Gozitan denies child porn charges

Joe Xuereb (London UK)

Dec 21st 2008, 11:08

I would like to pick up the thread of 'complaints' regarding the appearance of websites one has not requested. I often click the tab to access a perfectly ordinary website and what I get is a bevy of female beauties, parading their wares. Now, being of the homosexual persuasion, I find this irritating at worst. But hey, I am a grown up, I deal with it. I would never clamour for these websites to be consored and banned. Each to his own. End of story. It has only wasted all of two seconds of my life, the time it takes for me to exit the beauties and their assets - big deal!!

Joseph Schembri

Dec 20th 2008, 19:28

@Frans Sammut: Just one point: Why is pornography an insult to women? Stop pushing around age old chauvinistic ideas that make no sense. Have you never heard of porn depicting men?

Joseph Schembri

Dec 20th 2008, 19:18

@Graham Crocker: I agree with you that sometimes one downloads material to find that is something completely different. At best it can be porn at worse some malaware that robs you of your computer data. Both have happened to me. I have learned to be less naive at my own expense and not clicking blindly as fraudsters use all kind of clever tricks to disguise their intentions.

You rightly say that a click of the mouse can send one to jail. But do we want a society that sends people to jail for something like that? To me that sounds very Orwellian.

Frans Sammut

Dec 20th 2008, 18:43

@Nigel Lawrence

You do not seem to be aware that browsing pornographic sites is both free AND as I said, accessible to minors. The former is an insult to the intelligence of grown-ups and a peril to children and minors. Only supposedly "liberal-minded" freaks cannot see my argument. Those who do not agree have every right to their opinion, of course (Torquemada has been long dead and forgotten) but at least they should come up with more rational opinions to counter my suggestion.

@others

I was not talking about child pornography which is already banned. I was referring to cyber pornography in general. Nor I am not trying to reinvent any wheel. What I pointed out was that the aberration that is soiling the cyber street should be seen for what it is: an aberration and should be banned, not in China or in Malta but throughout the civilized world. It is an insult to women and a threat to the normal growth of chlldren and minors.

Joe Xuereb (London UK)

Dec 20th 2008, 18:20

cont./ And lest I stand accused of short-changing my readers, allow me to pick up the original thread, ie child pornography and its accessibility, particularly to children. Children are naturally inquisitive and should be allowed to be so in order to mature. They must, at all costs, be shielded from such imagery. Many children would view such images as some sort of game and therefore acceptable (I am assuming here that, unlike my childhood days, when we were threatened with fire and brimstone if we even saw another human, of whatever age, naked). So, children today would not necessarily look askance at an image of another naked
child unless it was particularly revolting and frightening. They would think it is some sort of game. So definitely, children must be protected from these websites mainly, as I am intimating, because they need protection from themselves ie being children, thinking that something is acceptable, and normal, and, knowing children's craving for acceptance and love, , and thinking that it is expected of them to emulate. If the children that are thus at risk are this young, I wonder, should they be using a computer at all, unsupervised or not.

Joe Xuereb (London UK)

Dec 20th 2008, 18:05

cont./ This may sound a bit tongue-in-cheek but shocking nevertheless to many. It is, in fact, a very serious matter. Unfortunately, I cannot claim the basic idea is my copyright. The attempt, possibly corny, to introduce some wit is intentional. We take sex much too seriously.
If some find some of this decidedly unfunny, I can only suggest to pick up some more spiritual reading matter. But worse still would be those who choose to home in on the 'Gannett' aspect of the comment to the exclusion of taking on board some of the horrific home-truths (for the benefit of the young and foreigners, the Gannett was a post-war humourous publication now long defunct.
The beauty of it is that one cannot begin to start to think about restraint on this matter. Sadly, few people would have the courage and the maturity to ask their partner the nature of their fantasy to enhance the performance. If they did, the chances are that they would get an evasive response at best. And this is what I mean by hypocrisy in case you were wondering. Abhorrent pornography? Do not even go there.

Joe Xuereb (London UK)

Dec 20th 2008, 17:49

cont./ Women, it is believed, fantasise idyllic situations to enhance their ecstasy. Or George Clooney depending on the woman. If she aspires to virtue (and they exist, just) she would think of England (to use a cliche). If she is Maltese and happens to be particularly conerned about the high birth-rate among women of foreign origin, she'll think of Malta (or even Nadur). Of course in this day and age, she could well be the sort of women who will go all out to emulate her consort/partner/cohabitee, whatever her domestic arrangement happens to be, and compete with him at his own level. In which case, there would be not only three people in the setup but four. Or fourteen or more if she cares to introduce a whole football team (plus goalkeeper, linesmen, referee, etc.) into her fantasy. It could get quite crowded if his fantasy veers towards a line of chorus girls, high-kicking for all they are worth, anxious to expose their pretty underwear, broderie anglaise and. like the dog's dinner, all the trimmings.
The presence of the referee could present a dilemma. He could blow his whistle at the wrong moment and spoil it for everyone. cont./

Graham Crocker

Dec 20th 2008, 16:37

The Maltese government or the ISP's can start by working on something quite cheap called a Blacklist, this will involve Maltese people breaking the law finding child porn and reporting them.
The Urls will be checked by Moderators and if they contain illegal content, then the next time somebody tries to access the URL they will be notified that the site is illegal to access.

Google is already implementing such a feature.

I don't agree with Schembri, have you ever downloaded something on the internet like a Program and then found out it was another program?

What if your kid downloads a video named " bible stories.avi" on your computer, then when he opens he finds something not very nice that your filter didn't catch, because of the title?

Some things are better left restricted, especially when a click of a button can send you to jail.

Joseph Schembri

Dec 20th 2008, 14:24

For those who think that I am exagerating when I say that it is not difficult to stumble upon 'abhorrent sites': While looking up 'censoring' on the internet for me to be better informed before leaving comments here, I chanced upon a site that lists addresses that are censored in one particular European country. In many cases the addresses were just numbers with no indication of what was contained within the site.

No need to elaborate.

Joseph Schembri

Dec 20th 2008, 13:34

F. Desira You ask me a difficult question and I'm uncertain about what conclusions to come to. In principle I believe that NOTHING should be censored on the internet. Let's forget about child porn for a moment as I believe that there are worse things: Snuff movies for example. I can't think of anything worse than that. Even in that case my first thought is that no state should remove such sites.

What is of course terrifying is not the content itself because you only see it if you want to but the fact that third parties are harmed (in this case tortured and killed). What worries me is that the content is there because there could be demand for it and that demand may fuel further production of such material.

One particular site comes to mind - in my opinion it is totally sick, worse than child porn IMO and I am not going to give it publicity (even though I believe it is perfectly legal to view and store the images in it) but its content was not produced FOR the site. So I see no reason why it should be banned.

Joe Xuereb (London UK)

Dec 20th 2008, 11:14

There is a lot of hypocrisy going on here. Of course child pornography is abhorrent. As is prostitution. Both involve people being forced to do things they would rather not do. I appreciate and admire the human body and have revelled in such imagery for years. I have never stumbled across child pornography simply because it is not something I look for.
@Joseph Schembri. Thank goodness you don't have the power to press a button.
@Shirley Sammut. According to whom, prejudice rules OK.
And to anyone who says that pornography (the adult type that is) is abhorrent, for sick and lonely, introverted people, I have this to say. What is more abhorrent than promising to be faithful to one's partner for the next sixty or more years and to promise not to think of anybody else (ie fantasise) while doing their business. And pigs might fly. It is said (here in any case) that whenever, wherever, there are two people 'on the job' (this is a family paper in Malta so I cannot be more graphic), there is invariably a third person present, usually in the man's mind. Women, it is believed, use the fantasy of a beach cont./

F. Desira

Dec 19th 2008, 22:35

Joseph Schembri: maybe I just don't get it but you said "what is abhorrent to me might not be to someone else". So by your argument, should all pornography - including child pornography - be permitted in the interest of free speech? I suspect your answer will be "no" and perhaps we're just miscommunicating.

Joseph Schembri

Dec 19th 2008, 20:15

@F. Desira: Look at our criminal code before you preach to me. Possession of child pornography is a crime in Malta, punishable by a prison term. Even stumbling across such a site leaves traces on one's computer and obviously at the ISP. That is considered possession. What constitutes 'pornography' is left in the hands of the presiding magistrate.

If my son looked at a bare chested 17 year old woman on hi5 he can be accused of viewing child pornography if the presiding magistrate so decides. (My internet filter does not filter out this network)

Just a note: If I had the power to press a button and remove porn from the net I would have a strong temptation to press it right now. But what is abhorrent to me might not be to someone else and I try hard not to be arrogant and presumptuous because as the overused but nonetheless true adage goes: 'There but for for the grace of God go I'

F. Desira

Dec 19th 2008, 19:23

Frans Sammut, as usual, wishes to reinvent the wheel. Disseminating child pornography on the internet (or through any other way) is a already a crime in Malta as well as in most of the world.

F. Desira

Dec 19th 2008, 19:20

Joseph Schembri: you evidently have little idea of what constitutes child pornography and the reasons why disseminating child pornography is considered a crime rather than a free-speech right. In any case, in most states, the law targets those who actively participate in child pornography not individuals who "stumble" upon a pornographic website. You may therefore wish to consider that unlike adult pornography, child pornography consists of adults forcing under-age individuals to be photographed in the nude or while being subjected to sexual abuse against their will. As you can see, it's not just about what your children can and cannot see on line. It's about what other people are doing to other children.

Nigel Lawrence

Dec 19th 2008, 19:01

@Frans Sammut

If the punters stop paying for this crap, then porn sites would simply disappear. Porn sites exist because there are a lot of very sad and extremely introverted people out there who are quite happy to spend big money on this kind of merchandise. That's business!

Mark-Anthony Fenech

Dec 19th 2008, 18:17

@ Nigel Lawrence

Innocent until proven guilty maybe?

Joseph Schembri

Dec 19th 2008, 18:11

Much ado about nothing I suppose. If one accidentally happens upon a child porn site and leaves within seconds, one's ISP records that visit and any images on that site are saved in the computer. I have read of cases where even after a format the FBI were able to recover images. So even If I inadvertently happen across some unsavoury material in the eyes of the law I am guilty even if I go to the trouble of deleting the internet cache from my computer (few people even know how to do this). Good thing that God's eyes are different from those of do-gooders who must justify their salary by prosecuting hapless individuals.

I heard of a case where a local photographer was prosecuted for generation of child porn after he took photos of a 17 year old body builder male who wanted to show off his muscles. Apparently the photos depicted this young man shirtless in 'glamorous' poses, but in the eyes of the prosecution this was child porn!

Spend some time on the hi5 network and have a look at the pictures of themselves that Maltese children put up on their home pages.

Joseph Schembri

Dec 19th 2008, 17:11

Nothing should be banned on the internet. Repressive states like China block many sites 'to protect' their people. It all starts by blocking ONE site. It is up to the individual to manage self restraint.

I am a Catholic and it is not a virtue if I do not watch pornography because it is censored out. The virtue in God's eyes lies in controlling my urges.

As regards my children, I have filtering software. Just remember that there are clever ways round such software but I reason that if a young person finds a way to gain access to certain sites despite such blocks then s/he is probably mature enough to look at those sites.

Michael Attard

Dec 19th 2008, 14:21

@Frans Sammut

It's your kind of backwards mentality that makes porn what it is. if you don't want your children to watch porn install a cyber nanny and get it blocked. What you call an aberration, others call lawful entertainment. Child Porngraphy is an ILLEGAL form of pornography. Agreed. That should be banned, since it's illegal. But the rest is not.

Frans Sammut

Dec 19th 2008, 11:25

I do not wish to anticipate further developments in a sub judice case. But I would very much like to seize the opportunity to move that ALL pornographic sites on the Internet should be banned precisely because they are so easily accessible to minors. Cyber street should not be allowed to constitute the perils that society guards children from in the rest of human situations. Forbidding such aberrations IS not a measure that can be construed as somehow denting fundamental human rights. If browsing pornography is considered as a human right, permitting the proliferation of dangers to minors and children is, to my mind, a direct attack on their right to be protected from such perils.

Marianna Galea Xuereb

Dec 19th 2008, 00:38

To J. Buttigieg

Personally I am all for abusers and criminals being named and publicly identified. After all, even if they are jailed they will eventually be released among generally unsuspecting and naïve members of society and I believe the latter have a basic right to know relevant facts about all those around them. Unfortunately data protection and privacy arguments are continuously being used to prevent adequate disclosure. Certain gozitans would complain if certain among them are identified by age, gender and the sparsely populated village they come from more than would somebody who is so identified as coming from Sliema, Poala, B’kara i.e. densely populated Maltese towns whose population is comparable to that of the whole of Gozo.
Still, what worries me most is the fact that the press is allowed to publish the name of a pornography addict but not the name of many people convicted of rape and child abuse even though the latter are much more dangerous to society

Shirley Sammut

Dec 18th 2008, 22:53

The main issue here is not the nationality but the unspeakable crime committed against children - this is yet another sick person who had official access to children - i am totally in favour of a sex offenders' register & yes, Mr Buttigieg, we need to know whether he was Maltese, Gozitan, or foreign so that we can protect our own children from such people.

Let us not lose sight of the big picture with petty grievances, & instead work together to ensure that our children are never at risk from such horrible abuse of their innocence!!!!

Muscat Peter

Dec 18th 2008, 18:52

I am GOZITAN very proud of it! Also, I very proud of living in this WONDERFUL ISLAND of GOZO!
Apart the above fact, it is also a fact that lately some silly twits have been advertising our Wonderful Island for the wrong reasons and some other twits, who have some kind of chip on their shoulders re'Gozo or Gozitans, enjoy giving us the limelight for the wrong reasons. That behaviour is silly.

Of course you find 'bad ones' everywhere and anywhere. and those who behave wrongly should be punished.

Vincent Galea

Dec 18th 2008, 18:07

To-day technology links together millions in a "World Wide Web" - a global village- allowing instant anonymous exchange of uncensored text and images. Anyone in this virtual metropolis can put anything online, and once it is there anyone can access it.
A turn down the wrong cyber street guarantees exposure to images as corrosive as anything available in the streets of New York. I hear from young friends how heavily trafficed these pornogaphic sites are when they exchange sites information with each other.
The nature of human psychology is that over indulgence in one pleasure creates a desire for another,more depraved pleasures in a potentally unending downward spiral towards total degradation.
These explicit sites have ripped the marriage apart.The Internet has robbed many of their loved ones.
Men are attracted to pornography because it gives them a brief albeit depraved opportunity to leave their painful, lonesome reality.These men are desperate to escape their solitary lives that they use pornography as a hallucinogenic drug. After the fantasy , return to reality is ever more painful.
We can teach our children about the cyber street and about the criminals and hucksters who live there.

P.Zammit

Dec 18th 2008, 16:33

@J.Buttigieg
Uwejja some people complain about everything under the sun. As if they are being racist by saying Gozitan or From Nadur. Sometimes when a Maltese person gets into some trouble abroad, it is reported as Maltese person and not a person from B'Kara for example. What's it to you ? Are you really being hurt by this ? That is, unless you are ashamed of the word Gozitan. I would not be.
And I thought the British moaned !

J. Buttigieg

Dec 18th 2008, 15:55

Why is it that the media still chooses to write 'Gozitan' in its headlines? Why are Gozitans being singled out in this way? Whenever someone from the island of Malta commits a crime, s/he is simply referred to by age or gender in the headlines, maybe by the town or village s/he comes from. I find this really unfair.

Nigel Lawrence

Dec 18th 2008, 14:25

"allegedly found on his home computer-----"

What do you mean "allegedly"?. Either it is there, or it isn't.