonder how many they need to lose before they can't afford "free speech" for child molesters anymore.

3:39 AM  
Blogger Karl said...

Let me make a quick explanation on behalf of Steadfast Networks.

Do not be fooled, removing this site would do more harm than good. The way they are currently setup it is a public forum, open to public scrutiny and law enforcement observation. Shutting down the site would not change these people and it would not hamper their ability to meet/converse. All it would do is either force them to a location, probably another country, where such behavior is allowed, taking them out of US jurisdiction, making it much harder to collect any evidence from the site. The other option is that it could force them into private forums, members only forums, etc. In those private forums the sky is the limit, they are not held to public scrutiny, their actions will not fall under the public eye nor the eye of law enforcement.

Honestly, what are you looking to accomplish, shutting their site down for maybe one week, max, causing them some slight inconvenience? Why not work with us in working with the FBI's Internet Crime division and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, who at this point do not seem to have much interest in the sites in question? Getting them involved, getting them to keep an eye on these sites, etc. is what is actually going to affect change, getting these people off the streets.

In addition, we do not condone their activities and we host many sites which we do not agree with. We will also gladly assist any law enforcement agency willing to be involved.

10:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Karl Zimmerman said the following:

Shutting down the site could just force them into a private realm, where no one, not even law enforcement, would have an easy look into their lives/comments. Don't be mislead to believe that shutting down the site will stop,
or even slow down, these people in any way, but it CAN act as a trap for these people with law enforcement involvement.

I have thought about his first comments and decided he doesn't understand these people at all. I know as you do where many of these folks congregate if Boycaht is not online. I see some of them on some pretty nasty IRC channels and they of course go to other pedophile boards etc.

I considered his other main point as well and have come to the conclusion that this is a lame excuse and I frankly don't believe that is why they are continuing to host the site.

I think in addition to contacting others who they host for maybe there are a few other things that can be done as well.

8:48 PM  
Blogger Rez said...

i agree with everything you're saying, midnight. Karl tried to offer me the same rationalization, along with a couple of false analogies.

typical smoke and mirrors crap, considering that he was Re:'ing to an email that quoted BC's head ped, Dylan Thomas, stating that adult men raping little boys is "just getting laid".

maybe Karl's just unfamiliar with, or chooses not to enforce, his own AUP that prohibits the "Transmission, storage, or presentation of any information," that "that promotes any illegal activity".

an email Kevin Stange had a couple of things in it that also made me wonder exactly who it is that we're dealing with here. i'm not saying anything without proof--and anyone stateside interested in avoiding a lawsuit should also be cautious about what they say from this point on--but some things you just can't get the stench off of no matter how hard you try, if you know what i mean.

11:30 PM  
Blogger Mata Hari Super Spy said...

Steadfast is using the excuse that if they close BC/GC's doors, take away the place they gather for "support" that might cause them to have to "act out" rather than just "talk" about their twisted fantasies. After all, that is what rookiee was arguing, and that is what they whine about on the boards. The sad thing is that Steadfast took the bait and agrees with them...just like libsyn. I think that they are going to be a tough nut to crack because they have dug their heels into the ground on this one.

We can do it. Just gotta find a big enough nutcracker. LOL

6:18 AM  
Blogger Proud To Be Anti Perv said...


Unfortunately, LEO are more apt to hang out in chat rooms for the easy kill. They tend to stay from message boards. Maybe you should monitor the BC and GC message boards and read posts like this one:


What do you think this poster is implying? and also this response:


Sounds a bit suspicious to me.

11:26 AM  
Blogger Rez said...

Karl thinks his pathetic rationalization of neutrality absolves him from the guilt of profiting off of the rape of children. but it doesn't work like that.

8:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yo Karl!

DO you have kids? No? Nieces, nephews? Go to the links Proud To Be posted... tell me that's not disgusting. Just tell me that once. HOW STUPID can you be man?

Everyone else... keep fighting the good fight... I'm with you all the way.

12:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The big problem with Karl's logic is that these people are using the internet to encourage each other by discussing what they want as normal and convincing themselves it is normal behavior and everyone else is F'ed up.

They really can't even be honest even on BC about what they want. They discuss it as just wanting to have involvement with children. The thing is adults can do that now as long as the involvement they want is not sex. They take things like being in Big Brothers or being involved in scouting and equate that with wanting to have sex with kids. That is what they do on these sites.

Karl may not want to read between the lines or may not see it but that doesn't change the fact that if all they wanted were to just have some involvement there is no reason they can't do that now but they always discuss not being able to love as thy want to.

I know that legally Karl is right they way they are currently presenting their arguments is not crossing lines and if anyone does they try to clean it up right away but I think most people know what they mean.

The only people they may be fooling are each other and that might be the biggest danger. Being able to congregate and convince each other than wanting sex is no different than wanting to take a kid fishing. Are we really better off with people starting to think there is no difference?

My last point would be that if these people are going to act out on what they think they will do that with or without BC, GC, and whatever other site they have. The site is not going to stop that in fact I would suggest Karl follow along and see how often desires for sex are argued against or discouraged successfully on these sites.

5:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home