O'Reilly: Abducted child "liked his circumstances," had "a lot more fun" than usual

[RamboLiberal]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200701170009

On the January 15 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly said of Shawn Hornbeck -- who was abducted at the age of 11, held for four years, and recently found in Missouri -- that "there was an element here that this kid liked about this circumstances" and that he "doesn't buy" "the Stockholm syndrome thing." O'Reilly also said: "The situation here for this kid looks to me to be a lot more fun than what he had under his old parents. He didn't have to go to school. He could run around and do whatever he wanted." When fellow Fox News host Greta Van Susteren pointed out that "some kids like school," O'Reilly replied: "Well, I don't believe this kid did."

The following day, during his "Talking Points Memo" segment, O'Reilly responded to viewer mail criticizing his comments about Hornbeck. O'Reilly concluded: "I hope he did not make a conscious decision to accept his captivity because" his kidnapper "made things easy for him. No school, play all day long."

O'Reilly frequently casts himself as a champion of children. He has also suggested that he is "looking out for the kids" and attacked "the print press" for not "car about the children."

From the January 16 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: The kidnapping of those two boys should be front-page news in your house if you have kids. I actually hope I'm wrong about Shawn Hornbeck. I hope he did not make a conscious decision to accept his captivity because Devlin made things easy for him. No school, play all day long.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. O'Reilly is so disgusting

depends what else O'Reilly is alluding to. Filthy thing

[rfranklin]

25. O'Reilly is promoting child molesting...isn't that a crime?

He sounds like the spokesman for NAMBLA.

[Maraya1969]

44. Yes that is exactly what NAMBLA says: that the kids like it. O'Reilly

is a disgusting freak. He is probably a pedophile.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

51. He should be fired

[Maraya1969]

63. I filed a complaint with the FCC. Hope others will do the same.

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cib/fcc475B.cfm

[WndWpnRndU]

82. Thank you for

the link, http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cib/fcc475B.cfm
I filed too.
That sick SOB.

[Doctor_J]

144. the hell with the FCC

they work for Smirk. Novam and airamerica should be running it every hour for the next week, and someone should send the clip to all his advertizers.

[mcg]

151. Done, but they will probably ignore it. nt

[TaleWgnDg]

150. Why? Why should O'Reilly's employer fire him? Isn't O'Reilly

getting a lot of attention from his comments? Aren't O'Reilly's ratings up? Aren't more tuned in to see/hear O'Reilly due to his sensationalistic comments (that apparently America cannot get enough of)? In short, O'Reilly's crap works. And, works well for his program and his network.

Personally, I think O'Reilly and his entire network should be tanked. I've never seen his show and don't care to ever listen or see his show. Who the hell wants to partake in such nonsense? Other than to respond to such message boards threads as this? Sheesh.

.

[Kikosexy2]

76. Falafel ...

f*#k mostly enjoys fornicating with kiddies while he's dressed in drag....I'm sure Mr. Oh Really is a cross-dresser, doncha' think?...

[I Have A Dream]

136. I've never known a cross dresser, but please don't insult them by...

comparing him to them.

Cross-dressing harms nobody. O'Reilly harms many.

[originalpckelly]

2. Why is there is a cross through on some of the text?

[BuyingThyme]

4. That happens when you paste a [s].

It said [S]ome...

[charlie]

6. The s in "some"

probably had brackets around it, which the forum software converts to angle brackets. That's HTML for "strikeout the enclosed text."

[RamboLiberal]

11. Yep - I fixed it - I hate when that happens

guess I should take the few seconds to use preview.

[dsc]

3. Some people have literally no shame whatsoever

[Infomaniac]

5. Methinks Keith Will Dub Billo " Worst Person in the World" again

And rightly so. Anybody who dumps on a 15 year old boy who has suffered unimaginable abuse at the hands of his captor deserves permanent "Worst person in the World" status.

[ladym55]

128. Keith wants him off the air

And I agree. O'Lielly is just vile. His spewings pollute the airwaves. He needs to be gone.

And Olbermann went beyond worst person in the world and incorporated O'Lielly into a story on the kidnapping. And asked why someone who said what O'Lielly said was still on the air.

[Taverner]

7. That fuckwad has all the tact of a beer bong at an AA meeting

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

8. Hmm.

A guy already known with a preponderance towards sexual predation suggests that young boys like to be kidnapped.

Hmm.

[me b zola]

19. That was my second thought

My first thought was what a low-life scum-sucker O'Liely is. My second thought was that he sounds like a sexual preditor.

[geardaddy]

9. Disgusting

Loofa boy is learning etiquette from Babs *.

Edited for spellng.

[NC_Nurse]

10. Jeebus!

What an ASSHOLE!

Why don't the people that watch his sh*tty show get incensed by his crap???? Are they all braindead?

Nevermind....obvious....

[Debi]

12. Ugh, just ugh!

Yep, an 11 year old kid would rather be held captive for four years than see his mom and dad and friends and family.

:puke:

[ClintonTyree]

80. Blame the victim......

that's been part of the right-wing playbook for decades.

O'Lielly also says if he's wrong he'll take responsibility for his statements and issue an apology. He's done that many times over the past few years and he never really does apologize, all he does is change the lie. A lot like the Bush administration, if caught in a lie, they'll just change the lie until people give up and accept it as truth. O'Lielly said that about the Iraq war. If Bush was wrong or was lying about the reasons for invading in Iraq he'd never trust the Bush administration again. Well, old Bill is STILL shilling for the Bush crime family so I guess that was a hollow promise as well.

Bottom line, O'Lielly is another in a long line of right-wing, brain dead, propaganda spinners for the Bush administration, an expert on every subject under the sun . I wish he'd keep his stupid opinions to himself. He makes himself look like a complete ass when he says stuff like this.

[KarenS]

13. There is a special place in Hell reserved for

people like O'Reilly.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

14. Why does this make me think that old Bill himself fits the profile

of a pedophile? A grown man who thinks that kidnapping a child is simply a way to provide them with a "lot more fun" than they had in their safe, loving home gives me the shudders. Maybe they should check out Billo's basement.

[madeline_con]

31. And the crawl spaces, too. n/t

[Richard Steele]

109. Bear in mind, he's a sexual harrasser himself. Same mindset, different victim. nm

[tanyev]

15. What. An. Ass.

[Rex]

16. So even if it is wrong, it is the victims fault.

Nevermind the fact that the neighbors reported abusive noises coming from the apartment. He could have simply told him, 'go back and I'll kill you and your old family'. Did Bill Fucknuts think of that? Was he ever 11 or did he just hatch into his leathery shell?

[tandot]

17. I wish someone would make "things easy" for O'Reilly for 4 f*cking years

and subject him to the same "fun" that Shawn had to endure.

I loathe that ignorant f*ck. He has NO clue about anything.

[WI_DEM]

18. I wish he could be sued but it's just his opinion, so I guess he can't be.

[Karenina]

20. I ask myself when

will American citizens decide that the HATE and SLIME spewed 24/7 on their airwaves is UNHEALTHY for children and other living creatures...

[AlCzervik]

21. O'Blowhole is usually a victim blamer, not surprised by this latest charge at all.

[annabanana]

22. His abusive personality is showing again. . .

He chronically blames the victim. It's his default position.

[AlCzervik]

24. except when i comes to himself, he's always the victim of the "Liberal elite media"

isn't that funny, he assigns himself the victim status while almost always denying it to real victims.

[DixieBlue]

23. Just when I thought he couldn't get any slimier ...

What a nasty freaking windbag.

Can't wait to see the Cobert face off.

[sakabatou]

26. Didn't he do the same thing to the Smart case?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

27. Only a complete nut like O'Reilly could make child kidnapping an issue

pro or con, in the so-called "culture wars".

[Maraya1969]

28. Is there anyway the Hornbeck family can sue O'Reilly?

Defamation of character or slander.

O'Reilly is pig shit. I've love to see him pay.

[SeattleGirl]

29. Why am I not surprised?

What a sick fuck he is.

[madeline_con]

30. Won't somebody please put him out of his misery?

I SO wish this kid would sue the FUCK out of Shitbag Bill.

[rudy23]

32. He also basically called the kid "neurotic" nt

[renate]

33. Maybe Mr. Falafel should stop analyzing other people's behavior

Although in a way it's kind of a good thing that he's flashing his ass in public about such a high-profile situation. Little by little his viewers may start to go "whoa... that's not cool, dude."

[Art_from_Ark]

66. I hope you're right

But Limbaugh did a similar thing and he still draws in the kool-aid drinkers

[bluewave]

34. Run around and do whatever he wanted? Bill, this guy is a sex offender

The kid probably spent a good part of those years getting raped.

The FCC should be informed that we, the citizens, do not approve of Bill O'Reilly rationalizing child abduction and molestation.

[Maraya1969]

46. Here is the link to the complaint form for the FCC. Let's all send one.

http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cib/fcc475B.cfm

[badgerpup]

48. You CAN hit his sponsors in the wallet, you know.

Boycotting en masse and VERY PUBLICLY and letting the sponsors of his show know that you are doing so, and why.
Emails, snail mails, phone calls...y'all know the drill! :evilgrin:

It got the Ford motor company's attention back in 2005...and didn't this very strategy (I will NOT use bushisms) get O'Lielly dumped from a radio station or two when he invited terrorists to come and blow up Coit Tower?

I don't have a TV or listen to the radio stations that he pollutes (thank the gods), but I'll join in the boycott and the noisemaking...

[Left Is Write]

35. I am frequently disgusted by O'Reilly, but this is just beyond the pale.

[Miss Chybil]

36. I'd really like to comment on this,

but, I am speechless.

[Pierre.Suave]

38. Me too

I cant imagine how anyone could think being kidnapped is a good thing...

[FourScore]

37. I feel sick to my stomach.

My prayers go out to those boys and their families. I hope they can be sheilded from such smut.

[Fleshdancer]

39. Is anyone surprised by this?? O'Reilly is a sociopath.

From his egomania, his childish outbursts at anyone who is critical of him and the fact that he feels he has the right to make sexually harassing phone calls to his employees, does anyone really surprised by this? In his world, everyone is "asking for it".

[bling bling]

56. For real. The only thing as sick as O'Reilly is his target audience.

He's a step below a slimy slug. Who cares what slimy slugs have to say about our societal matters. He and his listeners can be as gross and nasty as they want to be. I want nothing to do with them and I refuse to give them the power to upset me. Fuck 'em.

[Bluebear]

71. I am stealing that.

.

[Cass]

40. OMG. What an asshole.

Why in the world would anyone pick on a kid who has been through hell for the last 4 years? This is disgraceful.

O'Reilly's moral superiority act is as phony as a $3 bill. O'Reilly is a damn liar and a pervert to boot! Who is he to sit in judgement of this kid or anyone for that matter?

This makes me sick to my stomach.

[dsc]

41. The icing on the cake for this

is that often the biggest thing that kidnapper molesters hold over their young victims is that fear the victims have that they will be perceived to be gay and thus rejected by their parents. O'Reiley and his ilk help make that fear real by demonizing gays at every opportunity. I sincerely hope Shawn is OK but fear that he isn't.

[Echotrail]

105. It's also common for them to threaten the lives of the childrens'

parents.

O'Reilley is hurting a family already hurting from a grave injustice. They lost years of their child's life.

[dsc]

121. The fact he still has a job says all one needs to know about FOX

and yes, often the molester threatens the parents' too.

[mountainvue]

42. Sick bastard. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

43. Right, Billo, kids LOVE being kidnapped

Sure beats school, right? Where you get an education sorely lacking in modern TV punditocracy, right?

What an asshole. And I mean no disrespect to assholes.

[mzmolly]

45. Just when you think this !#% can't get any sicker.

Attention parents ~ keep your children away from Bill O'Reilly.! :scared:

[nonconformist]

47. Un-fucking-believable.

Speechless.

[pamela]

49. I'm glad Media Matters caught this.

I saw him say this the other night and was extremely upset by his remarks. I kept checking Media Matters and Newshound yesterday to see if they mentioned it but I guess they hadn't seen it yet. Here's the thread I started about this yesterday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3129968&mesg_id=3129968

Bill O'Reilly is a sexual predator so it shouldn't really surprise me that he is blaming the victim in this case. It sickens me. I feel so bad for this kid. I bet he is going to be one seriously fucked up individual and people like O'Reilly will just make it worse.

[UncleSepp]

50. O'Reilly has to "not buy" Stockholm Syndrome

IMO, the support of the Republican agenda by the very same working class people who suffer from the politics of the wealthy depends on a Stockholm-type psychological effect. It is absolutely necessary not to admit that such a thing can exist, anywhere, on any scale.

Yeah, yeah :tinfoilhat: this is a stoner-speak kind of opinion, not very strongly held, and I wouldn't bother defending it. But it *might* be true.

[2bfree]

52. What a sick MF.

:puke:

[philosophie_en_rose]

53. Bill "NAMBLA" O'Reilly needs to shut the fuck up.

Adding to this kid's trauma is just disgusting. NO ONE knows what this kid has gone through.

And there is NO WAY that he could have consented to being KIDNAPPED.

I would have expected a "culture warrior" to demand that the system crash down upon the kidnapper, but I suppose O'Reilly's dedication to NAMBLA talking points is just too strong.

[in_cog_ni_to]

54. OMG! That man should be FIRED! Sean's parents should file a law suit

and go after that piece of crap! What a hateful thing to say! This was a little boy he's talking about! 11 years old at the time! GEEZUS! Don't these people ever get tired of spewing their disgusting crap? How do they sleep at night?

[Warren DeMontague]

55. Well, how can you attack the "victim mentality" in this country

if you're not merciless in attacking victims?

[TheMadMonk]

57. There is no doubt that child abuse is about as heinous as things can get,

However, do you people realise just how much like freeptards you sound sometimes on this subject, or indeed in coming out against anything O'Rielly says.

What was done to Shawn is/was wrong, wrong, wrong. And Devlin deserves to rot forever for what he did.

First the caveat that none of us know the full story, and most likely never will.

That said, one thing is fairly clear from the little that we do know.

Shawn, had numerous opportunities to walk away. He had apparently unmonitored internet access. Someone identifying themselves as Shawn Devlin asked something like "How long are you going to keep looking for your son?" on the website set up by his parents.

For whatever reason, valid or invalid, Shawn must have believed that he and/or his family were better off with him staying where he was.

Possibly it was Stockholm Syndrome. Maybe Shawn felt he was such damaged good that his parents would not want him back. Or just possibly, much as it might gag us to say it, O'Rielly was right for once in his life, and Shawn thought he was on a bloody good wicket.

Before you flame me, consider that teenagers do tend to be quite narcissistic, and a good many both boys and girls do voluntarily abandon their families every year, to enter into wildly inappropriate relationships for what they perceive as considerable personal gain. And for them the quid pro quo doesn't seem all that arduous.

Unpalatable as the idea might be, O'Rielly's surmise is both a logical and reasonable one to make. It's also fucking insensitive.

One thing that concerns me far more than whether or not O'Rielly is correct, is that Shawn receives the therapy that he actually needs, and not that which far too many people will believe that he should have for his own good.

[Black Adder]

84. OTOH

My wife worked for Social Services for many years and came to realize that many people (mainly women and children) won't and can't leave an abusive relationship - particularly where the threat of violence is real and has been used.
While in reality Shawn may have had opportunities to leave the situation, in his mind there was there were no such options.
I don't think there is any credible scenario where we can assign any blame to Shawn (the victim).

[TheMadMonk]

103. Indeed. And Mea Culpa, I forgot that potential scenario.

However, it only adds to the other possibilities mentioned and does not negate them, which can only be done by identifying which is the correct one, something I already said can't be done without a far greater knowledge of the facts than we are likely to ever receive.

And please, there was no intent to blame Shawn. Devlin engineered the situation, and EVEN IF he convinced/cowed/bribed Shawn into being complicit in his own continuing abduction, the blame remains solely with Devlin. Complicity and blame are NOT the same thing. Blame requires a reasonable understanding (or the expectation thereof) of the ramifications of a chosen course of action. Complicity only requires a motivating factor that works.

That the possibility exists that Shawn MIGHT have been bribed into staying with Devlin, is why I finished with the hope that Shawn receive the therapy he needs. Because if he did "voluntarily" go along, being told ONLY that it's not his fault, won't be all that effective if he "knows" (however wrongheadedly) that his actions contributed. That just sets him up to remain a victim for the rest of his life.

Alternatively he may come away with the "understanding" that NOTHING is his fault, leading to either a continuation of the cycle of abuse, or a pattern of self destructive behaviour.

IF he did make errors of judgment then he needs to have those errors explained to him in a rational, non-judgmental fashion and not just glossed over.

[ourbluenation]

124. Yep - It takes the average battered woman 8 times before she leaves

her batterer for good. For many reasons, none of which are because she likes it there ya big dumb Falafel O'Reilly.

[Der Blaue Engel]

85. I wonder if you realize how much like a freeptard YOU sound.

:puke:

[durrrty libby]

89. No kidding. That guy sounds freepier that o'lielly

O'lielly has the bully pulpit and everything out of his pill-hole

is equivalent to raw sewage.



:hangover: :hurts:

[TheMadMonk]

110. ¿Que? Because I made an attempt to look at this rationally and not purely emoionally?

Just how far into my post did you get, before deciding what I was?

O'Reilly is a shock jock. Emotive reactions are his stock in trade. He deliberately appeals to the vile hatreds of his believers. Further, you can be damned sure that he banks on those who don't agree with him reacting in just the fashion you, and virtually everyone else in this discussion have done. Particularly, on a subject as emotive as this one. He wants your blind vitriolic hatred, he wallows in it, because that serves to convince his listeners that HE is RIGHT. By descending to his level, you give him the victory.

He is a twisted evil, contemptuous little man. What he says is pure unmitigated, toxic shit. However, you will note he is still on the air. In the "reality" he and his listeners inhabit he speaks the "truth" and HIS "truth" is nearly always just close enough to that of the reality we more rational human beings inhabit, or sufficiently qualified, that most of the time he can get away with it in a legal sense.

Hate what he has to say by all means, but don't let that hatred drive you into an irrational or purely emotive response. If you do, he wins and you lose.

Examine what he has to say, try to understand why it appeals to some people. Acknowledge their fears, no matter how wrong headed, and try to show them why those fears are baseless. Unfortunately, odds are you won't have much success turning his listeners away. However, remember in their eyes they are the reasonable, rational human beings, and telling them, no matter how truthfully that they are aresholes, will only convince them more firmly that YOU are the arsehole.

[cboy4]

107. You got that right!

:puke:

[tandot]

99. A 11-year old boy chose to enter "into wildly inappropriate relationships"???

You are kidding, right? You can't be serious?

He might be 15 now, but when he was kidnapped, he was a 11-year old child.

[TheMadMonk]

115. No. NO. NO!!!! The posibility exists that he was bribed into acceptance.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

[philosophie_en_rose]

139. Like a prostitute?

An 11 year-old boy cannot consent to either kidnapping or abuse. While it is true that child rapists use a variety of methods to get their victims to comply, it is not as if there is a business transaction between the adult and the child.

[tandot]

143. This is utter nonsense

Maybe some research in child abuse and child sexual abuse would help?

http://www.rainn.org/effects-of-rape/stockholm-syndrome.html


I guess you don't believe in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder either?

http://www.icadv.org/lib/Resources/CDAA_Level_II/CDAAlevelIIPTSD.pdf


It saddens me immensely that so many people have absolutely no understanding of mental health issues (or just simply an utter lack of empathy).

[NovaNardis]

101. Now I, like the rest of you...

know very little about this whole ordeal. And frankly, it is really strange. Why did he never TRY to leave? He had ample oppurtunity to. I'm not saying I as an 11 year old would have had the presence of mind to outwit a thirtysomething, but at 14, 15?

I don't know about any abuse allegations; frankly I haven't been following this story because I really don't care about it. It isn't news. Knowing what I know, O'Reilly's statements (while callous and insipid) sound rather rational. In fact, it is one of the least objectionable things I think I've ever heard the man say.

What you are all doing is jumping down on this statement and shit because O'Reilly said it. Imagine, for a second, that Al Franken said it. Or Jon Stewart said it. Is it as objectionable? I don't know that it is.

There remains one question about this ordeal. Why didn't the kid run away. O'Reilly's answer is actually contributing something meaningful to that debate. The way he said it is a little cold, but the point is interesting. The kid didn't try to run away. If he had internet access, it's easily doable. He knew the neighbors, they knew him. He rode his bike around a lot. There has to be a reason he didn't leave. If O'Reilly doesn't buy Stockholm Syndrome (which I really don't, either), then this is another logical answer. He liked his abducted situation more than his home life. Does that mean he SHOULD have liked it? Does that mean it actually WAS better? Does that mean the abducted situation was GOOD? Does that mean his family was EVIL to him? No. Like MadMonk says, teenagers are rather narsicistic (I would say stupid). Maybe he thought he was better off. At 11, I really would like to not go to school.


***
Personally, I think this abducter guy must have convinced Shawn he was his real father, or something like that. There is way too much in this case for something like that NOT to have happened. And this kid is deeply maladjusted, if not before his abduction than certainly afterwards.

[NovaNardis]

102. Also

I'm not really defending O'Reilly, but rather the thought process behind what he said. He said it like this kid thought he was in paradise being abducted. I think maybe Shawn thought he was just better off, and that's not to say he didn't miss his old life. Maybe he thought his family was better off, too. The issue is a lot more complex than O'Reilly would ever like to admit, for anything. But I think the train of thought he has is almost rational.

[bling bling]

108. Please just stop.

Gawd there aren't enough eye-rolly smilies in the world for this post. Yeah, it's real reasonable and unobjectionable to assert that a kidnapped sexually raped boy is narcissistic and didn't defy his 300 lb. captor who probably brainwashed him from the age of 11 (e-l-e-v-e-n) to be absolutely terrified of the prospect of leaving him to the point that his mind just erased that as even being an option in order to cope. COPE. An eleven year old boy snatched from the security of his home, his family, his city, and brought someplace to cope with a terrifying situation completely alone, all by himself with a 300 lb. monster. I can't imagine that his little brain would react in a way that was anything but completely logical and reasonable to you and Bill O'Reilly, so you must be right.

And true, if Jon Stewart had been the one to bring it up we'd all be in agreement. Because we're brainwashed dittoheads who can't think for ourselves. Oh wait......

You know what. Forget it. Tell ya what, just don't even worry about it. How about that?

[philosophie_en_rose]

140. Thank you.

It's pretty unnecessary for the public to speculate about the specifics of his ordeal - let alone second guess a kidnapped child for doing the best he can to survive.

[bling bling]

106. Whoa, there, buddy.

Who do you think you are?

"Unpalatable as the idea might be, O'Rielly's surmise is both a logical and reasonable one to make. It's also fucking insensitive"

Logical and reasonable?? How is it logical and reasonable to surmise that a kidnapped 11 year old boy would only stay with his captor willingly by choice. Were you a kidnapped 11 year old boy? If not, then how the fuck do you know anything at all about what behavior is logical and reasonable to expect when an 11 year old is kidnapped and sexually abused.

For your information, it's the freeptards who typically exhibit the absolute inability to sympathize or empathize with people who have different experiences from themselves. They are the first to point their finger and judge other people despite the fact that they are truly clueless and have no fricking idea what the hell they're talking about. Not surprisingly, the freeptards often find themselves feeling a whole lot differently about their judgements when the shoe is on the other foot. When THEIR daughter is pregnant, suddenly abortion isn't just a one-sided black and white issue anymore. When THEIR kid turns out to be gay, they see the gay issues and stereotypes a little differently. When THEY lose their jobs and have to apply for government aid, they shut up with the "pulling up the bootstraps" nonsense at least temporarily.

The difference between the people here on this thread and the freeptards is that we don't need to literally and personally have a brick fall on our heads to sympathize with the fact that it fucking hurts when it happens to others. Whereas the freeptards are so dense and shallow and out in left field that they won't truly get it until it happens to them personally. Until then, they just envision in their minds that if a brick were to fall on their head they'd bounce right back up without skipping a beat and therefore that's what they expect everyone else to do too.

[WhollyHeretic]

111. Very well said

:thumbsup:

[TheMadMonk]

123. I did not say it was the only explanation.

Just that it was a logical and reasonable one. One among several. FYI, bribery is a very common technique used by abusers to assure the ongoing compliance of their victims. And in this case it is an explanation that fits the available facts.

Further I did not accuse any one of being a Freeptard, just sounding like them.

Has anyone noticed that abuses committed against children seem to have become much worse pretty much in lock step with the increasingly negative feelings shown towards the abusers? If this is a real trend and not just an artifact of the media seeking sensation, then we are doing the victims an enormous disservice with the unreasoning hatred we as a society display.

[bling bling]

127. So now WE'RE responsible because we hate the abusers too much?

First:

Society at large doesn't like it when it's children are threatened or hurt. It doesn't matter what corner on the earth you're from or what time throughout history you've lived in a society is instrinsically wired to protect it's young ones. So no, I dont see that our particular society is behaving in any trendy way towards abusers that is unusual from any other point in time or place on earth. In fact, any negative feelings that we harbor towards child abductors goes a long way towards diddly squat. Big deal that the abusers have to deal with a society that has negative feelings against them. I refuse to believe that we're doing the victim wrong by hating those people who want to hurt our kids.

If anything, I think we need to hate them more. I think we need to come together more in our community and get to know each other better so that we'll be more aware of outside predators who come into our communities and hurt our children. It's really sad to me that nobody in the abductors community (Kirkwood, MO) did anything to help this child for 4 years.

I live in St. Louis so I've seen a lot on the topic. Neighbors interviewed *admitted* they heard screams coming from the apartment from time to time but they just figured it was kids playing because there were lots of kids who lived in the complex. WTF?? In hindsight they're admitting that they must have had blinders on and are starting to see a lot of things that they really should have seen in the first place that could have rescued that poor kid a lot earlier.

Second:

It's not logical or reasonable to try and bolster a theory about the kid wanting to be there vs. home using the argument that teenagers are narcissistic and lots of them leave home all the time. That's only logical or reasonable to you and O'Reilly because you aren't thinking about it from the perspective of an 11 year old stolen from everybody you know and brought to a strangers house to cope with being raped and having nobody -- nobody -- nobody but your own little 11 year old self to rely on for help. The brain of an 11 year old is not rational or logical yet in the first place. The brain of a traumatized child will go into emergency survival mode to cope. When you really and truly TRY and put yourself in that childs situation it is really difficult to then talk about how logical and reasonable it is to surmise that the kid probably just ended up liking it there since he didn't have to go to school. This is an absolutely fucked up traumatized kid who no doubt along with this horrific experience will have to deal with guilt and shame due to the way his mind handled this situation. He probably won't understand it himself for a long time and for people in his society to add on another layer to his pain by suggesting he LIKED that kind of torment is really as sad to me as the people in his Kirkwood society who ignored his screams while he was being raped.

Yeah, I really don't think the problem these days for our victimized children is that we hate their abusers too much.

[TheMadMonk]

130. Bullshit. Cornish coal mines. Textile mills. etc. etc. etc.

For most of so called "civilized" history, children have been a resource to be exploited.

Take a look at modern day India, China, Afghanistan. The list goes on an on.

edited to add: Are you aware that the first child abuse case in the US was prosecuted under the "cruelty to animal" laws, because there were NO LAWS protecting children whatsoever.



As for what I said about us doing the children a disservice. Consider this, a person who has nothing to lose also has nothing to restrain his impulses and every reason to try to cover his tracks in ANY WAY he or she thinks necessary and that will ALWAYS be to the greater detriment of the child.

Further our hatred has risen to the level that the thought is now the deed. A person who discovers that he has paedosexual feelings, has to deal with his problem alone. He or she can not ask for help without risking being branded as the equal of those who have actually offended.

Even amongst actual offenders there are degrees of offense, yet we refuse to differentiate between them. All are equally bad in society's eyes. Is it any surprise then that they begin to see themselves the same way, rationalising themselves from looking to touching and beyond. Who suffers the most? The kids.


IF what you say about the screams is true, then quite possibly the hypothesis that has us all hot under the collar should be dismissed. However, as you said the people thought they were the sounds of children playing. Perhaps they were, perhaps they weren't. But your automatic condemnation of them for not immediately knowing the difference is more than a little hateful in it's own right. These people will be doing enough self condemnation without it being added to by people who weren't there. OTOH, if they just didn't want to get involved, they are indeed scum.


AND nor is it logical to automatically assume that the abuse Shawn was subjected to, was either violent and/or painful as you appear to be doing. If it was then the hypothesis of "purchased acquiescence" flies out the window. If Devlin was gentle and patient, then it still stands AS A POSSIBLE HYPOTHESIS.


There are also a number of other possible hypotheses that might explain Shawn's remaining with Devlin: Something like Stockholm syndrome; A total loss of self worth; or as was pointed out to me something akin to battered woman's syndrome. Which one of them it was I don't know, and nor do you or anyone else here. Actually I lean towards a combination of the latter two. However, I refuse to dismiss out of hand another possibility, just because it happens to be distasteful, or because it was posited by an evil minded, shock jock out to get exactly the response the majority of posters here have reacted with.

[bling bling]

131. You're veering off the topic a bit, there.

There doesn't need to be written laws on the books to understand that there are certain actions that are taboo in any human society on earth. Societies intrinsically disapprove of strange predators abducting the children of the society. I dare say people in all societies frown at kidnappers and find it a little surpising that I'm defending this position. This is not a discussion about parent-child abuse or child labor laws so your argument just doesn't refute the assertion that it is not a new or trendy that our particular society expresses a disliking or even a hatred towards kidnappers and sexual predators who prey on our youngest members.

I'm not really sure about your "thoughts=the deed" argument either. That's not something I agree with but I don't have anything to support my side and I don't have much time to research it. All I can say is that I do not believe that our negative perception of child predators is making the problem worse for our children or worse for the actual victims. I personally doubt if that is even a tiny component of all the dynamics that factor into what makes someone steal a child.

My condemnation of the people in that community is not based on hate. It's based on the news reports that people heard screaming and shrugged it off. "Oh, it's probably just the kids in the neighborhood" is shrugging it off. They weighed it, considered what they were hearing, and then went back to what they were doing because they didn't want to get involved for whatever reason. What kind of community is that where a child is being raped and screaming and people hear it and just go on about their day rationalizing that it probably isn't anything.

From newsweek on msnbc:

"An abductor often imposes himself further through intimidation or outright violence. That’s a plausible scenario in Hornbeck’s case, according to Devlin’s upstairs neighbor, Harry Reichard. He says that over the course of the year and a half that he lived above the two, he heard all manner of disconcerting sounds, including whimpering, pleading and screaming. On one occasion, he says, “it was like Shawn was trying to get (Devlin) to stop doing something.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16673873/site/newsweek/

So the upstairs neighbor hears whimpers, pleading and screaming and even concludes that it sounds like the kid below him is pleading for his "father" to stop doing something. And this goes on for a year and a half. THAT'S what I'm condeming and if that makes me hateful then geez, so be it I guess.

*****

From your post: "AND nor is it logical to automatically assume that the abuse Shawn was subjected to, was either violent and/or painful as you appear to be doing."

I'm not automatically assuming this. I'm more inclined to consider that he was subjected to traumatic painful and violent experiences because that IS what is more logical. Read the literature. Read previous experiences. Look at what every single expert on child psychology and child abductions in the United States of America is saying to explain why Shawn probably didn't try to escape and then you'll see where I'm drawing my information from. It's not some off the cuff automatic assumption. Furthermore, it's logical to assume that where screaming is involved there is pain and violence involved too. I am open to being wrong about my assumptions.

I still find it disheartening that everyone wouldn't automatically give this child the benefit of the doubt. You know, assume that his actions were based on an 11 year olds plan for survival that ultimately did keep him alive in the end. I hate to see people questioning that a victim stayed a victim because he or she must have liked it. Like I said before, once Shawn finally gets out of survival mode and feels safe enough to let go of the mindset and behaviors that he perceived were keeping him alive for so long he will probably feel shame and guilt and confusion as to why he didn't just leave. It seems cruel for people to add an element of guilt to his traumatically-packed little life whereby his actions are being skeptically judged by the public nationally on top of everything else he's had to endure.

But anyway, I "get it" that you refuse to let go of the possibility that Shawn chose to stay in his situation because he liked it. What can I say. You're not alone. I just honestly don't know how people that cynical can sleep at night. The world must be a very ugly place in your eyes. There's no doubt in my mind that kid is a fucked up individual thanks to his abductor. Too bad he has to come back from a nightmare to an ugly world where so many people unabashadly and publically argue for the scenario that could crush him completely should he hear about it. And the chances that he'll hear about it are pretty good considering it's all over the t.v., newspapers, and internet. It's sad how little importance we place on being good neighbors and doing and behaving in a way that's in the best interest of this child. Our desire to form skeptical opinions and play detectives so we can say "gotcha" to a kidnapped boy really makes me want to throw up.

[TheMadMonk]

134. And I agree with you for the most part..

However, you made a blanket claim of societies always protecting children from ALL harm. I responded. Furthermore, you seem to be blissfully unaware of the number of parents out there who will ignore or dismiss attacks on their own children for fear of their own personal security, whether it be financial, or their standing in the community. Abduction does put a different light on these matters, but I wasn't really thinking of that, despite the subject of this discussion.


On the thoughts=deeds, well you try announcing to your work mates that the family pics on their desk make you horny. Make sure your insurance is paid up. You might be able to safely confess to a priest or a therapist, but building a support network would be virtually impossible, and it's the support network that really helps people work through their problems.

And you might well be right in that abductors don't consider societal views when giving in to their urges, but I'm damned sure that they do affect their thinking in the aftermath.

And it's in attacks of opportunity where I believe that those attitudes really hold sway over the attacker's actions. Panic is a natural reaction when a person faces the prospect of being found out in any wrongdoing, and the worse the perceive response, the more extreme their attempt to cover their tracks will be.

All too often these days, the conclusion to stories of abduction for sexual purposes is a dead body. Yes the people who commit these crimes have to be stopped, and separated from society for the sake of everyone. However, they also have to know that they will be accorded the same level of dignity of any other criminal.

Even the experts agree, that the increasingly draconian "Megan's Law" clones springing up as communities race to each show themselves tougher on perverts than the next county over, are having a deleterious effect as they drive sexual offenders underground. If you know he's there and you are vigilant, a pervert ceases to be a serious problem. It's the ones you don't know about that are more likely to cause harm. And I will virtually guarantee that at least one person writing in this discussion will have such a person living right next door if not under the same roof.

The most rational course of action is not blind hatred of someone you might not recognise until far too late, but educating your children and making sure that they know just how much you love them no matter what happens in their lives.


O.K. you have had access to more information than I had. And reading back through the discussion I found a reference to the screams heard by neighbors. However, on my first run through I missed it in amongst all the people scrambling to express their hatred of O'Reilly for being O'Reilly. That changes matters as I have already noted, and significantly decreases the plausibility of "paid aquiescence" as a possible scenario.

And I'm right alongside you, if people really did ignore those screams and pleas as not their problem.


I do give the child the benefit of the doubt. But I was also giving O'Reilly the same consideration, based upon what I knew at the time as little as he deserves it. The discussion we are having here is not likely to ever come to the attention of Shawn, so its impact upon him is not really a factor. And you will note that I did condemn O'Reilly as an insensitive arsehole for raising the question in a place where what was said is very likely to come to Shawn's attention. And I have much the same feelings towards Oprah, who (along with her audience) already knew (or at least strongly suspected) the answer when she asked her question. In some ways she's worse than O'Reilly, because she builds her image around compassion, but doesn't let it get in the way of a good soundbite.


For the fact that Shawn's plight has been splashed about so publicly, I don't know who to scream at first, the media or his parents for giving the media what it wanted.


And I do have the best interests of the child at heart. Which means understanding all the facts, and exploring all possibilities that those facts allow. New facts, such as those you presented to me eliminate some possibilities.

However, children do sometimes do stupid things for stupid reasons, and when they do, they can't be given free passes for those actions, no matter how much the ultimate responsibility might lie with another person. Errors of judgment have to be pointed out if poor choices have been made. Anything less, only sets the child up for further harm later in their lives.

[elehhhhna]

145. "Shawn thought he was on a bloody good wicket"

Interesting choice of words.

Get help. Seriously.

[TheMadMonk]

148. I wonder just how creatively I could quote you out of context.

If I could be effing bothered.

[sandnsea]

58. In a saner time, he'd have been fired

I just can't believe what people are allowed to say in our so-called mainstream media. Doesn't get much crazier than this.

[LynnTheDem]

59. I wish for Dild O'Lielly to suffer himself all he spews on others.

What an ignorant hateful sick bastard.

[Patsy Stone]

60. In fact, overall

It was working out quite well for him. :eyes:

[Blue_In_AK]

61. I'm sure he believes

that every woman who is raped enjoys it. What an ass.

[mitchum]

62. Spoken like a predator

[NorthernSpy]

64. more evidence that American conservatism has reached the self-parody stage...

The kidnapping of those two boys should be front-page news in your house if you have kids. I actually hope I'm wrong about Shawn Hornbeck. I hope he did not make a conscious decision to accept his captivity because Devlin made things easy for him. No school, play all day long.

In other words:

Hope I'm wrong, but what if that kidnapped child has a bad work ethic? Maybe he's lazy, and doesn't really deserve our sympathy.

Or maaaaaaybe the kid stayed because he, you know, liked it...



Bill O'Reilly is a sick, sick man.

[TheWatcher]

65. One of these days something's going to happen to Bill

Something very, very bad.

And ironically, when it happens, it might be the first time in memory that blaming the victim for their plight might actually be relevant.

Enjoy yourself while you can Bill.

Karma has a funny way of balancing things.

The amount of tears that will be shed for you wouldn't moisten the head of a pin.

[Lindsey]

67. I think as many of us as possible should write the FCC...

the link is in on this post. I just did. This man must be fired.

[Beelzebud]

68. I'm sure O'Rielly's sexual harrassment victim "liked her circumstances" too.

[Skidmore]

69. Kinda makes you wonder if old Bill O' might have

a child or two squirreled away somewhere himself. We already know he has some pretty weird ideas of the birds and the bees and a real distorted idea of personal boundaries. He is a known harrasser.

[Marie26]

70. Creep, creep, creep. nt

[Bluebear]

72. The only thing as sick as O'Reilly is his target audience.

Stealing it from above because it bears repeating.

[Prophet 451]

73. How does this fuckwit still have a show?

Really, I know that intelligent conservatives exist, I've even met a few. So how is it that this clown still gets airtime?

[Virginia Dare]

74. I wish somebody would string him up...

and taser his balls repeatedly to see how he likes it. I know I would like it a lot.

[moggie]

75. The O'Reilly Factor for Kids

Don't forget, folks, this is a guy who has written a book of advice for kids. From an editorial review at Amazon:

Grade 6 Up–Advice on issues that confront today's teenagers is given in a confident manner by the talk-show host. Factual information supports personal, no-nonsense guidance in navigating life's various challenges on the road to adulthood. Examples from the author's life further augment the points being made, illustrating both triumphs and mistakes, and their natural consequences. Content adequately covers relationships, sex, music, school, and philosophical reflections that will aid teenagers in developing their unique identities and value systems.

Yes, like a creepy uncle, he really wants to give your kids advice on sex and relationships.

[maine_raptor]

77. Please Bill-O, stop it!

You're killing me here with your hypocrisy.

First you rant about all them A-rab kids being brainwashed into being homicide bombers, but now you're saying that brainwashing can't happen to an AMERICAN kid; he'd have to choose to live like that.

Me thinks the axis on the No-Spin Zone is a mite wobbly.

[Chorophyll]

78. It boggles the mind.

At this point I fully expect the right-wing blowhards to blame the victim when it's a woman who's raped, abducted, whatever -- but I cannot imagine that the lowliest freeper in freeperville was cheering O'Reilly on when he said THIS crap.

These guys just can't keep their own warped proclivities under wraps, can they.

[AngryOldDem]

79. What an asshole. n/t

[Bushies gotta go]

81. his "old parents"... what a scumbag. eom

[Sequoia]

83. He talks, and toads, snakes, and insects fall out.

He is a demon from hell.

[Radio_Lady]

113. Toads, snakes, and insects are thoroughly insulted by your analogy!

His spoken and written words are sufficient to make him a demon from hell.

[durrrty libby]

86. It is O'Reilly and people like him that are ruining this

country

He gives permission to the nasty fools to spew their hate. In this case his vileness is
directed at children

:freak: :hurts:

[Initech]

87. How does he know what the kid thinks? What an ass.

Really. If you were to look up the word "ass" in the dictionary, you'd see a picture of O'Reilly's face.

[qanda]

88. There is no hell hot enough for people like him

That is as disgusting as anything I have ever read.

[Morgana LaFey]

90. The families and young Hornbeck on Oprah today - starting now nt

[cwydro]

94. I gotta wonder why they're doing this publicity

that seems a little odd to me.

[DollyM]

98. The same reason . . .

that people went on television and talk shows after the Oklahoma City bombing and after 9/11 and after any tragedy that garners national attention. Telling your story is a way of processing your grief, making the senseless seem a little easier to bear. Most of us suffer in silence with our fears and grief, this family has the opportunity to talk about it in public and receive public support.

[Morgana LaFey]

100. Publicity?????

Oprah has been a leader on the issue of child abduction and child sexual abuse and has been the cause of several at large sex offenders being identified and caught. Were you not aware of that?

I didn't end up watching the show, but did see the very end. Cliff VanZant and she agreed that there needs to be a huge change in the law, a ONE STRIKE change. You kidnap and assault a woman or child and you go away forever. And Oprah told the audience that she was going to be asking for our help to get this accomplished across the nation.

You wanna wonder why these parents participate in that "publicity"????

[philosophie_en_rose]

141. To cut off more intrusive "journalists" maybe.

[madinmaryland]

91. Worst Person of the Day...

I hope KO picks up on the latest from Bill-O!

[madmax]

92. Reminds me of that old weather guy Tex (something)

(maybe Antoine) commented on a rape story on the evening news. 'Confuscious say when being raped relax and enjoy'... or something along those line. The rape victim was a 6 year old child.

There was such outrage he was fired the next day.

[yellowcanine]

93. Uh, loofa boy - The kid was 11. You can't hold him responsible. Adults are in charge. Remember?

[DollyM]

96. Been there . . .

Having been molested as a child by a family member, I was told I would get in trouble if I said anything. Years later, I ended up in counseling which did help but to this day, my family, including my mother, does not know. (I am now 45) Deep down inside there is still this feeling that if I told my mother, she would be so hurt that she wouldn't be able to handle it. I know that isn't rational but that is the 10 year old little girl speaking who is still afraid of her molester.

[Raydawg1234]

95. Yet I doubt that Bill has ever met the kid

so easy to talk about people behind thier backs

[iverglas]

97. big duh: the kid is a kid

"I hope he did not make a conscious decision to accept his captivity because Devlin made things easy for him. No school, play all day long."

A kid would make "a conscious decision" to eat chocolate bars for breakfast, potato chips for lunch and pizza pockets for supper, with something gooey and sweet before bedtime (i.e. 3 a.m.) if given the option.

That's why kids have parents. And why kids should not be in the care of people who allow them to act on their own decisions when it comes to things like whether to go to school and what to eat all day and whether or not to go to bed.

Wayward Puritanism, prosperity theology, "personal responsiblity" carried to the absurd. Now 11-year-olds bear sole responsibility for what they do / what happens to them. Soon it will be 2-year-olds, solely responsible for swallowing that bottle of aspirin, shooting their baby sibling with the handgun lying around and running out in front of a truck ...

[KamaAina]

104. Has he been knocking back gin with Babs Bush?!

You know, Babs "And so many of the people in the arena here, you
know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she
chuckles slightly) is working very well for them." Bush?! :grr:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001054719

[connecticut yankee]

112. Do people really believe him?

[Babsbrain]

114. Disgusting Man

Last week, Fox attacked Steve Irwin's daughter, Bini, for smiling. Headline was "Why Is She Smiling?". Sickening. God forbid the 8-year old smiles "this soon after her father's death".

Now we have that sexual predator denouncing poor Shawn Hornbeck who has endured fear, pain, abuse, terror for the last four years and O'Reilly said the kid liked it. Damn him to hell!

This shows us how much he really wants to protect our children from sexual predators. Hey, Bill...get another subject other than sexual predators. You are the LAST person to represent that issue. YOU are the sexual predator (I heard the tapes).

[sproutster]

116. When did Bill join Nambla? Sounds like a chapter out of their handbook

Nice to know fox endorses Nambla.

Does anyone know how easy it is to f' up an 11 year old? Holy jeeze, from a 12 y/o in the system ... it's easy to destroy the self esteem and make the child hate themselves so much, they don't want to shame anyone else, nor do they think they fit in anymore.

God I watched Oprah today and cried. Why the fuck are those parents taking him around like a fucking sideshow??!!!

Seriously WTF.

Also, noted they are COMPLETELY seperating the two families. I think this story is about to get worse and more flipping sad. I think it might bring the 1 strike and death debate to another level. :(

PURE horrified speculation on my side, but I know the statistics, and it was brought home with the clearing of the 1st family to the next family.

[Geek_Girl]

117. I know he's a right wing nut job

But I think that man is mildly retarded. I'm not joking I really do.

[adamuu]

118. what an know-it-all s.o.b.

this makes me so mad i wish i hadn't read it. this definitely set me off.
i'm going to go find something else to do for a while. :(

[thickerstrings]

119. More evidence

that O'Reilly is a blithering fucktard. If he's ignored, won't he go away?

[Patiod]

120. So what if the kid DID run away (not saying he did)

I think the kid was grabbed.

But just for argument's sake, let's say the 11-year-old DID run away. Does that make Devlin any less a predator? Does that make him any less culpable? So adults are allowed to prey on kids so long as they are run-aways. What a completely ridiculous thought process. I'm assuming O'Reilly has no kids......

I don't have cable, but was traveling yesterday and in a hotel, and heard O'Reilly spew this nonsense. Was shocked - what eleven-year old makes a decision like this.

Positives to no cable: no O'Reilly
Negatives to no cable: no Daily Show/Colbert Report

Just out of curiosity, where's Nancy Grace on all this?

[adamuu]

138. i, too, wonder what Orally's point might be...

and, what exactly is he proposing? that the 15-year-old be punished by his parents, now? Or is he proposing that any other 11-year-olds in this situation who happen to be watching better watch out! Or is he proposing that parents set family rules on this matter... starting with, "if you are abducted, and.." and ending with, "... or else you're in big trouble mister!"

Is he expecting an 11 year old to make rational, adult-level, life choices, without the help and presence of an adult with his genuine best interests in mind?

In America, this is not expected of 11-year-olds... I know in New York, they aren't even allowed to decide which parent to live with in the case of divorces!

So what, exactly, is Orally saying?

=====

By the way, I took a break from this topic (as I said in another post), and with time i have come to assess the perfect adjective for Orally in this situation.

"VILE"

Orally, himself, is abusing a child, here.

[GreenPartyVoter]

122. Not being allowed to sleep more than 45 minutes at a time. Being sexually molested. Yah, I am sure

that was what kept this poor kid with his captor.

[npincus]

125. f*cking animal.

he should get kidnapped f*cked in the ass for 4 years. Fun, fun, fun! More fun than a loofah and a falafel!

Stupid motherf*cker.

[Canuckistanian]

126. Play all day .....and sodomization at night

What kid wouldn't fantasize about that? :sarcasm:

Maybe O'Reilly does.

[ProudDad]

129. What a freekin' idiot

Further proof that o'liely is as dense as a post and has the empathy of Heinrich Himmler...

On edit:

O'liely is a proven abuser so it's not too suprising. abusers can't feel their victim's pain nor empathize with their situation...

[RummyTheDummy]

132. Because getting raped and sodomized by a middle aged slob is so much fun

This is really beyone the pale. I'm not sure what to say. It should be a career ender for him, but alas, his minions will celebrate it.

[B Calm]

133. You think O'Reilly has abducted children and is knowledgeable on this

subject?

[benEzra]

135. I think that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard/read him say...

and that's saying a lot...

[dsc]

137. I saw the kid on Countdown via Oprah

and that kid was abused, no doubt in my mind. He was taciturn to the point of one word answers, his head was bowed down eyes on the floor for much of the interview. If he wasn't sexually abused I am the king of Siam. O'Reilly should rot in Hell for this.

[TrogL]

142. I saw the Oprah show with the kid

(and the other one camped out in the Green Room playing video games).

According to what the parents said, the kid simply hasn't opened up yet as to exactly what happened, and even if they had, they were under tight control of the FBI to avoid compromsing the trial.

At best, O'REilley's talking through his hat. At worst, he could cause considerable damage.

[Boomer]

146. Pedophiles know how to manipulate children

A pedophile will use every psychological trick in the book to manipulate the emotions of their victims: lies, threats, bribery, coercion.

If a child "likes" his situation, it's because the pedophile has worked very hard to provide incentives for staying and discincentives for leaving.

A kid has no chance against that kind of psych warfare.

[HughMoran]

147. King of the psychotic RW idiots

There is no comment to describe something so stupid.

[bluescribbler]

149. What a maroon

This guy should be taken off the air.