Politics The War on Porn

Jamison

Cadet
This would be hilarious...if it weren't for the fact that it's true.

Recruits Sought for Porn Squad

By Barton Gellman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, September 20, 2005; A21


The FBI is joining the Bush administration's War on Porn. And it's looking for a few good agents.

Early last month, the bureau's Washington Field Office began recruiting for a new anti-obscenity squad. Attached to the job posting was a July 29 Electronic Communication from FBI headquarters to all 56 field offices, describing the initiative as "one of the top priorities" of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and, by extension, of "the Director." That would be FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III.

Mischievous commentary began propagating around the water coolers at 601 Fourth St. NW and its satellites, where the FBI's second-largest field office concentrates on national security, high-technology crimes and public corruption.

The new squad will divert eight agents, a supervisor and assorted support staff to gather evidence against "manufacturers and purveyors" of pornography -- not the kind exploiting children, but the kind that depicts, and is marketed to, consenting adults.

"I guess this means we've won the war on terror," said one exasperated FBI agent, speaking on the condition of anonymity because poking fun at headquarters is not regarded as career-enhancing. "We must not need any more resources for espionage."

Among friends and trusted colleagues, an experienced national security analyst said, "it's a running joke for us."

A few of the printable samples:

"Things I Don't Want On My Resume, Volume Four."

"I already gave at home."

"Honestly, most of the guys would have to recuse themselves."

Federal obscenity prosecutions, which have been out of style since Attorney General Edwin Meese III in the Reagan administration made pornography a signature issue in the 1980s, do "encounter many legal issues, including First Amendment claims," the FBI headquarters memo noted.

Applicants for the porn squad should therefore have a stomach for the kind of material that tends to be most offensive to local juries. Community standards -- along with a prurient purpose and absence of artistic merit -- define criminal obscenity under current Supreme Court doctrine.

"Based on a review of past successful cases in a variety of jurisdictions," the memo said, the best odds of conviction come with pornography that "includes bestiality, urination, defecation, as well as sadistic and masochistic behavior." No word on the universe of other kinks that helps make porn a multibillion-dollar industry.

Popular acceptance of hard-core pornography has come a long way, with some of its stars becoming mainstream celebrities and their products -- once confined to seedy shops and theaters -- being "purveyed" by upscale hotels and most home cable and satellite television systems. Explicit sexual entertainment is a profit center for companies including General Motors Corp. and Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. (the two major owners of DirecTV), Time Warner Inc. and the Sheraton, Hilton, Marriott and Hyatt hotel chains.

But Gonzales endorses the rationale of predecessor Meese: that adult pornography is a threat to families and children. Christian conservatives, long skeptical of Gonzales, greeted the pornography initiative with what the Family Research Council called "a growing sense of confidence in our new attorney general."

Congress began funding the obscenity initiative in fiscal 2005 and specified that the FBI must devote 10 agents to adult pornography. The bureau decided to create a dedicated squad only in the Washington Field Office. "All other field offices may investigate obscenity cases pursuant to this initiative if resources are available," the directive from headquarters said. "Field offices should not, however, divert resources from higher priority matters, such as public corruption."

Public corruption, officially, is fourth on the FBI's priority list, after protecting the United States from terrorist attack, foreign espionage and cyber-based attacks. Just below those priorities are civil rights, organized crime, white-collar crime and "significant violent crime." The guidance from headquarters does not mention where pornography fits in.

"The Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's top priority remains fighting the war on terrorism," said Justice Department press secretary Brian Roehrkasse. "However, it is not our sole priority. In fact, Congress has directed the department to focus on other priorities, such as obscenity."

At the FBI's field office, spokeswoman Debra Weierman expressed disappointment that some of her colleagues find grist for humor in the new campaign. "The adult obscenity squad . . . stems from an attorney general mandate, funded by Congress," she said. "The personnel assigned to this initiative take the responsibility of this assignment very seriously and are dedicated to the success of this program."
 
Well, I don't know if this would count as a war since the Republican party and the bush administration accepted a donation from a porn producer and allowed to attend one of their fund raisers.

Personally, I don't have a problem with porn as long as it is legal and only involves consenting adults as xdancer pointed out. I guess my only gripe is regular HIV/AIDS testing and contraception use are not required. Hoteliers profit HUGE from porn, it is a billion dollar industry.
 
Being a good Catholic girl, I am no expert on porn but don't they have mandatory HIV tests, because there was a big scandal with the porn star who infected a few of his "co-stars"
 
i'm confused....i thought pornography involving consenting adults was legal...

I thought the same thing. But I guess it doesn't mesh with Bush's view of "morals" in America.

I'm not really sure about the whole thing


Being a good Catholic girl, I am no expert on porn but don't they have mandatory HIV tests, because there was a big scandal with the porn star who infected a few of his "co-stars"


Well that's for the big major companies. Free lance individuals don't have to, and usually don't.
 
I thought the same thing. But I guess it doesn't mesh with Bush's view of "morals" in America.

I'm not really sure about the whole thing
Well that's for the big major companies. Free lance individuals don't have to, and usually don't.

Yes, the ones that have enough money do but many do not. The actor was discovered and sadly, one of his female co-stars was infected and it was her first and last film. She was a French Canadian actress that came to Los Angeles trying to make it as an actress but it wasn't going as planned. She said that she needed rent money so she swore to herself that she'd do one film and then she would be out. :(

I believe that the adult fim actress Bella was followed by dateline cameras and she tried to get into the major production company that regularly test their actors but she didn't make it in. Also, that dateline special showed that the production companies were trying to get cable, satellite and hotel chains to require regular HIV/AIDS testing since they're the ones that profit the most from these films and the actors in them.
 
while i do not agree with porn, i think the Bush Administration is yet again doing something but not the right thing. we do have other priorities.


There are many other priorities (war on terror, anyone?). Porn is a relatively small issue in the scheme of things. Especially when this "squad" isn't even going after people who exploit children. It's going after porn between consenting adults. Whether or not you agree with it isn't the point. It's a legal practice that, let's be honest, a good portion of males (and females) watch on a regular basis. As long as they aren't harming anyone in the process, I don't see the problem.
 
You are right but I don't know specifics like which states and fetishes... :blush:

This "war" as Jamison said is such a waste of money and time. And, sexual frustration can lead to great and dangerous anger! Look at ALL of the religious people that condemn anything sexual, they are furious and sometimes very violent! Porn is a release and if it's taken away....the target audience (most of which are males)...I don't want to think about how they'll react.

I don't see harm in porn, of course that's just me. As long as it's with adults and consensual, I'm fine with it. I'm not going to pretend that I know nothing because from my posts I obviously do. I don't judge who watch porn because it's not my place and I'm not going to act as if I'm better than them neither. I've seen some, out of curiousity and I'm not a fan but I understand why there's a following. Anyway, here is an age restriction and it's not as if Jenna Jameson and Mary Carey are trying to market to children. Yes, some can be addicted to porn but the same goes for alcohol, prescription drugs, cigarettes, and sex but the administration isn't declaring war on any of those things.

Alcoholism, drug addiction, domestic violence, pedophilia, child pornography those are REAL threats to families and children not Jenna Jameson having sex on tape! And speaking of pedophilia, rape, and molestation, a lot of female porn stars (possibly some of the men) experienced one or more of the heinous acts listed above during their childhood or adolesence which of course shaped their views on sex as an adult. If they weren't sexually violated then they were at least physically abused. All the psychologists have said that most of women in the sex industry have traumatic pasts and they're right.

Jenna Jameson was neglected by her father and physically abused by her step-mother for most of her childhood. When she was in high school she was raped by her boyfriend's father and then gang raped by the football team.

And former porn star Traci Lords (she's been out of the adult industry for over 15 years) was raped when she was 10 and was molested by her mother's boyfriend for most of her childhood. And, he also got into drugs and at alcohol when she was 14 then he got into the adult industry.
 
I gather that in some states in the US Fetish events are illegal? am i correct

You would be correct. I'm not sure what states out law what fetishes. But there are states that do have laws against those certain things.

I do know that Minnesota has a law that states a human and a bird can't be involved in a sexual act.
 
My teacher told me that Texas is trying to repeal their Anti-Beastiality law... :shudder:

Ok Texas, I don't get you. Gays are legally forbidden from getting married, adopting and becoming foster parents but you're trying to make it ok for a human to sexually exploit an animal? :blink:
 
Haha, I hear you. I think Texas is one of the states where all gay sex (consentual or not) is considered sodomy and therefore illegal..but don't quote me.
 
I remember that, the Daily show did a hilarious segment! :lol:

So, it's hard for me to imagine Bush and Company going after porn..it's a billion dollar industry ;)
 
I remember that, the Daily show did a hilarious segment! :lol:

So, it's hard for me to imagine Bush and Company going after porn..it's a billion dollar industry ;)


Especially when they accepted money from the porn industry (or at least a well known producer) and had him and Mary Carey to the White House for dinner...

Can we say hypocritical?!
 
Okay here is how i feel on this topic...i agree 100% with Bush only because if ppl see something in the movies they could try it in real life. The whole thing with animals should be banned in all 50 states...thats gross and wrong if someone is caught doing they should be thrown in f---en jail for life. I hate ppl who are into BDSM which involes animals in some case and there is only one place they can find this felgercarb is through porn and i will be in dc if there is ever a ralley on this subject becaue it is wrong and gross and porn should be stopped.

yes i will fullely admit i do watch it now and then and it sickens me each time i do...why do i go back...i really don't know and don't wanna know. but what i can say its wrong...

another thing with porn can you say you know for 100% that it is constenctial(sp) or is someone forcing them into it...you really don't know...a girl could go to the cops and they are not gonna believe her based on what...i was forced to do a porno...hell no they aren't gonna believe her. so thats one reason i'm against it...

plus porn can ruin families...it does and thats a known fact!

thats all i have to say on it for now!

mel
 
Back
Top