FBI Distributes Child Porn

The FBI seized control of an internet message board which specialized in the advertising and sharing of child pornography, and explicit conversations related to the disgusting subject matter. But rather than shut down the website the FBI continued to operate the page, and freely distributed an undocumented amount of illegal material. Although they claim the crimes they committed were simply in the interest of ensnaring some of the 5,600 clients of the website, no arrests have been made.

Even if arrests had been made though, this case, like so many others, calls into question the integrity of law-enforcement in America today. When the law-enforcers are the perpetrators of criminality, then what is the basis of justice? Is it justifiable to commit god-awful crimes, so long as you have "good" intentions? And if that be true, then why should there be any difference between a public official and a citizen? After all, aren't the law-enforcers employees of the people, public servants? By what right do they claim immunity from crimes that we would be imprisoned for?

Perhaps we should listen to the words of U.S. Attorney Marci Ellsworth, when she sent a man to Federal prison last year.

“Distributing of child pornography – images and videos of real children experiencing the worst moments of their young lives – is not a ‘victimless’ crime, and the heinous nature of this offense should never be diminished by referring to it as ‘just pictures,’” Ellsworth told the court.  “The children portrayed … suffer real and permanent damage, for the rest of their lives, each and every time their exploitation is shared over the Internet.”

If this premise was true enough to send a person to Federal prison, does it not also hold true for anyone, regardless of their profession? Can murder, or rape be justified, so long as the perpetrator is wearing a badge? Would an FBI agent be justified in physically molesting a child, simply to get closer to the purveyor of innocence? Where is the line drawn? Does a line exist, or does the shield of law-enforcement exempt the wearer of all accountability? And if that be true, then what sort of persons can we expect to seek out the badge, as franchise rights?

The details of this particular case have been sealed since it was first uncovered by a Seattle news outfit. But be sure to read their article for more details at the following link:

Seattle Pi

Also see:

FBI Allows Felons to Buy Guns in 'Fast and Furious' Operation

Is the FBI a Terrorist Organization?

Child Rapists In Power (Conspiracy of Silence, Banned Video)