[–] hojuruku [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I have seen this before. Greatest Gay Activist and First homo to open a gay orgy bar in Singapore Mr Alex Au UPLOADED A PICTURE OF A GAY DADS BABY SEX VICTIM DRAKE NEWTON AS A POSTER BOY FOR GAY PRIDE AFTER HIS RAPISTS WERE ARRESTED IN AMERICA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Au

accelerate.lgbt/about aka wordpress.com support says it's homophobic to oppose little boy / baby anal rape victims being used as poster boys for gay pride.

This is exactly the same stance the baby rapists in the picture below said - it's homophobic to oppose them getting children to rape. Hear them say it here http://archive.org/details/TwoDadsAreBetterThanOne - or see the embedded video that my father was prosecuted for the crime of linking to on https://web.archive.org/web/20140722080525/https://www.causes.com/posts/891061 - search "mckee burns" on case law for that one.

More info: http://archive.is/bBPyo (resulted in a http://facebook.com/policeglbti gay child sex police raid for exposing the person suing my dad and John Sunol sends his penis picture you can see in the comments to underage child prostitutes) THIS LINK IS A MUST SEE BECAUSE IT SHOWS PETER TRUONG'S LAWYER AFTER CONVICTION VIA EMAIL SAYING HE'S NOT A PEDOPHILE HE'S A HOMOSEXUAL WHO MUST BE RESPECTED STOP BEING HOMOPHOBIC

https://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2013/01/20/pastor-ambushes-goh-chok-tong-with-demand-to-defend-377a/ https://yawningbread.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/pic_201301_312.jpg

vs this documentary the ABC is censoring saying published gay marriage activists raping babies has no bearing on the gay marriage debate whilst covering the case

This video is a crime to link to - put "abcplugspedos" into austlii.edu.au / www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au to see what I mean. On the same day that case law came out - the newspapers will say you are a "gay basher" for critizing these russian infant rapists by linking to the video on my youtube channel below AND DOING NOTHING ELSE from your blog. Read the case law to confirm what I am saying. To hate gay dads baby rape is an act of court confirmed homophobia. Don't be a homophobe love baby fucking is the message that is coming out from the court.

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/3172166/ex-cabbie-told-to-stop-gay-bashing/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHrR9MY6GdM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEi5zYNSRuQ

See ABC TV Censoring their own video where they say published gay marriage activists raping babies has no bearing on the gay marriage debates with copyright claims AFTER WE THE TAXPAYER PAID FOR THE VIDEO TO BE MADE AND THEY PULLED IT FROM THEI WEBSITE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xufh8XysHJ4

Proof the baby rapists were gay marriage activists: http://web.csulb.edu/~d49er/spring99/v6n88-samesex.html

It's a crime to expose Obama's having boy rapists fly on Air Force one... Move over Lolita express

https://www.quora.com/Who-would-you-trust-alone-with-your-kids-Obama-or-Trump/answer/Luke-McKee-1

P.S. Listen to my dad talk about being prosecuted for the crime of not loving a good gay dads baby fucking session by the boylover http://twitter.com/garryburnsblog who sends his penis picture to child prostitutes. The special gay police are trying to prosecute john for what I put on that censored blog post. I can post the police audio and John's audio of the police threatening him with imminent arrest a week after it was posted if he didn't take it down. It was a empty threat because it took them 6 months to try and arrest him.

http://www.truthnews.com.au/web/radio/story/cultural_marxism_101

Alefantis is protected by the same special gay child sexxer protector police aka http://twitter.com/GLLUDC that must be officers in charge of any investigation involving a homo as I exposed here before.

See a video of said special DC homocops winning Harvard's best innovation in American government - gay apartheid segregated police award in 2006 here: https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2019082/9960815

Here is DC gay activist https://twitter.com/amyloudermilk?lang=en saying GLLUDC anal bumfuck team status overrides police rank - and only a pure homo must be put in charge of a case if it involves a homosexual, as all normal police are too inferior and must be bigots. If her claims are true being a faggot makes you outrank the chief of police in DC assuming he/she isn't a fag.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNMEICF3VcM

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1896325/9322506

[–] hojuruku [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Leader of Faggot Pink News UK who also covered the boylover @garryburnsblog many times is pushing OTO kinsey child sex baby rape theories that children are sexually active from birth.

The website’s chief executive, Benjamin Cohen, told BBC News NI he has “no intention” of removing the article claiming the article was “tongue-in-cheek”, that it was a “legitimate” piece of social commentary, and denied it had sexualised the little boy. PinkNews, which describes itself as “premier LGBT news outlet in the UK and beyond”, published the article on July 25th. “There are of course those who say that any discussion of the prince’s sexuality is premature, but this isn’t about his sexuality,” the article elaborates. “Kids are born with a sexuality, and should be encouraged to find it without it being assumed that they’re straight,” it adds.

Compare that to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9ztmp1yDq8

[–] R34p_Th3_Wh0r1w1nd 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

We know the Royals run a ring. Who is going to arrest them?

[–] hojuruku [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4782440/Row-erupts-Pink-News-brands-Prince-George-gay-icon.html

It's going viral globally now - the war against faggots normalizing little boys loving anal sex with little boys. My trolls on this video illharris2able YouTube liked videos are all little boys saying they love gay sex if you see the comments on the below video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4

[–] Votescam 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

If you want to protect children, it has to be understood that our sexual abusers of children are MALE ... and that they are heterosexual males. Homosexual males are 100X LESS likely to sexually abuse a child than a heterosexual male.

Whatever this website and article ....

PinkNews, which describes itself as “premier LGBT news outlet in the UK and beyond”, published the article on July 25th.

It cannot be used to suggest that the entire homosexual community likes it -- or is responsible for it.

Again, our sexual abusers of children are MALES ... and they are heterosexual males according to studies.

[–] hojuruku [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

AHHAHAH Homosexual children are 100 times less likely to abuse males.... because they are 100 times more likley to rape little boys instead.

Judges couldnt' debunk my father's medical studies and submissions to court that homosexuals are at least 10X times more likely to rape boys.

CDC says 1.7% of america homo - 1% gay men. breavehearts.org.au say 35% of all child rape victims male children raped by a male - therefore a homosexual sex act. That's 35% times more likely to fuck a child.

You are not one of those hoomos who run around saying only hetrosexuals rape little boys like Garry Burns right? You might want to read this debunking your gay child fuck love false PR from my dad. It's very academic:

You are inspiring me to release all the court transcripts where he testifies gays are 10X more likely to fuck children (really its' 35 or 40 like the family research council says)

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/58b7789fe4b058596cba49b5

Mr McKee said that the audio clip and his comment represented a serious and legitimate concern about an increased risk posed to children brought about through commercial surrogacy. He said that he was discussing the nature and risk of paedophilia in connection with the purchase of surrogate babies by male homosexual couples. He said he was motivated not by hate but by an appreciation of the vulnerability and needs of children. Mr McKee said he also considered public discussion of same sex marriage to be important in Australia due to possible changes in the law. He said that the concerns he raised could influence the state of mind of voters in a future referendum on same sex marriage in Australia. Mr McKee said that it was understandable that public discussion of scientific data relating to the relative incidence of paedophilia within the male homosexual community and compared to the male heterosexual community would be strongly resisted by political lobby groups set up to push for same sex marriage. He said that his one paragraph commentary dealt with what he described as “controversial and challenging” child protection concerns in relation to legalised gay marriage between two males of unknown or unverified sexual orientation.

In support of what he said was the academic or scientific basis for the statement made in the second sentence of the publication Mr McKee referred to the article:

“Freund K and Watson R J ‘The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual paedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study’, Journal Sex Marital Ther. 1992, Spring; 18(1): 34 – 43.”

He said that a hyperlink to this reference was provided in the internet discussion which followed the 30 December 2013 publication. Mr McKee made reference to the abstract of the article on which he says his statement was based. The abstract and the article were in evidence. The abstract read as follows:

“Previous investigations have indicated that the ratio of sex offenders against female children vs. offenders against male children is approximately 2:1, while the ratio of gynephiles to androphiles among the general population is approximately 20 to 1. The present study investigated whether the aetiology of preferred partner sex among paedophiles is related to the aetiology of preferred partner sex among males preferring adult partners. Using phallometric tests sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true paedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into account consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual paedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11 to 1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true paedophiles among persons with the homosexual erotic development is greater than in persons who develop heterosexually. This, of course, would not indicate that androphilic males have a greater propensity to offend against children.”

In his evidence Mr McKee set out his conclusions based upon his reading of the article saying:

“If one is reasonably capable of doing arithmetic, one can roughly apply the above data to, say, a representative sample of 100,000 adults in the Australian population. The ratio of 20:1 referred above implies that there will be 95,200 opposite-sex attracted adults and 4,800 same-sex attracted adults in that sample size. If we now assume, for arguments sake, that approximately 1% of all children suffer from some form of sexual molestation at the hands of an adult, then we can assume that 1000 children have been sexually molested in some way by that sample size of 100,000 adults. The above ratio of 2:1 suggests that, of those 1000 unfortunate children, 667 will be girls and 333 will be boys. The report says that it is rare that an adult female sexually molests a child, so we will ignore such unlikely events and assume that only adult males molest children. Therefore the sample size of 100,000 adults would contain approximately 47,600 opposite-sex attracted males and 2,400 same-sex attracted males. These numbers indicate a ratio of 36 heterosexual adult males per female child sexually molested, but a ratio of 3.6 homosexual males per male child sexually molested. On this simplistic analysis of the data, a homosexual male is 10 times more likely to molest a child than a heterosexual male.

The Respondent's comment that a homosexual male is three (3) times more likely to sexually molest a child than a heterosexual male therefore appears substantiated.”

Mr McKee said that he concluded upon the basis of the material in the article and his calculation as he put it “society faces a significantly increased risk of sexually abused children if two men of unknown and unverified sexual orientation are legally permitted to marry in the same way as a man and woman are legally permitted to marry.”

Mr McKee was cross examined on his expressed motivation for the publication and as to the relative incidence of paedophilia among homosexual persons when compared with heterosexuals. He said that it was “a combination of status quo views combined with concern for scientific data that suggest that homosexual men are ten times more likely to have paedophilic sexual orientation compared to the same sample size of heterosexual males”. He said that this was his opinion based upon his scientific research. He said that he had consulted other people on the technical paper and they had come back with similar conclusions. He did not elaborate on who those people were or the specific nature of their conclusions. He said:

“Even though it’s unpalatable for the homosexual community, the fact is that you can make other generalisations about the homosexual community, for example, ACON says that the use of drugs is much, much higher in the homosexual community that in the heterosexual community, probably by a factor of ten. Justice Kirby says the prevalence of Aids is higher in the homosexual community. That is not inciting hatred. So I say the prevalence – based on my scientific research and my gut feel and based on the YouTube clip that the instance of paedophilic sexual orientation is higher amongst homosexuals than heterosexuals and the YouTube clip demonstrated that”.

He went on to say:

“… but I believe that scientific statement and that’s why I have great concerns about two men of unknown sexual orientation being allowed to marry in Australia and adopt babies. I see an ocean of suffering in the future caused by this. I am entitled to have that pessimistic view of same sex marriage – mainly between men …”.

Mr McKee was also cross examined on the difference between the publication in which he stated that homosexual men are three times more likely to commit sex crimes against children and his statement in the evidence in which he said they were ten times more likely to offend. He responded:

“The three times was a less onerous comment. That was based on calculations done at the time based on percentaging the Australian census … number of homosexuals in the Australian population based on the 10% figure that 10% of all crimes against children were done by homosexual paedophiles, whereas when I researched the actual scientific paper and did calculations on a spreadsheet it came out at ten times …”.

On further questioning Mr McKee said that it was his honest belief based on his research that homosexual men are ten times more likely to have paedophilic sexual orientation compared with the same sample size of heterosexual men and that he was being conservative in the estimate contained in the publication.

On second thought I won't give you the link to my dad's scribd because you'd just run out and complain and shadow ban it Wait a week until I put it all on my Russian server including the $350 medical study you have to pay big $$$ for if you type "PUBMED HOMOSEXUALITY PEDOPHILIA" into google and click on the first link.

Homosexual peds fuck 3-10 times more kids per hetrosexual pedophile. 1 in 9 peds is a homo ped aka androphile in medical terms. one in 30 people is a faggot. Faggots are therefore MORE LIKELY to rape children based on their representation in the pedophile community - but it's more pronounced in the representation of child sex victims being little boys.

[–] Narcissism 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I read the article as a social commentary/ diversity/ tongue n cheek piece. Some people here are deliberately reading way to much into the Gay aspect....

[–] UnicornAndSparkles 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

There was an article recently in the Daily Mail about people working and voulenteering for The National Trust being forced to wear gay pride lanyards no matter how I worded and hid the "flag" words like I do with Pizzagate comments, I could not get a single comment posted about the forethcoming merge of peadophilia and LGBT .. funny coincidence they should print this a week later. Blatant normalisation for the sheeple blue pilled.

[–] hojuruku [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Qantas in Australia was the same FORCING people to wear rainbow gay marriage rings the kind of filth that http://twitter.com/nodiscrim gives out for free at gay pride conferences when they aren't ruling my dad is a hate criminal for disrespecting those who fuck babies (see my other comment here).

Here was the response to such policy by shareholders: http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/qantas-boss-alan-joyce-cops-a-pie-to-the-face-in-bizarre-incident/news-story/8cb68ffb79691b9859d1ff5007ff62a7

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/firms-ring-in-campaign-for-marriage-equality/news-story/0539ca1821754e570cd16a08dc7b6586